Why is the C6 so expensive ?????
05-04-2009, 10:07 PM
#81
Racer
Member Since: Aug 2008
Location: Morganton NC
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What if GM is subsidizing the cost of the Camaro? If they are banking on selling Mustang-like volumes of the things, they can get away with less of a profit margin on each car.
I get your drift with the original post--in a way, it seems like the brand-new Camaro is being given at a huge discount all the hard work the Corvette has done over the last few decades.
Each year Corvette is thrown into a pit of competition that gets faster and more refined, and thanks to the engineers at GM the vette manages to keep up with the pack. Every year the car seems to get faster and more complicated. How much money has been spent on research for that small block alone?
Time will tell if the Camaro is really that much of a bargain. The Corvette has proven itself; if the new Camaro holds up as well--reliability, performance, endurance, heritage--then we can call the vette overpriced. I really doubt it. I am driving an icon; the new Camaro, for now, is just a good looking car.
I get your drift with the original post--in a way, it seems like the brand-new Camaro is being given at a huge discount all the hard work the Corvette has done over the last few decades.
Each year Corvette is thrown into a pit of competition that gets faster and more refined, and thanks to the engineers at GM the vette manages to keep up with the pack. Every year the car seems to get faster and more complicated. How much money has been spent on research for that small block alone?
Time will tell if the Camaro is really that much of a bargain. The Corvette has proven itself; if the new Camaro holds up as well--reliability, performance, endurance, heritage--then we can call the vette overpriced. I really doubt it. I am driving an icon; the new Camaro, for now, is just a good looking car.
05-04-2009, 11:32 PM
#82
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: Bann Camp & N.Y.C.
Posts: 26,900
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
St. Jude Donor '08
1. They have an exclusive assembly plant. So cost per unit rolling out is higher
2. Because of the Camaro w/LS3 being near 40K, The base price C6 would be close, so they bumped the price..
3. Inflation....
4. GM is trying to change the Corvette's image so they bumped the price out of rednecks budget........
5. Short version of #4. Too many Vettes in Trailer Parks.
2. Because of the Camaro w/LS3 being near 40K, The base price C6 would be close, so they bumped the price..
3. Inflation....
4. GM is trying to change the Corvette's image so they bumped the price out of rednecks budget........
5. Short version of #4. Too many Vettes in Trailer Parks.
05-05-2009, 01:39 AM
#84
Le Mans Master
05-05-2009, 01:54 AM
#86
The Corvette is plastic, but it has been since 1953, so that isn't exactly new or high tech. The Corvette uses an engine developed for Chevy trucks (L92) with trivial modifications to make it a LS3. It is a very nice engine, but its basic technology was developed in 1955. The auto tranny has button shift, but Chrysler had push button on the dash shifting in the 1961 Valiant. Nothing new there either. And BTW for whoever touted the tranny in the rear, the 1963 Pontiac Tempest used a torque tube and had its transmission located in the rear with the differential. Corvette's laminated balsa wood floors are about the most advanced high tech thing about the car. That does save a small amount of weight, but the Corvette weighs more than 1.5 tons, almost the same to the pound as a 1967 Impala. That's not light. A real sports car, the Austin Healey Sprite, weighed in a 1435 pounds. That's a light car. Where's the beef?
05-05-2009, 03:44 AM
#87
Le Mans Master
It's a car. At a fundamental level, most systems in cars have been around for a while.
Aside from the engine-management, active handling, and navigation gadgets, most of the really game-changing tech is in R&D, materials science and manufacturing. That's how they're able to mass-produce super-reliable cars with ultra-low emissions that do mid-12s in the quarter mile, lap the 'ring in the high 7-minutes and hold up in crash tests.
Nobody was able to pull that off even ten years ago.
Aside from the engine-management, active handling, and navigation gadgets, most of the really game-changing tech is in R&D, materials science and manufacturing. That's how they're able to mass-produce super-reliable cars with ultra-low emissions that do mid-12s in the quarter mile, lap the 'ring in the high 7-minutes and hold up in crash tests.
Nobody was able to pull that off even ten years ago.
