I know this...

For 50 years, and more specifically since 1984, Chevrolet has managed to build a car that can compete with any of the exotics built and normally available.

They do it year in and year out.

No Corvette driver that brings one to a track needs to hold his head in shame running them against all comers.

The entire assumption of your thread is that Ford is someway, somehow going to do something smarter than Porsche, BMW, Ferrari and Lamborghini have been trying to do for decades and have failed at - embarrasing a Corvette. Hasn't happened.

Now, the rest is subjective, but I can guarantee you this:

Corvette makes money. Corvette makes lots of money. Cars that make money get money invested into them so that they can continue to make money.

Viper loses money.
Supra lost money by the bushel because Toyota couldn't give them away, so did RX-7 and 300ZX.

The GT will NOT make money, and Ford is hurting.

It's a walking victim, and it's gonna get the ax.

I'm an engineer, and I can tell you this:

Either you make money, or you're dead meat.



WRONG.

1) If you think for a second that a Ferrari owner is going to cross-shop a Ford, I submit you are VERY wrong.

2) The Corvette DOES NOT have to out-perform it or out-class it. First, it's a Corvette, and by the name alone it already out-classes the GT - which the general public will have to be EDUCATED about in the first place. Corvette is an icon, everybody knows what it is.

Second, all Corvette has to do is get CLOSE in performance for 1/3 of the price to embarrass it - and it will easily. GM does not take Corvette lightly, and they have TONS more money to throw at it than Ford does at the GT. Bet the farm on that one.



Corvette vs. Mustang?

Not even worth a response.





It's a fun discussion though GT vs. Vette. Regards!

 

 

That “any exotic built” is stretching it out a bit. Real exotics aren’t normally available either (available as in corvette available) and are rather rare. I’m not trying to take anything away from the vette, but I want to give those exotics their due credit as well. The z06 and the Zl-1’s are the real vette winners here. The lt-1 and Ls-1 vettes were just mediocre when compared to exotics. They aren’t slaying any many Porsche 911 turbos. They’d have their hands full with the average Supra TT, M3, and sub-4000lb M5 sedan.

Corvette doesn’t disappoint (except the 70’s and early 80’s and that’s excusable).

They shouldn’t. We aren’t talking about a cavvy here. The corvette is a respected premium performance car and the #’s the z06 brings to the table shouldn’t be taken lightly. No shame there. It still is one heck of a car.

Porsche, BMW, Ferrari, and Lambo are not failures. They are success stories and the pinnacle of styling, performance, class/prestige, technology, quality, etc…. They cost and fetch a hefty premium, and for good reasons too. They never tried to embarrass or go after the vette. They had their own sets of goals, standards, and values.

Ford seemed to have invested heavily in the GT. They don’t plan on mass-marketing the GT as chevy does the vette. They’ll build a certain amount (few thousands), charge a certain price (100k+), and sell all of them. End of story. Ford doesn’t want them on every block.

The GT wasn’t put into production to make money, it was put in to boost image. If they were worried about sales, they’d have offered a lesser and cheaper alternative. Ford has made that very clear. If money was the big issue, they wouldn’t have bothered with the GT to begin with. That task belongs to the Mustangs, F-series, taurus’s, focus’s, expedition, explorers, escapes, etc…. Not the GT.

See above. There are exceptions to the rule. That and Ford will easily sell the dew thousands they plan on building.


Again, you try and paint the GT as just another Ford. That’s the missing link in your argument, therefore voiding this whole assumption. It’s more than just another Ford and one look is all the proof one needs.

Jay leno seemed to have taken a liking to the GT. In fact, he and a few other celebs as well as the media showed up for some test drive or media intro not too long ago. Ever looked Leno’s garage? I’m sure you’ll find lots of Euro’s finest. He seems to be a ready and eager customer.

The corvette outclassing a GT? Lol. Just due to the name? If you can’t recognize or recall the GT-40, you don’t deserve to own the GT. A huge part of exotics is performance, and anyone who has a clue of performance and racing history knows the GT/40. Ford isn’t selling the GT to the general public so it doesn’t matter whether the masses are educated on the GT or not. It isn’t for the average joe. The average joe wouldn’t know what a Buggatti, Konigg, Mosler, or a Mclaren is. I guess the vette out-classes all of them just due to the fact that it’s recognized by the average joe? Nope. Heck, the civic and Mustang are well recognized name-plates. To think Fords own Mustang out-classes their GT…that’s one heck of a thought. Same logic since the Mustang too is an Icon and one of America’s favorite cars.

