Mid engine maintenance cost?
10-30-2018, 02:01 PM
#21
Le Mans Master
if you want Toyota reliability, buy a Toyota which is made in volume (millions per year).
If you want Ferrari reliability, buy a Ferrari which is made at just under 8,000 per year.
10-30-2018, 02:04 PM
#22
I F---I-N-G AGREE!!!!!!… Is it a CADILLAC IS IT A RE BADGED FIERO????? Why would they build a ME I think it'll be a FE Cadillac sold in Chevrolet dealerships and will cost $200,000 or $65,000 with options that'll be free or cost $20,000.SHEEEEESH...……….It will be a MID ENGINE CORVETTE sold at a CHEVROLET DEALERSHIP AND PRICED so that MOST of us that have a C7 can buy one. Get used to it ..The times are a changing
Last edited by Walter Raulerson; 10-30-2018 at 02:06 PM.
10-30-2018, 02:09 PM
#23
Some Ferraris have the engine pulled
10-30-2018, 02:13 PM
#24
Race Director
10-30-2018, 02:42 PM
#25
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 1999
Location: One Hour From Boston!
Posts: 6,408
Received 4,684 Likes
on
1,862 Posts
The following 3 users liked this post by BIG Dave:
10-30-2018, 05:57 PM
#26
I don't get it. You all really believe that all the drawbacks of the rear mounted mid engine platform that no other manufacturer knows how to solve, will just magically DISAPPEAR now that GM is building it?
Audi R8. Built by the Volkswagen conglomerate, a company that builds hundreds of millions of cars. Look up how much that car's maintenance cost.
If building rear mounted mid engine cars were as simple as you all seems to suggest, and have ZERO drawbacks and it's all sunshines and unicorns, wouldn't all car manufacturers have moved to this platform long ago? If the ME Corvette is going to cost the same as the FE Corvette, have the same amount of practicality, interior room, weigh same or less, and as easy to service, wouldn't GM have switched to the ME platform last century?
There has to be a reason why the ME platform is not common, or at least, not as common as a FE rear drive, just as rear drive isn't as common as front wheel drive. There are certain draw-backs, compromises, and mechanical engineering hurdles to overcome. And if anyone believes that the new ME C8 is going to have all of the below:
1) Cost the same as the C7
2) Be as practical and have as much usable space as the C7
3) As easy to maintain as a C7
And all the while offer superior handling characteristics?
I'll have what you all are smoking.
Audi R8. Built by the Volkswagen conglomerate, a company that builds hundreds of millions of cars. Look up how much that car's maintenance cost.
If building rear mounted mid engine cars were as simple as you all seems to suggest, and have ZERO drawbacks and it's all sunshines and unicorns, wouldn't all car manufacturers have moved to this platform long ago? If the ME Corvette is going to cost the same as the FE Corvette, have the same amount of practicality, interior room, weigh same or less, and as easy to service, wouldn't GM have switched to the ME platform last century?
There has to be a reason why the ME platform is not common, or at least, not as common as a FE rear drive, just as rear drive isn't as common as front wheel drive. There are certain draw-backs, compromises, and mechanical engineering hurdles to overcome. And if anyone believes that the new ME C8 is going to have all of the below:
1) Cost the same as the C7
2) Be as practical and have as much usable space as the C7
3) As easy to maintain as a C7
And all the while offer superior handling characteristics?
I'll have what you all are smoking.
10-30-2018, 06:23 PM
#27
Advanced
I own an MR2 and maintenance isn't really much more expensive than other Toyotas that use the same powertrain. It is not hard to work on and most things can be done about as easily as a car that is FWD. It will all come down to packaging. Mid engined cars do not have to be expensive to produce or expensive to maintain.
The following users liked this post:
Zaro Tundov (10-30-2018)
10-30-2018, 06:37 PM
#28
Race Director
I don't get it. You all really believe that all the drawbacks of the rear mounted mid engine platform that no other manufacturer knows how to solve, will just magically DISAPPEAR now that GM is building it?
Audi R8. Built by the Volkswagen conglomerate, a company that builds hundreds of millions of cars. Look up how much that car's maintenance cost.
If building rear mounted mid engine cars were as simple as you all seems to suggest, and have ZERO drawbacks and it's all sunshines and unicorns, wouldn't all car manufacturers have moved to this platform long ago? If the ME Corvette is going to cost the same as the FE Corvette, have the same amount of practicality, interior room, weigh same or less, and as easy to service, wouldn't GM have switched to the ME platform last century?
There has to be a reason why the ME platform is not common, or at least, not as common as a FE rear drive, just as rear drive isn't as common as front wheel drive. There are certain draw-backs, compromises, and mechanical engineering hurdles to overcome. And if anyone believes that the new ME C8 is going to have all of the below:
1) Cost the same as the C7
2) Be as practical and have as much usable space as the C7
3) As easy to maintain as a C7
And all the while offer superior handling characteristics?
I'll have what you all are smoking.
Audi R8. Built by the Volkswagen conglomerate, a company that builds hundreds of millions of cars. Look up how much that car's maintenance cost.
