Racer X

Metal is faster to produce. So in high volume you can stamp a lot of fenders in an hour. The GRP, and SMC, and carbon fiber takes a LOT longer to form. So it is not well suited to really high volumes. It may be more expensive than steel. Some do use it.

geezerman

good god,...where did they come up with that number?!,....i know a fair number a porsche owners, and other than the rare birds who actually buy them brand new,...i know of few that seem to making that buckage!,...maybe i'm in with a "low end" crowd of porsche owners,...but that's just amazing to me if that's true!,...so what do they say the average 'vette owner makes?,...ferrari owners must all be millionaires,...well,...actually, i guess THAT is a given,...i would venture that a vette buyer purschasing a zr1 new would be making the big bucks too!,...those puppies aren't cheap either,...and i actually think there should be a fair amount of cross-over there,...some 911 owners would probably like to sample the wares of the corvette, and vis versa,...just a thought....

Racer X

Probably new 911 buyers, not owners. It's like the age of new Corvette buyers, very very few under 30, probably less than 1%. But lots of Corvette owners under 30. It's all in the exact wording of the statistic. Is it the "average" , median, or mode? How do they take the statistics? do they ask for ranges of income or stated income ( a single $ figure). At lot of surveys stop over 100k or 200k or 250k. So they don't get a true "average" income.

pTr73

Saturns used it, and if you dont think its lighter, go stamp a metal clone of your corvette fender and compare weight. Its harder to stamp metal than mold plastic.

BobRBob

I don't think Saturn used the same material. As for lighter, I don't think so. It's a draw at best. To be strong enough, SMC has to be thicker than steel panels. As for fabrication, metal is much easier to work than any composite material. Tooling is cheaper for SMC so the economics can work for low volume runs where the cost of tooling for steel would not be sufficiently amortized. That is why it was selected for the C1 back in the beginning but that can't be the reason for using it today.

Frankly, I think the Corvette is made of plastic because Corvettes have always been made of plastic. It's a sacred cow.

Racer X

Lotus uses it. They make what is probably the lightest production full body sports car. You must know more that Lotus about building a lightweight car and the advantages of using fibreglass type body panels than they do.

Actually the Saturn cars used some of the same materials. Staurn used more than one "plastic" depending on the surface. The Corvette does as well.

BobRBob

The high tech composites and aluminum used by Lotus more closely resemble the materials used in the ZR1 than the more common SMC fibre glass and plastics used in the base Corvette. Lotus may also enjoy the cost advantages that accrue from the use of composites in low volume applications. I don't know what their volumes are.

Most of the reasons I hear given whenever this topic comes up don't really explain why Corvette bodies are made of SMC. To me, it feels more like inertia than anything else. If the case for SMC was so compelling (less costly, easier to fabricate, lighter), seems to me it would see far wider use in the industry than it does.

And remember, Saturn went under. They really aren't a good reference for how to do anything in the car business.

jackhall99

I have not read the entire thread regarding the discussion of the use of "plastic" on the Corvette. Maybe I should, but without reading all of it I don't get the point of the 'anti' position.

The 'vette started out 59 years ago with some form of FRP for its body. That is its signature. Why change that when it works.

BobRBob

Well, I guess that's the point I'm making. Corvette's are made of plastic because Corvettes have always been made of plastic and that's about the extent of it.

It's not that I'm against it particularly. I'm just wondering why GM uses it when there may not be a business case for it, other than tradition.

StArrow68

Plastic/Fiber Glass seems to be lighter than steel, light is good.

As for attracting younger buyers, sure lots of young folks would love a
Vette, but who can afford it? Mine was two years after the kid got out
of College and an afterthought at that. But it is the best and most fun
I've had behind the wheel, aspire and you might succeed. The reward
is fun.

Racer X

I have been to the Lotus factory in Hethel and the Elise and Exige are put together with chopper and hand laid mat. There was not carbonfibre and $6,000 a gallon UV blocking clear coat as on the ZR-1. It is not as high tech as the panels used on the Corvette.

Saturn did not fail because of the materials used to make the body panels.

Just as the Fiero did not fail due to the materials used to make it's body panels, or the method of assembly.

jackhall99

OK, and thanks.

My guess is tradition, and it has worked well for everybody.

A side note: After waiting five months for my '69 coupe (car ordered during the end of the '68 run, and the early non-availability of the side mount exhaust delayed delivery), I finally got my green pride and joy.

Five weeks later, while driving to work on I376 in the Edgewood area of Pittsburgh in stop and go traffic, a semi didn't stop. He crushed a station wagon and involved five more cars in the chain. I was the next-to-last car in the 'chain'.

My Corvette was cracked throughout the entire body structure, but retained its basic shape, absorbing the shock of the impact beautifully. The Mercedes Benz sedan I hit had its trunk shoved into the back seat!

I'm not knocking the MB for crushing the way it did; its crush zone worked well, nor the totaled steel cars behind mine. But I was proud of the 'vette also doing a great job protecting me.

I, for one, vote 'Don't change the body construction.'

Topas

There are lot of thing on Corvette that exist just because they have been done this way since the early years:
- fiberglass body
- composite leaf springs
- ladder frame (basically)
- until recently, popup headlights. Remember the cry of fans when C6 lost them?

