Muscle Cars Buck Downward Trend in Coupe and Sports-Car Sales
12-19-2010, 01:43 PM
#41
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the current Corvette has a few good things about it. But... it also has a slew of serious issues resulting in it's lowest sales since 1961. All of which I pointed out. You can apologize for them all day long but that does nothing to fix them. Hopefully GM does, I like the Corvette and want it to succeed and it really deserves better. Right now it is far (and falling farther each year) from where it really needs to be. There's no excuse for the styling, terrible materials they make it out of, and shoddy workmanship. Especially for what GM is asking for the car. Especially when other cars they make are much better and cost less.
The ZR1 is especially disappointing in that it's literally a ZO6 with some tacked on, poorly integrated body parts, extremely expensive brakes and a blower. That's it? And it's over 100k? They didn't even bother to put a steering wheel gripped for human hands or proper high performance seats in it. Either they were too cheap to spend the money on Recaros (which they do bother to put in the CTS-V) or they figured the car would be purchased by posers (which is also true).
In contrast the Viper has exceptional seats in in standard form. Chrysler even gave that car some very special and focused special editions in making it a honed and proper beast, the last and greatest being the ACR-X. Ford's flagship was a new car from the ground up that paid proper homage to the legandary GT. Side-by-side there's no question which one is the better supercar and more exotic. Where was the proper homage to the ZR1 in the modern ZR1? Just a blower doesn't cut it.
Look at it this way. The Corvette is GM's flagship car. Yet it exhibits all the bad things that GM has been notorious for from the inside out. For a flagship and having a model that is GM's most expensive car it sets a bad example.
If GM put half the effort into the Corvette they did with something like the CTS-V or the Camaro or the same effort Ford put into the Ford GT it would be the car it should be, a Hell of a car.
12-19-2010, 02:04 PM
#42
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,290
Likes: 0
Received 1,723 Likes
on
1,235 Posts
I see objectivity is not a strong suit when it comes to the Corvette.
Yes, the current Corvette has a few good things about it. But... it also has a slew of serious issues resulting in it's lowest sales since 1961. All of which I pointed out. You can apologize for them all day long but that does nothing to fix them. Hopefully GM does, I like the Corvette and want it to succeed and it really deserves better. Right now it is far (and falling farther each year) from where it really needs to be. There's no excuse for the styling, terrible materials they make it out of, and shoddy workmanship. Especially for what GM is asking for the car. Especially when other cars they make are much better and cost less.
The ZR1 is especially disappointing in that it's literally a ZO6 with some tacked on, poorly integrated body parts, extremely expensive brakes and a blower. That's it? And it's over 100k? They didn't even bother to put a steering wheel gripped for human hands or proper high performance seats in it. Either they were too cheap to spend the money on Recaros (which they do bother to put in the CTS-V) or they figured the car would be purchased by posers (which is also true).
In contrast the Viper has exceptional seats in in standard form. Chrysler even gave that car some very special and focused special editions in making it a honed and proper beast, the last and greatest being the ACR-X. Ford's flagship was a new car from the ground up that paid proper homage to the legandary GT. Side-by-side there's no question which one is the better supercar and more exotic. Where was the proper homage to the ZR1 in the modern ZR1? Just a blower doesn't cut it.
Look at it this way. The Corvette is GM's flagship car. Yet it exhibits all the bad things that GM has been notorious for from the inside out. For a flagship and having a model that is GM's most expensive car it sets a bad example.
If GM put half the effort into the Corvette they did with something like the CTS-V or the Camaro or the same effort Ford put into the Ford GT it would be the car it should be, a Hell of a car.
Yes, the current Corvette has a few good things about it. But... it also has a slew of serious issues resulting in it's lowest sales since 1961. All of which I pointed out. You can apologize for them all day long but that does nothing to fix them. Hopefully GM does, I like the Corvette and want it to succeed and it really deserves better. Right now it is far (and falling farther each year) from where it really needs to be. There's no excuse for the styling, terrible materials they make it out of, and shoddy workmanship. Especially for what GM is asking for the car. Especially when other cars they make are much better and cost less.
The ZR1 is especially disappointing in that it's literally a ZO6 with some tacked on, poorly integrated body parts, extremely expensive brakes and a blower. That's it? And it's over 100k? They didn't even bother to put a steering wheel gripped for human hands or proper high performance seats in it. Either they were too cheap to spend the money on Recaros (which they do bother to put in the CTS-V) or they figured the car would be purchased by posers (which is also true).