If building rear mounted mid engine cars were as simple as you all seems to suggest, and have ZERO drawbacks and it's all sunshines and unicorns, wouldn't all car manufacturers have moved to this platform long ago? If the ME Corvette is going to cost the same as the FE Corvette, have the same amount of practicality, interior room, weigh same or less, and as easy to service, wouldn't GM have switched to the ME platform last century?
There has to be a reason why the ME platform is not common, or at least, not as common as a FE rear drive, just as rear drive isn't as common as front wheel drive. There are certain draw-backs, compromises, and mechanical engineering hurdles to overcome. And if anyone believes that the new ME C8 is going to have all of the below:
1) Cost the same as the C7
2) Be as practical and have as much usable space as the C7
3) As easy to maintain as a C7
And all the while offer superior handling characteristics?
I'll have what you all are smoking.
They are going to a mid-engine platform because, as has been pointed out hundreds of times, the FE platform is at it's end, performance wise. To take the next step, the car has to go to mid-engine. This is a Corvette...a sports car, we're talking about.
And yes, the car will be close to the C7 price wise. All the handwringing that goes on about pricing ignores THE most important thing. GM has spent $800 MILLION DOLLARS on Bowling Green Assembly in the last 2 years. Do you think they did that to make 2/3rds FEWER cars, at a HIGHER price point, and hope for the best?
PS. What are YOU smoking. VW and ALL it's subsidiaries don't make "HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS" cars per year. Maybe every DECADE.
Last edited by jimmyb; 10-30-2018 at 06:42 PM.
10-30-2018, 07:00 PM
#29
Race Director
...I will say thats the problem with Corvette though. Its like the only performance car i can think of that has such unreasonably high expectations! People want it to have super car performance, exotic looks (but STILL maintain that american not european look), do cross country road trips, be DIY friendly, all while still clocking in near the price of the current C7 stingray!!!
I believe GM, while not always very bright as a company, has had, and now has, a really smart team supporting the Vette. Somehow, they are going to get this right. I have been very consistent in my hope that that is an "expanded line" solution including C7-like GT's, a sophisticated and pricy low-volume C8 (say 5-10K units per-annum), and maybe even "something else," be that a hot sedan or some sort of hybrid SUV. I don't have the knowledge or data to defend that as a strategy; I merely think it would be cool
But, if it is a one model solution, well the market is pretty well established. You must start it around $60K to get anywhere near the volume that the C7 delivered over its run...
Last edited by Rapid Fred; 10-30-2018 at 07:03 PM.
10-30-2018, 07:21 PM
#30
Drifting
I don't understand what you're saying. I think per car a Toyota is more reliable than a Ferrari so if you agree then your saying if you want less reliability than buy a Ferrari. If you're saying a Ferrari is more reliable then your making my point of "If you spend more than you should get more reliability". However, I think he thread was more about maintenance costs and I understand a Ferrari costing more for maintenance but my objection is when just because it's a Ferrari jacking up the maintenance costs ( gouging ) because the owner probably has more money.
Last edited by LawrenceFromTorrance; 10-30-2018 at 07:22 PM.
10-30-2018, 07:21 PM
#31
Race Director
^^^^
The NSX base price is $159,300
$300K cars KNOW they're $300K, in their bones. And the maintenance is commiserate with the price.
Car and Driver did a great piece a few months ago about all these ultra high end luxury cars, that at 15 years old, are now the price of a new Accord. The problem is, that although you bought a 2003 Bentley Continental GT for $30,000, in the car's mind, it's still a $250,000 car. So, the old adage of "Maybe you can afford the car but can you afford to keep it running?" applies here. Parts and maintenance on 2003 Continental GT are STILL the price they were when it WAS a $250,000 car.
Exactly.
Anyone that's tried to do repairs in the engine bay of a modern transverse engine FWD car can tell you that it is NO easy deal. Go price a timing belt replacement on a PT CRUISER....depending on the year, the timing belt replacement is THE value of the car.
The NSX base price is $159,300
I don't understand what you're saying. I think per car a Toyota is more reliable than a Ferrari so if you agree then your saying if you want less reliability than buy a Ferrari. If you're saying a Ferrari is more reliable then your making my point of "If you spend more than you should get more reliability". However, I think he thread was more about maintenance costs and I understand a Ferrari costing more for maintenance but my objection is when just because it's a Ferrari jacking up the maintenance costs ( gouging ) because the owner probably has more money.
Car and Driver did a great piece a few months ago about all these ultra high end luxury cars, that at 15 years old, are now the price of a new Accord. The problem is, that although you bought a 2003 Bentley Continental GT for $30,000, in the car's mind, it's still a $250,000 car. So, the old adage of "Maybe you can afford the car but can you afford to keep it running?" applies here. Parts and maintenance on 2003 Continental GT are STILL the price they were when it WAS a $250,000 car.
