Hi HR,
Wow! Fast-forwarding 5-1/2 years...
I agree with a lot of what you said, and especially that, "Extremely better than GM ever thought possible." But - and promise I'm not trying to be difficult or argumentative by any means - taking the rear suspension and making everything stiffer is certainly not the best way to go - you've got to leave a source of transverse compliance in the system somewhere (and I would argue that the best place is the tires,) so that in the high-frequency, mass-controlled region of operation of the suspension, the tire can "permit" the suspension to migrate from side to side in a manner dictacted by, or constrained by, that very high roll center. If the tire is too stiff transversely, then the majority of the tire's traction can be taken-up simply in the course of taking-up difference-mode bumps and dips (i.e., those irregularities that would tend to induce roll in the suspension) in the road surface, leaving less remaining to negotiate curves well or to accelerate the car forward or backward.
So here's what tends to happen: if you make everything stiff, then the car will probably handle better in a variety of metrics on a perfectly flat surface. But add bumps to the mix, and the rear will get skittish and difficult to control for sure because of the towering RCH problem.
If you must have everything stiff, then lower the RCH. That's what I'm doing currently in my project to convert to a 3-L Panhard rod geometry.
Best,
MAP