GM doesn't care about pedigree...
01-18-2014, 10:56 AM
#61
Racer
Member Since: Nov 2012
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been looking at some of the Porsche boards, and we also had a post from an M3 owner on the site recently. What I'm learning is that the German car fans, as well as some Corvette fans, are confused about where their manufacturers are heading. IMHO that is what the OP is really expressing here.
I think the rapidly changing technology, the new CAFE standards, the seemingly inexorable march to electric cars or hybrids, and changes in the economics of auto manufacture, are causing concerns among thoughtful enthusiasts,
I can understand this.
I think the rapidly changing technology, the new CAFE standards, the seemingly inexorable march to electric cars or hybrids, and changes in the economics of auto manufacture, are causing concerns among thoughtful enthusiasts,
I can understand this.
BMW has probably veered of their historical path more than anyone. Their "i Series" portfolio sports the 40K i3 and 130K i8 hybrids. They ditched the NA V10s for TTV8s in their M cars and their cars are heavier than ever. Not exactly what I would call "The Ultimate Driving Machine" anymore.
If anything, GM is staying as true to performance as anyone. Cadillac is now the luxury leader in lightweight engineering and chassis dynamics, something BMW used to be known for. Not to mention, GM doesn't take a back seat to many on power; their cars largely lead the pack on this front.
Porsche enthusiasts should know exactly what's happening with their brand. Porsche went from the NA V10, RWD three pedal Carerra GT to the V8 hybrid, AWD torque vectoring, DCT 918. They've been racing with hybrid technology for a minute now and it's available on their street cars too. The writing is on the wall for them.
It only takes a split second of though to notice that EVERYONE is doing the same thing, yet we always get these "end of the world" posts about the Corvette. Everyone else has to deal with the same business challenges but I don't see any shortage of high performance vehicles. Performance is at an all time high and that won't stop. It just needs to be obtained in new and innovative ways.
The market direction has nothing to do with the US dictating changes. New green standards are be implemented all over the world! I don't feel sorry for GM, BMW, Porsche or Ferrari because they're fine and completely capable of adapting to these changes while still providing the products we love. I demand more from car makers now, not less. And guess what? They still deliver.
01-18-2014, 11:00 AM
#62
Intermediate
Member Since: Aug 2013
Location: Jupiter Florida
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My thoughts...which will probably not be received well...but I don't mind.
I posted this in another thread, but figured I should start my own for the sake of discussion. I think GM did corvette guys a huge favor. There used to be a corvette for every user out there. Wanted an auto?...get a GS. Wanted the flagship? Drop the coin and get a ZR1. Wanted a hardcore track car? You get the ZO6. Their prices were reflected accordingly...and the results were what you paid for.
Now, GM reshuffles the deck and says screw the hassle and losing money on making 4 different vettes to make buyers happy. The SOLUTION!!! Make a one size fits all Corvette. The C7 Z is exactly that. They combined the Grandsport, and ZR1 and eliminated the ZO6 out of the line-up all together. This way...the GS crowd gets their auto with aggressive looks and the ZR1 guys get the big brakes and blower. Mix up a bag of options and what do you have? The GS, and ZR1 all assembled the same way and badged a ZO6; all under one roof and on the same assembly line. This saves GM HUGE $$$$$ on tooling, parts, manual labor hours, production times, etc. AND!!! GM now gets a huge price tag for every one produced by badging it the ZO6. I love the "$85K" estimated price tag too. After mark-up look at at LEAST 100-110K. Total win win for GM.
Yes, for me this car marks the end of the road between GM and I. I will never again buy a GM product...but I offer them congrats on forever ruining the ZO6 pedigree.
I truly have to thank all of you future C7 ZRGSZO6 owners as well...with every purchase you solidify the C6Z as the last TRUE ZO6.
I posted this in another thread, but figured I should start my own for the sake of discussion. I think GM did corvette guys a huge favor. There used to be a corvette for every user out there. Wanted an auto?...get a GS. Wanted the flagship? Drop the coin and get a ZR1. Wanted a hardcore track car? You get the ZO6. Their prices were reflected accordingly...and the results were what you paid for.
