When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Bill Mitchell was the head of GM design until his retirement in 1977, so the above ME’s were just of few of the accolade designs that should rightfully accrue to him.
Mitchell succeeded Harley Earl who retired in 1958.
The Corvette has had a good run. Someone higher up then Zora Duntov made the correct decision years ago to keep it a front engine design. And higher up than Dave Mclellan, and higher up than Dave Hill made the same decision.
65 years of continuous production proves those higher ups were right.
I just hope the 'suits' today know what they are doing.
JoesC5, you are again dead wrong, this time as to who is behind the decision to additionally create a ME. It is being pushed by the engineers, led for the last 15 years by Tadge Juechter.
You are also wrong in assuming that even after 65 years, that a business can not fail to see the changing times and instead say, “well, it has worked so well for us, we are # 1 in our field for seven decades, and why should we change now?”
Best example was/is Kodak. It was started in 1886. They invented the digital camera in 1975, were making so much money then from their old tech camera and especially from sales of their Kodak film, that they decided not to embrace the new digital camera’s technology, and now are down from their heyday of over 120,000 employees to now under 18,000. They were the first U.S. to have $1,000,000,000 in annual sales in 1962. They went from # 1 in cameras then worldwide to now being an also ran.
Joe, your often-incorrect ideas are extinct, and Kodak IMO is damn close to it.
GM is wisely not pulling a Kodak, but going to develop a second, also successful Corvette line.
And for those who prefer, the front engined C7 is continuing. What is wrong with giving customer a choice?
JoesC5, you are again dead wrong, this time as to who is behind the decision to additionally create a ME. It is being pushed by the engineers, led for the last 15 years by Tadge Juechter.
You are also wrong in assuming that even after 65 years, that a business can not fail to see the changing times and instead say, “well, it has worked so well for us, we are # 1 in our field for seven decades, and why should we change now?”
Best example was/is Kodak. It was started in 1886. They invented the digital camera in 1975, were making so much money then from their old tech camera and especially from sales of their Kodak film, that they decided not to embrace the new digital camera’s technology, and now are down from their heyday of over 120,000 employees to now under 18,000. They were the first U.S. to have $1,000,000,000 in annual sales in 1962. They went from # 1 in cameras then worldwide to now being an also ran.
Joe, your often-incorrect ideas are extinct, and Kodak IMO is damn close to it.
GM is wisely not pulling a Kodak, but going to develop a second, also successful Corvette line.
And for those who prefer, the front engined C7 is continuing. What is wrong with giving customer a choice?
What did I say that was wrong? You are clearly wrong if you think that the "higher ups" don't have the final say, no matter what a chief engineer is pushing. The past 65 years is a clear example of that.
I retired as an engineering manager for a fairly large manufacturing company. The "higher ups" ALWAYS had their way, in the end. They signed the BIG checks. I signed the LITTLE checks.
Of course, I pushed for what I wanted, but the "higher ups" were "higher up" than I, and they ALWAYS had the final say so, no matter what I was pushing for, or how much I thought I was right.
That's why I only got to use the company plane was when the Company president wasn't using it. He was always pulling rank on me. He signed my paycheck, so after he made his decision on ANYTHING, I shut up. I presented my best case, but the final decision was his to make, just as it is with GM and their "higher ups".
There are a lot of "higher ups" above Tadge and they will make the final decision, right or wrong, not Tadge. I just hope they are correct with their decisions , as their predecessors were for the past 65 years. Tadge is not the only person who has an input on what the next Corvette will be. Marketing has huge input, accounting(bean counters) has a huge input, finance has a huge input, manufacturing has a huge input, Quality Assurance has a huge input, blah, blah, blah…..
From the spy photos we have seen plus the CAD drawings we have seen, it sure appears that a mid engine Corvette is on the way. As I said, I hope the "higher ups" got good input from EVERYONE(not just Tadge) and knows what they are doing as far as their decision on whether a mid engine Corvette is going to fly or crash.. A lot to lose if they **** it up.
