Corvette ZR1 : Sold

Page 2 of 2  
You mean other than the fact that it is fiction. Or then maybe you really do believe it. I suppose your being biased has nothing to do with your distorted sense of reality. Never mind, your opinion is noted and
your contribution has been assigned an appropriate value.
Uncle_vito wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000609060609050600060201 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Uncle_vito wrote:

Don't you think the cost of a say a Toyota Camry -vs- Vette might have something to do with that... There are also less McLarens sold in the US than Camrys..... LOL

Which generally comes with age and work history. DUH!

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Actually I said more Toyotas than GM vehicles (not necessarily corvettes). Maybe I am rushing it a bit. I believe Toyota is number 2 in sales (ahead of Ford) but likely still behind GM but I do not know how much.
Vito__
______________________________________________________
Uncle_vito wrote:
Since more Toyotas than GM vehicles are sold in the world, there are a lot of folks that agree with me.
Ummmmmm....... might wanna think that through.... Don't you think the cost of a say a Toyota Camry -vs- Vette might have something to do with that... There are also less McLarens sold in the US than Camrys..... LOL
GM seems to be able to only sell trucks and Corvettes and a few Cadillacs. The Corvettes and Cadillacs are only sold to those folks over 65 years of age.
Anything wrong with this picture?
No.......... it's called disposable income. Which generally comes with age and work history. DUH!
Vito
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't see anyone agreeing with you.

again, thats your opinion of GM. not everyones opinion...
--
'Key
=====




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070900040202070101090205 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
'Key wrote:

Ronald McDonald in disguise!
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com
Why are they called stairs inside but steps outside?
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
There is a lot wrong with the picture. GM has been pretty unresponsive in many areas over the last couple of decades. They have been paying the price for it, too. They have begun a new phase, with Cadillac reinventing itself as they recognize their clientele are 60 and above and reducing in numbers, so they have tried some new styling, added some performance, went racing, and are bringing in a new set of Cadillac buyers.
They still don't appeal to me, but they are getting younger buyers, although not the upper teens and young 20-something year olds.
Toyota is selling a lot. They are Number 2 and in some surveys I have read, they are Number 1. They seem to listen, some. Not much, but better than GM. They are also producing a lot more cars that are a price people can afford. However, in my own experience, Toyotas have a crap resale value at a dealer, which is the wrong message to give. It tells me that a used Toyota is worthless and if it is worthless to even a Toyota dealer, why should I bother to buy a new one to lose everything?
But since most buyers buy on credit, and simply roll the debt from one car to the next, they haven't figured out that they are dealing with no value.
Personally, I find GM styling to be the worse in a long, long time. Yes, some of the late '70s box cars were not much, but compared to the ugly front ends they have been putting on in the last 10 or so years, those boxy Chevies from 1980 are a clean look. My opinion, yours may vary.
Personally, I haven't found any Chevy other than the Corvette that I have been excited about. The Camaro I think lost its audience, and as such, lost its marketplace and went under. The original Camaros were great platforms to produce the car you wanted. Any engine, modify as needed, and it was yours. The 4th Gen Camaro was a V6 that took a dump after 100,000 miles or the full fledged LT1 and LS1. There wasn't much middle ground, unless you consider the Z28 middle ground with the SS the top. I think that weakened the Z28 status. There were far too many, and almost everyone had one.
It wasn't that easy to mod. The darn engine sat under the windshield, making most work a real pain. While the LT1 and LS1 produced great performance with decent economy, they were not cheap to work on and parts weren't found in every corner store. And it got so big on the outside, yet seemed to be smaller on the inside. A buddy had an '85 and I'm sure the back seat had more room. I know the '69 I had did. Ford kept the Mustang pony car formula true with the Mustang, and even though the Camaro was more aerodynamic, the Mustang stayed true to Mustang style, so there was no mistaking it, and it said Mustang even to non-car people.
The '98 to '02 Camaro looks like a wider Chrysler Sebring.
And yes, I have a 4th Gen Z28, and I like it, but it is a lot less than GM was capable of.
I drove a bunch of new Chevies a few months ago. They ran well, handled well, performed well, but none of them fired any juices in me but the Corvette. The Cobalt did some, especially the supercharged Cobalt, but the supercharged one was too much a straight line car, and not a good overall handler.
But then, there isn't much that turns me on with Toyota either. I like the Spyder, but I wouldn't sell a Corvette to get it. And nothing else really fires the juices. The Corolla is a nice car, but is more tuned for a grandmother than someone looking for fun. Which explains all the Asian car tuners out there, retuning suspensions to handle and be fun to drive, adding horsepower to make the car respond to the right foot.
So what does this prove? Really, to me, it only means that all cars suck anymore. They may be faster and more efficient, but they all suck in the fun factor and the cool factor.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Based on the article I just read in AutoWeek, they don't plan on doing that at all.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.