There are many examples of corvettes abv 100K. I highest I know of is Chris Chesnoe of Callaway Cars, a 2010 Callway with well over 200K miles. Its a C6 but a great example on how well made the corvette really is if you follow sked mx. I suspect the C7 will follow into the 100K plus group for anyone that keeps theirs over the C8

 

LOL

 

Only issues that bother me are
1. Z06 overheating/heat soak issues
2. Z06/GS wheel bending issue
3. A8 seems to have some problems- IDK, I'm a manual driver.

Electronics are one of those things- it's either going to go out early or not at all. If it doesn't fail in the first 3 years, I doubt you'll have touch screen problems.

 

I've had 4 corvettes, 3x C5's and now my C7. Combined well over 100k miles, including a yearly road trip from Texas/Oklahoma to Las Vegas. I've driven on the Texas Motor Speedway several times and pushed them on other smaller tracks. I drive it for the fun car it is made to be, not like I'm protecting a vintage baseball card in a sleeve. Outside of normal maintenance, I have never had one in for service.

 

Consumer Reports can only publish the data they get from the letters they send out to owners asking for owner opinions. So how can that be biased. ...

 

I had my C5 for 9 years and put 133k on it and only spent $2000 in repairs, and had my C6 for 4.5 years and spent $2500 in repairs. I'm hopeful that my C7 is reliable too and so far after 7 months and 5600 miles it has been flawless.

 

 

My 2012 GS, which I bought new, was flawless as a daily driver for over 40,000 miles. Perfect in every way...literally zero problems.

 

I always love hearing about how their Corvettes broke down after 100s of laps around a race track in August in Texas. I really can't say much about reliability because I have only been driving it for 5 month, 5 GLORIOUS months. No complaints other than that damn hatch release button by my knee when I get in with out the seat back.

 

The problem is CR's ratings don't reflect a representative sample. The input is limited to members and how many people are members and what is their background? The other thing about electronic complaints isn't necessarily an actual failure in the electronics but the failure of consumers to understand how the electronics actually work. They hit the button and expect a certain result when they aren't considering the button may not be programmed to do what they want in the current setup of the system. And of course there is always the secret code that you need to know to fix an issue that might pop up. Last year our Terrain was hit in the rear at a stop sign. Once we drove away from the body shop I noticed I was getting issues with the security system saying the power hatch wasn't closed when it actually was. Went back to the body shop and they couldn't figure it out. Then drove to the dealership and told the service writer what was happening and he took our key fob and started locking the car and unlocking it and doing something else at the same time. After working all doors and the hatch he threw me the keys and said its fixed and it was. Now that could be and is often written up as a complaint because I had to take the car to the dealer to get it to respond properly. However, was there really a failure all that happened is the system was confused because the body shop removed the rear hatch to straighten out the edge that was crumpled? If I had known the secret code I could have done that myself. I am of the opinion that Customer usage problems need to be accounted for differently when it comes to car reliability/durability. Just because a Customer doesn't know how to do something doesn't mean the car is less reliable.

Bill

 

Let's rephrase and see if it answers the question "How can that be biased?":

"CR can only publish the data opinions they get from the letters they send out to a very small and select group of owners asking for owner opinions, and then use those opinions as "facts" to publish reliability ratings that are presented as "objective".

Consumer Reports has clearly been biased in many instances in the past regarding automobiles (Re: Samurai, Ford Explorer) and I see no reason to believe they still don't color their "findings" according to their own biases.

Example of one of CR's "totally objective" statements: "One cheap way that automakers make an SUV less prone to rollover is to equip it with less-grippy tires". They didn't say "could" -- they stated that it IS happening. No proof, just "feels".

CR might be good for rating kitchen appliances and electric shavers, but their auto 'tests' have always been extremely suspect.

 

What are the specifics of it not being reliable

 

You should buy a car that Consumer Reports likes then. Perhaps a Toyota Corolla would be a good car for you. I think that a performance car, where many components are designed near their limits for performance reasons, would cause you worry on a daily basis.

 

I have a 2015 Z51 3lt M7, had 50k miles when I bought it in December 2017 . It now has 61k miles and runs like a champ no problems. Still looks new.

 

I've owned a C5, C6, and now own a C7 Vette. No reliability issues with any. Only normal maintenance.

 

That's a good example of why they are biased. Their samples are completely flawed. They ONLY ask CR SUBSCRIBERS, so the subset of Corvette owners is biased right there. What about non-CR subscribers? Then they only tabulate responses, i.e.: people who bother to respond and have a reason to. Third, they do not publish their methods OR their data so you have no idea if their statistical calculations are correct. There's no way to validate what they are saying. You just have to trust them. Scientifically, they are a laughingstock. They're just hoping their claim that they accept no advertising creates enough trust in you to accept their claims.

Many years ago I saw a cartoon in one of the car mags: C&D, R&T, or MT, I forget which. Two guys in the foreground are talking. A few bespectacled, white-coated "scientists" are in the background with clipboards as you see cars being pushed off a cliff. One guy says to the other, "Oh, that's just Consumer Reports testing cars again."

 

They claim they use accepted statistical sampling practices, and when a valid sample is not available they state it as such. I've seen no evidence to suspect that they do not do it as well as can be done given how they acquire their data.

For one thing, it's true that the Corvette does have some sophisticated electronics, but so do many other cars that don't fare poorly in CR's ratings. Also, I would venture to say that most Corvette owners are a step or two more tech savvy than, say, a soccer mom is with her new high-dollar SUV.

 

2014 Corvette, M7 3LT base
Bought new in November 2013
53,000 miles
new infotainment screen under warranty
new water pump under warranty
as reliable as any car I have owned

 

Sure they claim that, but they don't show their work. Why not? What's to hide? And they don't show their data. How many cars per model are we talking about? Nobody knows. They won't tell us. So why all the secrets? And "given how they acquire their data" is a huge problem right there. Their sampling technique is statistically invalid. The sample of "CR Subscribers who also own Corvettes AND respond to the annual CR survey" is simply NOT a valid sample of all Corvette owners. If you rely on CR data, you are getting skewed data.

 

I just did a search on Consumer Reports survey methods and there are a number of articles on the subject. This one by CR itself is fairly specific and answers a number of questions on their methods. I didn't spend a lot of time reading the various articles but if you'll take a look at them, let me know what you believe they lack in specifics. In general terms CR takes the surveys and categorize the various groups (engine, electrical, etc.) into ratings based on the performance of other cars in the survey. The statistical models aren't that complex and really don't need to be.

By that notion any data not including all Corvettes manufactured are skewed. In the second link above they say the typical results for one model and model year is 200-400, with over 640,000 surveys received. Granted, that's a far cry from all Corvettes sold per model year, having small-to-moderate sample sizes is better than none at all.

For my needs, what they provide is better than any other guideline for picking products based on survey results and their on-site testing. It isn't my only source of information but one that helps me along to make a rational choice. I tend to research products I plan to buy more than most people, to a fault I'm told, so I'll take the CR info and digest it along with any other sources I can find. For example, I just purchased a mini-computer for my home theater setup, and it took me two weeks of research to finally make the decision. I read everything I could lay my hands on, and had I not done it that way with all the variables involved (OS compatibility, RAM, storage, etc.) I could easily have ended up with something that didn't fit my needs.