Interesting view point GM vs Ferrari

I was on the Corvette and offered the following to be followed by a very interesting perspective. Thought I would share.


Originally Posted by RBK
The ZR-1, truly respecting the drive train, suspension, brakes, and expensive paint, is a "fast" Corvette.. What do we compare it to if we eliminate the speed per se? To me. GM has built another "hot rod" (a fine tradition incidentally), still lacking the refinement and elegance of Ferrari, Bentley, Porsche, etc. GM has made a great car, but it has now left the stadium and entered the concert hall where raucous behavior is no longer tolerated. Best

RESPONSE:

With all due respect to your question , I suspect you are using an extremely narrow and highly selective view of “refinement and elegance” to broadly and inaccurately paint a favorable picture of the marques in question at the Corvette’s expense. So let’s take a more detailed look at things over the past decade using one of the marques, Ferrari, you cited.

1. From a technical refinement standard why do you think the Ferrari 456 GTA used a GM/Corvette transmission?

2. The optional run-flat tires on the F430 are a GM/Goodyear design which Ferrari has now effectively licensed for use. As with the 456 GTA Ferrari is apparently satisfied with the component’s level of technical refinement

3. In the same vein, the magnetic suspension system on the Flagship Ferrari 599 GTB was originally developed by GM/Delphi for use in the C5 and is now used on the Ferrari with the express permission of those two companies. Are we supposed to be impressed by technology on a current $300,000 Ferrari that is essentially derived from a generation old Corvette?

4. The Corvette Z06 has approximately 40% better EPA fuel economy than an F430. It does this while exceeding the rated horsepower and torque of an F430. To add insult to injury, it does this without penalty of the $4,500 gas-guzzler tax you get on an F430. In this engineering refinement context it is Ferrari that is still wandering the stadium.

5. The Corvette has 150% more cargo capacity than an F430.

6. In a world that sees 10,000 people killed in side-impact crashes the Corvette has government-mandated side-airbags and second generation frontal airbags. The F430 has neither. Instead, Ferrari petitions the government for waivers while claiming that it cannot integrate such systems cost-effectively. They seem to hope that customers will dodge such crashes over the vehicle's production life till they get their act together. Note what happened to one of the first F430's Car and Driver was going to test as it was enroute to the test site.

7. Why is Ferrari’s warranty only 2/24 as opposed to GM’s 3/36 with a 100,000 mile powertrain warranty?

8. Ever seen what passes for a NAV system in an F430?

9. No HUD with its integrated NAV.

10. The patented hydroforming technique used to give the Corvette frame its inherent strength is such that a Corvette convertible with a power top requires no additional structural bracing and can meet rollover standards for a hardtop car even though it does not have to. The F430 convertible requires an additional 22 lbs. of bracing and to the best of my knowledge cannot meet that rollover standard.

Again, with all due respect to your question, I find that people who go on about the “refinement” supposedly inherent to Ferrari’s cars are first often guilty of selective enforcement. They see nothing wrong with the crude interior of Ferrari’s landmark F40 but would be appalled if GM’s similar performance flagship was so severe. In the same vein, Ferrari’s Enzo is excused for having manual windows, no stereo, NAV system or side-impact airbags, a significantly shorter warranty and precious little cargo space. All factors the Vette would have been swiftly assailed for. Its shocking fuel “mileage” relative to the Vette and a problem endemic to all current Ferrari’s is quickly and routinely overlooked.

So what’s left? Higher quality interior materials? Now we come down to the hyper-narrow vision of “refinement and elegance.”

A 3LZ Z06 is an $80,420 car. The F430 is $173,079. Base. A 599 is $280,295 base. For $92,659 and $199,875 more (mind you, loaded Vette to BASE Ferrari’s) respectively I should hope you would get better materials. Actually, you would be wrong. Virtually every interior nicety on these cars is an option. Look at the details from Car and Driver’s test of the 599 for an illustrative list compared to the approximately $100,000 ZR1:

The expensive ceramic brake set ($18,550), Bose stereo ($3,260), leather rear shelf ($2,418 – you didn’t think that was standard at the price did you?), the nice Daytona style seats ($3,035), carbon-fiber interior trim $5,621 and the iPod connector ($821 – you didn’t think that was standard did you?), leather ceiling ($439) and auto-dimming rearview mirror ($371 here but free on a base Vette), fender badges ($1,742 – believe it and yes fender badges are free on both the Z06 and ZR1) are all options.

Yes, you read the preceding correctly. The options that bring a typical 599 up to the standard you see in most magazines will run you $36,257. GM provides about $23,923 of the 599’s option package cost content on the ZR1 for free. That option package alone exceeded the net salary of 70% of U.S. taxpayers who make $50,000 or less. You own a Bentley. Be careful about assuming that the rest of the world does or has a similar approach to buying cars..

