Yet another Guibotch thread wreck.

 

S.

 

Volkswagen. Mk. VI Jetta. Enough said.

Not that I'm really in this debate, I just happened to have a legitimate answer to that question. I like all cars that are fun to drive, refined or not.

Also, total déja vu with this post. I think I made a nearly verbatim comment to either you or Notch on this same subject before...

 

That doesn't mean the Jetta has taken a step back in quality or price, or improved performance at the expense of quality. That just means Hyundais have taken a huge leap forward in design and quality. Which is borne out in quality survey after quality survey. Same for Kia. Speaking of which, guess who is responsible for the design themes of the new cars?
Peter Schreyer, a German.

Check the pricing trends for Jettas over the past few years:
2011 - $15,365
2012 - $15,515
2013 - $16,720

BTW, your video blows a hole in telepierre's theory that execs don't throw their own company's products under the bus. Thanks for sharing.
And let's not pretend the powerful German auto unions weren't put on notice on what's at stake in competing with lower Korean labor costs. Does anyone think the likes of Rick Wagoner, who oversaw GM as it spiraled into its deathbed, would have such a hands-on approach to quality? Think about the success of the various VAG platforms, vs some of the miserable failures GM has had. Consider Winterkorn's education as a bonafide engineer with emphasis in quality control. But just be as aware that since he knows how to use a tape measure, he can make you believe whatever he wants you to believe.
Regardless, it's still under the bus.

 

No, the link doesn't really say much with regard to the new Jetta. But I do know that for the new Jetta they brought back drum brakes, the 2.0L four-cylinder that was used in the Mk. IV, switched to hydraulic steering instead of that awesome electro-mechanical set-up they had, and used classic trunk hinges that jut inwards versus the low-profile duck-hinges in the Mk. IV and V. All to meet a price. And I'm not even listing everything.

I don't have any performance metrics to show you, I'm going entirely on gut. Stepping backwards feels cheap to me. I owned a Mk. IVa Jetta (GLS trim level, I believe...it was loaded), and it was pretty terrible on the engine and transmission side of things (ate oil, couldn't find anything wrong with it, and the transmission died every other year because of faulty electronics that got diagnosed too late), the seats were hard, and yet it boasted some higher end features than the Mk. VI. A base Mk. V was also more plush than a base Mk. VI is. They dropped all of those nice qualities to shave roughly $2360 off of the base price (year over year, 2010-2011, it's $15365 vs. $17735). As a driving kind of guy, not worth it. Even my 2002 Mk. IV was rather planted and good-handling for a car of its class.

There is no animosity coming from me. Hyundai actually makes a fairly solid product these days. I also don't really begrudge VW trying to sell more cars. That's business. It's just if I were in the market for a Jetta today, I would be somewhat biased towards buying a used 2008-2010 GLI (GLI because racecar) rather than buying a new 2013 GLI...because the older one is both prettier (to me...gotta have the red accent piping or it's not a GLI/GTI) and more premium feeling.

That said, if I were in the market for a used GLI at all, I'd probably be looking at another C4, or maybe find a 944 or M3. I like my squares. .

 

Fair point about the VW. Perhaps what I should have asked with regard to the topic of this discussion is, which of the premium-marque European brands with performance car that might reasonably compete with Corvette is doing what VW have done to compete in a lower class (Corolla)? Some of the premium brands did something similar to lure Jetta/GTI types out of their cars, with BMW's 318ti and MB's C-Class hatchback, and how did those models fare? Not very well; the BMW had its interior and suspension lifted from the model preceding it (E30) and lasted only a few years in the States. BMW later said screw it, let's not cheapen the 3-Series like this, the entry level BMW deserves its own designation, and produced the 1-Series. But they made sure that that car had the basic quality, suspension, and driving dynamics worthy of the name (if not the looks nor quite the materials to overtake its larger sibling). Some of the mags pitched the 1-Series against the Cayman to pander to benchracing types, which I'm sure thrilled BMW marketing immensely, but 1er vs 3er is the more likely "competition."

More on that Hyundai:
"Hyundai unveiled its next-generation i30 at the 2011 Frankfurt International Motor Show. The new i30 was designed and engineered at the Hyundai Motor Europe Technical Centre in Rüsselsheim, Germany...It will be produced in Europe at the company's manufacturing facility in Nošovice, Czech Republic.
Production of the Korean-spec i30 might be affected by labor union woes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_i30

Aside from Winterkorn obviously not stepping into an Old GM/Ford/Chrysler product in amazement, the subtle message to the unions and which I'm sure VW shareholders would find favorable is: Hyundai's "magic" is German design and engineering combined with the lower labor costs of Eastern Europe (about 1/4th of Germany) or working conditions that would be intolerable under EU labor laws (for the Asian market). Mexico, Brazil, and S. Korea was just the start. There will be plenty of markets emerging from beneath the emerging markets. And all is not well with the unions in Korea either:
"Under the previous arrangements, Hyundai workers worked an average of 2,678 hours in 2011, 485 hours more than the country’s average annual workload of 2,193 hours, which is itself higher than any developed country. Workers have long complained of muscular pains, sleep disorders and disruption of their family life."
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/10/kore-o30.html

 

And based on your past reading comprehension and paraphrasing I'll be the first one to share to you that if your observation abilities are remotely close to your reading,comprehension, and paraphrasing skills than I would tone down your OWN observations.
You are a classic case of cognitive dissonance.