I own an MR2 and maintenance isn't really much more expensive than other Toyotas that use the same powertrain. It is not hard to work on and most things can be done about as easily as a car that is FWD. It will all come down to packaging. Mid engined cars do not have to be expensive to produce or expensive to maintain.
Anyone that's tried to do repairs in the engine bay of a modern transverse engine FWD car can tell you that it is NO easy deal. Go price a timing belt replacement on a PT CRUISER....depending on the year, the timing belt replacement is THE value of the car.
Last edited by Steve Garrett; 11-04-2018 at 03:54 PM. Reason: Merged Posts-please use the Multi-Quote button in the lower right hand corner (the middle icon) to make your responses to multiple people look like this!
10-30-2018, 10:28 PM
#33
Le Mans Master
I don't understand what you're saying. I think per car a Toyota is more reliable than a Ferrari so if you agree then your saying if you want less reliability than buy a Ferrari. If you're saying a Ferrari is more reliable then your making my point of "If you spend more than you should get more reliability".
Toyotas are more reliable MAINLY due to the fact that so many are made. If Toyota made a car that sold only 8,000/yr it would be about as reliable as a Ferrari.
Volume over years gives the engineering crew time to figure out how not to allow workers to build cars that will break down.
I'm sure GM has plenty of Toyota reliability in them too. Corvettes are not part of that equation, they are somewhat between pony cars and Ferrari's in reliability.
10-30-2018, 10:40 PM
#34
Racer
Member Since: Nov 2017
Location: Wentzville MO & Port Charlotte, FL
Posts: 408
Received 198 Likes
on
102 Posts
My Huracan yearly service which is basically a glorified oil change and some other checks is just over a grand at the lambo dealer. Aftermarket type dealers will do it for a few hundred bucks but they don't do as much checking on the rest of the car. There are 8 drain plugs on the car some a pain to get to, it is a very labor intensive job. I wouldn't expect the c8 to be that much but probably somewhere in the $2-300 range for the base models and maybe a little more for the high performance version. My c7 I bought at the beginning of the year new, the free 500 mile oil change from the dealer was like $140 or some crap I can't remember. As someone previously said it's the labor on mid engine cars that make up the bulk of the cost. Also Audi dealers charge around $500 give/take for a service on the R8 v10+ which is basically the same car as the Huracan so some of what I pay is lambo dealer fluff, but the car is still under warranty so I take it to the lambo dealer in case I ever decide to sell it. Once the warranty is out it'll go to these aftermarket shops for servicing.
Last edited by blb078; 10-30-2018 at 10:44 PM.
10-31-2018, 01:34 AM
#35
Ya i had an Toyota Mr2 first model year, the midengine is still tightly packed back there, have a friend that put in a Camry v6 in his. Only problem no room for the catted exhaust know. Anything can be done. But try working on a mid engined full size supercar not an MR2 where you can stretch your arm across from one quarterpanel to the other. Just saying if GM can figure out an easy way to work on these , bravo. And how about diy mods ? Surely be above most shadetree mechanics abilities.
10-31-2018, 06:48 PM
#36
Melting Slicks
Ya i had an Toyota Mr2 first model year, the midengine is still tightly packed back there, have a friend that put in a Camry v6 in his. Only problem no room for the catted exhaust know. Anything can be done. But try working on a mid engined full size supercar not an MR2 where you can stretch your arm across from one quarterpanel to the other. Just saying if GM can figure out an easy way to work on these , bravo. And how about diy mods ? Surely be above most shadetree mechanics abilities.
10-31-2018, 07:04 PM
#37
Melting Slicks
I'll disagree with anyone that thinks a Corvette buyer will put up with maintenance and repair costs like a Porsche, Audi, Beemer, and won't even consider a Ferrari, Lambo or McLaren.
So yeah,Chevy better have it together. Even more so if they foolishly drop the FE car. If this thing fails without an available FE car, there won't be a C9.
So yeah,Chevy better have it together. Even more so if they foolishly drop the FE car. If this thing fails without an available FE car, there won't be a C9.
11-01-2018, 12:35 PM
#38
Drifting
11-01-2018, 04:22 PM
#39
Burning Brakes
I am not so sure these are good comparisons. The 1984 Pontiac Fieros were known for catching on fire. 
The MR2 had better reliability because it was built by Toyota but it was know for its snap oversteer when pushed. Also, the joke was if you would put anything from your supermarket run that was frozen in the trunk it wouldn't be frozen by the time you got home. 
I think the point everyone is trying to make about mid-engine sports cars is that they are more complex and typically have a larger number of compromises you have to make over a front engine design. It will be interesting to see if Chevy is able to overcome the typical mid-engine design challenges at a reasonable price.
The MR2 had better reliability because it was built by Toyota but it was know for its snap oversteer when pushed. Also, the joke was if you would put anything from your supermarket run that was frozen in the trunk it wouldn't be frozen by the time you got home. I think the point everyone is trying to make about mid-engine sports cars is that they are more complex and typically have a larger number of compromises you have to make over a front engine design. It will be interesting to see if Chevy is able to overcome the typical mid-engine design challenges at a reasonable price.
