|
Originally Posted by rcallen484
(Post 1582762677)
Yep. He's a security guard on the 3rd shift at the St. Catharines Engine Plant in Canada, or something like that :rock: :rock: :rock:
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/4..._002_super.jpg |
Originally Posted by 1320vetteran
(Post 1582762854)
Ox and Keeks on the job looking at the C7!:rofl:
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/4..._002_super.jpg |
Originally Posted by 1320vetteran
(Post 1582762854)
Ox and Keeks on the job looking at the C7!:rofl:
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/4..._002_super.jpg |
Originally Posted by 1320vetteran
(Post 1582762854)
Ox and Keeks on the job looking at the C7!:rofl:
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/4..._002_super.jpg http://www.betternation.org/wp-conte..._1024_768.jpeg |
Originally Posted by BlueOx
(Post 1582763009)
Nah, more like this...that's me on the left.:D
http://www.betternation.org/wp-conte..._1024_768.jpeg |
|
Keeks on his break
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/image...farisrogen.jpg |
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
|
|
Originally Posted by GmdVT
(Post 1582762356)
Yeah real silly to believe Jalopnik saw some early body panels instead of believing GM itself let them see the car and do a controlled release :rolleyes:
Go back and read the original 2011 Jalopnik story....they claim to have spent HOURS with 2 undisguised C7's, and yet, they only gave us renderings???? No one had a smart phone on them? I guess they (Jalopnik) were "protecting" their source which is the excuse (for no photos) I've heard a million times. The problem with the "protecting the source" deal is that there couldn't be many C7's laying around in November 2011 and I'm sure that GM knew where they ALL WERE at any given time. Roll your eyes all you want, and enjoy the Jalopnik koolaid. And almost 13 months after the Jalopnik "renderings" appeared, why has there not been ONE car phototgraphed undisguised???? Jimmy |
Originally Posted by jimmyb
(Post 1582763668)
Go back and read the original 2011 Jalopnik story....they claim to have spent HOURS with 2 undisguised C7's, and yet, they only gave us renderings???? No one had a smart phone on them? I guess they (Jalopnik) were "protecting" their source which is the excuse (for no photos) I've heard a million times. The problem with the "protecting the source" deal is that there couldn't be many C7's laying around in November 2011 and I'm sure that GM knew where they ALL WERE at any given time.
Roll your eyes all you want, and enjoy the Jalopnik koolaid. And almost 13 months after the Jalopnik "renderings" appeared, why has there not been ONE car phototgraphed undisguised???? Jimmy "These renderings were derived from hours this weekend I (and our designer) spent in secret, poring over the completely uncamouflaged "sheetmetal" of two versions of the next-gen Corvette." There is no way this is a GM marketing conspiracy |
Originally Posted by GmdVT
(Post 1582763738)
Maybe "you" should go back and read it
"These renderings were derived from hours this weekend I (and our designer) spent in secret, poring over the completely uncamouflaged "sheetmetal" of two versions of the next-gen Corvette." There is no way this is a GM marketing conspiracy Jimmy |
Sigh, they didn't see the car, they saw sheet metal body panels probably due to some careless supplier.
|
Originally Posted by jimmyb
(Post 1582763898)
I don't think this is a "conspiracy". I also don't believe that a GM supplier or a GM employee gave Jalopnik access to the car without some higher up's blessing at GM. I believe they saw what they saw (and rendered), I just doubt that it was "in secret". After Jalopnik's "scoop", all they have done since is post stuff from other people (Keek's CADs, Blue Ox's owners manual drawings, Trinity's renders, etc). If GM security was (is) that lax, why haven't we seen a photo of the undisguised car? The car will be revealed in 6 days, we had seen photos of the C5 and the C6 prior to the "reveal", in the case of the C5, MONTHS before reveal and in the case of the C6, six weeks before the reveal. As a final thought, why did Jalopnik ONLY show a rendering of the "high performance" C7 only, which, most everyone agrees, will not appear before 2016? They spent "hours" with both cars.....
Jimmy |
Originally Posted by GmdVT
(Post 1582763919)
Sigh, they didn't see the car, they saw sheet metal body panels probably due to some careless supplier.
Jimmy |
Originally Posted by GmdVT
(Post 1582763919)
Sigh, they didn't see the car, they saw sheet metal body panels probably due to some careless supplier.
Not to mention the Vette is made of fiberglass and composites.. not sheet metal :) Here is the link to the original JP article: http://jalopnik.com/5858683/exclusiv...chevy-corvette |
Jimmyb, please do better than "clever marketing ploy" to explain why a GM higher-up would allow leaking such a comprehensive look at the new Corvette 18 months before it's available for sale... and then deny it and go to not-insignificant lengths to squash later releases of much-less comprehensive information.
The simpler explanation is that Jalopnik people got temporary access to an undisguised representation, physical or otherwise, of the next-generation Corvette, in contravention of GM security measures. .Jinx |
Also a few things to note from the author of the JP article. You can tell he has actually seen a completed car, not just a bunch of parts.
1) Seems there is no additional widebody version of C7. The JP author has seen BOTH the a base version and a high performance model to debut later, which he describes as ZR1 "trim". He did not state it was wider. 2) The JP author has pictures. He clearly states that he did not want to show actual photos as it would reveal his sources. 3) The JP author states the C7 drawing shown is of an actual IVER car that was being used at the Milford proving grounds. 4) I think what he means by "sheetmetal" is that the surface of the vehicle was bare (i.e. not painted). These renderings were derived from hours this weekend I (and our designer) spent in secret, poring over the completely uncamouflaged "sheetmetal" of two versions of the next-gen Corvette. With limited time, we decided to, rather than show you the first one, a base level Corvette, we focused our rendering efforts instead on the high-performance ZR1 trim level. None of our sources were willing to go on the record or allow me to run their name for fear they might lose their jobs. That's also why I'm showing renderings rather than actual photos — I don't care if it might cast doubt on the veracity of the styling — but I didn't want anyone losing their job over this. That said, we showed these images to three different sources at General Motors — and all three confirmed that the images you see here accurately portray the ZR1 trim level for the seventh-generation Corvette. A fourth source — a non-GM employee — confirmed that the vehicle we show here is one of two Initial Vehicle Engineering Release (IVER) vehicles that's been making the rounds at the Milford Proving Grounds. |
Originally Posted by Daekwan06
(Post 1582764297)
I disagree. They got the wheels, windows, taillights, exhaust, headlights, mirrors, you-get-the-point right. Its hard to believe they saw just a bunch parts lying around and not the entire assembled car.
Not to mention the Vette is made of fiberglass and composites.. not sheet metal :) Here is the link to the original JP article: http://jalopnik.com/5858683/exclusiv...chevy-corvette Keeks CAD of the 3/4 rear shot is probably 100% accurate but the Jalopnik rendering has a different size and different placement on these lights. Let me add that the details on the rear fascia (lower vents ,etc,) are off too. If they were looking at a toy these mistakes could come easy. If a toy was photographed it would reveal their sources. |
Originally Posted by John T
(Post 1582764421)
I think a telltale issue with Jalopnik might be the side marker lamps. Jalopnik claims they had full access to the real deal + hours to scrutinize the car yet they got the placement and scale wrong on the side lamps.
Keeks CAD of the 3/4 rear shot is probably 100% accurate but the Jalopnik rendering has a different size and different placement on these lights. Let me add that the details on the rear fascia (lower vents ,etc,) are off too. If they were looking at a toy these mistakes could come easy. If a toy was photographed it would reveal their sources. I agree that Keeks CAD images are probably the most accurate production drawings we have seen so far. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:00 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands