C8 will be AWD - Page 3 - CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion

Notices
C8 General Discussion The place to discuss the next generation of Corvette, be it mid-engine, Zora, or whatever form it may take.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

C8 will be AWD

Old 12-26-2018, 10:18 PM
  #41  
smithers
CF Member
 
Member Since: Jun 2008
Posts: 98
Thanks: 0
Thanked 44 Times in 18 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sstonebreaker View Post
That pricing strategy makes no sense to me. If I were GM, that price strategy would put the C8 competing directly against the camaro. Why would I want to compete against myself?
Base model Corvettes have been priced similar to high end Camaros going back to at least the C5. The C5 FRC started right at about $38k, while the same year Camaro SS could get to the mid-high 30's depending on options.
smithers is online now  
Old 12-27-2018, 08:36 AM
  #42  
sstonebreaker
CF Senior Member
 
sstonebreaker's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2006
Location: Willow Park TX
Posts: 1,054
Thanked 69 Times in 57 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Foosh View Post
What makes no sense? It's exactly what's happening w/ the C7 and Camaro today and makes perfect sense. Base Camaros start at $26K and go to $70K. Base C7s start at $56K, and go to $130K+.

Moreover, 4-seaters have a much broader appeal such as to young families with young kids who want something "sporty."
And yet you can price a Challenger from $26k all the way out past $100k, at which point it will eat the Camaro alive. No, it makes more sense to move the Vette upscale and give the Camaro room to grow. I mean, what's the cheapest mid engined super car right now? Off the top of my head, it's probably the Audi R8, right? That's the market segment I'd be targeting if I were GM.

sstonebreaker is offline  
Old 12-27-2018, 01:28 PM
  #43  
megan.andrews
Junior Member
 
Member Since: Nov 2018
Posts: 29
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by djnice View Post
It would be pretty boring with AWD. No skill required. Might as well just get Tahoe. And an older fun car for track.
Hi Djnice,
i am agree with as it's not modern car for truck. Tahoe should be more concentrate on technology.
megan.andrews is offline  
Old 12-27-2018, 04:51 PM
  #44  
Foosh
CF Senior Member
 
Foosh's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Maryland/DC Metro
Posts: 15,156
Thanked 6,104 Times in 3,553 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sstonebreaker View Post
And yet you can price a Challenger from $26k all the way out past $100k, at which point it will eat the Camaro alive. No, it makes more sense to move the Vette upscale and give the Camaro room to grow. I mean, what's the cheapest mid engined super car right now? Off the top of my head, it's probably the Audi R8, right? That's the market segment I'd be targeting if I were GM.
But, the whole point is the market you're referring to is a TINY market, precisely because of high cost. GM doesn't target tiny markets.

Moreover, it's risky. There's no guarantee buyers of McLaren, high-end Porsche 911s, Audi R8, or Ferrari will have any interest in a high dollar Corvette. I'm certain that strategy would be a massive flop and a financial disaster.

GM is only going to sell about 2K ZR1s in a year starting at $130K. That right there tells you something about the size of the high-dollar Corvette market. However, since it's just a derivative of a car that starts at $55K, and they've sold more than 100K base C7s during the run, it doesn't add significant incremental cost to produce it using the C7 supply chain.

There will be a high-end ME, but the financial case only makes sense if it's positioned like the ZR1 at the top of the heap of lower-end, "budget" models of which they will sell 30K or so a year, minimum.

Last edited by Foosh; 12-27-2018 at 05:18 PM.
Foosh is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 08:55 AM
  #45  
sstonebreaker
CF Senior Member
 
sstonebreaker's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2006
Location: Willow Park TX
Posts: 1,054
Thanked 69 Times in 57 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Foosh View Post
But, the whole point is the market you're referring to is a TINY market, precisely because of high cost. GM doesn't target tiny markets.

Moreover, it's risky. There's no guarantee buyers of McLaren, high-end Porsche 911s, Audi R8, or Ferrari will have any interest in a high dollar Corvette. I'm certain that strategy would be a massive flop and a financial disaster.

GM is only going to sell about 2K ZR1s in a year starting at $130K. That right there tells you something about the size of the high-dollar Corvette market. However, since it's just a derivative of a car that starts at $55K, and they've sold more than 100K base C7s during the run, it doesn't add significant incremental cost to produce it using the C7 supply chain.

There will be a high-end ME, but the financial case only makes sense if it's positioned like the ZR1 at the top of the heap of lower-end, "budget" models of which they will sell 30K or so a year, minimum.
It worked for Ford.
sstonebreaker is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 10:57 AM
  #46  
Foosh
CF Senior Member
 
Foosh's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Maryland/DC Metro
Posts: 15,156
Thanked 6,104 Times in 3,553 Posts
Default

LOL . . . That comparison is ridiculous. The FGT was never a profit center, never mass-produced, and Ford has never developed a profitable 2-seat sports car. It was always just a marketing and racing campaign after the Henry Ford II v. Enzo Ferrari battles of the 60's where Ford won LeMans 4 years in a row. It never would have happened had Enzo not publicly humiliated Henry by refusing to go through with the Ferrari sale to Ford. Henry's retaliation was to shell out $400 million to develop a new race car just to punish Enzo, which he ultimately did.

It is reported that Ford is losing money or barely breaking even on every FGT it produces. Ford has built under 3000 FGTs in more than 50 years of on and off dabbling with the concept. Meanwhile Corvette has sold approximately 2 million since 1953.

There is no comparison. Corvette has had the American 2-seat sports car market to all to itself for the better part of 60+ years, and it has been incredibly profitable. GM would be purposely giving up a profit center for nothing more than bragging rights. Rational companies don't do that.

Last edited by Foosh; 12-28-2018 at 11:30 AM.
Foosh is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 11:01 AM
  #47  
Jimp94605
Junior Member
 
Jimp94605's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2017
Location: Oakland CA
Posts: 28
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Unlikely out of the gate. Bigger issues to resolve I’m sure. Lets not get out over our skis
Jimp94605 is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 01:22 PM
  #48  
Tennis & Golf Nut
CF Senior Member
 
Tennis & Golf Nut's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2014
Location: "Big Baller"
Posts: 6,267
Thanked 32 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Shrike6 View Post
Probaby not the base model

I detest AWD cars.

Probably only available in Automatic only, lets take ALL the fun out of driving.

May as well get a Tesla.
Tennis & Golf Nut is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:19 PM
  #49  
Jimp94605
Junior Member
 
Jimp94605's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2017
Location: Oakland CA
Posts: 28
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

why not the Tesla is faster 0 to 60 - especially the roadster Is the fastest production car 0 to 60. Im still partial to the Vette.
Jimp94605 is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:51 PM
  #50  
Crossed Flags Fan
CF Senior Member
 
Crossed Flags Fan's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2006
Location: Make America Great-Remove Trump!
Posts: 2,700
Thanked 224 Times in 144 Posts
Default Confirmed by reliable source.....

The top of the line C8 will have AWD, powered by a 12 cylinder mid-engine, a tubine front engine and nuclear powered rear engine.
My grandmother's friend has a cousin who works in the diner across from the site where GM garbage is dumped confirmed this after the diner's cook found a scrap of paper that blew across the road and on to his windshield with all this info on it.
And that's a fact Jack.
Crossed Flags Fan is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:10 PM
  #51  
Sub Driver
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Aug 2015
Posts: 564
Thanks: 0
Thanked 208 Times in 132 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jimp94605 View Post
why not the Tesla is faster 0 to 60 - especially the roadster Is the fastest production car 0 to 60. Im still partial to the Vette.
What are you talking about? The new roadster isn't in production and there hasn't been any proof for any of their claims.
Sub Driver is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:52 PM
  #52  
JoesC5
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Sep 1999
Location: Springfield MO
Posts: 39,625
Thanked 1,264 Times in 913 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Foosh View Post
LOL . . . That comparison is ridiculous. The FGT was never a profit center, never mass-produced, and Ford has never developed a profitable 2-seat sports car. It was always just a marketing and racing campaign after the Henry Ford II v. Enzo Ferrari battles of the 60's where Ford won LeMans 4 years in a row. It never would have happened had Enzo not publicly humiliated Henry by refusing to go through with the Ferrari sale to Ford. Henry's retaliation was to shell out $400 million to develop a new race car just to punish Enzo, which he ultimately did.

It is reported that Ford is losing money or barely breaking even on every FGT it produces. Ford has built under 3000 FGTs in more than 50 years of on and off dabbling with the concept. Meanwhile Corvette has sold approximately 2 million since 1953.

There is no comparison. Corvette has had the American 2-seat sports car market to all to itself for the better part of 60+ years, and it has been incredibly profitable. GM would be purposely giving up a profit center for nothing more than bragging rights. Rational companies don't do that.
Might want to rethink that statement.

1955...……

Thunderbird------16,155 sold,
Corvette---------------700 sold

1956...……

Thunderbird------15,631 sold
Corvette-------------3,467 sold

1957...….

Thunderbird------21,380 sold
Corvette------------6,339 sold

.

Last edited by JoesC5; 12-28-2018 at 03:54 PM.
JoesC5 is online now  
Old 12-28-2018, 04:22 PM
  #53  
Foosh
CF Senior Member
 
Foosh's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Maryland/DC Metro
Posts: 15,156
Thanked 6,104 Times in 3,553 Posts
Default

LOL . . . yes, and the T-Bird was dropped very quickly as a two seater after 3 MYs. Hmmm . . . wonder why. Ford wasn't happy with the results and abandoned that market. GM persisted and the rest is history.