Obviously you have not read the link I offered to you so that you may learn what CAUSE and EFFECT is...which is OK because this forum would loose a good laugh otherwise.

Here ye go again...classic Guibo attribution.. and the rest Guibo...

Truth and logic are a bitch right Guibo?

 

Well at least you guys use the word Corvette once in awhile...I understand the title of this thread..but this beyond reasonable. IMO...

 

So tell me, Telepierre. What is the CAUSE for so many journalists, professional race car drivers, engineers, execs, and owners to create the EFFECT that the Corvette's seats and interior quality are lacking, if there were no truth to it? Do you think Wellburn and Juechter are working for other car companies?
What's wrong with the logic? That is what you would have us believe, yet the reporting history of the Zondas is there for you to see. More importantly, you did not address my point: the interior quality and seats of the regular 3-Series (which are not so drastically different from that of the M3) have not been slagged anywhere nearly to the same extent as the C6 has. Wanna bet that Corvette:3-Series ratio isn't 4:1? Last year alone, BMW sold 406k 3-Series. That's 87% more 3-Series in one single year than your 214k C6s sold to "present." (Still didn't openly admit that your original "present" was only up to 2010 for the M3, I see.)
To backpedal your way into focusing only on "English-speaking" terms (ignoring UK, Ireland, Australia), BMW sold 110k 3-Series in North America alone. Almost an 8:1 ratio against what Corvette sold last year. So please do post up this 8:1 ratio showing how people are 8 times more likely to report poor seats and Malibu-levels of interior quality in the 3-Series by virtue of the fact that there were nearly 8 times more sold in North America. You could not do this when a very generous (and as yet still unsubstantiated) claim of 11:1 was whittled down (to an also unsubstantiated 4:1 in favor of the Corvette). Perhaps you can humor me now that the figures have swung in the opposite direction.
To put into terms that you might wrap your head around, there were 46k Cadillac CTSs sold last year. More than 3 times the number of Corvettes. Please point me to this 3:1 ratio of CTS owners or reviewers saying the interior is grossly subpar (likened to a Malibu), and that its seats are woefully unfit for purpose, rock on their bases, or flop forward when unoccupied.

Bottom line: you are the spreader of BS and "untruths" around here. There was never any shred of proof that only 19k M3s were sold during the period that you claimed it took GM to amass 214k C6s (many of which were the result of Old GM's push production practices that resulted in cars stagnating on lots, and moving only with major rebates and incentives). But I figured as much coming from someone claiming Corvette is "stealing sales from Ferrari."

 

Rossion Q1 or a Nobel M400; the latter especially with a Harley H1V8 at 1000 hp.

Seriously a Volkswagon; who would breathe those words like they were in the Vettes league??

 

I saw the F-Type at the local jaguar dealer 2 weeks ago. It was really sweet and sounded awesome. But the price on the one they had, S V8 was over $130,000. So I will be buying a C7 Corvette. I'm waiting to see the C7 convertible next month. I really like the lines of the C7 Coupe, I wonder how they'll translate to a convertible.

 

Yeah, the M3 is a nice Performance Luxury Sedan, and it's debatable if it is a legitimate rival to a Vette. But, based on performance alone it should be interesting to see how the C7 Z51 matches up, since, both cars (many cars) do share narrower street tires (GM's point?).
Anyway, I think there is a place that no stock seats can go aggressively. And the Vettes have been moving in the right direction to be more competitive in the seat department overall.

 

Considering an M3 performs about on par with a Mustang GT, not sure how one could possibly place it in the same class as a C7 Z51.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html
At a more comparible price point, a GT500 or ZL1 would stomp a mudhole in an M3...as in...turning into a spec on the horizon.

It's nonsense to put what is basically a German economy car in the same class as a sports car. I sort of have the same opinion when people compare Mustangs to Corvette.
S.

 

For ~$44k, you can have a Mustang GT with the Track Pack including 14" Brembos and 19" wheels, Safety and Security package, Electronics Package with nav, Shaker Pro Audio and the Recaros.
It's a car that gives you all of the performance of the M3. Nearly all of the creature comforts, but excludes you from the tea and finger sandwich crowd.
For ~$55k, you can have a GT500 or ZL1 that will so thoroughly dismantle an M3 from a performance standpoint that the discussion would have to turn to seats, or interior quality, or the fact that you can get an M3 sedan.
S.

 

That would be relevant...if we lived to buy cars based on stopwatch times at racetracks. See the test I posted of the M3 dismantling the Boss 302 in the environment where 99.9% of buyers will spend 99.9% of their driving time (on public roads).

 

This thread has lost all relevance to the forum it's in.

 

Most in C7 quickly do!

 

I'm sorry, what were we talking about, again?

 

The ZL1 Camaro on the Goodyears/911 Turbo S g's at Laguna Seca:

1).96/.92
2)1.22/1.20
3)1.21/1.20
4)1.23/1.22
5)1.32/1.32
6)1.65/1.76
8)1.40/1.43
8a)1.77/1.58
9)1.64/1.64
10)1.52/1.62
11)1.19/1.21

The C7 looks to be in good shape against the real sports car competition!

Thanks Guibo point well taken!

 

I sure miss the good old days when we actually talked about the C7 instead of all the Other Cars section crap.