Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

2014 Corvette


  • Please log in to reply
168 replies to this topic

#1 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,381 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:32

I am an unashemd fan of US V-8's so this link is biased - and I'm sure Magoo will have far more info than me but here is the 2014 Vette

http://www.autocar.c...rvette-stingray

If the under 1400kg is correct then it's got a serious power to weight ratio and 50/50 weight distribution.

I suspect GM stick with the two valve V-8 for brand image as well as cost reasons in their trucks , and the same same for the front engine layout of the Vette.

Nonetheless the Vette makes an interesting design reference point for " supercars" as it can do about 95% of what they can with very conventional technology but great development work.

Now isnt that EXACTLY what the journalists always say about the 911?



Advertisement

#2 Duc-Man

Duc-Man
  • Member

  • 1,077 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:13

Comparing 911 and Corvette it looks like they go through opposite development: the Corvette turned into a serious sportscar while the 911 became a fat goose. Specially since 1993 when the moved from 964 to 993.

#3 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 14 January 2013 - 11:04

2014 Corvette Stingray unveiled — first facts and photos | Mac's Motor City Garage.com




Posted Image


#4 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 14 January 2013 - 13:56

It will take some minor time to get used to. the "ZR1" will be cool looking i suspect.


#5 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,381 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 14 January 2013 - 14:23

Its just a personal opinion but I think the new Vette side view in Magoo's post looks just as good as a modern Ferrari.

http://www.macsmotor...-/431858176.jpg


http://images.cdn.au...ferrari-599.jpg

On a more geeky note I wonder if it still has the composite underbody panel which turned the trans. tunnel into a backbone in the C5 ( I think) Vette?

I was a closure panel with a composite sandwich using balsa wood which was attached to the trans tunel opening with lots of small bolts. In principle it should have given a lot of extra torsional stiffnes but I never saw any numbers claimed


#6 saudoso

saudoso
  • Member

  • 4,670 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 14 January 2013 - 17:33

I'm confused. I've read today 'GM unveils the new Corvette'. But to my knowledge GM had sold the division after the 2008 market plunge. What happened?

#7 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 14 January 2013 - 17:53

I'm confused. I've read today 'GM unveils the new Corvette'. But to my knowledge GM had sold the division after the 2008 market plunge. What happened?


In the 2009 bankruptcy, the Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab divisions were jettisoned. The Cadillac, Buick, GMC and Chevrolet divisions were retained as GM's core brands. (From eight brands to four.) Chevrolet division very nearly killed off the Corvette model as a cost-cutting/resource allocation measure but ultimately it was saved.

#8 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 14 January 2013 - 18:13

Was the Vette line not that valuable? Or would they have kept those cars but under 'just Chevrolet' ?

#9 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 13,072 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 14 January 2013 - 21:24

I think the car looks great. A Ferrari for smart people. The interior looks more than a little *ahem* retro though.

#10 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 14 January 2013 - 23:20

Was the Vette line not that valuable? Or would they have kept those cars but under 'just Chevrolet' ?


The Corvette doesn't do big volume and often doesn't run in the black. Also, the average Corvette buyer is now 60+ but that's another issue.

The core of the argument for killing/keeping the Corvette is: at a time when the company desperately needs fresh, new, innovative products across the lineup, so you expend valuable engineering resources on the low-volume niche vehicle? It's a matter of where you put your finite number of game pieces on the chessboard, if you will. Discuss.

#11 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 15 January 2013 - 00:02

But then there's the whole halo effect. Dropping Corvette would have said to me that GM was actually dead. Though an investor(or more likely creditor) isn't going to care and is probably pushing the offloading.

#12 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:40

One for the panel - do halo cars 'work'? Do halo brands 'work'? Does 'race on Sunday sell on Monday' still work?