Again, have a look at the Ferrari 360 Modena and 911 Turbo. I doubt they or their buyers care that a car costing a third less is creeping close to their #’s. I’d hardly say they feel embarrassed. You’re buying more than just #’s.

As for money thrown in, A look at how the GT is built is and the stuff that went into building it all the proof I need. There’s nothing cheap about it. In the end, one company is charging 120-150k for one and the other 60-65k at most. Which has more money thrown in it? . Chevy couldn’t offer a “REAL” GT caliber vehicle (not just performance but everything else) for less than 100k. That’s fine though, since that wasn’t GM’s goal nor the vettes formula.

It isn’t, and that holds true for the GT vs Vette. 2 different cars with 2 different intentions.

It is fun. It’s also funny how our opinions and views strongly differ too.

 

I'll try to get this thread back on topic.

I think the base V6 target times should be that of around the V6 Altima, Accord, and V6 stang which should be around 14.8-14.9

assuming the Z28/SS is going to use a 6.0L V8 at around 400HP and be able to do the 1/4mi. in 12.9 or less, I think we could use a Camaro that can do between LS1 and LT1 times, say 13.9. LT1s were fast cars and not everyone wants/needs a 12 sec. car, A Camaro 13.9 Camaro should be fast enough to make a lot of people happy.

 

For the price they charge, I care as do many others. The hardware and about everything else matter. When you spend upwards of 50,000 dollars, things other than performance matter a great deal. If I wanted performance alone, I’d have bought some cheap car and modded it myself for tons less(which I’m doing).

Going along this whole performance/dollar logic and it being an indicator of a cars value, why even buy a C5 vette when I can get an f-bod with the same exact powertrain for 50% of the price? Does the 50% price equal a 50% increase in performance over an Ls-1 F-bod? Nope. I get the same exact Ľ miles and 70% of the handling. Maybe even closer to 80% of handling with the 1LE upgrade. Is the C5 a rip-off when an Ls-1 f-bod costing 50% less will give you roughly 80% of the performance?. No. That’s the point I’m making here. The GT may cost more than a c6 z06, and the c6 zo6 may be able to give you roughly 80-85% of the performance, but does that make it a better car and the GT a rip-off? Take a good look at the ls-1 f-bod and c5 scenario. There’s a good reason why one costs more than the other. A lot more went into that C5, just as a lot more obviously went into that GT.

Hand-built=craftsmanship and attention to detail. Yes it = expensive which is why only very expensive cars and exotics usually get this treatment.


I understand but I believe that the GT/40 also has the name and the history. I personally feel that the potential buyer will see the GT for what it is and not just a Ford. I don’t view the vette as just a chevy, the vipers as just a dodge, the NSX as just a Honda/Acura, the Cien concept as just a Cadillac, the GT/90 and Indigo concepts as just Fords, etc… The line has to be drawn somewhere.

The GT is not short on image, class, performance, or exotic factor just because it has a blue oval badge. It is more than just a Ford, it’s the Halo car, and one that conjures images of the original racing legend.

The stripped Cobra R, a lowly Mustang (not really lowly), was marked up to hell and sold like hotcakes. The 300 were sold quickly and were probably spoken for before even production. Some went for as high as $90,000 dollars. It was a Mustang and a Ford, so why didn’t that stop it from demanding a very high premium? I think this holds true for the GT (the GT is actually worthy of the hefty premium unlike the Cobra R)

It’s like asking “how do we know the c6 z06 will perform as well as the GT’s or even close?” We don’t, and it’s based purely off speculation. The rumored c6 #’s have hinted at a sub-420hp for base and 500hp for the z06. The current Cobra already makes close to 410-420 realistically. Colletti has said it and all other S/c svt vehicles will receive the supercooler as well. Expect a 50-60hp boost there. There’s also rumors of a 500hp version and it packing a S/c 5.4 in place of the S/c 4.6L, and this rumor could be true for all we know. The Lightning will get a 500hp S/c 5.4. 3 years ago, no one would have believed Ford would have a 400+hp Cobra in 2003, so don’t dismiss this. Unless the base c6 is packing upwards of 460hp (110hp increase over c5), the Cobra (with supercooler) could very well likely outpower it.