In contrast the Viper has exceptional seats in in standard form. Chrysler even gave that car some very special and focused special editions in making it a honed and proper beast, the last and greatest being the ACR-X. Ford's flagship was a new car from the ground up that paid proper homage to the legandary GT. Side-by-side there's no question which one is the better supercar and more exotic. Where was the proper homage to the ZR1 in the modern ZR1? Just a blower doesn't cut it.
Look at it this way. The Corvette is GM's flagship car. Yet it exhibits all the bad things that GM has been notorious for from the inside out. For a flagship and having a model that is GM's most expensive car it sets a bad example.
If GM put half the effort into the Corvette they did with something like the CTS-V or the Camaro or the same effort Ford put into the Ford GT it would be the car it should be, a Hell of a car.
But no matter, everything in your post continues to be nothing more than your subjective opinion.
As much as you seem to think the rest of us are apologizing for the modern Corvette, I think you have developed tunnel vision that sees only an '84 Cross-fire injected POS. You are just as bad as your accusations towards the rest of us; you only see what you want to see.
12-19-2010, 02:57 PM
#43
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see objectivity is not a strong suit when it comes to the Corvette.
Yes, the current Corvette has a few good things about it. But... it also has a slew of serious issues resulting in it's lowest sales since 1961. All of which I pointed out. You can apologize for them all day long but that does nothing to fix them. Hopefully GM does, I like the Corvette and want it to succeed and it really deserves better. Right now it is far (and falling farther each year) from where it really needs to be. There's no excuse for the styling, terrible materials they make it out of, and shoddy workmanship. Especially for what GM is asking for the car. Especially when other cars they make are much better and cost less.
The ZR1 is especially disappointing in that it's literally a ZO6 with some tacked on, poorly integrated body parts, extremely expensive brakes and a blower. That's it? And it's over 100k? They didn't even bother to put a steering wheel gripped for human hands or proper high performance seats in it. Either they were too cheap to spend the money on Recaros (which they do bother to put in the CTS-V) or they figured the car would be purchased by posers (which is also true).
In contrast the Viper has exceptional seats in in standard form. Chrysler even gave that car some very special and focused special editions in making it a honed and proper beast, the last and greatest being the ACR-X. Ford's flagship was a new car from the ground up that paid proper homage to the legandary GT. Side-by-side there's no question which one is the better supercar and more exotic. Where was the proper homage to the ZR1 in the modern ZR1? Just a blower doesn't cut it.
Look at it this way. The Corvette is GM's flagship car. Yet it exhibits all the bad things that GM has been notorious for from the inside out. For a flagship and having a model that is GM's most expensive car it sets a bad example.
If GM put half the effort into the Corvette they did with something like the CTS-V or the Camaro or the same effort Ford put into the Ford GT it would be the car it should be, a Hell of a car.
Yes, the current Corvette has a few good things about it. But... it also has a slew of serious issues resulting in it's lowest sales since 1961. All of which I pointed out. You can apologize for them all day long but that does nothing to fix them. Hopefully GM does, I like the Corvette and want it to succeed and it really deserves better. Right now it is far (and falling farther each year) from where it really needs to be. There's no excuse for the styling, terrible materials they make it out of, and shoddy workmanship. Especially for what GM is asking for the car. Especially when other cars they make are much better and cost less.
The ZR1 is especially disappointing in that it's literally a ZO6 with some tacked on, poorly integrated body parts, extremely expensive brakes and a blower. That's it? And it's over 100k? They didn't even bother to put a steering wheel gripped for human hands or proper high performance seats in it. Either they were too cheap to spend the money on Recaros (which they do bother to put in the CTS-V) or they figured the car would be purchased by posers (which is also true).
In contrast the Viper has exceptional seats in in standard form. Chrysler even gave that car some very special and focused special editions in making it a honed and proper beast, the last and greatest being the ACR-X. Ford's flagship was a new car from the ground up that paid proper homage to the legandary GT. Side-by-side there's no question which one is the better supercar and more exotic. Where was the proper homage to the ZR1 in the modern ZR1? Just a blower doesn't cut it.
Look at it this way. The Corvette is GM's flagship car. Yet it exhibits all the bad things that GM has been notorious for from the inside out. For a flagship and having a model that is GM's most expensive car it sets a bad example.
If GM put half the effort into the Corvette they did with something like the CTS-V or the Camaro or the same effort Ford put into the Ford GT it would be the car it should be, a Hell of a car.
This post couldn't possibly be farther off-base. It's hard to find truth with all the bullshit loaded in there.