Now, GM reshuffles the deck and says screw the hassle and losing money on making 4 different vettes to make buyers happy. The SOLUTION!!! Make a one size fits all Corvette. The C7 Z is exactly that. They combined the Grandsport, and ZR1 and eliminated the ZO6 out of the line-up all together. This way...the GS crowd gets their auto with aggressive looks and the ZR1 guys get the big brakes and blower. Mix up a bag of options and what do you have? The GS, and ZR1 all assembled the same way and badged a ZO6; all under one roof and on the same assembly line. This saves GM HUGE $$$$$ on tooling, parts, manual labor hours, production times, etc. AND!!! GM now gets a huge price tag for every one produced by badging it the ZO6. I love the "$85K" estimated price tag too. After mark-up look at at LEAST 100-110K. Total win win for GM.
Yes, for me this car marks the end of the road between GM and I. I will never again buy a GM product...but I offer them congrats on forever ruining the ZO6 pedigree.
I truly have to thank all of you future C7 ZRGSZO6 owners as well...with every purchase you solidify the C6Z as the last TRUE ZO6.
I am not sure I agree. If want everything that all past Vettes had, and more, then a buy a regular Stingray in coupe or convertible. If you want the ultimate Corvette ever made in performance, then get a Z06.
Your right about costs and tooling. It makes no sense to make a zr1 on top of this z06. Remember, GM doesnt exist for the pleasure of Corvette clubs and Corvette enthusiasts. Its a business.
Many of you that werent around then dont realize how close GM came to dropping the Corvette altogether. That discussion was hot and heavy in 1983.
01-18-2014, 11:32 AM
#64
Melting Slicks
01-18-2014, 11:40 AM
#65
Le Mans Master
Yup...that's it. I'm butt hurt. I'm butt hurt that I have to wait (which I don't) to get behind the wheel of the ugliest corvette ever made, that I paid ZR1 pricing for, that basically is a ZR1 because there is no ZO6 to buy. 
Well done GM. I'm actually happy for them that they have so many people excited that they can buy a ZR1 for cheaper than before.
Well done GM. I'm actually happy for them that they have so many people excited that they can buy a ZR1 for cheaper than before.
I know there are alot of folks that would like to see a big N/A power stomper. However, looking at the current trends and the automotive environment, those days are coming to quick end. Manufacturers know that if they want to produce these high performance cars, that they will have to find new roads to get there. Big cubes will make for great museum pieces in the future, but they need to make and sell cars that people can actually afford to drive. The move to more efficient power isn't just a California thing, it is a global thing, and for any major manufacturer to be successful they have to think on a global level, and this is what GM is doing.
Oh, and before the C6, when did GM actually offer four completely different Corvettes? Prior to the C4, which introduced the ZR1, It was always one chassis with a choice of engine and suspension/braking packages. Then with the C4 there was the base car, or the ZR1. In the C5 there was the base car, or the Z06. Now, we have returned to the two car model.
As far as pedigree? Well, there's really only one pedigree for the Z06. That is a car that utilizes the best of the tech of the time to create a very track capable Corvette that will wipe the snot out of cars costing 3x as much on a track, yet be able to handle all mundane daily driving tasks just as easily. It seems that GM is honoring that pedigree pretty well.
And I see nothing wrong with a car that can out perform the vaulted ZR1 for under six figures. Anyway, off to the kitchen for some more kool-aide.
01-18-2014, 11:57 AM
#67
Le Mans Master
01-18-2014, 12:15 PM
#68
The Consigliere
Member Since: May 2006
Location: 2023 Z06 & 2010 ZR1
Posts: 22,261
Received 5,457 Likes
on
2,274 Posts
The first ZR1 package offered in the C3 didn't much resemble the C6 ZR variant as far as approach. The C3 LT1 solid lifter smallblock and the LS9 are both great mills, tho (even iconic).
Where they remained linked is with regard to the objectives or goals. Performance.
The new Z is pursuing the same objectives and goals of the previous one. Approach may differ, but mission remains the same.
To me, the pedigree continues.
Where they remained linked is with regard to the objectives or goals. Performance.
The new Z is pursuing the same objectives and goals of the previous one. Approach may differ, but mission remains the same.
