Originally Posted by jimmyb

Wow...so now Tadge "makes you buy the new model on the floor"?
I bet he would be surprised that that he has that much power.

I still don't understand why the "C7 makes the C6 obsolete" comment makes people mad. The C6 traces it's roots to the original 1997 C5...16 years ago!!! I would HOPE the C7 obsoletes the C6, if the engineering team can't better a car that has many engineering elements from over a decade and a half ago, heaven help them.

With the intro of every new Ferrari, they proudly point out how much faster around their test track the new car is than the Enzo. Isn't that the same thing?

Jimmy

Originally Posted by Sin City

Porsche just announced that the 2014 911 Turbo S comes ONLY with DCT. It has 550 HP and 518 lb/ft torque. It does 0-60 in 2.9 sec.
The idea that no DCT gearbox can "hold" the Vette's power is not true.
What is true is that the 911 Turbo S starts at $185,000.
Now you know why no DCT.

Originally Posted by SBC_and_a_stick

Booooring. What would go really nicely is a PimpmyRideLT package.

Originally Posted by BlueOx

First off, you don't even SEE the head engineers from Honda, Audi, or Porsche.

Originally Posted by Guibo

Not just 518 lb-ft, but it goes up to 750 Nm (553 lb-ft) with the overboost function. The Turbo S's price is largely a function of production (low compared to the Corvette) and massive profit margin. GM would not charge such a premium, nor would they have to.


Sweeeeet.


You do for Porsche. Andreas Preuninger is quite prevalent at unveilings of various 911s. He is the one who, when confronted by media comments about the use of PDK in the GT3, said:
"Ugh, God, you're one of them! Just shut up and drive the thing."


Would be great if Tadge could be so blunt to those complaining about the weight of the C7. I don't think he ever said the car would be lighter. About the DCT, he probably misspoke and meant to say they couldn't find one that met their torque requirements and fit in there (not "or," as he says in the video), but that is probably more of an issue of planning.

Originally Posted by BlueOx

To a point. I can't see it gaining Corvette to have him say things like that, even if he does believe them. It would be fun to hear him cut loose...maybe someday when he is retired.

Tadge has a far more active PR presence than most any guy in his position I have seen. Sometimes too much, IMO. But I think that is only because he says so much off the cuff, at live events like these races, car shows and the Bash. Like Tony Stark, maybe he should be given and learn to "...stick with the cards", because it seems that just one misplaced word or two and the many fickle Corvette owners (and supposed owners) turn on him like rabid dogs.

Originally Posted by crabman

He gave you his spin, there was nothing stopping them from putting a DCT in the Corvette other than the will to do it. They took a look at the investment versus the budget and decided the cost/benefit wasn't there. This is truth and I'm not sure I disagree with it even though I know to a fact the car would be better with a DCT instead of the slushbox. So much money can only go so far and another truth is a DCT would have involved an enormous expenditure which would have been best paid down by spreading the costs further across the corporate mix requiring a commitment beyond Corvette. Was such a thing possible within the greater corporate goals? I've no idea.

He was correct in the fact that Tadge was selling. All highly placed executives do it and its a part of the job every bit as much as whatever title may be on the door. When you reach those levels you bleed and sweat the corporate line. Without this you never get there in the first place because its a prerequisite to the job. But then I'm not telling you anything you don't know as far as this goes.

I don't think I need to tell you how the corporate line went with the A4 in 05 and how that all evaporated a year later with the A6. We all have our spin, even you. You have almost zero real world experience in a DCT equipped sports car but have been hard on them because you have made up your mind you don't like them. Now you say its not sales Tadge speaks but we both know in that previous A4/A6 example you yourself commented on the falseness of the corporate claims regarding the lack of need for the A6 when they only had the A4 to peddle and the rather interesting turnaround they made on that just one MY year later. They were selling then, they're selling now. No difference.

My own spin is that they made a call and its up to us to vote with our wallet which I suppose in the end agrees somewhat with your post. I just don't like the pretense that Tadges words can be taken at face value, they cannot.