05-05-2009, 05:05 AM
#88
Intermediate
Member Since: Mar 2009
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top End Feel
This is a very valid question and as much response that's came from it means that we've all rationalized it at some point. For me it only came when I broke 170mph, after that there was a true sense of value of the C6.
05-05-2009, 05:06 AM
#89
Le Mans Master
Member Since: May 2005
Location: Hope, Arkansas - '07 LMB Coupe
Posts: 5,865
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Cruise-In VIII Veteran
The two main factors that determine why the Corvette is so expensive are marketing research, and supply vs. demand. Not the build cost or the development cost.
05-05-2009, 05:38 AM
#90
Get Some!
You don't know what you are talking about or how cars are constructed. Read some Corvette engineering books. Also, the lower the volume the higher the price.
05-05-2009, 06:14 AM
#91
Melting Slicks
05-05-2009, 09:01 AM
#92
Le Mans Master
05-05-2009, 09:33 AM
#93
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Aug 1999
Location: N Carolina 08 Z51 Coupe
Posts: 5,411
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Uh, what technology might that be? A really bad stereo with mixed mono (1955 tech) and cheap Mexican paper cone speakers? Dozens of electromechanical relays instead of solid state switches? (Relay technology is over 100 years old, and failure prone.) Nasty Sachs OEM shocks that cause the rear of the car to skitter?
The Corvette is plastic, but it has been since 1953, so that isn't exactly new or high tech. The Corvette uses an engine developed for Chevy trucks (L92) with trivial modifications to make it a LS3. It is a very nice engine, but its basic technology was developed in 1955. The auto tranny has button shift, but Chrysler had push button on the dash shifting in the 1961 Valiant. Nothing new there either. And BTW for whoever touted the tranny in the rear, the 1963 Pontiac Tempest used a torque tube and had its transmission located in the rear with the differential. Corvette's laminated balsa wood floors are about the most advanced high tech thing about the car. That does save a small amount of weight, but the Corvette weighs more than 1.5 tons, almost the same to the pound as a 1967 Impala. That's not light. A real sports car, the Austin Healey Sprite, weighed in a 1435 pounds. That's a light car. Where's the beef?
The Corvette is plastic, but it has been since 1953, so that isn't exactly new or high tech. The Corvette uses an engine developed for Chevy trucks (L92) with trivial modifications to make it a LS3. It is a very nice engine, but its basic technology was developed in 1955. The auto tranny has button shift, but Chrysler had push button on the dash shifting in the 1961 Valiant. Nothing new there either. And BTW for whoever touted the tranny in the rear, the 1963 Pontiac Tempest used a torque tube and had its transmission located in the rear with the differential. Corvette's laminated balsa wood floors are about the most advanced high tech thing about the car. That does save a small amount of weight, but the Corvette weighs more than 1.5 tons, almost the same to the pound as a 1967 Impala. That's not light. A real sports car, the Austin Healey Sprite, weighed in a 1435 pounds. That's a light car. Where's the beef?
Indexed windows, HUD, sat radio, bluetooth.. etc..
Most of these high tech add-ons come without a weight penalty.
As for the Austin Healey sprite... you got wood floors that rot, no power, lousy electonics, fussy carbs, crap brakes, no room or comfort,
but you're right about one thing.. it weighed less.. hardly a car never mind a sports car
05-05-2009, 09:37 AM
#94
Racer
Member Since: Apr 2003
Location: Shrewsbury MA
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting Thread
Someone here mentioned the seperate factory.
I am surprised no one has mentioned tooling costs. The costs for tooling of a hydroformed frame and tooling for the "glass" body panels is more than a stamped or bent metal chassis/body.
I am surprised no one has mentioned tooling costs. The costs for tooling of a hydroformed frame and tooling for the "glass" body panels is more than a stamped or bent metal chassis/body.
05-05-2009, 09:52 AM
#95
It's a car. At a fundamental level, most systems in cars have been around for a while.
Aside from the engine-management, active handling, and navigation gadgets, most of the really game-changing tech is in R&D, materials science and manufacturing. That's how they're able to mass-produce super-reliable cars with ultra-low emissions that do mid-12s in the quarter mile, lap the 'ring in the high 7-minutes and hold up in crash tests.
