From the [i]Detroit Free Press[/i] on 2/21/10

[Terry M.]

From today's Detroit Free Press:

http://www.freep.com/article/20100221/COL14/2210510/1331

Should Chevy Corvette have 2 versions?
BY MARK PHELAN
FREE PRESS COLUMNIST

[Gary C.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

Terry, GM management needs to be careful about giving Ed Whitaker a choice of high end and low end Corvettes. Whitaker will go with the most money making option. Gary....

[Clem Z.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

corvette sales problems are "no leases" as my dealer where i have bought all 11 of my new vettes told me 40% of the corvette sales are leases. no leases no sales as most people can not afford a regular car payment on a $50K-$60K corvette. i do not believe that GM can take much cost out of a corvette with a stripper model as a lot of the stuff in a corvette is also used in the whole chevy line. the corvette problems will come if GM is forced to sell trucks without a V-8 engine to meet CAFE as they can not just build a V-8 for the corvette.

[Patrick H.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

"However, the more affordable version must not be a 'Vette-lite, IHS consultant Bruce Harrison said. 'It must be a no-excuses car -- it almost needs to be everything today's Corvette is.'
If GM can build that car for around $40,000, there's room for a separate top model with prices that start above the current Corvette and extend well above $100,000, he said."

Comments like this show how uniformed the "consultants" really are.

Put $40 000 into your pocket, walk into any large city Chevrolet dealership that has a selection of Corvettes and you'll drive home with a new Corvette. Walk in with about $100 000 and you'll walk out with a ZR1. Somehow the 3 models they have now don't fit exactly what the ill-informed consultant thinks is possible?

Why go through the expense of differing platforms when you don't have to?
And don't they know that the "cheap" Porsche costs more than a base Corvette?



Patrick

[Steven B.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

I was glad to hear he feels that there will always be a Corvette---but unfortunatley that is opinion. I was also glad to see that he acknowledged us (NCRS)---"fanatical enthusiasts". Realizing that many cars are now in the high $20,000's to $30,000's how low can the MSRP actually go and the car be exciting? I hope we don't see a Mustang II version of the Corvette, but more so I want it to continue well past my last days.

[Duke W.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

It's all about the 2016 CAFE standards that your Congress mandated a year or two ago, which are dramatically higher than the current standards that have been in place for decades.

All light duty vehicles will have to downsize, and anthing over about 3500 pounds curb weight will have to have some sort of expensive fuel mileage increasing technology, like hybrid.

The V-8 engine - or at least any engine over about 4-5L displacement is dead!

Very few people have any idea of what the new vehicle landscape will look like in 2016, but it will be dramatically different than today - smaller, and more expensive vehicles.

My guess is that if a new Corvette model is designed for 2016, it will be a lot more like the defunct Solstace/Sky than the current Corvette - a four or six cylinder engine at best, maybe with boost.

If you want a "real Corvette" - as we've known and loved them for better than the last half decade - better start saving to buy no later than a 2015 model, which will likely be the last C6, and the last of the "real Corvettes" are likely to be very collectible.

Duke

[Chuck S.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

There's already three different versions of Corvette, not including body styles: Standard, Z06, ZR1. The prices of the different versions provide something according to one's "need for speed" versus their wallet size.

Do we need a Chevette of the Corvette? Anyone supporting that idea is not thinking straight, and proceeding will only destroy the Corvette legacy to the ultimate loss of the corporation. Any success will be short-lived like retro styling...a high price to pay for a part of GM that remains true to it's long history.

It's true that the masses may yearn for cake, but if they can't afford the entry price, then they should be satisfied to hunger from a distance. They can either ramp up their ambition, or buy a good used one, if it's that important to them.

[Jean C.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

The DFP article stated that the Corvette is out of reach for a current college grad. Not sure I agree with that statement. Hasn't the Corvette always been priced higher compared to say a Chevy sedan? A '64 327/300 had a sales price of $4000 and some change. Wasn't the price of a '64 Impala in the $2000 plus range?
Best regards,

[Bill M.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

I would love to be able to buy a vette with a motor a standard transmision ac ,ps and pb. Thats it no power seats no power windows and none of the other space age crap. all of my mid years run fine with out the do dads.

[Patrick H.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

I would love to be able to buy a vette with a motor a standard transmision ac ,ps and pb. Thats it no power seats no power windows and none of the other space age crap. all of my mid years run fine with out the do dads.

The problem is that it is less expssive/cheaper/easier for GM to build 25000 Corvettes that are exactly the same than to build various compliations of options. That's why any option that gets 90-95% chosen eventually has be come part of the "base" Corvette and why we have 3 trim levels as almost our only options. It's also easier/cheaper to design a car with less options. I would suspect that if any "base" Corvette ever gets built you won't be able to add on much to it.

Note that they thought hard of doing that with the C5 "hardtop" Corvette. They were not popular and it eventually became the Z06 just so they could recoup some of their cost.

Also see how few of the 1LT (absolute base) Corvettes are built (no power seats, no electric AC, etc). I would suggest that the market for any low priced Corvette is small especially now that the Camaro is back.

Patrick

[Tom S.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

I love my 08 and probably will never buy another new one. And the boy's in D.C. will have to pry this one out of my cold dead hands. By the way I paid $38,500.00 for it brand new 2 years ago and it has everything I want plus awhole lot more. I am very happy with it.And on a long run I can go about 650 miles on a tankfull, that is 30.5 mpg. What more could a guy ask for? Tom Stanton #41491

[Steven B.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

We now have four Corvettes; base, GS, Z-06 and ZR-1 and 3-4 trim levels for each. I agree, we already have our "$40,000.00" Corvette now, after discount. It looks as if the performance will die again as it did in the 70's, and just as it was getting really good. 'Can't wait to see how some real car guys in Detroit solve this, as they always have in the past. Save the Wave and Keep the Faith.

[Terry M.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

The DFP article stated that the Corvette is out of reach for a current college grad. Not sure I agree with that statement. Hasn't the Corvette always been priced higher compared to say a Chevy sedan? A '64 327/300 had a sales price of $4000 and some change. Wasn't the price of a '64 Impala in the $2000 plus range?
Best regards,

My 1965 Impala - was $2300 base. I added $1100 in options and only had a 327, and four speed for the high dollar extras. ALL the rest was HD this and that at 10 to 20 bucks a pop. No AC, or PS or PB. I think Posi might have been 50 or 80 bucks. At that time I was making around 6K per year.

[John H.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

What will most likely keep the Corvette alive as we know it is its low volume; the number is low enough vs. total GM "car" volume that it will have little impact on the overall corporate average fuel economy calculation.

The 2016 CAFE law requires a corporate fleet average of 35.5 mpg for each manufacturer; with the current sales mix of "car" vs. "truck", that means cars have to get 42 mpg, and trucks must get 29 mpg, and that's the "combined" number, not the "highway" number everyone advertises (the "combined" number is usually only a couple of mpg higher than the "city" number). None of them will look or drive anything like they do today. Seen the size of a 42-mpg (combined) car lately? There aren't any.

[Chuck S.]

Re: From the Detroit Free Press on 2/21/10

...None of them will look or drive anything like they do today. Seen the size of a 42-mpg (combined) car lately? There aren't any.

I wonder how they will score the Volt in CAFE computation?