To me, the pedigree continues.
01-18-2014, 01:21 PM
#69
Le Mans Master
Thread Starter
The first ZR1 package offered in the C3 didn't much resemble the C6 ZR variant as far as approach. The C3 LT1 solid lifter smallblock and the LS9 are both great mills, tho (even iconic).
Where they remained linked is with regard to the objectives or goals. Performance.
The new Z is pursuing the same objectives and goals of the previous one. Approach may differ, but mission remains the same.
To me, the pedigree continues.
Where they remained linked is with regard to the objectives or goals. Performance.
The new Z is pursuing the same objectives and goals of the previous one. Approach may differ, but mission remains the same.
To me, the pedigree continues.
The new car is nothing impressive to me when compared to the C6 ZR1. It's 50 pounds heavier than the C6 and power is about the same. It's the same roots style blower, same pushrod style engine (albeit with direct injection, and some other new tech bells and whistles) and with the same brakes.
People are saying it will decimate all on the track...well that will either be true or not when they start doing some head to head type stuff. It's all bench racing until it's actually being tracked. Not saying you did, but its NOT ACCURATE to compare it to a C6 ZO6. They have nothing in common. Personally, I think people will see fairly quickly that the performance will be on par with previous ZR1's.
It's nothing more than a ZR1 with a new body and some additional options. Nothing more. Kudo's to GM for making it cheap by ZR1 standards...
Last edited by Pb82 Ronin; 01-18-2014 at 01:40 PM.
01-18-2014, 02:08 PM
#70
Le Mans Master
We're half a year into the first model year of the C7 and you're so certain about future models, huh? As in every Corvette and every car, the C7 will go through many product life cycles, with new models, options, colors, etc. to keep it fresh and sales as strong as possible.
01-18-2014, 02:19 PM
#71
Team Owner
01-18-2014, 03:50 PM
#72
Melting Slicks
From that perspective, I could agree. Someone else mentioned the C5 generation only having 2 models...valid. GM transitioning back to a 2 model generation makes sense when you look at it that way. This change could make or break GM (EDIT: When I re-read this, this most likely wont be the case...GM will be fine even in the corvette tanks). I look at it as GM getting lazy again.
The new car is nothing impressive to me when compared to the C6 ZR1. It's 50 pounds heavier than the C6 and power is about the same. It's the same roots style blower, same pushrod style engine (albeit with direct injection, and some other new tech bells and whistles) and with the same brakes.
The new car is nothing impressive to me when compared to the C6 ZR1. It's 50 pounds heavier than the C6 and power is about the same. It's the same roots style blower, same pushrod style engine (albeit with direct injection, and some other new tech bells and whistles) and with the same brakes.
People are saying it will decimate all on the track...well that will either be true or not when they start doing some head to head type stuff. It's all bench racing until it's actually being tracked. Not saying you did, but its NOT ACCURATE to compare it to a C6 ZO6. They have nothing in common. Personally, I think people will see fairly quickly that the performance will be on par with previous ZR1's.
It's nothing more than a ZR1 with a new body and some additional options. Nothing more. Kudo's to GM for making it cheap by ZR1 standards...
01-18-2014, 04:03 PM
#73
Le Mans Master
From that perspective, I could agree. Someone else mentioned the C5 generation only having 2 models...valid. GM transitioning back to a 2 model generation makes sense when you look at it that way. This change could make or break GM (EDIT: When I re-read this, this most likely wont be the case...GM will be fine even in the corvette tanks). I look at it as GM getting lazy again.
The new car is nothing impressive to me when compared to the C6 ZR1. It's 50 pounds heavier than the C6 and power is about the same. It's the same roots style blower, same pushrod style engine (albeit with direct injection, and some other new tech bells and whistles) and with the same brakes.
People are saying it will decimate all on the track...well that will either be true or not when they start doing some head to head type stuff. It's all bench racing until it's actually being tracked. Not saying you did, but its NOT ACCURATE to compare it to a C6 ZO6. They have nothing in common. Personally, I think people will see fairly quickly that the performance will be on par with previous ZR1's.
