What's your point?

Form follows function. For all I know, that stark interior could be of very high quality -- good materials, fit and finish, and no squeeks/rattles. What little is visble of the seats suggests they are awesome. Just add a bit of sound deadening and that interior looks ideal to me. But not to the largest Vette demographic I am sure.

 

Talk about apples and oranges. Adequate quickness, classy, semi luxurious, legendary teutonic feel vs. very fast, gorgeous styling, better roadholding, affordable maintenance, etc. You did not even come close to making a point about the new C7, but I concede your choice is justified in that all that stuff you reference about the Z4 is more important to YOU. VERY few people will cross-shop the Z4 and the Vette. I am one of them and might trade my DD C5 for an older 3.0 Z4 just to see what it is like as a daily driver for a few years. But I do fear the repair bills and will miss the accelleration and luggage space. And so, once I actually drive one of the things, I might just stick with the Vette...

And about the attitude of the Forum folks. Reread your post. Don't you think you are leading with your chin by displaying a seriously elitist attitude? If that's typical of BMW Forum members (and I expect it is not) then their stereotype as elitist snobs would be true. Perhaps you did not mean it to be but again, just reread your post...

 

Anyone been inside a 2012 ZR1?

What else can you ask from an interior at this price/performance point?

You guys are missing the point... the car will soon reach $200k and you will be complaining about it.

The C6 with the NAV Dash, even with the plastic center console looked awesome. The C6 with the carbon console looked better.

I like my C5... a lot.... Only thing I wish to do is wrap the center console in leather and that is it.

 

Oh man, if we could get an interior like this Id be very happy - lightweight functional and attractive...

Something like this should be the base interior and then those that want a 10 grand caravaggio style interior should be able to get the option separately. That way everyone (well almost everyone) gets what they want!

This would also mean that in comparisons (ie magazine articles or even the timed nurburgring runs) and in competitions that require stock cars, the vettes could have substantially less weight for even more advantage over the enemy...

 

Good post. Trying different cars is great. Wouldn't mind trying Porsche myself. I like Mustang too. If I had the money I would be in a Ferrari. Unfortunately the snob stereotype you mention is quite often true.

 

Well said. The seats are not proper if you plan on using the performance capabilities of the car, but otherwise the interior is really comfortable with good ergonomics, pretty decent leather trim and outstanding instrumentation. What's lacking in fit and finish requires really detailed examination side by side with the best German makes. After about 10 minutes of driving most normal folks would neither notice or care.

Complaining about the C5 or C6 interior is like griping about Cindy Crawford's mole.

 

Well, it is a bit posh for my tastes. I would like something a bit more hard core, but it would do for me.

Having owned an Elise I like it. Everything you need and nothing you don't. Follows Colin Chapman's philosophy of adding lightness.

Function over luxury.

Add 4 inches in width, 4-8 inches in length, 6 gallons in fuel capacity, a nice DI LS7 with a automated manual and keep the curb weight under 2500 pounds. That would be a fun car!

 

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1...easer-released

Hmmm. My interest is peaked about the Viper now(still expecting its exterior to be meh). Now that it's be possibly touched up by the Italians, it'll be interesting to see its interior vs both C6 and C7 interiors.

 

