When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I have noticed that a common theme in the speculation about a mid engine is the significant increased cost of the mid engine configuration. I guess I am not clear as to why folks think it will be significantly more expensive. It consists of essentially the same parts just positioned a bit differently. Since they will be starting with a clean platform and not using any new and exotic technologies (mid engine cars have been around for a long time) I would think the costs to develop a new mid engine wouldn't be that much different than a rear wheel drive design. GM has mass produced more mid engine cars than any other car company. GM's version 1.0 mid engine was, well it was what it was some econo box parts re-purposed to underpin a car that it's sporty looks significantly exceeded the ability of the generic parts to deliver. However GM's version 2.0 mid engine was another story. It was built specifically to be a mid engine performer and shared nothing from the version 1.0 parts bin (as a result it is very difficult to get parts for) When GM put the 1st test mules on tracks with hi-po engines the Corvettes of the day could not keep with them and yet even with their proprietary, sports performance mid engine configuration they sold for approximately half the price of the Corvette of the day (minus the HI-PO test engine)
For one thing, the existing "transaxle" where the transmission is in front of the differential will not work in a mid engine Corvette. A completely new "transaxle' will be required that has the transmission located behind the differential. That means that GM won't be able to use an existing transmission(either the GM Hydramatic or the Tremec manual transmission).
A completely new transaxle that is not subsidized by a million pickup trucks, Camaros and Cadillac's, etc will really run the cost up in a mid engine Corvette.
^^^ Yes, but not with a base price of $56K in today's money.
The OP is pursuing the question of why a mid-engine vehicle will be significantly higher in price. Actually, the Ford GT supports the higher cost premise.
Joe makes a very good point. Corvette has been able to keep the price down by sharing development costs with other GM lines. Examples include the LS and LT engines shared with other GM vehicles as was the auto transmissions. If they can't do that with the mid-engine model, it will mean the full cost of development must be supported by sales of the vehicle and that won't happen at the current $56K base price.
Last edited by Steve Garrett; 01-13-2017 at 08:29 PM.
Reason: No need to re-quote the previous post, especially if you're the next person posting.
Yes, but not with a base price of $56K in today's money.
The OP is pursuing the question of why a mid-engine vehicle will be significantly higher in price. Actually, the Ford GT supports the higher cost premise.
Joe makes a very good point. Corvette has been able to keep the price down by sharing development costs with other GM lines. Examples include the LS and LT engines shared with other GM vehicles as was the auto transmissions. If they can't do that with the mid-engine model, it will mean the full cost of development must be supported by sales of the vehicle and that won't happen at the current $56K base price.
I looked at a new 2005 Ford GT at my local Ford dealer, It's MSRP was $139,995 with a $10,000 option(wheels) for a total of $149,995. A 2005 C6 was $43,710.
Very little of the GT was shared with a conventional Ford(especially the DCT transaxle) and the extra $96,295 in the MRSP showed it.
PS- The Ford dealer had tacked on a "market adjustment" of $100,000. I walked back to my C5 and drove home.
I am guessing the version 1.0 might be the Corvair and 2.0 the Fiero - neither were high performance, and neither sold well.
And therein lies the rub - no mid-engined car has ever sold in significant volume.
You need volume to amortize engineering and tooling costs. Assuming the C7 production run lasts 8 years, at 30,000 per year average, that is 240,000 cars to spread those costs out - GM did their calculation based upon 20,000 C7's/yr, so GM is making lots of money on the C7. If they only sold 6,000/yr (which is 4x-5x the Viper, GTR, NSX), about what Porsche sells in Caymans worldwide, the amortization and tooling costs would triple, and all the other costs would go up too. Instead of a $55,000 base price car, it would more likely be a $75,000 base price car.
You can either make volume or sell for a high price per car - low price & low volume doesn't work. Acura will supposedly just break even on the new $170,000 NSX at 1,500/yr; would GM sell more than 3,000/yr if mid-engine C8's were $150k?
I am guessing the version 1.0 might be the Corvair and 2.0 the Fiero - neither were high performance, and neither sold well.
And therein lies the rub - no mid-engined car has ever sold in significant volume.
You need volume to amortize engineering and tooling costs. Assuming the C7 production run lasts 8 years, at 30,000 per year average, that is 240,000 cars to spread those costs out - GM did their calculation based upon 20,000 C7's/yr, so GM is making lots of money on the C7. If they only sold 6,000/yr (which is 4x-5x the Viper, GTR, NSX), about what Porsche sells in Caymans worldwide, the amortization and tooling costs would triple, and all the other costs would go up too. Instead of a $55,000 base price car, it would more likely be a $75,000 base price car.
You can either make volume or sell for a high price per car - low price & low volume doesn't work. Acura will supposedly just break even on the new $170,000 NSX at 1,500/yr; would GM sell more than 3,000/yr if mid-engine C8's were $150k?
The new NSX starts at $159,000 and Honda has the capacity to build approximately 2,000-2,000 annually in Ohio. For the first year they are building 900 for the US market and 100 for the Japanese market.
I bet that Acura fully researched the cost to build the NSX and how many they can expect to sell and their pricing reflects making a profit yet being competitive.
GM originally priced the 2009 ZR1 based on them building approximately 2,000/year for three years(as was reported). That was with a car that mostly relied on existing components from the base C6 and the C6 Z06 yet was priced considerably higher than the Z06, which was priced considerably higher than the base C6.
Low volume costs more money to build per unit. Personally, I don't think they can sell enough mid engine Corvettes to keep the price low. Too many people like the current architecture of the Corvette and like the ability to drive a reasonably priced car as a daily driver and too many like to be able to carry enough stuff to go on a two week road trip without having to do the laundry every night at the motel.
^^^ If you would have bought it at that price you now would have tripled your investment. And own an icon.
I'm not very good at predicting the future(I should have been a TV weatherman), and I wasn't about to spend $250,000(Plus tax, title and license) that I didn't have to spend on a toy, speculating on the Ford GT's collectability some 12 years down the road.
I am guessing the version 1.0 might be the Corvair and 2.0 the Fiero - neither were high performance, and neither sold well.
And therein lies the rub - no mid-engined car has ever sold in significant volume.
Might want to re-think the statement about the Corvair sales volume. Over 1,680,000 were sold and that does not include the truck, either wagon designs or Canadian sales.
Also, you never had the opportunity to dice it out with a Corvair Spyder. They were downright nasty in capable hands. My 289 Mustang with the handling pack was no match for one. The later 360ci Mustang GTs might take a Spyder on a straight but Corvairs lived for curves where they would pass all but the best handling cars of that time period. And those sold for way more, usually double what a Spyder sold for.
Last edited by roadbike56; 01-14-2017 at 09:10 AM.
I looked at a new 2005 Ford GT at my local Ford dealer, It's MSRP was $139,995 with a $10,000 option(wheels) for a total of $149,995. A 2005 C6 was $43,710.
Very little of the GT was shared with a conventional Ford(especially the DCT transaxle) and the extra $96,295 in the MRSP showed it.
PS- The Ford dealer had tacked on a "market adjustment" of $100,000. I walked back to my C5 and drove home.
At some point, Honda produced the Acura NSX as their "halo" car and not as a stand-alone, mid-engine, profitable vehicle. I would bet that it never made enough money to cover all its sunk costs even with 18K cars sold over 15 years. In fact, in the last several years, worldwide, the model was selling in the very low, single-digits. When asked why Honda continued to even make the car, the answer was because they were an engineering company and the car demonstrated their commitment to engineering. The last model was '05.
How about the Deloran the "BACK TO THE FUTURE CAR" minus the "Flux Capacitor" it was a reasonable priced mid engine car that NEVER caught on. Maybe, it was ahead of it's time...NO PUN INTENDED
I'm not very good at predicting the future(I should have been a TV weatherman), and I wasn't about to spend $250,000(Plus tax, title and license) that I didn't have to spend on a toy, speculating on the Ford GT's collectability some 12 years down the road.
I am more reflecting my own self loathing as i could have done that deal back then.. so its me not you....
GM is making the same mistake they did with the C6. Too many different models of the same car. If everything is true here is what they will offer for 2018-2019
Base Coupe/Convertible
Z51 Coupe/Convertible
GS Coupe/Convertible
ZO6/Coupe/Convertible
ZR1 Coupe/Convertible
Mid Engine Super Car
That's 11 different models of one car. Now excluding the Mid Engine car you also have 3 different trim levels which now makes 30 different cars. How is a dealer suppose to order inventory for stock? Most will never have the right car on the lot.
Since the price of the C7 keeps going up most dealer cars for stock are now 1LT's If GM can offer 20% off MSRP when they want move cars off dealers lots maybe they should take that money and use it differently.
Make the base coupe/convertible in one equipment group and throw in heated/cool seats, HUD, dual mode exhaust as standard equipment and don't kill us on the MSRP
Discontinue the Z51 Model
Make the Grand Sport standard with HUD, heated/cool seats, Navigation. Offer the 3Lt interior as an option.
Discontinue the ZO6
ZR1 takes the place of the ZO6
The Mid Engine Car only build 800 cars a year. It will keep the demand and value up.
01-13-2017, 05:36 PM
Real costs of mass production mid-engine?