It's nothing more than a ZR1 with a new body and some additional options. Nothing more. Kudo's to GM for making it cheap by ZR1 standards...
The new car is nothing impressive to me when compared to the C6 ZR1. It's 50 pounds heavier than the C6 and power is about the same. It's the same roots style blower, same pushrod style engine (albeit with direct injection, and some other new tech bells and whistles) and with the same brakes.
People are saying it will decimate all on the track...well that will either be true or not when they start doing some head to head type stuff. It's all bench racing until it's actually being tracked. Not saying you did, but its NOT ACCURATE to compare it to a C6 ZO6. They have nothing in common. Personally, I think people will see fairly quickly that the performance will be on par with previous ZR1's.
It's nothing more than a ZR1 with a new body and some additional options. Nothing more. Kudo's to GM for making it cheap by ZR1 standards...
Last edited by 1985 Corvette; 01-18-2014 at 04:09 PM.
01-18-2014, 04:11 PM
#74
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2000
Location: North Dallas 40 TX
Posts: 6,468
Received 4,382 Likes
on
2,070 Posts
Thank you for posting something worth responding to. I appreciate your input. I totally agree about the GT3...and the Viper being a purist platform.
Manual "option" sure, but I honestly think the the auto/manual option really was to combine all the platforms and give the end user the warm and fuzzy feeling of the "choice." Sure I represent the purist side of the house, so I do have a slightly biased perspective...but compare the C6 ZR1 to the C7 ZO6. When I look at the new "ZO6" it's the same "bells and whistles" as the previous ZR1. 6.2, blower, carbon brakes, etc, etc. There is no more "purist" track version for the Vette owners anymore. If I were to swap my current C6 ZO6 to a new C7 ZO6...it doesn't exist. Its an upgrade to a ZR1 platform or a blown GS (depending on how you look at it). GM announced that there is no ZR1 coming....and why or even how could they justify a GS model? It would have to be a "ZO6" body with the base model engine/performance. The cost/benefit analysis would not come out favorable for GM hence I'm using my "crystal ball" to hypothesize that there will not be a GS either. The C7 ZO6 body is not a cheap body to make for GM, so to run/mate a Z body to a base model powertrain might satifsy the GS nomenclature...but you'll drive up the cost considerably.
I could see (if a GS comes to fruition) $80K for the GS, and a the normal $100-110K for the Z. In fact I bet folks will find $110K for the new "Z" a deal. Someone mentioned earlier that GM makes no money from dealer mark-ups...and their completely correct. HOWEVER! This does NOT stop dealerships from marking them up. I happens with EVERY car company. Remeber the Ford SVT Raptor? MSRP $42K...and average going price from any Ford dealer? $50-55K. How about the ZO6? MSRP was supposed to be $75,600. Try going to ANY dealership and getting a 2013 ZO6 for $75.6. My local dealership (both of them) don't even have ZO6's on the lot. You have to order it. What happens when you do? The mark up... Expect a 20-25% on the Z...everywhere. It has always been that way...it WILL ALWAYS be that way.
I got told previosuly I don't get out much...I disagree. I'm very aware of the greed of GM and individual dealerships. I think some folks are just in denial about the new car thinking that they're actually buying a new ZO6. You're going to pay ZR1 prices for a ZR1 that has just been dubbed a ZO6 because GM isn't giving the option for a GS...or a flagship ZR1. Thus making them more money because the "purist" in all of us refuse to drive a base model.
Manual "option" sure, but I honestly think the the auto/manual option really was to combine all the platforms and give the end user the warm and fuzzy feeling of the "choice." Sure I represent the purist side of the house, so I do have a slightly biased perspective...but compare the C6 ZR1 to the C7 ZO6. When I look at the new "ZO6" it's the same "bells and whistles" as the previous ZR1. 6.2, blower, carbon brakes, etc, etc. There is no more "purist" track version for the Vette owners anymore. If I were to swap my current C6 ZO6 to a new C7 ZO6...it doesn't exist. Its an upgrade to a ZR1 platform or a blown GS (depending on how you look at it). GM announced that there is no ZR1 coming....and why or even how could they justify a GS model? It would have to be a "ZO6" body with the base model engine/performance. The cost/benefit analysis would not come out favorable for GM hence I'm using my "crystal ball" to hypothesize that there will not be a GS either. The C7 ZO6 body is not a cheap body to make for GM, so to run/mate a Z body to a base model powertrain might satifsy the GS nomenclature...but you'll drive up the cost considerably.