You're talking 61 YEARS AGO. Really, I mean really? If that's your definition of a successful 2-seat sports car, where has it been for all these years?

Last edited by Foosh; 12-28-2018 at 06:05 PM.
Foosh is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 05:56 PM
  #54  
Cautrell05
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2014
Posts: 182
Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Bill Dearborn View Post
AWD has the nasty habits of both front and rear wheel drive. Every HPDE student has sat through at least one classroom presentation on the friction circle and the grip limitations of tires. A tire has only so much grip. That grip can be used for cornering, braking or acceleration. If you combine cornering and braking the grip has to be shared between the two, if you combine cornering and acceleration that grip has to be shared between the two. Power out of a corner with AWD and the front end will understeer similar to what a FWD car does because you are sharing cornering with acceleration. If you aren't driving at the limit of the front tires grip level you may not notice the understeer but once you get on that limit you will find AWD may limit the amount of power that can be applied when powering off the apex of a corner.

Bill
I heard it refered to as the 100% theory. 100% braking or 100% steering on the front tires. 50/50, 70/30 90/10, doesent matter. Theres only so much to be shared.


I also read something a while back about GM getting a trade mark on the name E-ray. May or may not be related to this thread.

Nick
Cautrell05 is offline  
Old 12-28-2018, 06:37 PM
  #55  
Jimp94605
Junior Member
 
Jimp94605's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2017
Location: Oakland CA
Posts: 28
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Must of hit a nerve “when” it goes into production, its is the fastest production car 0 to 60 1.9 seconds and I belive its the model S is rather quick.

JUST SAYING.

Its OK I still love the Vette

Last edited by Jimp94605; 12-28-2018 at 06:38 PM. Reason: Spelling
Jimp94605 is offline  
Old 12-29-2018, 05:07 AM
  #56  
patentcad
CF Senior Member
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2015
Posts: 1,520
Thanked 644 Times in 287 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sstonebreaker View Post
That pricing strategy makes no sense to me. If I were GM, that price strategy would put the C8 competing directly against the camaro. Why would I want to compete against myself?
Profoundly incorrect on multiple counts. Camaro models do NOT open up @ $60K. The only Camaro up in that range are models that would be parallel to the Z06 and ZR1 Corvettes.
patentcad is offline  
Old 12-29-2018, 06:59 AM
  #57  
jschindler
CF Senior Member
 
jschindler's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 26,526
Thanked 100 Times in 67 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by PurpleLion View Post
Honda's biggest problem with their mid engine sports cars is that they never produced one with a V8!

Also, when they were planning for the first NSX, they commissioned a design study from Pininfarina. It was simply amazing, but instead of using it, they produced their own, so-so design.
Yeah, look at how much that has hurt the 911. It's only survived 50 years without a V8.
jschindler is offline  
Old 12-29-2018, 10:05 AM
  #58  
PurpleLion
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Dec 2017
Posts: 200
Thanked 75 Times in 49 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jschindler View Post
Yeah, look at how much that has hurt the 911. It's only survived 50 years without a V8.
I am not sure that your comment is relevant. A Porsche is a Porsche and is expected to have a 4 or 6 cylinder boxer engine. That is part of Porsche's DNA.

My point is that I believe that the majority of Americans believe that a mid engine sports car should have a V-8 engine at a minimum. Especially when the car in question costs over $80K.

Besides, GOD told me that he/she doesn't like V-6s.
PurpleLion is online now  
Old 12-29-2018, 10:12 AM
  #59  
Quinten33
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Mar 2017
Location: Florida
Posts: 554
Thanked 213 Times in 112 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JoesC5 View Post
Might want to rethink that statement.

1955...……

Thunderbird------16,155 sold,
Corvette---------------700 sold

1956...……

Thunderbird------15,631 sold
Corvette-------------3,467 sold

1957...….

Thunderbird------21,380 sold
Corvette------------6,339 sold

.
Two things that you’re forgetting:
1. The T Bird was advertised as a personal luxury car and focused on luxurious features, whereas the Corvette was much more performance-focused.

2. The Corvette’s Base MSRP back in 1957 was about equal to the MSRP of a fully optioned T Bird.
Quinten33 is online now  
Old 12-29-2018, 10:35 AM
  #60  
Tom73
CF Senior Member
 
Tom73's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 1999
Location: NM
Posts: 13,127
Thanked 115 Times in 73 Posts
Default

57 Tbird $3400
57 Vette $3100
base prices
Tom73 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: C8 will be AWD


Sponsored Ads
Vendor Directory

Contact Us About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: