WHAT IS an equivalent car to my vette vert? sure, i here road noise and it's highly dependent on the road surface. my two mustang gt verts had more road noise. one of my miatas had road noise until i change the tires. my jeep was way louder too. i hit 14, 500 trouble free miles yesterday.
but take what i way with a grain of salt...my other two rides are loud too

 

Consumer Report is very good and informative. What they recommend I DONT BUY

 

Lol... this is too funny... I think I'll lay claim to having owned the single LEAST reliable car ever sold in the USA... A 1972 MG Midget. Bought used in 1975 with 30,000 miles on it.

Looked great, but you were never sure you were going to get to your destination on ANY trip.

Parts on hand in the trunk at all times:
Fuel pump, Headlight switch, points, condenser, rotor caps, plugs, oil... and a lot of tools..

You were guaranteed to use at least one of them every time you ran the car...lol

Ah to be young and stupid..But the car was an absolute blast when it ran, and the women loved both it and me... What a GREAT CAR...

I've got a 1995 BMW M3 that I bought new, sitting in the garage. I wouldn't hesatate to drive it ANYWHERE in the US on a moments notice. It's that reliable. I can literally only think of 3 parts that have actually failed in my 23 years of ownership, (other than light bulbs and wiper blades) the Reverse light switch on the transmission, a brake light switch on the brake pedal, and an electrical relay for the headlights that failed because I installed Euro headlights incorrectly...

Other than maintenance (oil, all fluids, tires) it's the most reliable car I've ever owned. I can only hope my 2016 Z51 M7 is 1/2 as good... So far it looks like it will be... ZERO issues.

 

Um...no. I had previously owned a C6 and the interior noise level was fine. After driving the C7 for a few months I found the tire noise in the new C7 so brutal I went out and bought sound deadening mats from a forum vendor. WAY worse than the C6. Happily the mats worked. Honest to god, WTF was GM thinking letting the car hit production with the cabin noise that bad? The hatchback area was acting like a giant speaker box to make the whole car like a Tire Noise Experience ride @ Walt Disney World.

But the mats were very effective, can't recall the name but if you want to quiet down that tire noise rumble, well worth the $250 or whatever I paid and they just drop in under the carpet in the rear and behind the front seats.

 

This thread really is idiot flypaper. I just reference the CR observation to point out that in the bigger picture maybe these cars aren't the most reliable car, but hey, they're modern cars so that's a small %, I love the friggin car, and the two Corvettes I've owned have been great. That's essentially what I did. Then half the people here lose their minds as if they're Corvette Cardinals and I had walked into the Vatican and pissed on the Jesus statue. Then the intellectual interlude continues with forum members offering helpful and convincing 'well MY car has been flawless, so CR has to be wrong' arguments. Then the right wing nuts start pointing out that CR is a libtard conspiracy. One rocket scientist above even stated (he sounded pretty convinced of this) that CR is Japanese owned.

I don't rely on CR as a sole source of info on anything. But they are arguably the least biased source, and when it comes to a product like a Corvette, even more important: they're looking at it like the friggin enormous money hole, complicated, plenty of ways to make your life a pain in the *** CAR, i.e. dispassionately. Since they have no reason to placate an advertiser like GM (EVERY car magazine relies on car ads) all these people hollering that CR is biased might have a hard time convincing a judge of that. If CR points out some negative angles America's Sports Car, most consumers who want one will still buy the car. But at least they can do it having a fuller picture of what they're getting into. Yes, they do have bad interior noise, no, they're not Porsche reliable (I don't think Porsche is facing multiple class action lawsuits over maintenance issues). Good grief, if you're a Corvette fan and you really love the car (and I do), you want GM to make it BETTER in the future, which they have certainly done since the C6. But those C7 reliability issues are for real, just be happy you don't have a Z06 with a bad cooling system or blown auto transmission.

I'll say it again (it won't matter this is like banging my head against a granite wall) these reliability concerns impact a very small % of owners because modern cars are so much more reliable than they wer 20-40 years ago. But I am not a witch for posting this thread, you don't have to burn me at the stake, and you don't have to start decrying libtards who hate America which is purportedly being Made Great Again. So take a deep breath, calm down, do your GOP yoga, and all you gun owners, just try not to shoot yourselves in the meantime.

 

I'm a CR supporter notwithstanding the valid (non-political) criticisms leveled here. I am mystified, however, by the reports on p. 89 that generally show, on a line-by-line basis, the C7 to be much better than average, and the overall evaluation to be much worse than average.

The answer may be that the problems emerge in really important and costly items: engine (major) (but there, it's only the 2017 that isn't "much better than average", and the result is "average"); engine - minor (2015 much worse than average, 2017 worse than average); transmission - major (2015 much worse than average); drive system (2016-17 - average); in-car electronics (2014 + 2016 - much worse than average; 2015 - worse than average). While electronics may not be key to the sports car experience, they can be quite expensive to fix.