Personally, I don't mind. It's what makes a Corvette Corvette. But I am looking forward to which (if any) of these kind-of dogmas are going to be broken in C7.

BobRBob

I was talking about the Evora. Sounds like the other models are pretty basic in this regard. Lotus probably uses FRP in other models to avoid the high costs of tooling for steel for a low volume car, same as Corvette in the early years, but I don't know that. I don't claim to be an expert on this subject. I just asked why Corvette uses FRP for their body panels and I still don't know. I don't believe FRP is easier to fabricate, less expensive and lighter than steel for the same strength. Again, if it was, everyone would use it because no one could afford to ignore such compelling advantages. That said, I do believe the economics work for low volume vehicles.

I didn't say Saturn failed because they used plastic body panels. I just said I wouldn't use Saturn as a reference for anything because it is a failed company and they were clearly doing something wrong. They couldn't sell a car for more than it cost them to make it. Plastic body panels may have been part of the problem. Who knows.

Shrike6

Regarding the demographics of the Corvette buyers. For the price point, you can never get the kids. Cheapening it is out for obvious reasons.
So you need to broaden the pool of potential buyers to include people of the same demographic who never considered Corvettes before.
People love the looks of my C6, but get confused about the real performance attributes. They think of it as a blunt instrument compared to their BMW or Porsche or other cars. They don't see a quality interior or sophisticated suspension system. A laser sharp steering quality, supple, controlled ride, and nice technology. This perception needs to be worked.
Chevy needs to step up and address all the differences perceived between the Corvette and it's rivals, blow the competition away with style and value, and actually advertise! Yes, commercials and showing up at all the gatherings of potential buyers to give comparison test drives. Product placement where well heeled buyers look.
You want more buyers for Corvettes? Steal them away from other marques!
Make the C7 an out of the park home run, jaw-dropper!
Then go out and sell it!
Oh, and get another commercial like "A boy's dream" and don't pull it. It was a terriffic commercial!

pTr73

[QUOTE=BobRBob;1579030776]I don't think Saturn used the same material.[\quote]

It wasnt the same exact chemical compound but it was still a plastic resin of some sort. After all GM was saturns parent company.

Why would the body panels need to be strong? They dont hold the car together. You can remove all the body panels and the car will still have the same solidity.

jackhall99

Advertising is important. GM has not done enough of it with the Corvette. The ad "A Boy's Dream" was absolutely great, but GM folded to the menopausal ladies running some safety groups.

Leaders of several auto safety groups sent letters to GM chairman and CEO protesting the television spot, saying it sent a dangerous message.

The letter said the ad promoted excessive speed and the depiction of young children driving as illegal and risky behavior. It was compared to showing showing children having an after-school beer. What a crock of chit.

Any dumb folks who believe ads really depict real-life situations is off their rocker. Sadly though, it worked and the GM weenies don't advertise the Corvette now to the general public.

Jinx

Plastic allows you to form shapes that you can't (easily) form with steel. So if you begin with "we'll use plastic body panels" then it affects what you can do, and what you end up doing, in styling the production car.

Consider C5's fender vents. How do you stamp that? C6 isn't as deep but it's complex.

Now sure, they're doing some really deep-draw stuff with steel these days -- the rear quarter panels of the HHR were an example that GM was quite proud of -- but they make a big deal about how hard it is and what huge presses it requires.

I assume that C6.5 will still use plastic panels, and we'll get bullet points about why. I could swear last time around "lower weight" was among them.

And I hope they take full advantage of the material and give us a dramatic and timeless shape.

.Jinx

OregonC6

It is just my personal opinion ...and we are all entitled to that right? The rear end of the C6 ( and the C5 ) are way too wide and large overall. The tires are too wide as well almost to the point that they are a joke. Why not just make the tires two feet wide? Better on the skidpad maybe?

From the side the C6 ( and to a lesser degree the C5 ) look great. The reason I didn't buy a C5 was the rear end. The C6 is a bit better. Look at the rear of a 1967 and get an idea of what tasteful looks like. It's always seemed to me that they spent all their energy, time, and money designing the C5 and C6 from the side view and front and just gave up on the rear.

Just my opinions remember? The tendency of the designers has been to let the vette become larger over time. The C7 cannot possibly be larger than the C6 and be anything but terrible. It should be smaller.

It's been my opinion for years that GM has been taking advantage of boomers ( and older ) owners who will buy the vette no matter what it looks like. Just look at the early 80s to get an idea of the truth of this....no power and handled like a boat. Today we see this effect in many areas....scrimping on the interior is one. Another is offering better brakes on the CTS-V of the sort that should be on the Z06 but are not. The car costs enough that it should have the Brembos too....but they know people just gotta have a vette and will add their own aftermarket brakes. And the poorly designed clutch that needs the special treatment all the time for the burned fluid......

But...and here's the punch line....people younger than 30, or so their surveys might be telling them, don't have this same "need" to have a vette that will make them overlook obvious cost cutting and cheap equipment. Perhaps the problem is that GM realizes it will have to actually make the vette "better" in order to compete with cars that ARE better in terms of fit, finish, design, and materials.

Hmmmm?

It's gonna be real interesting.

GmdVT

I think the truth is that someone at GM read the off topic politics forum here and after their brain exploded they decided a new user base for the next generation corvette was needed.