How did the company which virtually invented automotive marketing become so piss-poor at it? How did the promotion and advertising of General Motors automobiles become reduced to a series of meaningless comparisons, numbers, and statistics? We are now in the fifth decade of General Motors’ abject failure to understand why people buy imported cars. In the Seventies, GM thought it was miles per gallon, and every GM ad trumpeted the Chevette’s ability to match the Corolla or Civic gallon in fuel economy. Forget the fact that the Chevette was a genuinely horrible car which has only recently found a reason to exist (a kick-ass, single-make ice-racing series, if you must know). In the Eighties and Nineties, GM marketing flacks got a whiff of “performance” and we were deluged with claims that the Pontiac Grand Am GTXPXT-W31-442-Z34 got better lateral “g” than the BMW L7. Of course, it took a skidpad, or a glassy-smooth racetrack, for something like a J-body to even catch sight of a Bimmer’s rear bumper.
Lately, it’s been Quality, and I’m capitalizing the “Q” ironically for all you Pirsig readers. Again and again, we are told that GM matches the best brands out there for quality. Most people read these ads to say, “OMFG, that car I would never buy is almost as good as the car which has given me eight years of trouble-free service.” Customers don’t care about JD Power numbers; they care about their own experience and the experiences of people they trust. GM spat directly into the faces of those people forty years ago and they’ve been doing it ever since.
And now, finally, we have Nurburgring times. The CTS-V is supposedly the fastest sedan around the ‘Ring. Nobody seems to care. If ‘Ring times ever really meant anything to anyone beyond frothy-mouthed teenagers pounding a keyboard in skid-marked underwear, the endless controversy about Nissan’s latest GT-R has more or less killed that goose. The GT-R’s times around the ‘Ring vary by nearly forty seconds, depending on who is driving, which tires were on the thing at the time, and whether or not anybody actually checked the boost controller before the car went out. ‘Ring times are worthless, useless, forgotten. They’re as played-out as the PT Cruiser…
…so naturally GM has an HHR for us to watch.
I got into a little Twitterversy the other day for suggesting that vehicle engineer Jim Mero is perhaps leaving a few seconds on the table in the above video. He is committing nearly every sin that would prevent a NASA HPDE student from being passed into the fourth level: he shuffles randomly, he leaves his hand on the shifter and one-paws the car through corner after corner like he is profiling on Woodward Avenue, and “smooth” is not the word than any sighted person would use to describe his inputs. Oh well. He got the time, and the stopwatch is blind. It’s not like Chevrolet is going to fly me over there to take a shot at it; they save that kind of PR handjob trip for Motor Trend.
The question is: does anyone care, particularly when the seven-second improvement is almost entirely due to a new set of tires? The ZR-1 is now faster than the Viper ACR, which is faster than the GT-R, which is faster than the 997 GT3, which is faster than the Boxster S, which is faster than your humble author’s 9:15 BTG in an automatic-transmission SLK200. Were I lucky enough to own my personal favorite RIng-wrecker, the Viper ACR, my first thought would be, “Hey, let me get those tires, and I can still beat Vettes.” Or I would do what every sensible trackday driver does and buy the Hoosier R6. Is the ACR still faster around the ‘Ring on equal tires? Almost certainly. Is it faster on every track in the world where top speed isn’t a factor? Absolutely. (The ACR has a big wing on back, you see.)
The question becomes: why did GM bother to take the time, fly the cars, and produce the video? ZR1 sales are flat. I can buy brand-new ones for $95,000 all day. YouTube isn’t going to change that. Is it just for bragging rights? That’s great, but the company is long past being able to waste money on bragging rights, unless those bragging rights are for things that actually matter — like providing a high-quality owner experience. Unlike inflated MPG ratings, lateral g skidpad numbers, or JD Power rankings for ashtray failures in the first three days of ownership, that never goes out of style.
I knew one of the chiefs in the GM competitive analysis group. I remember him telling me in the early ’90’s, how he and the GM management boys were all hot and bothered about body-stiffness and large-bending-moments … as an engineer, I thought they were talking about the characteristics of BIW, but now, on reflection, I think they were talking about some kind of bending-stiffies-body-moments sexual fetish… (add it to those others that Jack highlighted above.)
I agree with Jack about the irrelevance to most consumers of the (inter alia) JDP numbers (they are, however, useful for measuring one’s performance vs. one’s competitors), in that most of the car-buying public have never heard of JDP and the reality of their ownership experience, no matter how long in the past, or that of their family, neighbors, or friends (no matter how long in the past) have greater relevance for them.
The real gold in statistics is as near as in-house warranty data and customer satisfaction numbers with and within their own dealer networks, yet this seems to be (based on my own poor experiences as a customer in dealerships) secondary to these subscription rating houses.
And for the better part of the last 30 years, I have found it interesting how the Big-3 were always within about 5 years of catching the japanese … but in the end, it was more like chasing the horizon, or the end of the rainbow, in that they never quite got there (and then announced “5-more years, 5-more years”…)
Actually, a large number of car buyers heard of J.D. Power survey, they just do not trust the numbers that JDP churn out.
JDP is a survey of actual owners who report their own subjective impressions. It is as scientific a comparison as you can find and it is real.
No, its not scientific, not in the least. The entire dataset is flawed. They are taking people who just shopped for an expensive major purchase, and then “chose” whatever vehicle they happened to pick. People as a general rule buy the one they liked better than the others they cross-shopped, for whatever reasons they chose: quality, price, reliability, comfort, performance, whatever. It is human nature to defend that choice, whether or not it needs defending. If someone buys a price-leader Accent, they will gladly tell you how great it is and how happy they are; it makes them feel better about dropping a lot of money on something. This is especially true in the first 6 months of ownership.
The fact is, “initial quality” is a BS factor to rate. These days, any car you buy will be wonderful for 6 months… probably even a year. Even if it does need a repair or two, thats hardly the norm, even among the worst brands. What REALLY matters is the ownership experience over 5 yrs or so, maybe more. So which company tops the charts in JDP surveys doesnt even matter. Scientific?? No way…
@mnm4ever- I said it is the most scientific method available, not that it is perfect! What better means do you have to compare cars? Certainly not the word on the street! You seem focused on the initial quality survey. The long term dependability survey is three year old vehicles, not recent purchases. Far from perfect, the same pride of ownership would seem to apply to all, but I don’t disagree with you notions of subjective variation.
For example, Hyundai leap frogged over the Japanese in quality the year they put out much longer warranty coverage. Those of us in the business know that they did not suddenly turn every plant and carline around, they simply took care of problems with no owner expense. Surveys found that owners who have a problem that is quickly and correctly resolved actually have more loyalty to the brand than those who never had any problems at all!
This is a good point. Data is not always very clean for this kind of stuff, and in fact, it is usually pretty shitty. Many manufacturers do not use any sort of VIN decoding to a trim level, let alone equipment level. Therefore, JDPower does not know precisely which vehicles the repairs correspond to. They will claim that they do, but the simple truth is they do not. There are packages as well, which are almost never in a VIN. Unless JDPower has access to every single manufacturer’s build list by VIN, which they don’t, they can’t positively identify every vehicle.
That in and of itself makes it not completely scientific, let alone “real”, as doctor olds mentioned.
This ignores the fact they will also need to process data made available from consumers, who in general don’t know what trim level, options, etc. are on their own vehicle.
What newer car would be your favorite Ring car?
I’d like a 350Z or Boxster for a few dozen circuits
Remember how Hyundai destroyed the competition with their awesome ‘ring times?
Me neither.
I thought we were just told it doesn’t matter.
Followed up by an exhaustive recitation of the mistakes that were made, what everyone else has done, and what Jack wishes he could do, but no, really, only dumb kids are interested. Which is why we all read the article in the first place, right? Because we don’t care.
Really.
@M 1- Well said!
I’ll bet he had a racing seat in there, because the Vette’s OEM seat backs would have failed before the lap was done. I know from being a passenger at the Goodyear Proving Grounds in a Vette who’s seat failed on me.
The Cadilac CTSV is fast at the ring because the Holden its based on was very fast at the ring.
@Bryce- The CTS-V is Sigma architecture with virtually no relationship to the Holden Zeta achitecture.
Except that they are both POS GM architecture.
Holden developed the SIGMA platform they develope all GMsRWD platforms
Holden did NOT develop the Sigma arhitecture, though they are now the RWD engineering center for GM.
Actually, the initial development of the GM Sigma platform was done by Holden in Australia in the late 90’s. Not hard to find all kinds of supporting documentation inside and outside of GM that documents this.
@Camaro Kid- I believe that Sigma was developed from the RWD Opel architecture first used here in the Cadillac Catera. It has been exclusive to Cadillac, with no application in Australia. Sigma was deemed to costly for Camaro, thus the Holden engineered Zeta.
I will be pleased to be enlightened if you can provide me with a few links to support Holden developing Sigma. I’ll also check with my GM contacts to find out for sure!!
Sigma was indeed developed by the Holden engineering team (I don’t think it was ever used by any Holden models, but I could be wrong on that). See Ward’s Automotive from way back in 1998:
http://wardsautoworld.com/ar/auto_small_big_europeans/
“While the new Sigma program (or GWRD, for Global World Rear Drive) is being initiated from GM Holden’s in Melbourne, Australia, GM’s European operation also is tweaking the Vectra for Brazil and for Saturn in the U.S.”
In 2008, responsiblity for Sigma vehicles resided in North America. The Vehicle Line Executive was Jim Taylor, a great guy. The Chief Engineer was Liz Pilibosian. The Engine Chief was Tim Cyrus. I rode with them on a manufacturing validation ride to determine the new CTS goodness for release to commerce.
That is why I believe what I wrote, though I am prepared to stand corrected.
Zeta importation (G8) was the first time Holden was the controlling engineering center for a vehicle line sold in North America. My perspective is a function of organizational structure, though may be ignorant of original chassis design and dvelopment.
I’ll let you know what I hear back from my GM guy.
I was right to say that Sigma is a U.S. architecture and quite different from Zeta. Attached below are images of the two different arhitectures.
Here is the truth from GM:
1. Sigma was not developed by Holden.
2. Sigma was developed in GMNA (GM North America)and was not based on the Catera/Opel… Actually the old Holden products (GTO) were based on a version of the Opel/Catera platform.
3. Zeta was designed to be a lower cost RWD architecture compared to the Sigma and it was developed by Holden to replace the older Opel hardware. The front suspension on Sigma is a double wishbone style with a tall knuckle very sophisticated, lots of aluminum.. The front suspension on Zeta is a modified McPherson strut with two lower control arms and two ball joints (similar to a BMW 3-series).
Surprisingly, there’s little loss of precision in the Zeta hardware but Sigma is definitely a superior and more refined architecture. The Zeta rear suspension is also completely different. Note the location of the shock absorber on the Zeta as compared to the Sigma, and that on the Zeta the rear spring acts against the cradle while on Sigma it acts against the body.
Zeta front suspension – http://image.camaroperformers.com/f/18712134/camp_0906_14+2010_chevrolet_camaro_ss+front_suspension.jpg
Sigma front suspension. – http://www.brakeandfrontend.com/Content/Site308/Articles/03_01_2009/70489cts2jpg_00000028697.jpg
Zeta rear suspension – http://image.gmhightechperformance.com/f/10736030+w750+st0/0901gmhtp_03_z+2010_chevy_camaro_ss+independent_rear_suspension.jpg
Sigma rear suspension – http://autoinformed.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Cadilac-CTS-Rear-Suspension-1024×686.jpg
It’s pretty mesmerizing to watch that G force graphic bumbling around like a dizzy insect.
The CTS-Vis surely impressive and all, but shouldn’t Cadillac be focusing on luxury?
In total agreement that the “Our brand new model is no better than as good as the outgoing offerings by the competition” come-ons are seen through by [i]everyone[/i]
What a skeptic! I bet you’re also not wooed to purchase a car by the promise that “our brand new model is better than the outgoing model.”
Loved the video. I felt like I was in the drivers seat. I even became nervous as we entered numerous curves, I felt, a little too hot.
You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I can think of 2 Chevy dealerships near to me which have a dozen combined ZR1s. Inquire about a Z06 or Grand Sport, however, and they’ll try their hardest to shuffle out the single model they have, or start apologizing about the wait you’re in for while they find one located at a dealership in the middle of west texas.
Cmon Jack, even you have to admit that bend at 7:20 flat out at 180 was insane. Still the whole time I’m watching I’m thinking $100k and I have to look at those fugly center console vents all day? I don’t care how fast the car is, for that money I want an interior that doesn’t look like it was made by playskool.
