Road and Track article on mid-engine Vette
09-29-2017, 10:54 PM
#2
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2013
Location: Kansas City, Missouri
Posts: 25,347
Received 7,752 Likes
on
4,181 Posts
CORVETTE TODAY Host
St. Jude Donor'15
Interesting read.....
09-30-2017, 08:11 AM
#3
Race Director
Member Since: Oct 2011
Location: Holly Springs NC
Posts: 14,371
Received 1,609 Likes
on
1,037 Posts
St. Jude Donor '16-'17,'22,'24
Thanks for posting. R&T still knows nothing more than the members here on the forum. Want proof? At the end of the article is a link to "The Case Against a Mid-Engine Corvette". If you open that link and read the article, you'll soon see that according to R&T the mid-engine Corvette went on sale in 2017! All you folks who bought 2017s, those are mid-engine cars. Bet you didn't know.
R&T is trying real hard to nail down what's going on, bless their little hearts. However, they don't know any more than we do. I'll give them an A for effort.
R&T is trying real hard to nail down what's going on, bless their little hearts. However, they don't know any more than we do. I'll give them an A for effort.
10-02-2017, 01:00 PM
#4
There is no possible way GM is going to spend the money developing a mid engine Vette and spend the money to build an entirely new production line on a car that will not sell at least 30,000 units a year. Especially if it will eventually replace the front engine car. Therefore, the mid engine Vette, which I believe is fact and will be for sale in 2019 at the latest, will cost nowhere near 150K. Rather, I think it will sell for no more than 5K above the 2018 C7. Please do not think that GM can't develop a mid engine Vette that sells for a reasonable price. Porsche did it with Boxster and Cayman. The bottom line, folks, is that if someone has 150K to spend on a sports car, most will not buy a Chevy. (most Porsche 911 owners would NEVER consider buying any corvette, especially one that cost 150K!) Lastly, the mid engine Vette will not compete with Ferrari, Lambo, McLaren and the Ford GT because those are very limited production cars that people buy for very different reasons than the reasons of the folks who buy Corvettes.
The following users liked this post:
CPO Rob (10-09-2017)
10-02-2017, 01:32 PM
#5
Completely agree.
10-02-2017, 01:44 PM
#6
Team Owner
There is no possible way GM is going to spend the money developing a mid engine Vette and spend the money to build an entirely new production line on a car that will not sell at least 30,000 units a year. Especially if it will eventually replace the front engine car. Therefore, the mid engine Vette, which I believe is fact and will be for sale in 2019 at the latest, will cost nowhere near 150K. Rather, I think it will sell for no more than 5K above the 2018 C7. Please do not think that GM can't develop a mid engine Vette that sells for a reasonable price. Porsche did it with Boxster and Cayman. The bottom line, folks, is that if someone has 150K to spend on a sports car, most will not buy a Chevy. (most Porsche 911 owners would NEVER consider buying any corvette, especially one that cost 150K!) Lastly, the mid engine Vette will not compete with Ferrari, Lambo, McLaren and the Ford GT because those are very limited production cars that people buy for very different reasons than the reasons of the folks who buy Corvettes.
The Bowling Green expansion is 450,000 square feet.
10-02-2017, 01:49 PM
#7
The 2000 people who live all over the world who are willing to spend close to 200K for an NSX will never consider spending 150K for a Chevrolet Corvette.
10-02-2017, 02:00 PM
#8
Team Owner
My point is that just because GM built a 450,000 square foot building, that they are not planning on building 30,000 mid engine Corvettes annually.
Oh, and Acura only planned on selling 90% of the $157,000 NSX's in America and 10% of them in Japan. It wasn't planned to sell world wide.
America was their Target market and is why the NSX plant is located in Ohio, and not in Japan or Europe. Honda want's to increase Acura's market share in America, thus they are trying to improve their image among American car buyers that are now buying Lexus, Mercedes, etc.
Personally, I believe that Acura took the wrong marketing approach with the NSX. They decided to design and build the NSX to showcase it's "technology" to give potential customers of the "regular" Acura cars/SUV's a new impression of Acura.
I believe that if they had built a 3400 pound(instead of 3800 pounds) car(minus the heavy electric motors, batteries and wiring), and instead raised the horsepower to 573 with it's ICE(instead of 500 ICE and 73 electric HP), and marketed the car based on performance, and set the base price at $125,000-$130,000, they would be selling right now, instead of taking up showroom space in their dealer's showrooms. As it is now, I doubt that many potential customers of regular Acura's are not that impressed with the NSX's "technology", as they see a car that isn't selling, and not a lot of "buzz" going on about it, thus they might not be willing to switch brands and give Acura a try when they decide to buy a 4 door sedan or a SUV.
Last edited by JoesC5; 10-02-2017 at 03:28 PM.
10-02-2017, 03:43 PM
#9
The new building in BG is not for the production of vehicles. It is a painting facility. The current plant, where the Caddy XLR was built, has plenty of room for a 2nd line of cars, which is being installed as we speak. That is why plant tours have been stopped.
