b4i4getit

I am sure you have all heard the statement that only 2 parts were carried over into the C7. That has to be just talk. Efficiency in parts procurement and getting the best volume price would mean there has to be some commonality with other verhicle lines. I find this really hard to believe. The transmission is the same A6 from the C6 except for a different gear set so how can this claim be made ?

BlueOx

You can write a letter to Tadge calling him a liar.

Thespian

Perhaps when they are saying "this car", they are referring to the car right in front of them with the 7-speed manual which is not a carryover... I agree that seems to be a bit of a technicality

b4i4getit

I have his email so maybe I will. But I will say it nicely.

jr3

Would 3 screws count as 3 different parts?

Jinx

Was the "two parts" claim still being made after the carryover automatic announcement?

Even so, if the case is different and the gears are different and the programming is different with a newer rev chip, what's actually carryover? Some engineering, but not actual parts. It's only parts he's talking about.

.Jinx

JoesC5

No change in the gear set.

talon90

I think everyone is missing the point. Yes, there will likely be some commonality to parts within the GM line. The 2 part carryover is specific to the C6. The cabin air filter and the rear latch for the roof panel are the only two parts from the C6 line that transfer to the new car. The A6 is changed in case, gears and software calibration. It is a considerably different part. It wouldn't install in the C6 nor would it operate with input from the C6 computers if you could bolt it in.

Racer

Don't care, so what. Is it that important to you?

BlueOx

So JoeC5 is wrong? Can't be!!

talon90

Could just be semantics, physical gears are different to fit in the different case. Ratios I believe are the same.

BlueOx

Thanks for clearing that up!

MarkRx

I actually saw what I think is a 3rd part carried over from the C6. The rear hatch interior light. Looks like the same housing. You'd think with all the technology and LED's on the car they would make this LED also!

b4i4getit

Sure it is. Its called telling the truth. I don't want to be told that the car is 99% re-engineered when in fact many of the pieces have been around in other GM products for years.

JPJR

Yes, the "two parts" comment is even on the "official" website.

I've been bringing this up in a number of different threads because it seems to contradict the comment about the automatic being a "carryover" part.

Talon90 is the first one to provide some information as to how this statement could be true.

I was planning on calling Tadge out on it at the Bash, if I get called on to ask a question.

I feel better knowing that they didn't overlook us automatic drivers when updating and improving everything else about the car.

JPJR

JPJR

I would love to hear his response.
It'd save me a question at the Bash.

tome

Actually they no longer have the same roof latch either. Tadge told us at the reveal that they ended up having to reengineer the roof latch. Something about the carbon fiber roof having less flex than the C6 roof and it affected the crash test since the CF has less give.

NevadaVette

Two parts carried over from the prior Corvette is just GM-speak to divert attention from all the parts brought in from the Cobalt.

I always enjoyed watching forum members snivel about the 2005 C6 steering wheel and cheer when GM swapped it out for a steering wheel from an $18,000 Cobalt. The same morons now specialize in tail light swaps.

MikeyTX

Yeah but ................. You know even with this warning from you Paul, someone will try and then whine when it doesn't work