Refinement is a combination of fit, finish, feature, function and technical excellence. The Corvette can hold its own and then some on all but, arguably, finish. But to that I would point to the towering price tag of any Ferrari offered up for comparison. If all the extra $100,000+ brought is fine Corinthian leather while taking the technical engineering steps outlined above backward then I would say that what one see as a “refinement” advantage in a more expensive car depends on the severity of one’s nearsightedness.

 

Well I LOVE the new ZO6/ZR1. But comparing it to any 430 is apples to oranges IMO.

 

Agree.

What seems to make a Ferrari special, at least in large part, are its price and therefore exclusivity. But that seems to be going away with the rumored corporate goal of 10,000 cars next year. Then whats left? I honestly dont know.

PS. At the end of the day a 360 spider is still my dream car. It is B-E-A-utiful.

 

A Vette can't touch a 430.

 

Reminds me of Oscar Wilde's observation about the fellow who knew the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

 

All you stated is simply true and that is why way more Corvettes are sold than Ferraris. It's more car for the money or the same car for less money. Still there are people that buy Ferraris. There is no arguement and all is fine to each his own I think.

 

The analysis presented begs the question of what Ferrari really sells then.... Performance, design, exclusivity, style? Or maybe all of the above and that is why peple are willing to pay "more".

The ZR-1 seems to be one hell of a car but I'd wait and see how much a ZR-1 depreciates. That tells you the value for your money.

 

I must admit, that is a well put together posting. I mean...what things can a Ferrari possess that a Z06 or ZR-1 cant? I think much of what a Ferrari is.....is based on emotion. The mystique of it all. But there are some things that those Italians do that doesn't show up on a Corvette. I'm NOT an authority....this is just from my memory, but I'm sure there are many technically minded people who could rattle off many items. My first thought is the electronic differential in the F430, that directs torque to the outer-most drive wheel to help rotate the car around corners. A Corvette does not have this. The second thing is the F-1 transmission option. Ferrari actually has a electro-hydraulic shifting manual transmission that can shift in the hundreds-of-milisecond range, while the Corvette uses an automatic trans with steering wheel buttons - not even close!!!!! Ferrari's have been dry-sump motors for many years, where as the Corvette has only recently adopted this method of lubrication. Due to European laws, Ferraris use much smaller engines, because engine size is TAXED in Europe. How can the Corvette guys feel good about the Z06 making 505 horsepower out of 7 liters, when Ferrari can make 483 horsepower out of 4.3 liters? General Motors has a huge bank of knowledge, and funding, to draw from. They DO rob from Peter to pay Paul, they take the best of several divisions (Cadillac, Buick, Chevrolet, Pontiac, AM General, and other divisions) and BILLIONS of dollars, where as Ferrari is only a small fraction the size of GM and bases it's whole existance on performance and racing. Ferrari employs less then 3,000 factory workers who take pride in their jobs. GM employs....how many, over 280,000 people, and do they all take pride in their jobs? I've pulled old beer cans out from the doors of GM cars - and these cans were put there by factory workers!

I do agree, the Corvette is a fabulous car for the money, as I've owned many, from a 1963 split window coupe to a late model ZR-1. I've restored them and driven them hard, and loved them. So I feel I'm in a position to give my opinion about this comparison between Corvette and Ferrari. All the years I drove Corvettes, I am guilty of running down Ferraris as over-priced, over-rated cars that are all hype and no substance. But yet during those years, I secretly always wanted a Ferrari...it was a dream to own an exotic. I didn't speak much about it but I certainly felt it. Then one day I sold my gorgeous, pristine, high performance ZR-1 and bought a high mileage Testarossa. On some levels the ZR-1 was better, but on many other levels the Testarossa blew the ZR-1 out of the water. In a drag race it would be close, with the 5.7 liter ZR-1 probably beating the 4.9 liter Testarossa. But at speads above 60mph the older, out-dated Testarossa would beat the ZR-1. In the squeeks and rattles department, the ZR-1 would win hands-down. In the comfort department, the ZR-1 would win. But in the pride department, the ego department, and the road-presence department, the Testarossa KILLS the corvette. It's not just about the DRIVING experience, but about the OVERALL experience....that counts. The Corvette is a great car and I respect them, but pull into a parking lot full of just regular folks with a Ferrari and your somebody. Now why is this? It's because of rarity, tradition, emotion, passion, and style.

The Corvette is worth every penny and then some for what you get. But it does not exceed the value of the sum of it's parts like a Ferrari does. I wish I could explain it...but if I could, then the mystique would be lost. The fact is...I can't explain it. And that's why I have a Ferrari today. It's been a dream of mine since I was a youngster. I've never regretted owning one, no matter what has happened. I know this is an emotional reply, but I'm afraid that's the only kind of reply we Ferrari owners can give you.