The Caddy XLR failed because no one had any interest in buying a Caddy sports car. Furthermore, it is not in GM's DNA to build a 150K car and sell 3000 to 4000 units per year. I mean, what's the point? The C8 will be a reasonably priced mid engine Vette and will completely replace the front engine Vette after 1 or 2 years of production. It will be a fabulous car in every way, and will redefine "bang for the buck."
The Caddy XLR failed because no one had any interest in buying a Caddy sports car. Furthermore, it is not in GM's DNA to build a 150K car and sell 3000 to 4000 units per year. I mean, what's the point? The C8 will be a reasonably priced mid engine Vette and will completely replace the front engine Vette after 1 or 2 years of production. It will be a fabulous car in every way, and will redefine "bang for the buck."
10-02-2017, 04:18 PM
#10
Team Owner
The new building in BG is not for the production of vehicles. It is a painting facility. The current plant, where the Caddy XLR was built, has plenty of room for a 2nd line of cars, which is being installed as we speak. That is why plant tours have been stopped.
The Caddy XLR failed because no one had any interest in buying a Caddy sports car. Furthermore, it is not in GM's DNA to build a 150K car and sell 3000 to 4000 units per year. I mean, what's the point? The C8 will be a reasonably priced mid engine Vette and will completely replace the front engine Vette after 1 or 2 years of production. It will be a fabulous car in every way, and will redefine "bang for the buck."
The Caddy XLR failed because no one had any interest in buying a Caddy sports car. Furthermore, it is not in GM's DNA to build a 150K car and sell 3000 to 4000 units per year. I mean, what's the point? The C8 will be a reasonably priced mid engine Vette and will completely replace the front engine Vette after 1 or 2 years of production. It will be a fabulous car in every way, and will redefine "bang for the buck."
10-02-2017, 06:38 PM
#11
(He also said, as far as he knew, there would not be a C7 ZR1). In the above video, he says that a mid engine car is the best for the track but not for a daily driver or car used exclusively for the street. Tell that to Porsche. And tell that to Ferrari, Lambo and McLaren, who sell cars to people who rarely, if ever, take their cars on the track.
10-03-2017, 06:07 AM
#12
Race Director
Can't wait for the new rear mid engine corvette that normal everyday guys can afford ...150 grand is ridiculous pricing ....just give us a 500 hp LT1 z51 variant and a lift off targa roof ..
Just make one wide body version and we'll gladly turn over around 65 grand to GM as a base msrp..
I see this as happening but then I also believe the corvette brand deserves a jaguar I pace competitor....
Just make one wide body version and we'll gladly turn over around 65 grand to GM as a base msrp..
I see this as happening but then I also believe the corvette brand deserves a jaguar I pace competitor....
10-03-2017, 03:36 PM
#13
I don't think 150k is outrageous. Chevy sold about 1500 zr1s each year... and they were $120k. I believe the base was $110k but virtually all of them were $120k with 3ZR interior.
$120k in 2009 money is roughly equal to $140k in 2019 money.
So adjusted for inflation, you could look at it that the mid engine is an extra $10k option over the highest spec front engine layout corvette.
Understandably, some of the points made that GM isn't going to retool a plant just to sell 1500 a year makes sense for sure.
I was merely commenting that if the thing is a Ferrari killer at only 1/3 the cost and much better reliability/warranty... it will sell.
It wasn't that long ago 911 turbos were getting "too expensive"... yet they keep raising the price and keep selling all of them.
Nissan GTR came out at 70k and yet the price is now 110k-130k for what is essentially the same car as in 2009.
$120k in 2009 money is roughly equal to $140k in 2019 money.
So adjusted for inflation, you could look at it that the mid engine is an extra $10k option over the highest spec front engine layout corvette.
Understandably, some of the points made that GM isn't going to retool a plant just to sell 1500 a year makes sense for sure.
I was merely commenting that if the thing is a Ferrari killer at only 1/3 the cost and much better reliability/warranty... it will sell.
It wasn't that long ago 911 turbos were getting "too expensive"... yet they keep raising the price and keep selling all of them.
Nissan GTR came out at 70k and yet the price is now 110k-130k for what is essentially the same car as in 2009.
10-03-2017, 03:42 PM
#14
Race Director
I believe that if they had built a 3400 pound(instead of 3800 pounds) car(minus the heavy electric motors, batteries and wiring), and instead raised the horsepower to 573 with it's ICE(instead of 500 ICE and 73 electric HP), and marketed the car based on performance, and set the base price at $125,000-$130,000, they would be selling right now, instead of taking up showroom space in their dealer's showrooms. As it is now, I doubt that many potential customers of regular Acura's are not that impressed with the NSX's "technology", as they see a car that isn't selling, and not a lot of "buzz" going on about it, thus they might not be willing to switch brands and give Acura a try when they decide to buy a 4 door sedan or a SUV.
10-03-2017, 03:51 PM
#15
Race Director
This was broadcast in March of 2015 which is 32 months ago. I was at a talk Tadge gave at Laguna Seca in May of 2016 where he said the same thing. Keep in mind he is famous for not letting any cats out of any bag.
(He also said, as far as he knew, there would not be a C7 ZR1). In the above video, he says that a mid engine car is the best for the track but not for a daily driver or car used exclusively for the street. Tell that to Porsche. And tell that to Ferrari, Lambo and McLaren, who sell cars to people who rarely, if ever, take their cars on the track.
(He also said, as far as he knew, there would not be a C7 ZR1). In the above video, he says that a mid engine car is the best for the track but not for a daily driver or car used exclusively for the street. Tell that to Porsche. And tell that to Ferrari, Lambo and McLaren, who sell cars to people who rarely, if ever, take their cars on the track.
For one on the highway a mid engine car is much more enjoyable than a wide tired front engine car that follows the grooves of the road.
The visibility out of the front of the car is much better with mid engine. Rear with all the rear view camera's isn't as much of an issue as it use to be.
I own a 2004 Gallardo that I converted to RWD and I love driving this car, no it isn't the best handling or the fastest but it is fun to drive. I love the turn in on the car and the light front end feel. I drove a 570s last year and it was amazing, it rode well and if you could afford to it would be a great daily driver.
10-03-2017, 04:44 PM
#16
This was broadcast in March of 2015 which is 32 months ago. I was at a talk Tadge gave at Laguna Seca in May of 2016 where he said the same thing. Keep in mind he is famous for not letting any cats out of any bag.
(He also said, as far as he knew, there would not be a C7 ZR1). In the above video, he says that a mid engine car is the best for the track but not for a daily driver or car used exclusively for the street. Tell that to Porsche. And tell that to Ferrari, Lambo and McLaren, who sell cars to people who rarely, if ever, take their cars on the track.
(He also said, as far as he knew, there would not be a C7 ZR1). In the above video, he says that a mid engine car is the best for the track but not for a daily driver or car used exclusively for the street. Tell that to Porsche. And tell that to Ferrari, Lambo and McLaren, who sell cars to people who rarely, if ever, take their cars on the track.
I really don't understand their comment as to why a mid engine would be worse as a daily driver. Either can be good or bad it just comes down to design and suspension settings.
For one on the highway a mid engine car is much more enjoyable than a wide tired front engine car that follows the grooves of the road.
The visibility out of the front of the car is much better with mid engine. Rear with all the rear view camera's isn't as much of an issue as it use to be.
I own a 2004 Gallardo that I converted to RWD and I love driving this car, no it isn't the best handling or the fastest but it is fun to drive. I love the turn in on the car and the light front end feel. I drove a 570s last year and it was amazing, it rode well and if you could afford to it would be a great daily driver.
For one on the highway a mid engine car is much more enjoyable than a wide tired front engine car that follows the grooves of the road.
The visibility out of the front of the car is much better with mid engine. Rear with all the rear view camera's isn't as much of an issue as it use to be.
I own a 2004 Gallardo that I converted to RWD and I love driving this car, no it isn't the best handling or the fastest but it is fun to drive. I love the turn in on the car and the light front end feel. I drove a 570s last year and it was amazing, it rode well and if you could afford to it would be a great daily driver.
10-04-2017, 11:58 AM
#17
Team Owner
I agree that at times Tadge has not been 100% up front with his responses to questions asked, but that doesn't mean that he is lying 100% of the time either.
Until it has been proven that Tadge is in fact lying about what he said about a mid engine Corvette, I'll accept what he said as being truthful.
10-04-2017, 12:43 PM
#18
Melting Slicks
In the above video, he says that a mid engine car is the best for the track but not for a daily driver or car used exclusively for the street. Tell that to Porsche. And tell that to Ferrari, Lambo and McLaren, who sell cars to people who rarely, if ever, take their cars on the track.
To the contrary, those who have understand why no mid-engine car sells in volume - they lose almost all practicality, and the performance gains for street use are minimal - but they do look super-cool.
10-04-2017, 01:18 PM
#19
I think the two points you are missing are; virtually no Ferrari, Lambo or McLaren is used as a daily driver - almost all are used 2-3,000 miles per year as toys, compared to about 50% of C7's that see just about daily use; with the lack of storage space, ME cars are pretty tough to use as a daily driver or for touring.
I know a guy who drives his 458 every day...including in the snow in the winter (not that I would though).
As long as you don't require big storage space (and who does on a daily basis?), they're fine.
So you expect the wide body ME car to sell for less than the current Grand Sport - not in a million years.
To the contrary, those who have understand why no mid-engine car sells in volume - they lose almost all practicality, and the performance gains for street use are minimal - but they do look super-cool.
Generally, FE Corvette buyers don't cross-shop McLarens.
You can buy a watch for a couple hundred bucks or you can buy a Rolex for 10 grand.
Both keep time, but the reason why Rolexes sell in lower volume is the price.
10-04-2017, 05:16 PM
#20
Melting Slicks
It is a mid-engine PORSCHE, it costs less than a C7 (Base MSRP $55,300), and they sell about 5,500 per year in the US compared to Corvette sales of over 30,000. Price can't be the reason, so what else is it - that people don't see Porsche's as good or desirable cars?