I'm sure that the head of Cadillac thought he was doing right with the ideas that he was 'pushing' to the "higher ups". Well, the "higher ups" must not of thought so, and canned him. I bet "Cadillac President" is higher up the totem pole than "Chief Corvette Engineer", yet he didn't survive, and Cadillac sales are still falling. "Chief Corvette Engineer" sounds great but is one piece of a 1,000 piece jigsaw puzzle.
Same as when I was in the Air Force. You want to survive, then "don't make waves" as there is always someone with a higher rank, no matter how important you think you are. Do your job to the best of your ability, but don't mess with another man's job.
PS- when are you going to post up your next poll? This time on "how many and how large will the cup holders be on the C8?"
JoesC5, you are again dead wrong, this time as to who is behind the decision to additionally create a ME. It is being pushed by the engineers, led for the last 15 years by Tadge Juechter.
You are also wrong in assuming that even after 65 years, that a business can not fail to see the changing times and instead say, “well, it has worked so well for us, we are # 1 in our field for seven decades, and why should we change now?”
Best example was/is Kodak. It was started in 1886. They invented the digital camera in 1975, were making so much money then from their old tech camera and especially from sales of their Kodak film, that they decided not to embrace the new digital camera’s technology, and now are down from their heyday of over 120,000 employees to now under 18,000. They were the first U.S. to have $1,000,000,000 in annual sales in 1962. They went from # 1 in cameras then worldwide to now being an also ran.
Joe, your often-incorrect ideas are extinct, and Kodak IMO is damn close to it.
GM is wisely not pulling a Kodak, but going to develop a second, also successful Corvette line.
And for those who prefer, the front engined C7 is continuing. What is wrong with giving customer a choice?
I dont have a problem with choices. A lot of people in this subsection think that we shouldn't have a choice. If GM is making a Zora ME Corvette, more power to them. It's the idea that they'd stop making the FE Corvette which has been the most successful car in America for over 60 years, that I don't agree with.
I dont have a problem with choices. A lot of people in this subsection think that we shouldn't have a choice. If GM is making a Zora ME Corvette, more power to them. It's the idea that they'd stop making the FE Corvette which has been the most successful car in America for over 60 years, that I don't agree with.
My thoughts exactly. And there are plenty in the C8 section that believe ONLY a mid engine is what 100% of the Corvette faithful will buy. They think that just because they want one, it is the best choice for everyone.
Maybe they reached the limit of FE performance(crashing as Indy race pace car makes it look like it's too much of a handful) and knew they wouldn't be in the performance range of other cars that they strive to beat/compete which are mostly ME. They're probably thinking buyers not sold on the ME design will opt for the high end Camaro's instead. Just my 2 cents, could be completely off the mark lol
Maybe they reached the limit of FE performance(crashing as Indy race pace car makes it look like it's too much of a handful) and knew they wouldn't be in the performance range of other cars that they strive to beat/compete which are mostly ME. They're probably thinking buyers not sold on the ME design will opt for the high end Camaro's instead. Just my 2 cents, could be completely off the mark lol
There are pros and cons to both the front engine design and the mid engine design.
Most buyers do not choose the super duper million horsepower model. They really are not concerned about the capabilities of the mega dollar super duper million horsepower Corvette when they make the monthly payment on their 460 horsepower Corvette.
It's been that way since the C1. I could drive my 210 HP 265 Cu In 1956 Corvette into a wall, if I wanted to be stupid with my driving. I don't need a $143,000 755 HP Corvette to do that.
Personally, I would never select a Camaro over a Corvette. If the mid engine Corvette does not fit my needs/wants, and if there is no next generation Corvette with a front engine to buy instead of a mid-engine, then I'll keep my C6 Z06. I sure won't be trading it in on a Camaro. GM will just lose a future sale to me.
You might be different, and I have no problem with that. Just as I am able to do, you are able to make your buying choices/decisions based on what you feel is best for you.
^Yeah, I agree I wouldn't get a Camaro either as a substitute but I'm sure there's some that would. I have a C6 ZO6 as well and love it, if the ME can be a better all around performer and fairly comfortable(I'm sure it'll be more so than the C6Z) at a reasonable price than I don't see the huge deal about the placement of the engine.
06-08-2018, 01:55 PM
Which Corvette Was Zora’s Favorite Design?
