Question about the XLR-C6 shared frame

[Brett]

Everyone seems to be up in arms about how the C6 is getting the XLR's frame and not it's own. I'm not sure what to make of this, because I don't know the details.

Did someone say the XLR frame is the C5 frame heavily modified?

Also, I just don't like the idea of the C6 getting a hand me down. Doesn't the Corvette deserve it's own technology?



Brett

 

[c4c5specialist]

HI there,
The frame rails and subframes and control arms are all the same, XLR or Corvette.
Allthebest, c4c5

 

[ROCKETBLOCK]

I think the technology was started for the C-5 C-6 first. I'm sure someone will back me up or correct me on this.

 

[LongTimer]

My understanding is that the Hydroformed side rails, aluminum subframes and magnesium cross members are essentially C5 components that have been "adjusted" to increase the wheel base by 1.2 inches. All these C6 / XLR components are otherwise C5 parts. The stink is that the reason for the 1.2 inch adjustment is to allow the Cad 5 speed tranny to fit.

I know we have participants who are better versed on this than I, so there may be some correcting posts later, but the above is the jist of it.

 

[Rob]

The other way to look at all of this is that it was the Corvette (C5) to first receive hydroformed rail technology and not the Cadillac. It's also quite possible that the hydroformed rails for the C6 were first developed for the C6 and handed down to the XLR. At this point - who's to say which came first: the chicken or the egg?

Either way, what difference does it make if you really stop and think about it? There is enough distinction between the XLR and C6 that both platforms are unique enough regardless if they share the same chassis components or similar chassis components.

As long as, visually, the C6 remains outside of all of GM's other platforms, and the engineering behind it, is mostly, unique to the platform, I'm happy.

I realize that sharing technology and enginnering across multiple platforms is an efficient way of keeping manufacturing costs down, but there's a fine line to ride when doing this: you can easily run the risk of losing brand identity because multiple platforms can end up looking all vaguely similar depending on what degree of sharing is integrated.

 

[LongTimer]

I agree with your post Rob, and that's another reason I am concerned about some of the posts that I've seen that expect a significantly higher price ($60 area). Most of the engineering costs for the C6 chassis have been recovered long ago.

If the LS2 is as high tech as we've been lead to believe, I could see a $1000 to $1500 justified price bump for the engine, but other than that, all of the do dads will be options and most of those from the GM parts bin. Vette may offer some first, but you KNOW the HUD, the radio and the MSRC will all be available on other lines - Cad & Pontiac at least.

I am very concerned the GM boys reading these posts will interpret them to be consumer acceptance of a greedy price increase.