jc9767

Quote from Detroit News:
Akerson, who became CEO Sept. 1 and board chairman Jan. 1, already is weighing in on new vehicles. He recently greenlighted the next generation of the compact Chevrolet Cruze, but vetoed a new engine for a sports car set for production in 18 months.

We are still debating engines for the C7?


From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110606/...#ixzz1OVCSwJ6h

Another comment from the CEO:
In a recent meeting with engineers, for example, Akerson pressed them to explain the logic behind putting a big 6.2-liter engine in an unspecified car whose competitor has a 4.4-liter turbocharged engine. The engineers replied: "Well, we want to be able to beat the other guy."

Akerson responded: "I don't think the average buyer is going to buy an eight-cylinder, 530-horsepower (car)." His point: Decisions must be supported by a solid business case, and not just for bragging rights or as a marketing tool.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110606/...#ixzz1OV89SLS4

I Bin Therbefor

Where's Alan Mulally when we need him?

Having said that, he must have been talking to the Cad engineers about a car which is intended to compete with BMW which has a model that carries a 4.4-liter turbocharged V8 engine. Makes one wonder what engine he wants in the car.

GM could always bring back the NorthStar and turbo charge it.

If I was Ford and saw what this guy said, I'd bust a gut laughing.

Clue to Akerson, business cases do not sell cars. Clue number two, you don't have a clue what does sell cars. Clue number three, all your wealth and past experience provides you with no qualification for the GM job. Clue number four, your opinion as to what people will buy is worthless.

RPOZ51

Uh. O-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-h!!

Explain the logic? Explain the logic? I mean if you gotta explain . . .

RPOZ51

Holy smokes. I hope you're right, and he is talking about the Caddy. But still. This is an upsetting thing to hear.

I've single handledly bought three Vettes, two motorcycles, and thousands of dollars worth of useless junk in my lifetime, and none of it had anything to do with logic.

This guy needs more than a clue.

He needs to go to Carlisle. He needs to take a big block down the 1/4 mile. He needs to visit the Museum. He needs to post on the Forum. He needs to take a few hot laps around Spring Mountain in a ZR-1.

JustinStrife

Give me 5 minutes with this Akerson guy. He sounds like he doesn't know anything about cars, especially corvettes.

HarryWild

From the article and comment on this thread; Akerson want to get other buyers in to the C7 Corvette. I think he trying to get new blood that are looking at the European sports cars to take a look at a C7 Corvette. The current ones interested in a 911, Cayman, R8, 6 series and M3 along with a list of exotics like Nissan GT-R, LFA, Ferraris, Astons, Masserattis, Mercedes SL and SLS series, etc....

I'm personally would love to see a dual turbocharge V6 with 10,000 rpm engine in the C7. If gas is keep high; it will be this engine. It is the politically correct choice. I just like it because of driving a 2011 GT-R. But Porsche has V6s too.

JustinStrife

What would be the point though? From a performance, dimensions, and economy standpoint, there wouldn't be any advantage to going that route.

I Bin Therbefor

"He needs to go to Carlisle. He needs to take a big block down the 1/4 mile. He needs to visit the Museum. He needs to post on the Forum. He needs to take a few hot laps around Spring Mountain in a ZR-1."

What are you trying to do, confuse him with reality?

This guy will only listen and look at things that confirm what he already believes. To show how out of touch with reality he is, I point to two items. First the war model of business has long ago been trashed by business. Second, the Chinese revolution to which he refers failed, only with the adoption of "it's O.K. to make a profit" have the Chinese really begun to succeed. Can't he find an American icon? If the Chinese revolution is his model, here comes the destruction.

He's a typical financial guy who believes because he's been able to make a huge personal fortune that he's also become all knowing about everything. He combines arrogance and stupidy with fanaticism and that combination will destroy GM. He's good at destruction. He equates activity with accomplishment.

Racer X

10,000 RPM engines do not get the best gas mileage. Friction goes up with the square of the engine speed. Longevity and reliabilty do not go up with engine speed, they go down. Longevity and relaiability do not go up with increased parts counts, they go down.

I have seen a few quotes, from the GM CEO and he clearly is not a car guy. Certain cars sell based on marketing bragging rights, performance cars are one of them. Why go with a 6.2 liter V8 versus a 4.4 liter twin turbo making the same power? Because it is cheaper to produce, warranty, and gets better gas mileage. He is an automotive idiot. I am concerned. Of course if those engineers and other car guys in the room couldn't quickly explain that (maybe they did and he is arrogant to listen) then GM is really in trouble.

JockItch

I agree, and am also concerned as a GM fan and car enthusiast. Here's another article to add fuel (no pun intended) to the fire. This guy is encouraging a gas tax hike, WTF?!?!

http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/07/news...n=money_latest

OzzyTom

The Corvette platform has always been used to introduce new technologies to GM products.
Keeping it real, gas prices will continue to rise, and as much as we keep kidding ourselves that it doesn't matter, to many prospective new owners, it will.

If GM wants to be truly innovative in leading the US automotive industry in a positive technological direction, I would think a high performance direct injection turbo charged diesel might be possibility.
Low revving higher reliability, huge torque, lower fuel cost etc
Just like having a fuel efficient big block!

Europe has embraced diesels, and they can be built to run extremely fast.
Afterall, diesel powered cars have dominated the LeMans 24 hour endurance race for a number of years.

Radical idea... Maybe.

But so was building a car from plastic back in 1953!

Racer X

Europe always knows better, after all all of their top performance cars are diesels.......... oh wait, none of them are

JustinStrife

Yes and that's why you've seen Corvettes come from the factory with AWD and/or turbochargers like other GM products that had them(Buick Grand National, GMC Syclone, etc). Oh wait...

Not all technology that GM messes with, ends up in the Corvette. As I have shown examples in my post.

Most of the people posting these radical ideas in the C7 section, seem to be somewhat newcomers to the Corvette world.

SmoothBen

I was pretty disappointed when I heard GM wants to turbocharge a smaller engine in the
C7. Since more than 50 years the formula was simple : american muscle. Why not just taking a LS3 and adding new features like direct fuel injection etc.. As we know a corvette is as great on fuel economy as many V6 turbocharged cars with 2/3 the power sp why trying to get a smaller engine.

Anyway the only motors GM made well are those 8 cylinders.

I Bin Therbefor

Another comment from the CEO:
In a recent meeting with engineers, for example, Akerson pressed them to explain the logic behind putting a big 6.2-liter engine in an unspecified car whose competitor has a 4.4-liter turbocharged engine. The engineers replied: "Well, we want to be able to beat the other guy."

Akerson responded: "I don't think the average buyer is going to buy an eight-cylinder, 530-horsepower (car)." His point: Decisions must be supported by a solid business case, and not just for bragging rights or as a marketing tool. Apparently BMW doesn't agree with Akerson. Gee, I wonder why? OP

This is the engine that the GM engineers (Cad?) wanted to beat.

"The new M5's M division-developed twin-turbocharged, 4.4 liter V8 develops 412 kW/560 hp at 6,000-7,000 rpm and a maximum torque of 680 Nm (502 lb-ft) from 1,500 rpm. Although BMW says the engine output is 10 percent up on the previous model M5 and the maximum torque has increased by 30 percent, the new M5 manages to cut fuel consumption by more than 30 percent over the previous M5, coming in at a combined figure of 9.9 liters/100 km (28.5 mpg), thanks to the inclusion of systems such as Auto Start-Stop and Brake Energy Regeneration."

SteveRiellyNZ

Since when is a corvette for the "Average Buyer"?

I'm looking to get one when I move to the US, because it's what other "muscle car" owners aspire to own, not because little miss next door has one her daddy bought her to go shopping in. I want the intake to suck her lap-dog up and spit it out the exhaust as I idle my way down the drive.

Putting a V6 in would be a disaster. I've seen it happen on the Holden here when they brought back the Holden Monaro ( 2dr Coupe ). It should have been a V8 HSV model only....but they put in a V6 as well for the average buyer.
Who's going to spend big dollars on a SC V8, only to know that the kid down the road has a V6 version that looks exactly the same?
That line didnt last very long before it was canned due to sales.

If I read correctly, the CAFE requirement is for economy across the line of GM cars? So would the volt etc with exceptional mileage, in conjunction with the efficiency of the LS3 etc mean its meeting requirements? I'm not sure it means the vette has to get 36MPG itself, or I'm sure the legal department could spin it that way.

There are a number of existing engines GM could use (LS4 with right redevelopment? ) that Twin Turbo's would give the same power as now, if not more, but also better mileage for normal driving. And as many comments have said, GM would have to be nuts to start from scratch and create a whole new engine when its just come out the other side of a Global Financial Crisis.

I'm looking at the tech that's used in the GM Holden's down here, and much if it would be suited for the vette, and its literally in the parts bin ( esp interior - nav, dash etc etc ), its just the shell/body that they can focus on.

Tommy D

OMG
Akerson responded: "I don't think the average buyer is going to buy an eight-cylinder, 530-horsepower (car)." His point: Decisions must be supported by a solid business case, and not just for bragging rights or as a marketing tool.

This guy may be a talented business man but he has no clue with regard to cars. The Corvette has a nice niche market which apparently has been adding incremental revenue to GM's bottom line. Why screw with success?

The average Corvette buyer purchases a Corvette because it has been something he wants to drive & experience. To many of us it is more emotional. That is something which Mr. Akerson and other business men fail to understand.

BTW Mr. Akerson the Corvette as a performance car has great gasoline mileage and is the best bang for the buck

GM and now Akerson have no clue how to market the Corvette. They fail to realize Corvette has it own little market. Why incur additional advertising expense going head to head with the European cars in the market place; if you don't have too. GM lost its shirt trying to expand the Cadillac brand in Europe and it sounds as if he is going to try it again.

Apparently, Akerson did not take notes or consider GM's past experience. In warfare you always try to avoid attacking the enemy's strong point, smart commanders by pass it, go around it or cut it off and go on to the next objective. Why trade off a buck of earnings per share trying to increase market share in a market that you have no chance of generating more business.

Corvette has the C6R which gets quite a bit of publicity in Europe by winning races "Win on Saturday sell cars on Monday". If you want to spend marketing $$$ start getting too the younger generation (children, tweens & teenagers). The movie Cars 2 finally has a Corvette in it,

In closing, the American auto industry lost it's market share because it did not listen to those who purchased the product. The Japanese & others capitalized on that fact and now own the market. Lets not repeat history.

Hopefully someone from GM is reading what us gear heads type:
DO NOT SCREW UP AN AMERICAN ICON

Purvis

F - U Ackerson. Dont mess with my high tech - large displacement V8.

If you do, Im not buying another Vette. So for every "new age" buyer you gain, you will lose 2-3 loyal veteren buyers.


Again, F-U

That is all.

aks801

Oh, give me a complete break.

Everyone in here who is having heart palpitations over an as-of-yet unbuilt car that might possibly not meet their personal definition of a Corvette just needs to get over themselves.

I know these cars stir up a whole lot of passion, which can be a really good thing, but a dose of perspective might be in order.

Ok, someone help me climb down off this dang soapbox, I might hurt myself.

Kevin_NYC

listen at 7:50...they need this guy

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/06/20/l...oit/#continued