I’m sure the Cobra won’t hold a candle to the c6’s handling, but straight-line acceleration may/could be close (again, speculation). The fastest 03 Cobra’s have already turned 12.4’s and sub-113mph traps. It doesn’t take much to get low 12’s or even high 11’s. With a good enough HP increase and extra boost from supercooler for the 06 Cobra, these times could be possible depending on output. However, that wont put it in the same class or make the Cobra a vette competitor.


You want stories of driving? Talk to guys like Dan Gurney (sp?) who have driven them to the finish lines. He’ll have plenty of good stories to tell. Much better ones too than some average joe across the street. History is what has made certain cars (ex: Mustang and vette) popular, why can’t it do the same with the Gt-40’s. Loyalty, and feelings of past models go out the door here. This isn’t some mass-produced car and it isn’t a car for everyone. Very few could afford it, and even less would be able to buy it since it will be sold and built in limited #’s.


You missed the point. It isn’t going to have the whole racing world on its heels. Say 40 years from now and people look back at the sub-2000 year LeMans, they’ll be talking of Audi dominating with a 1, 2, 3 finish, not the C5-R finishing 7th or 8th overall. The C5-R’s record has been very impressive, and is unrivaled in GTS, but those wins are not Gt-40 or Audi caliber wins. That’s not to discredit the C5-R’s Lemans accomplishments though. The C5-R has been successful, and hopefully will continue to be successful. I root for every American car and the C5-R is a personal favorite of mine.

Every new comer has to fight an uphill battle. Some are successful right from the start, and others aren’t. The secret formula is to offer a just as good product for less, and the GT comes with the goods and a very competitive price. While the Lambo’s may have decades under their belt, they don’t have quality LeMan records/wins. The GT will not be lacking history, image, or passion despite it being a new-comer. Trust me on that. It isn’t a complete “freshmen” or newbie in the racing/performance world.

Yes they have an uphill battle, but the road up this hill imo seems nicely paved.

 

What was the original topic again?. We have gotten way off base.

To get back on topic, I doubt we'll see more than 2 engines in a 5th gen (one 6 and one 8). That pretty much rules out a middle engine.

 

"Hand-built=craftsmanship and attention to detail. Yes it = expensive which is why only very expensive cars and exotics usually get this treatment."

Absolutely, completely, totally and unconditionally wrong.

NO human being is more repeatable or accurate than a machine. NONE.

Hand built = "we didn't have enough cash to buy the proper fixturing and equipment to make a world-class car".

Human being vs. robotic welder?

Robotic welder every time.


Human being vs. automated setting fixture?

Automated setting fixture every time.


Human being vs. CNC mill or lathe?

CNC mill/lathe every time.


Rolls Royce buys transmissions because they can't afford to manufacture them - they buy GM transmissions because GM can. Hand built, $500,000 car... 4L80 tranny.

Same one GM trucks get.



Now... here's another point.

Porsche and Ferrari have gotten their rumps handed to them by the Z06, at less than HALF their price point - FOR YEARS. Go check the numbers.

On top of that, the quality disaster known as Ferrari can't hold a candle to Corvette for build quality, and Corvette routinely hammers on the Porsches in JD Powers surveys.

Now, explain to me, really slowly, how a hand build (i.e. SUBSTANDARD) body process is going to beat a state of the art body shop.

ANSWER: It won't.

 

Could that thread be any longer ????

 

This thread has evolved into something else...but:

I do want to comment on the original posts by jay:

DoD as said by AdioSS is a good idea and it will work. Remember that the Ls1 had many criticism for being a OHV engine, and look what has become of it... 1) imagine an engine doing over 30mpg and still making 12s in the 1/4 without a hitch!!!!!!!! 500HP is not all that difficult for the current Lsx engines... Specially when you add headers and you add other stuff... Look at what for did to the Mach 1 may aftermarket combos already from factory... it makes a meaner factory engine, but still... not good enough..