#13 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 1,663 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:42

Tend to agree with Ross. As a marketing tool, the Vette is...well, the Vette. A hallmark of American performance, a challenge to the Euro crowd etc etc. It's the university-degree'd hot rod where the F bodies / pony cars were for us unwashed heathens. When the Camaro / T/A went away, we moved into their trucks and over to the Mustang. If the Vette went away, and I'm assuming the performance development behind it that fed in to the -V Cadillac line, then where do you go? Off of GM and over to the Porsche guys with whatever trickle-down effect that has.

New buyers are 60+ because they're the ones with the money ;-) and an empty nest. I couldn't swing a 2-seater in the house unless it was a 3rd vehicle that I'd paid cash for. I don't have new Corvette disposable income (or nice enough primary vehicles to permit it). Not even used. On the other hand, I could easily swing a used M5 / E55 / C63 /S6 as "dad's" car - capable of hauling all 5 of us and entertaining enough to want to own it.

#14 kikiturbo2

kikiturbo2
  • Member

  • 633 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:14

One for the panel - do halo cars 'work'? Do halo brands 'work'? Does 'race on Sunday sell on Monday' still work?


coming from automotive marketing side of business, I have to say that some brands still need "halo" models as they tend to enhance the image of the brand.. If they manage to break even, even better...
Also, in these days of increasing reliance on social networks and other "alternative" channels of marketing communication, "halo cars", just as racing I suppose, give you additional content to use.. Makes people feel a bit better about the brand.. There is nothing worse than a boring car brand..

#15 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,381 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:34

Greg, " do halo cars work?"

Yes, its spelled B....M...W..3..Series

I know the 3 series is a startling good car but in the Uk its more than that, its 110% image . That image was rooted in the performance of high power ones , espeically the M3.

The number of fake M3 's in the UK is amazing and there is rash of BMW thefts using key code hacking not for resale but to rob the high spec parts to convert ordinary 3 series in Eastern Europe to "M3" style cars.


Going much further back the Lotus Cortina did the same thing for Ford in the 1960's.Then the Sierra Cosworth repeated the trick.

Times move on , 30 years ago you took your 'swerth to Sowfend - if you travel the A120 today its all 50 limit lined with camaras and filled with bumper to bumper BMW's and Mercs.

sorry the last bit will probably only be recognized by Greg, Tony M. and myself.

#16 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 15 January 2013 - 13:06

More stuff from day one of the North American International Auto Show


North American International Auto Show: day one wrap-up | Mac's Motor City Garage.com



Posted Image
Posted Image


#17 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 15 January 2013 - 16:58

One for the panel - do halo cars 'work'? Do halo brands 'work'? Does 'race on Sunday sell on Monday' still work?


I would for me if the buggers in racing had the original chassie, gearbox and suspention+ -

In many ways street cars on track events are a better guide.

"What about a Toyota supra?" stock crank can take 1000hp+ that sells for me. stock drivetrain can take tons of abuse too. thats impressive. and so on.

Corvette is much much more tuning friendly than any ferrari. That sells. Ferrari sells on image.

Modern car entusiasts like their cars to be upgrade friendly.

Not a Citroeng in other words.

I don`t think i have ever heard about a turbo converted citroeng.

I think that a brand like Alfa romeo would grow quickly if they just switched to rwd.

Personally i miss a true stripped car from the dealership. the 911 RS from Porsche isnt really a stripped down model.

Im talking naked interior and plastic sidewindows. no sound and heat insulation, no radio, no AC, no TC and the like. It shouldn`t be hard in these digitalised days with robots installing most stuff. It should be just a order and a thinner price tag.

I wonder how much less you would get it for.

But all this is a minority group. Hence the lack of such offers.

#18 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 15 January 2013 - 17:31

Does 'race on Sunday sell on Monday' still work?


It must, otherwise they wouldn't be there. Car companies are too big, too unprofitable(relatively speaking) and have too few racing mad people for them to do it on a whim. There must be a way that they're able to juice the figures so that it works when they make their annual budget requests.


With the exception of Honda. You get the impression they'd still race if there were no fans or competition showing up.

#19 NeilR

NeilR
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 15 January 2013 - 21:34

do halo cars work? yes, assuming that they are used properly in the marketing. Examples are numerous: WRX, EVO, M3, BRZ/FT86, Falcon Turbo (?), MX5...for the life of me I cannot think of a british car apart from the carlton....lotus sunbeam thingy?
The 'problem' with the corvette is the age it appeals to. In the 'glory days' I assume that corvette appealed to a youth segment, where getting attention was mixed with getting brand loyalty. The Corvette won't work the same way any more, but it is acknowledged as a good car. If they sold in Australia for the same price as in the states then a few would be sold here.

Advertisement

#20 Robin Fairservice

Robin Fairservice
  • Member

  • 498 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 15 January 2013 - 22:47

do halo cars work? yes, assuming that they are used properly in the marketing. Examples are numerous: WRX, EVO, M3, BRZ/FT86, Falcon Turbo (?), MX5...for the life of me I cannot think of a british car apart from the carlton....lotus sunbeam thingy?
The 'problem' with the corvette is the age it appeals to. In the 'glory days' I assume that corvette appealed to a youth segment, where getting attention was mixed with getting brand loyalty. The Corvette won't work the same way any more, but it is acknowledged as a good car. If they sold in Australia for the same price as in the states then a few would be sold here.

The problem is that GM doesn't make RHD Corvvettes for countries that drive on the left.

#21 NeilR

NeilR
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 15 January 2013 - 22:55

Yes I know. Local companies reverse engineer them, but I'm sure GM has gone through the numbers re making RHD versions and it is not worth it. base price is supposed to be $55,000USD?

#22 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 15 January 2013 - 23:34

It must, otherwise they wouldn't be there. Car companies are too big, too unprofitable(relatively speaking) and have too few racing mad people for them to do it on a whim. There must be a way that they're able to juice the figures so that it works when they make their annual budget requests.



Old ad joke: CEO says, "I know we're wasting half our ad budget. The question is which half."


#23 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 16 January 2013 - 02:30

It's the underlying argument for why an Indycar program I'm working on is so much better than 'normal' :p B2B is lovely when done right.

But Indycar is a good example. How do Chevy justify the cost. NASCAR seems like a good fit, and the media value is there.

The military sponsorships in NASCAR are weird, and possibly bad, examples but the response rates on the National Guard side were alarming.

Edited by Ross Stonefeld, 16 January 2013 - 02:30.


#24 NeilR

NeilR
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 16 January 2013 - 04:21

many of us are a long way removed from this, so what was the response to the national guard and army teams?

#25 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 16 January 2013 - 11:37

Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., tried to prevent military spending on sporting events last year. Although her measure failed then, she gained support in Congress with Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., sponsoring the bill this time (McCollum is the co-sponsor).
"You've got to lead by example," Kingston told USA TODAY Sports. "I think that if Southern, pro-NASCAR people say, 'You know what, I love NASCAR but this is not a good recruiting tool (and) we've got to make some serious decisions in the name of the (USA).' I think NASCAR fans would appreciate that."
McCollum, whose website said National Guard spent $20 million in professional fishing and $90 million in motor sports in 2011 and 2012. cited the Air National Guard's sponsorship of the NASCAR Sprint Cup race at Richmond International Raceway in September 2010 as an example of waste.
She said that the Air National Guard paid $650,000 to sponsor that event.
"One night, one race … 439 recruitment leads,'' McCollum told USA TODAY Sports. "Six of those — only six — qualified as potential recruits and then they got zero out of it.
"The military needs to be present in our communities. There's nothing to prevent them … from having recruiters at these events. We're paying for recruiters to be at these events. It's the above and beyond that is just ridiculous."
According to the National Guard, it will pay $26,539,294 this fiscal year (October 2011 through September 2012) for its NASCAR sponsorship.
In fiscal year 2011, the National Guard reported that it spent $32,775,000 in its total NASCAR sponsorship fees. That represented 8.6% of its total recruiting budget.
NASCAR spokesman Kerry Tharp touted the sport's connection to the military and its role with helping fortify an all-volunteer force.
"Military sponsorship in NASCAR and other forms of motorsports have proven to be a very effective recruiting tool," Tharp said. "There's really no better platform than motor sports for the military to connect with potential recruits and their families. The level of exposure and reach that these sponsorships have is enormous."
According to the National Guard, in 2008, approximately 16,800 individuals cited NASCAR as the source of their interest in joining. In 2009, 53,740 qualified leads were generated because of the NASCAR program, which included an online drive around Earnhardt. The Guard stated that 43,934 fans signed up to the online program with 38,846 considered qualified leads. Of those, 343 joined the Guard.


My short version is the military probably gets something out of motorsport, but they're over-spending to get it. You don't need to be the primary or even co-sponsor of someone like Dale Earnhardt. You could do a personal sponsorship deal and drop a zero off the check, and probably get the same amount of recruits.

#26 NeilR

NeilR
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 16 January 2013 - 22:16

Thanks for that information. I have difficulty with defence forces spending such money when many military families get food stamps etc.
Pretty low recruitment levels for the money, mind you recuitment is only half the story, you have to keep the recruits...having been brought up with a father in the RAF, the US servicemen were always considered to be better off.

Back to halo brands and do the work...we're talking about one, so in that sense they work. Our awareness of the product is aroused and we in some sense buy into the information share simply by discussing it.

#27 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,535 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 16 January 2013 - 22:34

Back to halo brands and do the work...we're talking about one, so in that sense they work. Our awareness of the product is aroused and we in some sense buy into the information share simply by discussing it.

The question is does the Corvette make you more likely to buy a Chevrolet econobox or whatever you are looking for? Did the GT40 project sell any Escorts? My personal belief about 'supercar' projects having worked on a couple is that they are propular with senior management because the comparison tests and evaluations are fun to do, and the competitor fleet is a nice source of cars for the weekend, not because they have any real long term benefit for the company outside of that.

Now admittedly that is more about supercars, not the Corvette which is a special case as it actually has some history and a fairly unambiguous image these days.



#28 NeilR

NeilR
  • Member

  • 469 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 17 January 2013 - 00:53

I think when the halo car is so unrelated to the prime product the the halo may not transfer as well. It is different with a halo car that is based on the std production car ala' WRX STi, Evo etc.
In this instance the shape and base mechanicals get a halo boost. These would be more effective than the FT86 for this purpose, as it has no correlation to any other toyota product line...but I am not well read in the psychology of purchasing.


#29 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:25

Im fairly sure GT/FT 86 is a success story for toyota. That car doesnt even need to sell more of the other toyotas. The lack of a decent coupe on the marked was pretty big. It has been some time since the S15 was out of production. Overall id say there is a need for a dirt cheap RWD car. Perhaps cheaper than the GT/FT 86.

#30 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 17 January 2013 - 15:31

Personally i miss a true stripped car from the dealership. the 911 RS from Porsche isnt really a stripped down model.

Im talking naked interior and plastic sidewindows. no sound and heat insulation, no radio, no AC, no TC and the like. It shouldn`t be hard in these digitalised days with robots installing most stuff. It should be just a order and a thinner price tag.


Problem is that anymore, you can't get much weight or cost out of the car with de-contenting. The elective stuff doesn't weigh very much... with the possible exception of the airbags, but then you don't have a street-licensed vehicle anymore, a whole new can of worms in marketing and liability.


#31 GSpeedR

GSpeedR
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 January 2013 - 15:49

I don't think that technology transfer from a halo car can be discounted. Advanced technologies can be pushed further in a low-volume, high(er)-priced vehicle with less financial punishment if the technology is scrapped or needs more development. Sport-bikes are certainly beneficiaries of this transfer from their racing counterparts, which is an extreme example. Many features we find in current 'standard' vehicles were developed first for higher-end models (6-speed transmissions, stability control, etc).

#32 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 17 January 2013 - 17:14

Halo cars probably work in-brand, ie the Acura NSX probably makes the rest of the company look okay?

#33 kikiturbo2

kikiturbo2
  • Member

  • 633 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 17 January 2013 - 19:11

I think when the halo car is so unrelated to the prime product the the halo may not transfer as well. It is different with a halo car that is based on the std production car ala' WRX STi, Evo etc.
In this instance the shape and base mechanicals get a halo boost. These would be more effective than the FT86 for this purpose, as it has no correlation to any other toyota product line...but I am not well read in the psychology of purchasing.


I am not so sure.. With a "halo car" you show the world that your company is sexy/technologically advanced/cool/hip/... Also, do not discount the fact that PR exposure is counted just like the paid advertising... so you can look at it that way too..

Renault for example, made their Sport sub brand (makers of clio sport, megane sport, etc) operate at a profit... not much but not at a loss.... But they do milk that positive PR as much as they can.. Audi Sport will shove their PR films on lemans down your throat all day long..

#34 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 13,072 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 17 January 2013 - 20:54

The Corvette doesn't do big volume and often doesn't run in the black. Also, the average Corvette buyer is now 60+ but that's another issue.

The core of the argument for killing/keeping the Corvette is: at a time when the company desperately needs fresh, new, innovative products across the lineup, so you expend valuable engineering resources on the low-volume niche vehicle? It's a matter of where you put your finite number of game pieces on the chessboard, if you will. Discuss.


If the engineering is done in-house and the program comes even close to breaking even then I don't see any downside. It isn't like engineering resources are inherently finite, you have as much as you decide to staff and fund. The raw talent available is in essentially unlimited supply if the capability exists in-house to develop and hone it. More are always better, the more programs you can run giving engineers more experience, the more human capital you possess and can deploy for whatever purpose. Racing likewise, if the engineering isn't outsourced and the expense can plausibly be rationalized, creates more human capital trained to problem solve within the company. Look how VAG or perhaps more generally Samsung have increased their market shares by aggressively creating product for every imaginable market niche. Has there ever been a viable automaker that suffered from a surplus of engineering talent? Become adept at producing "game pieces" rather than looking at them as an inherently finite quantity that must be judiciously rationed, it's good for the company, its product line and the economy.

#35 bigleagueslider

bigleagueslider
  • Member

  • 860 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:21

GM sells about 13,000 Corvettes per year, and there is a fat profit margin on each one sold. The Corvette is not that expensive to manufacture. Most of GM's profits come from truck and SUV sales. The "halo" vehicle that GM loses huge amounts of money on is the Volt hybrid. GM also loses huge amounts of money with their Opel division.

Overall, if you consider the real financial numbers rather than the make-believe accounting numbers GM publishes, the GM corporation is currently operating at a net loss. And there is nothing they are doing that will change this situation anytime soon. Unfortunately, it's likely that GM will be back in financial trouble in another year or two.

#36 Canuck

Canuck
  • Member

  • 1,663 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:42

I'm of the opinion that it is the accountant's job not to report the truth but to ensure the numbers reflect whatever expectations held by the shareholders / stakeholders are. Not crooked, just not transparent.

#37 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 902 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 10:47


To return to the subject of the new Corvette: - I don't doubt that it is a very good and capable car and may be mechanically the best Corvette ever - but in my personal view it is verging on downright ugly. The side on view is not too bad but all other views seem to have far too many lumps and bumps, vents etc. The front view looks silly as does the rear view.

Previous Corvettes were much better looking.

#38 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 16:07

To return to the subject of the new Corvette: - I don't doubt that it is a very good and capable car and may be mechanically the best Corvette ever - but in my personal view it is verging on downright ugly. The side on view is not too bad but all other views seem to have far too many lumps and bumps, vents etc. The front view looks silly as does the rear view.

Previous Corvettes were much better looking.

Its allways like that. It takes some time to get used to the model. I remember when that Ferrari 430 replaced the 360. It was uugly.. Now i would rather take the 430. It was something about the lights that did not fit. Its like they taped over the rest of the light house.

I don`t like the side vent on the Corvette. Its so not in tune with the rest of the car. Lambo nails this better than anyone else. There is a system in their sharp edges and angles.

Edited by MatsNorway, 18 January 2013 - 16:19.


#39 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 17:56

I don`t like the side vent on the Corvette. Its so not in tune with the rest of the car. Lambo nails this better than anyone else. There is a system in their sharp edges and angles.

I agree. There is something not quite right about the vent, possibly the angle or the sheer blackness of it. Overall I find it a bit too fussy, too many hard edges.

Advertisement

#40 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 6,024 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 19 January 2013 - 03:07

I agree. There is something not quite right about the vent, possibly the angle or the sheer blackness of it. Overall I find it a bit too fussy, too many hard edges.

Agreed, Vettes should be simple classic sports styling. Which most have been. Though I do not hate it. And if I had to drive a Sports Car a Vette would be my no 1 choice. The most simple in engineering, probably the most reliable and cheapest to service. And also one of the fastest. Though I am near the so called buyers age demographic and dont want one. Too bloody hard to get in and out of and the driving position would kill my back in and hour. As do most modern passenger cars too!

#41 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,534 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 19 January 2013 - 08:37

GM also loses huge amounts of money with their Opel division.


Didn't GM divest themselves of Opel?

I assume you also meant in North America....cos the Chevy trucks probably didn't sell too well in Europe, but various Opels did.


#42 Duc-Man

Duc-Man
  • Member

  • 1,077 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 19 January 2013 - 16:07

GM also loses huge amounts of money with their Opel division.



Didn't GM divest themselves of Opel?

I assume you also meant in North America....cos the Chevy trucks probably didn't sell too well in Europe, but various Opels did.


Just to put here something into the right perspective:

GM also made big money with Opel. For a long time went every year the profit that Opel made straight into Saab...for no f***ing reason as it turned out. And we talk here about a couple billion bucks.

Up to the last year was Opel only allowed to sell cars in europe. A market that lost a huge volume due to the economy crisis in the southern countries where Opel used to sell a lot of cars. Spain, Portugal and Greece were strong markets for Opel.
And GM flooding europe at the same time with those 'cheap' korean pseudo-Chevys is not very helpful either. Along those lines goes that 5 out of 12 models are build and bought in from other companies and sold as Opel.

Here is a quick overviev:
Adam - genuine Opel
Agila - Suzuki Splash, made in Hungary
Corsa - genuine Opel
Combo - Fiat Doblo, made in Turkey
Astra - genuine Opel
Ampera - Chevy Volt, made in USA
Insignia - genuine Opel
Mokka - Chevy Trax/Buick Encore, made in Corea
Antara - Chevy Captiva, made in Corea and Russia
Meriva, Zafira and Zafira Tour are genuine Opel

GM tried to sell Opel and backed out last moment because they figured they will lose an important organ(Opel R&D).
Thanks to some numb-nuts in the GM/Opel management does Opel not get out of negative headlines and has to suffer bad if not decreasing sales figures.

Opel has a long tradition in building compact bread-and-butter-cars. Remember the Opel/Buick Kadett, Manta and GT? A segment that GM has left to the japanese competition in the US for decades.

#43 bigleagueslider

bigleagueslider
  • Member

  • 860 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 20 January 2013 - 04:26

Didn't GM divest themselves of Opel?..........I assume you also meant in North America....cos the Chevy trucks probably didn't sell too well in Europe, but various Opels did.


GM still owns Opel, and Opel cars are not sold in the US. GM lost an estimated $1.5 billion from Opel-Vauxhall operations in 2012.