Having sat inside some Lotus, I can say the fit & finish isn't exactly good (way, way below even a Boxster). There are some good materials like Alcantara, but it's not stitched together very well. And on the ones I've seen, there was excess bonding adhesive poking out from the seams. Not what I'd call a high-quality interior at all.
FWIW, C&D rated the Grand Sport higher in interior fit & finish than the Evora, which has a much more upscale interior than that Exige. And that's even before you factor in the higher equipment content of the Corvette.
Meaning, there is not a direct correlation between price and interior quality. The single biggest contributor to a car's price can be volume and indeed the Exige is a low volume product. And that has to do with what some in the market expect at that price. At that price point, some expect better performance and, yes, a lot expect a much better interior. For years, Lotus was content to play that pricing strategy. But even Lotus knows it cannot sustain itself making Elise/Exige products. That's why there was the push to the Evora and to expand even to higher end models that will compete directly with Porsche.
The problem in the Corvette vs Porsche model is that the 911 actually outsells the Corvette consistently, meaning we'd expect it to be cheaper (more amortization), but that's not the case. Porsche's profit margins are among the highest in the business, at 18.7% return on sales. Ferrari, for example, is at 14.1%; BMW is around 10%. I'd bet it costs Porsche very little extra in producing a better interior than the Corvette. Within the brand, the extra price in a GT3 RS over a standard Carrera has more to do with the market (lower volume) than any real extra effort to make the car faster. A Sport Classic was considerably more expensive than a comparable GTS, but not really any better or faster; same for the GT2 RS vs the GT2. The massive price difference is largely because the RS was limited to 500 units. By the same token, BMW officials have said it doesn't really cost them anymore to produce a 5-Series than a 3-Series, even though the 5-Series has a better interior. The price difference has more to do with what customers are willing to pay. Does anyone really think it costs Ferrari/Lambo anywhere near $1700 for some shields and "SV" stickers? Let's get real here.

As for demographic, the 911 customer base isn't really much younger than the Corvette's. Last I read it was 53 years old vs 58 for the Vette. Boxster/Cayman buyers are probably younger. The median income of a 911 buyer is around $390k, so it's not like they're "unintelligent" for choosing the car they do (like trying to pay for a steak dinner when all you can afford is a Big Mac). The free market has decided that the 911 is worth what it is.

And BTW, the early 996 and original Boxsters were criticized for overly cheap materials. That's why when the facelifts came, the interiors improved dramatically. So you can't say that Porsche is given a free pass in the media.

 

The median income of a 911 buyer is $390k?

There are a LOT of rich *****, judging by the number of 911's I see.

 

Yeah really LOL.

 

From a Forbes article:
"Take the Porsche 911. Its buyers are 86.8% male with the average age of 51 and median income of $390,000."
http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/05/car...positesex.html

From a Reuters report about the recession:
"The number of workers making $1 million or more rose to almost 94,000 from 78,000 in 2009. However, that was still below some earlier years, including 2007, when more than 110,000 workers made more than $1 million each."

In the world, there are some 10M people with net worth of $1M or more. So yeah, there are probably more rich ***** than we'd normally think.

 

The interiors were improved, but you are making the Boxster STANDARD interior sound like it is the 'Second Coming'. It's not amigo.

It is nice, but remains simple 'Plane Jane', just a little better materials. The seats are manual adjusted, plastic (Alcantara), nothing fancy. The dash is plastic or whatever, similar to the 'vette's, etc.

The difference? It comes from Porsche so is automatically better than the Corvette interior.

 

The wealthy don't have to brag or showit. In fact so many of them live quietly, unobtrusively.

My grandfather taught me when I was a little boy to never let other people really know what you have. Great advice.

 

The current 987.2 Boxster compared to the current Corvette is still much better. I think even Dave Hill, at the introduction of the C6 was saying the 996 Turbo was the benchmark for performance so it's reasonable to guess the C6 interior is about on par with that 996. Unfortunately, the C6 and 997 hit the market at around the same time and it was obvious which car had the interior that lagged by a generation.
The point is, Porsche's interior have been criticized before. They didn't get a free pass. The same with their old, counterintuitive PDK interface which received a lot of criticism from media and owners. They listened and changed it for the better. The media did not turn a blind eye simply because "it's Porsche."

 

Where did the Porsche Turbo come from comparing the Corvette and Boxster interiors?

As to the media turning a blind eye simply because "it's Porsche."; many on here will disagree with you on that position.

Regards.

 

Well, the point is that there is not a correlation between a car's MSRP and the quality of the car's interior.

I take it you haven't driven a 260 S; interior = noisy, low quality, poor fit and finish, and full of rattles and squeaks.

 

Namedropping and 'perceived superiority' all too often take the place of actual reality, unfortunately.

 

I agree.

 

It takes more than just quality materials to make a quality interior. The overall design, and the manner in which parts are constructed and attached also make a big difference. A well designed and constructed interior, using something other than leather and carbon fiber, can certainly be assessed as "quality" (read - base Boxster's interior).