There is a rumor that the c6 will get the 427 (7L) engine. I do not see that being difficult to hit the 500HP mark with it.. With bigger displacement you can have a radical cam and not be hurt down low or lack of torque this is not a 4.6.

Check out the people at www.cartek.net and you will see what the current LS is still capable of... I think that with the variable timing it would help out reach the 500HP mark.. The new engine comes with more improvements in head design over the LS6 and that is impressive..

A side note... the ohv engine is a lot cleaner and more efficient in the lower rpms than it is the OHC engine with 4 valves/cyl... If they cant hit the power mark from factory to meet emissions or something else I am sure they will make the design that with 500 bucks of bolt ons it will be surpassed EASY... We have to wait and see what it comes out...

GM has always been just a bit ahead of everyone else with regards to performance and some aspects, or at least that is my impression...

The cobra is an outstanding competitor and its in the ls6 territory for 15k less and the cobra has an expandability that the corvette doesn't have...

Hitting the 500HP mark with a supercharger should be easy, but I think it would raise the cost of the engine in forging and I strongly believe that Ford is LOOSING $ on the cobra just to gain it on the other models, for having bragging rights? or just to convert cheaper ones into cobras easily and have bragging rights... So, I dont think they will put a S/C on it.. Besides, they have had many problems with the 3.8s/c. So.. I dont thinkso.. or at least not for the moment

My thoughts are a bit jumpy but its 5am

 

Tell that to every maker of 100,000+ dollar cars. If it's so sub-standard, then why do these respected manufacturers openly advertise it? Why is it basically expected/mandetory in the 100,000+ dollar price bracket? Why does ford advertise that the 4.6 Cobra engine is hand-built? truely, Ford does have the resources to mechanize everythiing for the GT and Cobra, so why did they take that specific route? Why did they hand-build the Cobra engine and the whole GT if it was so sub-standard? They clearly have access to machining, robotics, etc...Heck, why do i see stuff like "hand-painted", "hand-made", etc... adverticed in products all the time?

As for the Gm tranny, there are exotics that use stock, slightly modified, and heavily modified Ford 4.6L cobra engines. I could name 3-5, with one of them being the 250mph Konigg CC (sp?). Maybe they thought that product was good enough for use in their cars. GM does make excellent tranny's and some of them are more than good enough for use in any car, even a R-R.

Actually, the z06 is no faster than 911 Turbo nor is it any faster around a track than either it or the 360. I've seen the numbers. As close as they may be, no rumps are being handed to Porsches 911 turbo. The GT2's and carrera GT's are out of this league.

You completely miss out on the price thing. Porsche and Ferrari aren't in the market to sell "cheaper" cars nor do they cater to the masses. One look in and outside a vette and a porsche and you'll notice the obvious price difference.
Quality disaster? is there a definite study backing this? JD survey? really? I have a hard time beliving a 45k vettes build or quality holds a candle to a car like the Porsche 911. How come year after years, JD lists Porsche as one of the most reliable car manufacturers while positioning chevy at the bottom? To top it off, Porsche only makes performance cars. Sounds like a quality company to me.

See 1st reply.

I have to run for class, so i might add better replies later.

 

The term hand built is not that they do not use robots, its there is people that are checking everthing.. EG: Oh... there is a "sleeve" here... there is a mismatch there, etc etc etc, and they fix all the imperfections the machines leave behind... Port matching... Removing grooves... Smoothing things... That may not account for much more HP numbers, but it will account for the smoothness and the quickness of the engine that will make the engine a lot faster...


Rice Eating 5.0

I beg to disagree on a few things... Depending on who you ask the Z06 is not faster than the modenas, but after you visist the tracks constantly you see that the z06 are beating the modenas easy on the roadcoarse...

On the mags the z06 is not faster than porsche 911 gt2... $$$$ for the mags.. you see... Porsche pays a lot of $ to the advertisement on the mags... The z06 will never beat it in a mag... But go to the street and Damn... There has not been a single porsche get near me in my z06... NONE!!!! and I am stock, through stock mufflers...


Porsche does cater to the masses or what do you call the BoxterS??? I call it the Embarrasement S.