Originally Posted by BlueOx

Tadge has a far more active PR presence than most any guy in his position I have seen.

Originally Posted by Guibo

That could just mean you haven't paid as much attention to other engineers. I would also add Nissan's GT-R chief, Kazutoshi Mizuno to that list. I'm sure Preuninger's German press coverage is overkill. You will certainly see him in more interviews in the UK media than Tadge. Years ago, he decried the use of PDK in Porsche's sportiest GT cars. In 2010, he said:
"Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."
"PDK does not have a clutch you can control, and if you want to do really big drifts, sometimes you need a clutch*. The manual gearbox in the GT3 is the best match for the purist."
"GT3 drivers want a manual."

Fast-forward 3 years and Preunginer, in interview for the 991 GT3, reveals that people had been asking for a dual-clutch transmission:
"With the first GT3, they were practically throwing rocks at me because it didn't have an automated-manual transmission."

As for what enthusiasts want, and the ability to clutch-kick a car into a drift, see what he says here, starting @ 2:52:
http://youtu.be/ECATvlRf3ls?t=2m52s

So when he said earlier that DCTs can't be used for clutch-kicks, that might have been technically true at the time (just as it likely true that GM couldn't find a DCT that could fit and handle the LT1's torque), but as an engineer, it is entirely his business to find solutions that overcome such problems.
In that video, when he looks at the camera and says he's not in marketing, you know he's not telling the whole truth. Clearly he is doing some marketing when he goes on these press tours and drive events when promoting the results of his new projects.

Originally Posted by raj

Like it or not, DCT is a necessary evil and will become part of the C7's arsenal at some point - possibly, as early as the Z06 introduction. Porsche's decision to offer their new street legal racer, the GT3, exclusively with PDK is an unequivocal signal that this is the future. In reality, they'd just had enough of getting their clocks cleaned by the 458s, the GT-Rs, the R8s, and other DCT-equipped rivals. Not long ago, a test driver estimated how much quicker a ZR1 would be around a road course if it had DCT and the difference was quite significant. Lap times and records are integral to the allure of these cars as evidenced by GM's involvement in creating stellar in-car videos of the Z06/ZR1 Nurburgring laps. The 2014 GT-R's lap time on that very circuit is reportedly about a second quicker than the ZR1, despite a 93 hp deficit and greater weight; this is in no small part due to its ultra-fast and always precise DCT. Same holds for acceleration times; GM claims a sub 4-second 0-60 for the C7, but the competition is a node lower at the 3 second mark which can only be approached with DCT. I love the third pedal and will miss heel-and-toeing , but the visceral appeal of the manual is simply not enough to justify its lower performance in today's super competitive sports car market. It's part of the inevitable evolution of technology in cars, and automakers have to adapt or become obsolete.

Originally Posted by raj

Like it or not, DCT is a necessary evil and will become part of the C7's arsenal at some point - possibly, as early as the Z06 introduction. Porsche's decision to offer their new street legal racer, the GT3, exclusively with PDK is an unequivocal signal that this is the future. In reality, they'd just had enough of getting their clocks cleaned by the 458s, the GT-Rs, the R8s, and other DCT-equipped rivals. Not long ago, a test driver estimated how much quicker a ZR1 would be around a road course if it had DCT and the difference was quite significant. Lap times and records are integral to the allure of these cars as evidenced by GM's involvement in creating stellar in-car videos of the Z06/ZR1 Nurburgring laps. The 2014 GT-R's lap time on that very circuit is reportedly about a second quicker than the ZR1, despite a 93 hp deficit and greater weight; this is in no small part due to its ultra-fast and always precise DCT. Same holds for acceleration times; GM claims a sub 4-second 0-60 for the C7, but the competition is a node lower at the 3 second mark which can only be approached with DCT. I love the third pedal and will miss heel-and-toeing , but the visceral appeal of the manual is simply not enough to justify its lower performance in today's super competitive sports car market. It's part of the inevitable evolution of technology in cars, and automakers have to adapt or become obsolete.

Originally Posted by jimmyb

Perfectly stated.

Jimmy