mid engine corvette qtr panels leaked photo

Well since I tend to look at the business side first, I have to say to Chevy, really why do you need to build this. You had 60 years and you sell plenty of Corvette as it is, so why build this car. Unless you now want to try and put yourself in the same league as some other mid engine cars, which may or many not be a good idea. I will say this if I am paying 450K for a car the damn seat better move. I see nothing about the Ford GT worth more than 150K, so unless Chevy is trying to market this car to a whole new group of buyers they better leave all the things Corvette buyers expect from their cars. I also believe that a lot of things can happen in 18 months (in this crazy time a lot of things can happen in a week), and Mayor just might be right. Remember there are only so many buyers for cars once you get past 150K for a two seater, and most of them like prestige with their keys.

 

I think this sounds about right, give or take 10k, or so.

Like Bob, I paid Z06 money for my '14. With the way they option their cars, I think sub-100k is possible and can easily see highly optioned cars pushing close to twice as much.

 

You've said this a couple of times and it really isn't true....

The "transaxle" in the Corvettes is actually just a conventional rear differential bolted to the back of a conventional in-line transmission. This is how they saved money and didn't actually have to develop a transaxle. It is really one of the worst features of the C5 and newer cars because it results in the wheelbase being stretched and while it helps weight distribution it really isn't a transaxle like you need for a mid engine car. If you bolt the engine up to that transaxle it would result in way too forward an engine mounting. (some kit cars have done that and it wasn't pretty) For a proper mid engine car you need to have the transmission mounted behind the rear axle and that means tooling for a very different and new transmission. This has always been one of the biggest development and tooling costs of the program and has been a sticking point for a very long time. Duntov even patented a very messy arrangement that avoided making a conventional transaxle because of the cost, way back when.

While the uprights may be used, it's likely that the suspension would required different length control arms to properly locate it and have room for the engine in the back and the feet of the driver in the front.

I'm not saying that there won't be a lot of parts used on both cars, but certainly the transmission isn't one of them, nor will most of the suspension be carried over.

When you start looking at each piece you end up with most of the time, some small changes to make it work and then the costs get based on production numbers and it all falls apart. Bottom line is that if you don't make a lot of them, the costs go thru the roof, and you end up with a car that costs $150k.. It's tough to hold the line on commonality, been there and done that...

 

anything under 150k is a bonus. look at competition like 570, r8, nsx, 911tt are all at or over 200k. forget the next level up with 488, huracan, 720 well more than double. viper acr was 140k. no need for mid vette to be bargin basement. thats what the front engine one is for.

 

The mid-engined Corvette is not about sales and profits for that particular car - it is about making a statement. The statement is "Not only can we beat you at our game, we can beat you at yours". It is a car that will give GM a lot of positive exposure and give the brand's other customers, the ones that won't buy the mid-engined car, a reason to think "Wow, there are some great engineers at GM, they make a fantastic product, maybe I'll buy another".

There is always a trickle down effect. You need to look past the immediate.

 

I wonder once this car comes out if they will switch their GTE car to this new mid engine version, or continue to run the current C7R. Maybe they can get approval to run it before it is actually in production and beat the Ford GT at it's own game.

 

Meh... really? Chevy is worried about its image? They sell more 2 seat sports cars a year by a factor of 5 over everyone else in the world.

Seems like they know something others don't to me

If they build another electric hybrid NSX they throw away the Corvette's key philosophy

NA V8
Good daily driver
Good performance for the money
Simplicity
Manual option

These are the things that have made it successful for so long.

 

Ford made the new gt so limited that it made gm's choice to go ahead with a rear engine vette a sure thing. They'll build as many as they can sell and for way less then the gt. As long as it performs at the same level or even higher it will be a huge success. Ford really missed the opportunity to build as many cars as the market would stand in favor of pissing off long time customers by using such a stupid application process/criteria for the gt. No reason to limit the amount of cars they build either.

 

You're getting stuck on the transsaxle which you shouldn't. It's not like GM is going to design/develop a transaxle for this car. They will buy an off the shelf unit from one of many suppliers that offer one.

 

I have a good freind who is very close with the owner of a Chevy dealership...he has already put down a deposit to get the first one, so i suspect the car will be built.
I also suspect it will come in around $125K well-optioned.
It will be an amazing performer and they will sell many cars no doubt.

 

$125 is too low. c6 zr1 was over 100k and that was long time ago already. new z06/7 is over 100k and a new zr1 is coming which needs a price point between z06/7 and c8.

 

$150k for a well optioned is where it needs to be. 700 hp, under 3500 pounds. Performance to match the Ford GT and market the hell out of that. 1/3 the price for the same performance and none of the bull **** sales tactics.

 

Chevy needs to learn from the Viper debacle. Price it too much more than your established market, and you're dead. I don't see $150k going well.




Mark

 

nissan gtr did ok with 100k std and 165k nismo at nissan dealerships

 

That's not what killed the Viper.

 

Well, it certainly wasn't its performance....



Mark

 

Well, actually it was. When the Viper debuted in 1992 its 8 liter V8 produced 400 hp and a whopping 465 lb-ft. The car could run low 12's in the quarter mile. At that time Ferrari was producing the 348 which had 300 hp and ran a 14 second quarter mile. The Viper may have been unrefined but it was a brute compared to anything else on the market. Amazing power for it's time. Fast forward 25 years, the Camaro ZL1 will outrun a Viper in the quarter mile and makes more HP. I could think of a dozen production cars that make more power and are also more refined. The hp/performance wars killed the Viper, not its price.

 

I think lack of refinement killed viper. Market for a brutish performance car over 100k is too limited

 

The same Viper that holds (or at least held) production car track records all over the place isn't a performer??




Mark

 

How big can the marketplace be for such a track weapon? The ACR isn't really comparable to any other production car. It was a nice side project but the base Viper needed far more refinement or 1000 hp or something. Plus not to mention one looks like a real cock driving these cars with giant wings on the back.

 

The GT-R was no sales monster here in the U.S.:

Nissan GT-R Sales Figures - GOOD CAR BAD CAR

 

First and foremost, we don't know what the car is going to sell for or what it's specs are. GM has a very good handle on Corvette business (although they didn't in the past) now...I doubt they are going to screw it up. Besides, we all got the Ford GT pricing DEAD wrong.

As far as the Viper, the car's lack of refinement hurt it more than anything. There just aren't many people willing to put up with bad ergonomics, burned calves, etc when you can buy cars that don't require an advanced masochistic streak.

 

its sales died off quite a bit since it hasnt had any real updates in almost 10 yrs but my point was that people did go into nissan dealers selling sentras, etc and plunk down close to 200k for a nismo without too much regret. it can be done with an expensive vette too

 

No, they didn't. The GT-R has been a sales flop from the start (in the U.S). I see more Ferraris on a weekly basis that GT-R's.

This notion that somehow the GT-R drove SENTRA sales (or whatever) when it couldn't drive it's OWN sales is just wrong. So, GT-R tire kickers actually pulled the trigger on SENTRAS? That's gonna need some proof...
The GT-R from the start of this generation, has been a very impressive "numbers" car (many of those numbers are somewhat dubious), but it is STILL to this day (IMO) a not especially attractive car, and I would never buy one.

Calendar 2010: 877 units Average 78.08 per month
Calendar 2011: 1,294 units, Average 107.83 per month
Calendar 2012: 1,188 units, Average 99 per month
Calendar 2013: 1,239 units, Average 103.25 per month
Calendar 2014 (best year): 1,436 units, Average 119.67 per month
Calendar 2015: 1,105 units, Average 92.083 per month
Calendar 2016: 698 units, Average 58.17 per month
Calendar 2017: 403 units (through 7/31), Average 57.57 per month

My point is there in NO tangible proof that HALO cars drive show room traffic. And based on the fact that these HALO cars don't drive showroom traffic, they must make business sense on their own. The numbers above DON'T make a business case for the GT-R in the U.S. While the above breakdown is certainly better than Viper numbers, they are still very weak. Even 2014 (the best GT-R year from 2010 - 2017 to date), the numbers PALE in comparison to the Corvette. GM sold well over 8,000 Z06's in 2015 alone (more than the GT-R in TOTAL from 2010 - July 2017)