I could see (if a GS comes to fruition) $80K for the GS, and a the normal $100-110K for the Z. In fact I bet folks will find $110K for the new "Z" a deal. Someone mentioned earlier that GM makes no money from dealer mark-ups...and their completely correct. HOWEVER! This does NOT stop dealerships from marking them up. I happens with EVERY car company. Remeber the Ford SVT Raptor? MSRP $42K...and average going price from any Ford dealer? $50-55K. How about the ZO6? MSRP was supposed to be $75,600. Try going to ANY dealership and getting a 2013 ZO6 for $75.6. My local dealership (both of them) don't even have ZO6's on the lot. You have to order it. What happens when you do? The mark up... Expect a 20-25% on the Z...everywhere. It has always been that way...it WILL ALWAYS be that way.
I got told previosuly I don't get out much...I disagree. I'm very aware of the greed of GM and individual dealerships. I think some folks are just in denial about the new car thinking that they're actually buying a new ZO6. You're going to pay ZR1 prices for a ZR1 that has just been dubbed a ZO6 because GM isn't giving the option for a GS...or a flagship ZR1. Thus making them more money because the "purist" in all of us refuse to drive a base model.
The supercharger? There have been supercharged road race cars for decades.
The automatic? The Chaparral used a modified Powerglide in 1960's CanAM racing quite successfully.
So highlight the upgrade that you think fails as being track oriented. We will show you where it has been a successful part of racing tradition.
Perhaps your knowledge of tradition is just not broad enough.
01-18-2014, 04:16 PM
#75
I am not sure I agree. If want everything that all past Vettes had, and more, then a buy a regular Stingray in coupe or convertible. If you want the ultimate Corvette ever made in performance, then get a Z06.
Your right about costs and tooling. It makes no sense to make a zr1 on top of this z06. Remember, GM doesnt exist for the pleasure of Corvette clubs and Corvette enthusiasts. Its a business.
Many of you that werent around then dont realize how close GM came to dropping the Corvette altogether. That discussion was hot and heavy in 1983.
Your right about costs and tooling. It makes no sense to make a zr1 on top of this z06. Remember, GM doesnt exist for the pleasure of Corvette clubs and Corvette enthusiasts. Its a business.
Many of you that werent around then dont realize how close GM came to dropping the Corvette altogether. That discussion was hot and heavy in 1983.
If the C7 doesn't sell as well as GM hopes, it could happen again. We don't know if the new CEO is a vette fan or vette hater.
01-18-2014, 04:19 PM
#76
01-18-2014, 04:57 PM
#77
Melting Slicks
OP, maybe you could ask GM if they'll sell you one of their aluminum frame models with just the one seat, engine, and 4 tires so you can lay claim to the most stripped-down Z06.
As quick04Z06 said, it's possible some people are just confused with the direction the industry is going, and the changing economics of the auto industry.
However, I think there is also confusion among some people that GM was building something that they really weren't. For example, when GM produced the C5 Z06 with the massively ugly fixed roof, some people actually thought that GM was recognizing the fact that a fixed roof was required for track usage, and that an ugly roof was even better, because it demonstrates what a purpose-built car it was.
See, that's the problem right there. GM had to install a fixed roof because as revolutionary as the C5 was at the time, it was still not very rigid by today's standards. A fixed roof was needed to help it compete on the track. It was ugly because it was cheap, and GM wasn't going to pour a ton of money into a great roof that would only sell a few hundred/thousand units.
I guess a decade of seeing the necessity of a fixed roof on the older, more wobbly cars created the impression in some people's minds that a fixed roof = great track car. I guess they feel betrayed when all the sudden GM comes around and says everything they've come to believe about a fixed roof is not true -- that the Corvette has such a stiff structure now that it's not necessary to limit the Z06 to a fixed roof.
After all, there certainly is no requirement on the track to have a fixed roof, because they only thing that matters on a track (aside from the roll protection of the coupe) is that it functions well. When the C7Z handily beats a C6Z's time on the track, does the fact that the roof panel is capable of being detached matter in any way? I feel silly to even have to ask that question. Of course it doesn't.
So if it doesn't matter on the track, then obviously the answer is that it matters only in the minds of certain people unwilling to have more than one narrow view.
As quick04Z06 said, it's possible some people are just confused with the direction the industry is going, and the changing economics of the auto industry.
However, I think there is also confusion among some people that GM was building something that they really weren't. For example, when GM produced the C5 Z06 with the massively ugly fixed roof, some people actually thought that GM was recognizing the fact that a fixed roof was required for track usage, and that an ugly roof was even better, because it demonstrates what a purpose-built car it was.
See, that's the problem right there. GM had to install a fixed roof because as revolutionary as the C5 was at the time, it was still not very rigid by today's standards. A fixed roof was needed to help it compete on the track. It was ugly because it was cheap, and GM wasn't going to pour a ton of money into a great roof that would only sell a few hundred/thousand units.
I guess a decade of seeing the necessity of a fixed roof on the older, more wobbly cars created the impression in some people's minds that a fixed roof = great track car. I guess they feel betrayed when all the sudden GM comes around and says everything they've come to believe about a fixed roof is not true -- that the Corvette has such a stiff structure now that it's not necessary to limit the Z06 to a fixed roof.
After all, there certainly is no requirement on the track to have a fixed roof, because they only thing that matters on a track (aside from the roll protection of the coupe) is that it functions well. When the C7Z handily beats a C6Z's time on the track, does the fact that the roof panel is capable of being detached matter in any way? I feel silly to even have to ask that question. Of course it doesn't.
So if it doesn't matter on the track, then obviously the answer is that it matters only in the minds of certain people unwilling to have more than one narrow view.
One note of warning--remember when the early C6Z06s with the (supposedly) fixed roof were having that roof de-laminate? I sure hope the C7Z07, with its targa top, keeps that top firmly attached at 170 mph on the back straight at Road Atlanta....
And, while just my opinion, I like the C5Z06 roof line--no way to mistake it for a more mundane C5 and its roof was well and truly fixed at any speed. It would have been nice if Chevy offered a removable fastback valance in Lexan to decrease drag for the track.
And, the C5 chassis was very stiff for its time. I could jack it from one spot and change both tires and when I balled up my silver 04 at Road Atlanta--glancing blow into the concrete at about 75 or so--the doors still opened and shut perfectly. I know the C6 and now the C7 chassis are stiffer yet, but the C5 was no flexi-flyer.
Last edited by quick04Z06; 01-18-2014 at 05:05 PM.
01-18-2014, 06:15 PM
#78
Melting Slicks
To paraphrase you are simply saying that because the new Z06 will have an automatic transmission option they ruined the brand?
It's 2014 and most all the worlds super cars have autos and have had them for years now and it's been long overdue that GM would stop listening to those who refuse to stop living in the past.
No disrespect intended but your way of thinking about transmissions are just not based in reality. To honestly think that given the facts one would still believe that anything but a manual transmission in a Corvette is a sin or ruins the brand is just pure sentimentality and not based in fact.
It's 2014 and most all the worlds super cars have autos and have had them for years now and it's been long overdue that GM would stop listening to those who refuse to stop living in the past.
No disrespect intended but your way of thinking about transmissions are just not based in reality. To honestly think that given the facts one would still believe that anything but a manual transmission in a Corvette is a sin or ruins the brand is just pure sentimentality and not based in fact.
01-18-2014, 06:25 PM
#79
Melting Slicks
In forty plus years maybe... I think it will be one of the more popular Corvettes to collect because it is probably going to be considered the end of an era. However, they just made too damn many to be considered highly sought after until most if not all of the members on this forum are dead and buried.
01-18-2014, 06:47 PM
#80
Le Mans Master
I am impressed with how Chevy has stayed "true" with the Z06, though, with improvements in every category. They really went all out to be the best, and they had high goals right from the start. It deserves the Z06 name.
Michael