 

I believe that if GM built only 2500 Corvettes a year, like the 430, the price would be similar if not higher than the 430.
I agree that the Corvette, especially the newest high end iteration, is an engineering masterpiece and deserves better recognition of its qualities.
It is also a car that can price out at over $100k, so the price gap is shrinking a bit.
GM is by its nature a mass producer, in some ways no different to FIAT, but the difference is that that Corvette is not an independent brand like Ferrari is to FIAT.
If it was, and it raced for decades and built less cars than the public demanded and spent a bit more training time to ensure comparable fit and finish it would be equivalent to a Ferrari.
But it's none of that so it it's perceived as a lower end offering. And perception for most is reality.

 

It's the price of exclusivity.

Inside the USA, stuffed in most every suburban garage to tall weeded yard, is a Corvette.

 

Corvettes are Engineered VERY well, but the platform is managed by accountants which explain the poor materials, bland appearance (compared to the C5) and poor build quality (the cheap paint they use sucks).

Of course the biggest detriment is also a function of accounting.........they make TOO DAMN MANY........the target is to build one Corvette for every Starbucks......

 

As someone who has a 2002 C5 Corvette (and have owned six Corvettes previously), which shares a garage with an F-car...and as a guy who has driven an example of a very high percentage of marques, I can say that this is a topic that can't be fully understood unless you've actually lived with both cars, and have a basis of comparison beyond the two marques.

Essentially, when it comes down to performance by any measure, a Z06 or ZR1 simply are equals with a Ferrari...any Ferrari. At some point, you're talking about levels of performance so high that the difference will be in the driver.

Now let's get away from performance and talk about the refinement issue.

It doesn't matter how refined the Corvette gets, European car enthusiasts will bash the car. It comes down to quality of only the interior materials and engine design-- and that's it. Interior: C6 cars are equal to $100+ Porsches. I've inspected both, and can see and feel no difference. As for ergonomics, I challenge anyone to find a car like a C5 Corvette that can be shifted while still holding the wheel with the thumb.

Build quality? Both have their issues, as do Porsches, BMWs, Toyotas, and every other car under the sun. The comment about paint quality is simply not accurate, as Corvettes actually use an extremely expensive and high-tech paint. Some even use a "tint coat" that utilize color in the clear coat. It is extremely difficult (near impossible) to match a factory Corvette paint job, because the color literally impregnates the surface. Paint, across the board, has gone down in quality in terms of orange peel. If you can find an orange peel free new car, buy it! The upside is that the new paint doesn't kill people and the earth as quickly now.

Engine: Mention Corvette and inevitably some yutz says: it has a pushrod engine and then comments about how ancient the technology is. Of course, nobody ever says "Wow, Ferrari -- multivalve OHC V8?...C'mon, that technology first appeared in 1903!!!" (There's nothing new under the sun, people. Hemispherical combustion chambers are nearly 100 years old (Franklin) as are gasoline-electric hybrids (Lohner-Porsche) -- even ones with regenerative braking!

It's simply perception, because in actuality, the technology in Ferrari and Chevy small block engines are extremely high tech.

Looks? Not a huge difference. We forget, because we're car folks, but to unitiated eyes, Corvettes and Ferraris (and now Vipers) look almost too much alike.

The big differences come down to:

-Sound: Throaty V8 versus high-winding (shrieking) V8s and 12s. Both companies tune their exhausts for their market. I prefer the Ferrari (which is why I spend quite a bit of time in mine over 6,000 rpms!!!) Neither is "better" or "more refined".

-Cost: High Cost=Exclusivity=desire=inspiring jealousy=image

It's not a question of "getting it" or "not getting it". It simply is about priorities and style. I like Ferraris, I like Corvettes, I like Porsches, BMWs, 1930s cars -- but not many 1940s cars (even though they are "better" in almost every way).

There's nothing wrong with anyone who chooses one car over another...it's just their priorities are different.

 

very very well put sammyb. I am not a corvette fan... but I can't understand why people would bash it. you don't have to like something to respect it.

 

Absolutely -- well put.

There are many cars that don't "speak" to me, but that doesn't mean I underestimate their value. In this group I can include Lincoln Continental MK1 (through 1948), Town cars/Sedanica D'ville of almost any make, Citroens (even the SM), Jeeps, post 1950s hot rod and customs, etc...

I just think that people need to spend some time around and in the cars before finalizing a judgment.

When I first drove my '99 C5 Convertible, I commented that it was the best all-around sports car AND the most fun car I had ever driven. It was better than the '85 Testarossa I had driven from Seattle to Vancouver, B.C. and back in every single conceivable way. It was better than the air and water-cooled (front, mid and rear) engined Porsches I had driven. It was better than the Triumphs, the M3s, the Jaguars, the Audis, the Subarus, the Supras...Faster, quicker, handled better, sounded better, looked better, was better built (inside and out), more comfortable, got more looks and comments. Plus I raced it on weekends to a SCCA SoloII class title while commuting in it during the week -- and all I did was pop the center caps off and adjust the tire pressures!