The GM corporation was given a $50 billion bailout by US taxpayers in 2009 in return for some GM stock, and since then GM has paid back around $8 billion of that money. At GM's current share price the stock held by US taxpayers is worth about $15 billion, which means that US taxpayers currently would see a $27 billion net loss.

The only vehicles that GM currently sells at a profit are Corvettes, Camaros, trucks, and SUVs.


#44 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 261 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 20 January 2013 - 07:17

It must, otherwise they wouldn't be there. Car companies are too big, too unprofitable(relatively speaking) and have too few racing mad people for them to do it on a whim. There must be a way that they're able to juice the figures so that it works when they make their annual budget requests.


With the exception of Honda. You get the impression they'd still race if there were no fans or competition showing up.


They race b/c the business model is no longer "race on sunday, sell on monday" it's now "sell on saturday, race on sunday". A few manufacturers still pay big bucks to race, but increasingly more are worried about selling race vehicles or using racing for its media presence, not the competition. They want to sell FIA GT3 race cars, S2000 touring cars, etc.

Besides F1 and LMP1, I cannot think of a singe series that encourages technological investment by the manufacturers. Every series uses BoP to make the cars equal, thus, discourage proprietary technology so the vehicles can be sold to private teams.

#45 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 20 January 2013 - 11:43

I don`t follow BoP series. Who here does that?

I follow Pikes Peak, F1, Various time attack events, Formula drift and in the future intend to keep a eye on Global rallycross series. I just hope they improve the safety a tiny bit. (no silly jumps etc)

Edited by MatsNorway, 20 January 2013 - 13:00.


#46 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 20 January 2013 - 12:41

They race b/c the business model is no longer "race on sunday, sell on monday" it's now "sell on saturday, race on sunday". A few manufacturers still pay big bucks to race, but increasingly more are worried about selling race vehicles or using racing for its media presence, not the competition. They want to sell FIA GT3 race cars, S2000 touring cars, etc.

Besides F1 and LMP1, I cannot think of a singe series that encourages technological investment by the manufacturers. Every series uses BoP to make the cars equal, thus, discourage proprietary technology so the vehicles can be sold to private teams.


That'd be the case for something like the Mercedes SLR GT3, but that doesn't seem to be the justification for Mercedes in F1 and DTM.

#47 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 20 January 2013 - 14:37

The only vehicles that GM currently sells at a profit are Corvettes, Camaros, trucks, and SUVs.


That's sorta backward. Camaro and Corvette aren't even two of Chevrolet's most profitable car lines. And then there are Buick and Cadillac.

Of course, Corvette is now in MY2013 production but there is a sizable back inventory of 2012 cars, with rebates across the board, including the Z06 and ZR1. Kinda scary considering that MY2012 production was only <12,000 units total, lowest since around 1961. The C6 Corvette has done 35-40K annual units in its good years.

#48 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,504 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 20 January 2013 - 14:44

The Volt vs. Corvette thing has been notoriously described this way: The Volt is an investment in the future, while the Corvette is an investment in the past.

Thoughts?



#49 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 20 January 2013 - 14:49

another design thing worth mentioning is that the corvette has a history of round or near round brake lights. They are now tiltet squares with a cooling exit on the side.

Do to many design chances and the car loses its identity. Ford learned this when they morphed the mustang into the fox body and so on, thats why they are now back with the old look.

Same goes for porsches 911. Porsche has been aware of this for a long time. And has only messed up a few times with non round front lights, and now i think the rear end is getting too high and squared. 911 has been very good at keeping itself fresh and modern.

I think we can say that in general Japanese brands also have missed out on this largely. Some brands have evolved their models on occation, like the Lancer evos, skyline 32-34, the nissan S series and the subby.

I would point out Toyota as one of the worst to evolve their models. they seem to just pump out a new car and stick a old name on it.





#50 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,524 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 20 January 2013 - 14:49

And when you answer, please state whether you own any GM stock.