Nonetheless, I find the overall evaluation to be out of line with the specific, lime-by-line evaluations. Last year, the C7 got a significantly better overall rating. The volatility may well be affected by the small sample size, but the results are puzzling nonetheless.

I learned something by reading this thread - the existence of truedelta. I'll look at that when I have some time. I don't trust JD Powers. It seems to me part of the award industry. I get offers for plaques celebrating my professional accomplishments all the time. Just send money and get a plaque. That's JD Powers.

 

Amen.

 

If you were looking for a long series of passionate responses, you got it.
One of the biggest problems with this thread was the title. If you want to inflame the C7 faithful there's no better way than to do it by starting out with the title C7 Reliability Blows. It implied all C7s are rated poorly when, according to your post, the CR article was about the 2014 model year.
Consumer Reports finds 2014 C7 Reliability Issues may(?) have been less emotional, less melodramatic.

 

Everything negative I have heard has been mostly with the first year of the C7's (quality control, transmissions, and overheat with Z06's) and little issues from then on. I think the expectation of most people is that there should be very few problems with generational vehicles, while they expect more problems with brand new introduction models. Realistically though these cars should be bulletproof as they are the flagships of the Chevrolet lineup.
I'm looking forward to selling my bulletproof C6 and getting a C7, but will only consider 2017's and newer when the time comes.

 

You must have misheard something. In the first MY of C7 (2014), there was no Z06, and there was no problematic transmission (A8). Those first appeared in 2015. 2014s had very good first year ratings.

 

I am over the moon impressed with the reliability of my Corvettes. A C5, 6 and 2 C7s. Excellent cars.

 

This is exactly why I don't use CR to justify a purchase. This lunacy can be seen in many of their product evaluations. I've seen it in their appliance compares & ratings where a brand like Whirlpool will get better marks across the board and CR recommends Amana or GE.

 

Hope I'm not jinxing myself, but my 2014 has 30,000 miles on it and the only issue was a torsion bar replacement. Have driven corvettes since 1969 and find them to be very dependable.

 

Knock on wood, but I've owned a '92, '01, '08 and now an '18 and they've been rock solid. I love Corvette's. In this price range there is nothing else I would want to buy!

 

I found that a disconnect as well. I take CR with a huge grain of salt myself, but there is no similar source for generally objective testing on consumer products, they seem mostly on the money, if not always, and yes, they can get it quite wrong: we purchased a Samsung clothes washer c. 2014 (a brand CR rated highly then) and it turned out to be a total lemon, with an 'unbalanced' load' sensor that kept stopping the wash as unbalanced, after 4 years or so the extended warranty company from Lowe's threw up their hands, pronounced the machine as unfixable and mailed us a check for a full refund.

I asked my repair guy which washer to buy, which was most reliable. He immediately replied 'Speed Queen, they make the commercial washers in laundromats'. So we did. So far, so good. It does the wash without faltering or warning buzzers every time. Just like you would expect until Samsung got involved. Samsung TVs are reliable, but those don't have moving parts.

 

I take it back.

I am a witch.

 

Bill: You have a point. But it is entirely possible to design an infotainment system that is fairly intuitive. So a confusing one is a failed design. And, while I personally don't care much about infotainment and can learn what I need to learn, many people care more about it than they do about style or performance.

 

Idiot flypaper? We are all idiots because we disagree with the CR 'test' results because they differ from our real world experiences for this particular generation of Corvette? You state the percentages "impact a very small % of owners" which mirrors our experiences. That's good news for a mass produced item, isn't it?

I read where most people simply pointed out the flaws in the CR reviews and why it wasn't a good overall indication of the vehicles reliability. No one blamed YOU for the article, just the inflammatory nature of the threads title. I don't see it as a personal persecution (witch hunt?) just a disagreement.

This is the Corvette Forum and we are Corvette enthusiasts... the pushback to the article was predictable. Were you looking for validation for the article or simply stirring the pot? I honestly can't tell.

As far as the political innuendo and insults, they have no place in the forum. No one gives a **** what political party you or I support and they do nothing to clarify any points in Corvette discussions.

 

I don't think you are a witch but I suggest doing some self reflection understanding that this is a corvette forum and for the most part it is rightfully frequented by "sports car guys"...

No offense, but the pick of title and arguments put forth (rather eloquently) read as chronicles of things that are not yet generally accepted as true. Most simply respond with the "no problem here" because that is how car guys correctly illustrate the reliability question.

I don't own a C7 so I don't have a skin in the C7 game but I will tell you I have done a LOT of reading and numbers collating to draw my own conclusions on the C7 reported RELIABILITY.

For example..A8 issues...since reliability is also a statistical derived number I find it mathematically unlikely that out of the 400K+ A8s (rough number of sales with ALL vehicles with A8 out there ) the issues alleged would have not caused a recall by now..maybe there will be one..but until then statistically the A8 is just fine..

Can always do better...but first lets get a true picture of what needs to get better..

My2C