jefnvk

The market for the Corvette is not 30k FE plus another 30k ME, it is around 30k period. With scant few exceptions from some kicking and screaming holdouts (who likely already have a C7 FE and have no need to buy an identical new one), every FE that would be sold is a ME that is not being sold. With the exception of something like a small number of FE ZR1s still being produced while the high performance ME is finalized, that is exactly why the ME and FE will not have any significant overlap in production.

PCMIII

If the ME cannot compete, then it should not be built, period. Either the ME is a success on its own or it goes the way of Fiero.

I believe the LT4/ME with DCT will be a success because it would blow away everything else on the market up to $300k. I expect it to replace the Z06 and ZR1 FE cars with a price of approximately $100K. There will be a lot of used Z06's on the market soon after the ME arrives.

jefnvk

Umm, doesn't that bolster my point and hurt yours? It will compete on its own, therefore no FE would need to be produced alongside.

PCMIII

You assume that FE buyers will all embrace the ME? You know that is not true.

The FE Supra would conquer a lot of former FE Corvette buyers especially since the ME will be significantly more money.

It makes much more sense for Corvette to build a LT4/ME w/DCT at $100K and drop the FE Z06 & ZR1 while continuing the FE Stingray at $50K w/500hp LT2 and refreshed front and rear fascias. Something for everyone.

jefnvk

I embrace the fact that far fewer people care about FE v ME than folks on these boards believe. Same goes for pushrod v DOHC. Somehow, I believe Toyota v GM is far more prevalent of a concern for the majority of current Corvette buyers, and I don't see them choosing Toyota in any significant numbers.

And for the last time, there is no significant cost differences in producing a ME v a FE that would necessitate a significant jump in the base price of a ME over a FE. That is not to say GM won't choose to bump the base price up (although I still personally don't think it will be that much more), but there is nothing there that means a ME has to be significantly higher priced. If a ME is going to lose out to the Supra on price, a FE is as well.

PCMIII

You are assuming that the ME will be a direct replacement for the FE at all current price points of the FE. There is no basis for that assumption and it makes no sense to simply move the engine behind the driver when there is no apparent demand from Corvette buyers for such a move, especially when it means losing the manual trans, cargo space and classic proportions of the FE.

What Mark Reuss said does make sense: The FE has reached the limit of its performance capability.

Therefore the ME will be the high performance platform going forward. IOW, the LT4/ME w/DCT will replace the FE Z06 & ZR1 and be priced accordingly, e.g., $100K and up.

JerryU

Yep can “hear” that meeting now between Tagde and Marry Barra:

”I know we have spent hundreds of millions developing the ME C8, have a number of them running around in test and have vendors building transmissions etc. But there is a risk. Just heard a rumor that some C2 though C7 old farts found the “Fountain of Youth!” They may be around for another 25 years! Heck let’s just put it off!

PS: I have no allusion there will be a few holdouts, like those who still say they won’t buy a C7 because it doesn’t have round taillights! But like those on the C7 Forum, we got over it! Took me a few weeks after Detroit when I put money down to get a spot in like!

PCMIII

We are not talking taillights here. I want a manual transmission. I want cargo space. I want the classic proportions of a FE sports car which Corvette has had for decades.

Why would Corvette not give me what I want when they clearly have the capability to do so and I clearly have the capability to buy the car? You have no answer.

jefnvk

And a "Stingray" ME will also replace the base FE at a slight bump in price, as happens with any new body style changeover. It makes far more economical sense than two platforms, especially MY3 and later where you aren't selling 30k a year.

PCMIII

You are just assuming that one platform is more economical than two for production. There is no basis for that assumption and BGA is known to be easily capable of producing different models on the same line, as most car factories are today. Corvette can walk and chew gum at the same time.

C7pimp

You honestly think two model platforms could be cost-equal to one? That's some serious crack smoking right there.

"There's no basis for that assumption"

There are 100,000's of cases where this is 100% true. You are ignorant.

Atari_Prime

Well you can't have them. For the same reason I can't have Windows 10 look like Windows 95 even though Windows 95 is better. A) it's not my choice, and B) if the public wanted it that way, they can voice their opinion with their wallet. The things you want in the car, simply aren't that important. Your voice will not be heard as a result.

Foosh

Jefnvk is an automotive engineer, who works in the industry in Detroit, and you're telling him what is more cost effective as far as production is concerned? Wow.

PCMIII

Have you got any actual data on dual production lines? No you don't.

C7pimp

Production labor costs and assembly are only one part of a much larger cost equation for any type of product.

I have worked in product development for 15 years. Although I don't work in the automotive sector, the principles of total cost to produce are exactly the same.

Foosh

Google "economies of scale." Having read your posts you probably won't understand it, so no use for me to try to explain for you again. It's been explained here many times in this thread alone by myself and others.

One of the major reasons Corvette can sell a car that performs like something 2X the price is because they use the same platform to build many more. Lower price equates to more sales all things being equal.

PCMIII

The ability to produce multiple car models on the same assembly line in any sequence without set-ups was a radical new idea when it started with Toyota in the 1960s, but nowadays it is industry standard. https://www.allaboutlean.com/toyota-...y-evolution-2/

You are only 50 years out of date. Not surprising, but still amazing. You might want to educate yourself on how Toyota builds cars.

C7pimp

When you have an FE and an ME platform, you are now looking at a long list of components that need either dual configurations or its own separate and unique part. Every single on of those alterations or additions costs A LOT of money to make, not only in tooling and manufacturing costs but paying people to design and validate all of that. Body panels are a big one. Those tools are massive and incredibly expensive. You now have two sets of all those tools. A different chassis needs to be designed and produced. You also now have two have exhaust systems, one for the FE and one for the ME, a driveshaft for the FE with a different rear axle set up, a different transmission configuration, engine and tranny mounting, ECU harnesses, wiring assemblies, sound deadening materials,etc. Interior fittings won't be equal so many of those need to be redesigned and paid for twice. Suspension componentry will have to be different specs. Different tires? you have to test and validate both configurations of these assembled cars.

All of these things work against the "economy of scale" that Foosh keeps trying to inform you about.

If you think that will ultimately be a cost-equal endeavor to producing two platforms instead of just one then you are braindead.

Foosh

Yep, brain-dead is right. Sure you can do it, but it will drive up costs, cause a price hike, which will drive down sales.

Toyota is not doing what you're suggesting with two entirely different platforms each with so many unique parts. The other difference is Toyota is building their models in the 100's of thousands, so they have economies of scale very well covered. The market for 2-seat sports cars is small.

jvp

This is a comical statement.

1) Who has confirmed it?

2) Who has been asked specifically, and they didn't deny it on record?

I know the answers to both questions, but I'd like to see how much deeper a hole you dig yourself into. Remember to A)answer carefully, and B)show your work. Also remember the folks at GM that I just happen to know.