JerriVette

Ergo? Bewaaaaa

dcbingaman

Look at the Ferrari car line for where this may be heading. Since the 1970's they have always had a mid-engine supercar, from the Berlinetta Boxer to the Testarosa, to the 288 GTO, F50 and F50, the Enzo, and now the Laferrari. But they have also almost always had a very good front engine GT car. The 250 GTO, the 275 GTB/4, the 365 Daytona, the 575 Maranello, the 599 Fiorino, and the current F12. There is room and demand for both in Ferrari's market plan.

In fact, many more people use their Corvettes as GT cars, than pure performance track cars. The beauty of the Corvette has been this duality of utility - the C7 can do both well, bet then so have these front engine Ferrari's. The marketing dilemma is do you maintain this duality, or do you leave a great front engine layout for a pure racer type mid-engine layout. It is a tough call, but the answer may be do both. Exactly HOW they do it is still a mystery. We may not get any answers for another year or so.

JerryU

Just finished reading a book entitled Zora! He understood from before WWII that a mid engine car was best for racing! I agree.

Guess I was not specially relating to this thread-it's too long! I was talking about Tadge's responses in general.

You can feel however you want!

IMO we will have a mid engine Vette because GM will need to have a double overhead cam, 4 valve per cylinder where intake and exhaust timing can be varied separately and dual turbo - because it is more efficient! Probably ~3 liters! That won't fit in a low hood front engine sports car! Mid engine works!

JoesC5

The C4 ZR1 had a low hoodline(and a lower overall height than the C7), and it had a 5.7L DOHC V8 engine. The 2005 Cadillac XLR had a low hoodline, and it had a DOHC V8 engine and also a supercharger sitting on top.

The current Mercedes AMG GT has a low hoodline and it has a DOHC V8 with twin turbos sitting on top.

It is not necessary to go mid engine to have a DOHC engine.

One thing they all have in common. They are all front engine sports cars with low hoodlines and DOHC V8's.

Look at the two latest mid engine cars, the Ford GT and the Acura NSX. Because of packaging requirements they both are V6's.

sunsalem

Tadge's credibility as a reliable spokesman for the Corvette program is as sh!tty as some Press Secretary's and, IMO, the "grain of salt" is about the size of a baseball.

skank

We have some ornery guys here. Come on we need some Tadge love !!!

JerriVette

I like and admire TAdge.

1985 Corvette

You know guys, I have to say my favorite CE for Corvette is Dave McLellan. He was at the helm of Corvette coming back from the true dead: a low horsepower 3rd generation, long in the tooth, AND still using the same basic chassis from 1963. Clean sheet design that was the platform for the C4 ZR-1. Dave McLellan fought a hard battle to bring exotic car performance to Corvette when GM didn't care or want it. Say what you want about the C4 generation but it's the one that really saved Corvette as far as I'm concerned.

During the C5 and C6, Corvette HAD to have high performance models. The C7, and the generations that come after HAS to have high performance models. It's a non negotiable now and part of the business model. Not the case back in 1980s, that was a big uphill battle he and his team fought. Today's hipo Vettes are what they are because he had the resolve to push forward back then.

JerriVette

Technically speaking. The most performance oriented corvette is the the latest iteration,

Each of the chief engineers have done an amazing job.

Deciding who is the best is ridiculous as each had their own special challenges.

Whoever actually brings the mid engine corvette to production gets my nod as the chief engineer who has the opportunity to realize Zora Dontov s dream.

After listening to some people's reaction to non circular tailights I'm sure there are many who will be disappointed with a non front engine corvette.

Change is often difficult for corvette enthusiasts to embrace early on.

Once the vehicle hits the showrooms sales seem to speak otherwise.

Just my two cents as I look forward to the c8 and it's changes whatever they might end up being.

LT1 Z51

Not ornery. Just trying to redirect people's misplaced respect/love fo the guy.

He's just a manager, which means he's "responsible" for the car just as Mary Barra is "responsible" for all of GM.

OEMs and GM more so than others, outside of Powertrain and Studio Design do not wholly engineer a car anymore. They participate in the engineering process, and where they provide the most input is in the manufacturing and testing of the car.

I worked on the steering gear in the C7. Basically this is how that part was designed:

1. The supplier designed electronics were carried over from a previous program, in this case A1XX aka Alpha aka ATS/CTS (specifically the ATS).
2. A new gear housing and mechanical component set was designed at the supplier to fit GM's packaging and strength requirements.
3. The components were tested
4. The software was designed again in house at the supplier, but modified to meet GM's communication requirements (the CAN layer of the SW). All the functions are supplier in house designed which GM paid to use.
5. The steering gear tuning was done by supplier engineers on GM prototypes at Milford Proving Grounds, this tuning was signed off by GM (first by the vehicle dynamics team on a component level, then upper management like chief engineer signed off on the car as a whole).
6. Any testing, software or tuning issues were brought to the GM team and agreed to either at the engineering level (with no say so from the chief engineer), unless the deviation required "program approval" in which case then the chief engineer was brought in to approve.

Basically, each component at GM is owned by that GM component team. They decide the requirements for that component and approve or don't approve of most deviations. The program then takes this "corporate approved component" and uses is. The team basically only does the "integration" of the component, as in they make all the parts work together in unison so the car cohesively meets program requirements.

Tuning is very similar, only it is owned by vehicle dynamics with final signoff on a full vehicle level by the program team.

Basically, 90%-95% of the car (outside of again Powertrain and Studio Design) is designed, engineered, and approved before it even reaches people like Tadge. They provide very little input into that process. This is the way component based engineering works. In those fields, Tadge can only decide to use a feature/component or not. He's not in charge of the specifics. In fact I can attest to on the steering side that the system is 95% designed by the supplier (Bosch) with 5% GM's input (and 1% of that 5% being Tadge even being in the conversation let alone deciding direction).

So if you want to show some love, show it to the suppliers who make your parts and the component engineers who work with them as they do the actual work and most of what you are driving was approved and agreed to at that working level.

JerriVette

"Just trying to redirect the misplaced respect/love to the guy"

[]

That's a pretty weird thing to attempt..

But thanks for trying?

LT1 Z51

If it's not be painfully clear, and I've said this previously, I don't like Tadge on a personal level. I understand a lot of Corvette people only know him (that's done by GM on purpose) and think he's so great and responsible for this car. I'm going to do my best to dispel the "myth" GM is trying to build around him.

FWIW, he's not great, and while he's responsible managerially, the respect you have should go to other people. Sometimes people who Tadge himself does not respect, which in my mind is typical arrogance. He was one of the more "megalomaniac" type program guys I dealt with. Did not like being told he was wrong even when data was presented to him showing that fact. I remember him losing out on an argument with people on the component side about some software issue (basically Tadge wanted a unique solution and was told no), it was pretty ugly.

JerriVette

So you have a personal beef with the guy?

Many of us understand.

Thanks for explaining

JoesC5

An example of Tadge not knowing the car that he is the chief Engineer on goes back to the 2013 NAICS where the new 2014 C7 was shown.

He was having an interview with a group of UK journalist and he told them that the C7 would be available in a right hand version. of course that news immediately hit the news in Australia.

The VERY NEXT DAY, the number two person at GM(not the number two person at Chevrolet, but the whole of GM), had to issue a press release saying that the C7 would not be available in a right hand drive version.

Think about it. Having a RHD C7 is a major engineering design effort as well as a major manufacturing change in Bowling Green. Tons of additional parts entered into the system, etc. Don't you think that the man in charge should know the correct answer to "is the C7 going to be available in a RHD version?"

That is something that the man in charge(Tadge) would be well versed about. Apparently Tadge was not well versed. We're not talking about a change in the wheel's lug nut design that Tadge wouldn't necessarily be involved with, but a major product and manufacturing decision that everyone at the top of the food chain would be involved in.

skank

I'm glad we are getting some clarification from some of you on the corporate ladder evolution of Team Corvette. I for one realize the effort that the lower tier engineers put in is critical to the overall continual improvements of the Corvette. I do believe that the Ask Tadge section had a question based on a overall list of engineers and who were the key people in the hierarchy. Hopefully these key critical engineers don't get shuffled around to other GM model platforms when they have a complete and intimate understanding of the Corvette. The mere fact that Corvette has been elevated to new heights should be enough of a testimony.

jimmyb

As usual, try GOOGLE, as actual FACTS are easy to find.
Here is what Tadge said about a RHD "CAR":

http://gtspirit.com/2013/01/16/right...ray-confirmed/

If you call that a "confirmation" then have at it.
Who would imagine that a writer would JUMP head first into proclaiming there would be a RHD C7.


And here's further reading on the subject should you desire:

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/15/g...ons-boss-says/

Philr56

Now where am I going to put my golf clubs?

JoesC5

In chronological order....

1) Bob Lutz.... "GM’s Bob Lutz indicated last year(2006) that with the next incarnation of the Corvette, the C7, GM does intend to engineer a Right-Hand-Drive version for export."

2) When dan Akerson was asked(2013) if the C7 was going to be released in a right hand version, he replied "yes" and "soon".

3) When Tadge Jeucher was asked(2013) if what Dan Akerson said was true, replied...."There is no plan to build a right-hand-drive version in the short term," the Corvette's chief engineer, Tadge Juechter, told us. "In the long term it's something we definitely want - to make this a more global car - but it won't be for a couple of years."

4) Then Tim Lee(second in charge at GM at the time) said(2013), the very next day....“I’m telling you there is no plan,” Mr Lee, told a group of Australian media at the show today.
“We have no plan to put a right-hand-drive under that bonnet. It would be a significant engineering task.”
“This is a non-story from my point of view. You guys write what you want to write, I really don’t give a ****, but it is not in the mainstream plan.”
The News Limited story, penned by respected former motoring.com.au contributor Josh Dowling, quoted both GM President Dan Akerson and C7 Chief Engineer Tadge Juechter, who backed right-hand drive and Australian sales for the new Corvette, probably beyond 2015.
But that cut no ice with Mr Lee.
“I recognise what my boss said, I recognise what [the Corvette chief engineer] said, I’m telling you as the operating guy in charge there is no plan.”
Mr Lee said the C7 was not even ‘package protected’ for right-hand drive, which means such an engineering job would be massively expensive.
“I would say if we chose to make it a right-hand-drive ultimately we could do that, it would be a huge resource allocation decision, we haven’t made that decision.
“There is no engineering execution, there is no plan. If the CEO said tomorrow that he wants us to do that it would take us years to get it done.”
The C7 will be sold in Japan and the UK by Chevrolet, but in left-hand drive form.
It appears that in Australia, it will be left to private engineering firms such as Performax to convert to RHD.
“The Corvette is a Chevrolet. We don’t sell Chevrolets in Australia, we sell Holdens,” said Mr Lee."

Apparently Tim Lee thought that BOTH Dan Akerson and Tadge Jueuchter said the C7 was going to be build in a RHD version, and he made it VERY CLEAR, that they were wrong in their statements.

So....where did the CEO of GM get his misinformation about a RHD C7? It couldn't have been from Tim Lee or Bob Lutz(who retired four months before Dan Akerson came on board as GM's CEO), so it must have been from Tadge Jeuchter. I really doubt that Dan Akerson just made that **** up on a spur of the moment reply to the world press. When Tadge was asked if what Dan Akerson said was true... he could have said "no".

jimmyb

And Mr. Lee was wrong and is now long gone. No doubt, some writer did NOT quote Tadge directly but said "Tadge says that a RHD C7 is coming", and based on that (which is NOT what Tadge said), Lee made his remarks. No where did Tadge say there would be a RHD C7, he pointedly said CAR, so if you want to make it Tadge's fault, have at it.

Indeed he does, which is his prerogative. But we should also keep in mind that it's HIS opinion. I wonder what Tadge thinks of HIM?

CFHay

He probably doesn't think of him at all.