My 2002 will eat my F-car for a midnight snack, but that doesn't mean I don't love my F-car to death!!! Every car gives me different feedback. It's certainly not all about performance!!! (If it was, I wouldn't enjoy driving old cars so much.)

 

I once had a girlfriend who loved her Fiat 850 spyder. I bet it wasn't worth 500 bucks. She had it for years and years. It broke all the time, it rusted, it was slow, it would barely stop (and never in a straight line), the top leaked, the headlights were as effective as a Zippo lighter, the heater didn't work (even when new), and it would run rough or die when it got hot. So, I asked her...why do you love this car so much? She said "because it's pretty and I like driving it!"

I couldn't argue with that.

I've driven both the Z06 Vette and the F430. Both are fine, fine cars. But, I've made my decision. My F430 spider is due in June. Silly or not, there's an emotional bond between myself and this car. Or, maybe it's because it's pretty and I like driving it...

 

I bought an 07 Z06 bcus it is simply the highest quality most badass production Corvette ever built

hydroformed aluminum frame, 505 hp, 25 mpg, carbon fiber hood & fenders, amd it will destroy any exotic short of an Enzo at a fraction of the price while looking great

I love Ferraris but Vettes have won LeMans almost 6 times in a row

You have to give credit where credit is due
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

oh boy one of these.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I think the Corvette is a remarkable vehicle, everything considered.
However I would not bring up the Ferrari use of an automatic transmission for the 456 as a proof of borrowed technology and I would not just compare top speed between the Corvette and the 430 as a way to declare which car is best.
After all, race categories are for the most part defined by the size of the engines and the Corvette has about 30% more engine displacement than a 430.
IMO GM has done a remarkable job in refining the Corvette package over the years and it has done also a remarkable job in massaging the small block V8 to obtain the power level of today.
Other refinements are indeed the shocks (but the shocks of the previous versions were the same used first by Ferrari), the chassis rigidity level of today and (why not?!) the plastic body that does not get dinged.
If one is after speed and thrills at an affordable price (or the best bang for the buck), the Corvette is certainly up, at the top of the list.
On the other hand, Ferraris are completely different vehicles, built with a completely different philosophy.
Technological innovation wise, there are paddle shifters with remarkable short shift times, for those who are into that; there are carbon ceramic brakes, there are overhead cams that allow for higher RPM, there are driver selected settings that alter not just the suspensions, but also the mapping of the engine electronics and the list goes on.
Is all that worth the price difference? That is a question that only the individuals who buy the cars can answer.
It is noteworthy to observe though, that Corvettes have a niche used market populated by Corvette fans and the used car prices seem to hold up quite well, even though older Corvettes were remarkably devoid of any kind of technological innovation.
The Ferrari market place, new and used though, is nothing short of a phenomenon and the latest letter from Michael Sheehan does a rather nice and accurate evaluation of it.

 

Interesting discussion. However, you could use the same line of reasoning in the OP to bash people for spending $100,000 plus on a low tech muscle car from the 60s. Performance numbers and build qualities are obviously important factors in the desirability and pricing of the car, but they clearly aren't the most important factors.

 

In the end it comes down to vanity and ego. is it worth a $200k premium for you to say "I drive a new Ferrari"?

 

That may be true of some but not all. I have wanted to own a Ferrari since I was a little kid, but I've never had the same level of fascination with a Vette. I'd say it's more about lust and preference than vanity.

 

Another measure of engine design is normally aspirated HP per liter. The smaller and lighter the "physics package" the more latitude the aerodynamics team and suspension designers have to optimize their work. This has been a point of pride for many manufacturers around the World, even the Japanese. When the Challenge Stradale was introduced, it claimed the crown......I don't know who has it now, but due to US bean counters its not a US company.......unfortunately.

 

I saw a new Vette in the dealership... it fits in nicely with the Tahoe, Cobalt and Aveo in the showroom line-up.

0% exotic.

 

Same here. Saw my first at about 4, before I knew what vanity was. Wanted one then and things haven't changed.

 

This fellow makes many valid and well supported points.

But you know what?

This is like comparing Ingrid Bergman to a sturdy and attractive mid-western housewife.

The house wife would surely best Ms. Bergman in contests of cooking, cleaning, birthing babies and maybe even helping around the garage and yard.

The house wife would likely be more dependable and possible less costly to maintain.

But she would lack a certain élan that Ms. Bergman possesses.

(Feel free to substitute modern-actress-of-choice for Ms. B, I couldn't think of any that possessed desirable qualities)