QUality from porsche??? Everything breaks... Everything LEAKS... everything is bothering always and everywhere on those cars.. Do you own one??? You should ask the HONEST owners, because the majority will never say the car is a POS after they have spent 200K for a car that does not behave like a 60k car... That shouldn't be, but it is...

I dont agree with your post... You should go out more...

 

Utz has handbaked potato chips.....





I don't know how the workers there put up with holding thier hands in the ovne like that....Ouch!

 

K, don't take this wrong, but it's time for some education...

Hand operated processes are never any better than the operator. A simple visual inspection for a paint mark to indicate something on a part is automatically assumed to have a 10% failure rate. Meaning that, no matter how good the human beings are, how badly they want to do their jobs, in a production environment you have to assume this level of failure.

Now, a visual system that checks for an automatically applied paint mark has a failure rate FAR below .1%. So far below that is can be assumed to be zero.

No human being can weld as well as a robot. They put the same weld down every time, within a thousandth of an inch, day in and day out. They monitor weld parameters that human beings cannot and will stop immediatly if the parameters are not met.

For building a body, the human eye cannot even see tolerances below .004". A machine can mate parts easily to within +/-.001". CNC machining centers can machine parts to within +/-.0004 without special processing. A human operating a Bridgeport mill can't even come close to that number, and couldn't even MEASURE IT reliably with hand tools (micrometers, calipers, etc...).

So, back to the question at had...

Why can't Ford build the GT by hand as well as GM can build Corvette with an automated line?

See above.

Why doesn't GT have an automated line?

Money.

It can't pay for it. The equipment is too expensive for the program to capitalize at the voume the car is going to run. If I want to buy a $1,000,000 machining center for Corvette for one year, it costs me $25 a car (at 40,000 units) to pay for it (if I only amoritize over one year). For the GT, it costs me $250 (at 4,000 units). That's not a factor of two or three, that's a factor of TEN. So, Corvette can easily afford tooling and equipment that GT could never pay for.

Now, why is it necessary in the $100,000 price bracket to hand build a car? Simple - no one builds 40,000 $100,000 cars a year. The volumes are too low, and you couldn't sell them. Selling 40,000 $50,000 car is no big deal (as long as their Corvettes), but as the price rises from the Corvette's price point, volume drops off drastically.

Because the volume doesn't exist to sell 40,000 $100,000 cars, to stop the costs from becoming prohibative, the manufacturers of these cars rely on something that doesn't require a gigantic capital investment - people. Unfortunately, people can't build a better finished car than a state-of-the-art body line can - they are, without argument, a lower quality build. Gaps and flushes aren't as good, the final finish isn't as good, the fits aren't as good.



Here are the facts. You don't have to like them.

Ford makes decent motors, terrific live axles, and miserable automatic transmissions. They are conversion kits for Mustangs to take TH-400 and TH-350 GM transmissions for a reason. Just like there are conversion kits to swap 9" rear ends into Camaros.

The point of the example was that even Rolls Royce, who can literally charge anything they want for their cars, recognizes that an automated process is far superior at building transmissions than a hand process. And they can afford either.



A Carrera 2 or Carrera 4 can't beat a 2002 SS on a road course. Neither are a match for the Z06. Even the 911 Turbo was slower than the Z06.

In the brother vs. brother comparision, the Z06 cleaned house. The only car close was the Ferrari, and if I remember right it was more than 4 times as expensive.




Porsche makes a freaking truck... sort of.

Chevrolet tracks light years ahead of Porsche in both initial quality and long-term reliability. Chevrolet beat both Mercedes and BMW in 3-year reliability. You need to read the surveys.

 

Sorry, but this is wrong.

Hand-built means hand built.

No automated setting fixtures for the body, no automated machining and inspection.

Now, GT will have some automation in the drivetrain components, but 4,000 cars can't justify much of a body line.

A CNC machining center leaves no imperfections behind if programmed properly. None. They are so precise that you couldn't see the imperfections even if they were there. The human eye cannot even see a .001" difference from one part to the other.

 

FYI The C5-R had an overall win at the Rolex 24 in Daytona, true, its not Le Mans, but it is just as gruelling of a race. The Vette beat out all of the competing prototype cars.