Nobody was able to pull that off even ten years ago.
Aside from the engine-management, active handling, and navigation gadgets, most of the really game-changing tech is in R&D, materials science and manufacturing. That's how they're able to mass-produce super-reliable cars with ultra-low emissions that do mid-12s in the quarter mile, lap the 'ring in the high 7-minutes and hold up in crash tests.
Nobody was able to pull that off even ten years ago.
05-05-2009, 10:00 AM
#96
Safety Car
I agree with all of what you said .... BUT ....
I didnt answer my question .
Its not a matter of "is it worth it" - IT IS .
Its a matter of WHY is it so expensive .
If GM can make , and profit off of a 30k Camaro , why not price the Vette at 35k and sell them like hot cakes ....
I didnt answer my question .
Its not a matter of "is it worth it" - IT IS .
Its a matter of WHY is it so expensive .
If GM can make , and profit off of a 30k Camaro , why not price the Vette at 35k and sell them like hot cakes ....
Bottomline you really wanted a Vette! You take this to the bank
05-05-2009, 10:35 AM
#97
Le Mans Master
I do, actually - a full report on the side-impact performance of the C6. They don't just design these things and never test them.
I have no idea why the NHTSA web site doesn't include this data, or data for so many other cars which are also crash-tested.
I have no idea why the NHTSA web site doesn't include this data, or data for so many other cars which are also crash-tested.
05-05-2009, 11:12 AM
#98
Melting Slicks
It would be really interesting to do a bare bones cost comparison and business model test of the two models. Take away the excess GM costs and advertising too.
Would be an interesting case! I see where your questions are coming from.
Would be an interesting case! I see where your questions are coming from.
05-05-2009, 11:59 AM
#99
aka allbottle¬hrottle
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Brooklyn New York The DVL and the chicken sleep with the fishes....
Posts: 13,759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
St. Jude Donor '08
Uh, what technology might that be? A really bad stereo with mixed mono (1955 tech) and cheap Mexican paper cone speakers? Dozens of electromechanical relays instead of solid state switches? (Relay technology is over 100 years old, and failure prone.) Nasty Sachs OEM shocks that cause the rear of the car to skitter?
The Corvette is plastic, but it has been since 1953, so that isn't exactly new or high tech. The Corvette uses an engine developed for Chevy trucks (L92) with trivial modifications to make it a LS3. It is a very nice engine, but its basic technology was developed in 1955. The auto tranny has button shift, but Chrysler had push button on the dash shifting in the 1961 Valiant. Nothing new there either. And BTW for whoever touted the tranny in the rear, the 1963 Pontiac Tempest used a torque tube and had its transmission located in the rear with the differential. Corvette's laminated balsa wood floors are about the most advanced high tech thing about the car. That does save a small amount of weight, but the Corvette weighs more than 1.5 tons, almost the same to the pound as a 1967 Impala. That's not light. A real sports car, the Austin Healey Sprite, weighed in a 1435 pounds. That's a light car. Where's the beef?
The Corvette is plastic, but it has been since 1953, so that isn't exactly new or high tech. The Corvette uses an engine developed for Chevy trucks (L92) with trivial modifications to make it a LS3. It is a very nice engine, but its basic technology was developed in 1955. The auto tranny has button shift, but Chrysler had push button on the dash shifting in the 1961 Valiant. Nothing new there either. And BTW for whoever touted the tranny in the rear, the 1963 Pontiac Tempest used a torque tube and had its transmission located in the rear with the differential. Corvette's laminated balsa wood floors are about the most advanced high tech thing about the car. That does save a small amount of weight, but the Corvette weighs more than 1.5 tons, almost the same to the pound as a 1967 Impala. That's not light. A real sports car, the Austin Healey Sprite, weighed in a 1435 pounds. That's a light car. Where's the beef?
05-05-2009, 01:46 PM
#100
Drifting
You could also got to the far end of the extreme as say why not get the cheepest Hyundai you can buy instead of a Corvette. Both will get you from point A to point B. Both will go the posted legal speed limit. What's the difference????
Mark
Mark