I can't take anything away from the Ford GT in terms of concept...Ford had a great idea and put out a great offering...but it was and still is a POS. Poor build quality, shitty ergonomics, and despite all it had going for it, performance was really sub-par (though not by alot i'll admit).
If you think a Viper has a better interior than a C6, you clearly haven't spent much time in one. Yeah it's greatly improved from the first generation, but it's still not up to Vette standards (and that's not to say that the Vette is great on fit and finish, it's not). The Viper's seats may look great, but they are anything but comfortable and supportive.
There's no question that despite the fact that the C6 interior is not great, it's easily the best of the big three supercars.
Is there a bullshit quota in this section of the forum? It seems that the closer we get to the end of the year, the more ridiculous the claims get in this section.
Wow.
12-19-2010, 03:13 PM
#44
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eau Claire-ish, WI
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-19-2010, 03:24 PM
#45
I think the Corvette just needs a bit of a refresh. The C6 has been around for a few years, why buy a new one that is the same as one a couple years old, basically? Once the C7 comes that should help.
I see a lot of pointless arguing over it in this thread, enough I didn't bother reading all 3 pages.
For the Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger sales, I'm happy on that
I see a lot of pointless arguing over it in this thread, enough I didn't bother reading all 3 pages.
For the Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger sales, I'm happy on that
12-19-2010, 04:29 PM
#46
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's the comment about the "great" Porsche interior again...where do people get this from? Porsche's interiors SUCK. They look like they are right out of the 80's, with more monotone then the 4th gen WS6, and styling that could pass for a Boeing design. Hardly a benchmark to compare anything.
And yes, for a Corvette to do what it can do at the price it does it at, something has to give. The interior is what gives. There's really nothing wrong with the C6 interior, it's very nice. However it does not compete with the interiors that the C6's performance puts it up against. But again, those interiors are in cars that retail for at least double what the C6 does.
And yes, for a Corvette to do what it can do at the price it does it at, something has to give. The interior is what gives. There's really nothing wrong with the C6 interior, it's very nice. However it does not compete with the interiors that the C6's performance puts it up against. But again, those interiors are in cars that retail for at least double what the C6 does.
I've always thought Porsche interiors were very nice... that's from a Cayman S.
Yep. And I don't necessarily agree with everything TriShield said, but he's not nearly as "crazy" as a few of you are making him out to be. He has some very valid points.
12-19-2010, 05:10 PM
#47
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't cast too many stones at windows, dude. You've been a very high profile fanboy in this section for a while now. Only difference is that you play up the weaknesses of other brands while playing down the cons of GM products. I don't see eye to eye with Trishield on alot of things, but I do agree with him that GM should be looking to go more upscale with the Corvette. They've got the Camaro back now, there's no excuse for them trying to keep the Corvette so low cost/low rent. Too many here are just willing to except it as is because it's cheap and more excessible to them.
12-19-2010, 06:08 PM
#48
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eau Claire-ish, WI
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see eye to eye with Trishield on alot of things, but I do agree with him that GM should be looking to go more upscale with the Corvette. They've got the Camaro back now, there's no excuse for them trying to keep the Corvette so low cost/low rent. Too many here are just willing to except it as is because it's cheap and more excessible to them.
12-19-2010, 07:37 PM
#49
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that's what the Corvette has always been, a bargain sports car that could keep up with the best of them. If they want to do something more upscale they can't call it a Corvette, nobody is going to pay $150k+ for a Corvette and they won’t be making an upscale car with ZR1 specs for less than that. And even if the Corvette is having a hard time selling right now they are still selling about 50 or more of them for every Viper sold, it's not like they aren't selling at all.
12-19-2010, 08:56 PM
#50
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't cast too many stones at windows, dude. You've been a very high profile fanboy in this section for a while now. Only difference is that you play up the weaknesses of other brands while playing down the cons of GM products. I don't see eye to eye with Trishield on alot of things, but I do agree with him that GM should be looking to go more upscale with the Corvette. They've got the Camaro back now, there's no excuse for them trying to keep the Corvette so low cost/low rent. Too many here are just willing to except it as is because it's cheap and more excessible to them.
12-19-2010, 09:05 PM
#51
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's what i'm used to from porsche:
You can't tell me that's any better than this:
12-19-2010, 09:12 PM
#52
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just from looking at it, I like the Porsche interior better. And the fact that I know the entire interior is wrapped in leather just makes it better. Like everybody knows, there is a reason that the Corvette only costs $45k. And it isn't the powertrain. You can't praise a car for being a performance bargain, and then complain when people point out the car's shortcomings. I absolutely LOVE Corvettes, and have for about half my life. Hell, my favorite modern Corvette (that I have a chance of buying in the next 5 years) is the LT4 model, because I like C4s. I know ALL of the C4's shortcomings, and I still love them. So I don't jump down people's throats when they point out that the chassis is as stiff as a wet noodle and the interior is a complete and utter clusterfuck. Same with my mom's '01 Z51/6spd; the interior is terrible, it rattles every time you breathe at it wrong, the targa top creaks when you hit a pebble in the road... but I still love the car. Cars are a lot like women in that aspect, I suppose. They don't have to be supermodels with PhD's for you to love them.
12-19-2010, 09:24 PM
#53
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But I do (as noted before) agree with most of the rest of your post. On a car that can do what the Vette can do at that price point, something has to give. The interior is not world-beating like the car's performance is...however it's not BAD either. That's MY point...it's not going to outshine a BMW or Bentley, but it's not anything nearly as bad as some in this thread make it out to be...and it's DEFINITELY the best of it's domestic competition.
12-19-2010, 10:54 PM
#54
TECH Senior Member
All of which I pointed out. You can apologize for them all day long but that does nothing to fix them. Hopefully GM does, I like the Corvette and want it to succeed and it really deserves better. Right now it is far (and falling farther each year) from where it really needs to be. There's no excuse for the styling
, terrible materials they make it out of, and shoddy workmanship.
Especially for what GM is asking for the car. Especially when other cars they make are much better and cost less.
Its funny I never hear and complaints about the (lack of) interior the Elise has and the walmart playhouse build quality of them (every time I have shut the door of an Elise its feels like its going to come off), rather they excuse it because its a purpose built track car. The Corvette is as well, yet offers better built quality, materials, options and luxuries for the same price.
The ZR1 is especially disappointing in that it's literally a ZO6 with some tacked on, poorly integrated body parts, extremely expensive brakes and a blower. That's it? And it's over 100k?
Yea, I totally wouldn't pay 100K for a Corvette that can completely embarrass 300K+ supercars... What an underachiever...
They didn't even bother to put a steering wheel gripped for human hands or proper high performance seats in it. Either they were too cheap to spend the money on Recaros (which they do bother to put in the CTS-V) or they figured the car would be purchased by posers (which is also true).
In contrast the Viper has exceptional seats in in standard form. Chrysler even gave that car some very special and focused special editions in making it a honed and proper beast, the last and greatest being the ACR-X. Ford's flagship was a new car from the ground up that paid proper homage to the legandary GT. Side-by-side there's no question which one is the better supercar and more exotic. Where was the proper homage to the ZR1 in the modern ZR1? Just a blower doesn't cut it.
12-19-2010, 11:00 PM
#55
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eau Claire-ish, WI
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interior is not world-beating like the car's performance is...however it's not BAD either. That's MY point...it's not going to outshine a BMW or Bentley, but it's not anything nearly as bad as some in this thread make it out to be...and it's DEFINITELY the best of it's domestic competition.
I didn't see this before, but you are the only person I have heard call the GT a POS. I don't think a POS would still sell for more than what it did new 6 years later, while the Corvette you are comparing it to has dropped to half of what they were...
12-19-2010, 11:03 PM
#56
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In all honesty, I would like to know how much it would add to the bottom line of a ZR1 for the interior to look like that. If it looked like that, was made out of high quality materials, and didn't creak/rattle (haven't noticed much of that in C6s), people would pay more for it. If you're gonna spend $110k on a Corvette, I bet you'd spend $115k for one with an interior that rivals the best out there.
12-19-2010, 11:36 PM
#57
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eau Claire-ish, WI
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In all honesty, I would like to know how much it would add to the bottom line of a ZR1 for the interior to look like that. If it looked like that, was made out of high quality materials, and didn't creak/rattle (haven't noticed much of that in C6s), people would pay more for it. If you're gonna spend $110k on a Corvette, I bet you'd spend $115k for one with an interior that rivals the best out there.
http://www.zorly.com/images_corvette...%20cockpit.jpg
I think if they had an interior like that other picture it would be atleast a $15k option.
12-19-2010, 11:53 PM
#58
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I bet people would pay for it. You can get a Porsche interior similar to that for $10k. For $20k literally the ENTIRE interior (rearview mirror, vents, etc) can be covered in natural leather.
12-19-2010, 11:54 PM
#59
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've always found porsche's designs to be a bit boring.
From their interior to their exterior.
That being said, the 911 is one of my favorite cars...
Doesn't make much sense, does it?
From their interior to their exterior.
That being said, the 911 is one of my favorite cars...
Doesn't make much sense, does it?