+1 on the vents (and the whole dash). It doesn’t look any better than the one in the crappy Cobalt I used to have. You would think they would do something other than Chernobyl Grade plastic on a car that cost more than my house. Wood accents, chrome trim around the vents, anything to make a space in which I would be spending a lot of time more inviting. It would actually be awesome cool if they would retro the dash from the early 60s vettes with appropriate safety equipment hidden somehow.
The steering wheel is the same one that was in my 2008 Pontiac G6. I think the same wheel was in the later model Cobalts, as well.
It IS the Cobalt wheel! I had a rental recently. I really couldn’t find much to complain about…31000 miles and a major rattle in the left front when braking…couldn’t feel it, just heard it, so I didn’t worry. Drove great, but I thought the electric steering felt goofy. Glad to get my Civic back, even with less power. Everything else but the stereo makes up for the 15 horses. Damn, I rambled there. But that is the steering wheel, right down to the cheap-looking faux metal.
Have you seen the interior on the most recent Viper? Not excusing the Corvette but interiors seem to be low on the priority list for American sports cars.
I don’t mind that the video exists, after all GM tunes many of their cars over there so the video probably didn’t cost nearly as much as you’re making it sound like. They would have had a ZR1 sitting there regardless of whether or not they bothered to videotape it for youtube. I do agree that making a big deal out of the time itself is pretty silly though when their own explanation of the improvements is basically telling you that it’s the near-race spec tires they switched to responsible for almost all the improvement.
I think the problem here with the ZR1 is that it’s still too real. The purpose of the car should really just be to be a halo for the brand so while objective measures might be nice you really have to make the car something that goes beyond just being real and being more of a fantasy. Few people are going to buy it anyways-the point is mostly just to make people want to buy Chevys, so you might as well go all out and make everything from the interior to the exterior dreamy.
I think part of the point of the article is that ‘Ring times are now so obviously manipulated as to have very little meaning to the educatated buyer. Additionaly, after reading through all of these comments, it seems that a few people don’t understand that there is a huge difference between making a ‘fast’ car and a ‘good’ car. In my opinion, that is the basic issue with the Corvette – and the marketing behind it.
A couple of years ago EVO took the ZR-1 to the ‘Ring along with some competition. No tester wanted to drive it anywhere near its limit. It darted around under braking, the breakaway charcteristics were unnerving, etc. They said that just leaving the ‘lay-by’ they could feel how its damping and spring rates were off….
And the list goes on and on. Yes, respect, for the lap time, but when a car alienates you, who cares about a few seconds? If that’s really what matters to you, then fine, but for the love of god, is it really that hard to understand how little that means to rest of the car buying world?
Don’t forget that the Volt gets 230 mpg.
Great article, Jack, and you’re spot-on with the tone of GM’s advertising through each of those decades.
I find it interesting that *nobody* – including the Japanese mfrs – has an answer for the Hyundai/Kia juggernaut (warranty, value, style, mpg, etc.). They just choose to ignore them rather than advertise against them.
Don’t forget that the Volt gets 230 mpg.
And Nissan claimed the Leaf would get 365 mpg a few days later.
Oh, that’s right – both claims were based on the EPA testing criteria provided to both GM and Nissan and they followed the instructions. The PR departments ran with the numbers. The EPA said, well our test standards were crap.
Oh that’s right – GM’s fault.
And don’t forget that the only fuel economy numbers manufacturers are legally allowed to advertise are the EPA numbers. Easy to call out GM/Nissan on this but in reality they both followed the rules as given to them.
What I like about this video is the validation that real drivers do what I do on the ‘Ring in Need for Speed Shift – drive off the road when exiting half the turns.
Heh.
What I like is seeing that great avatar on a Monday morning!
The original Chevrolet upload to YouTube got 167,000 views in 2 days, so it must be interesting to somebody, and that’s not counting the many copied uploads.
This car, like the Viper and GTR is mostly advertisement, none of these manufacturers plans on selling a lot or even making a profit selling these top end cars (Bugatti Veyron has never made a dime of profit), but just lay down one of the fastest production car laps on THE hottest track in the world and I’ll bet every car magazine, online, in print and on TV does a story on your car……advertisement
Instead of worrying about GM’s advertising, you should all be watching the 24hrs of LeMans on Speed, where, as I write, a Corvette is leading in the GTE Pro class with Oliver Gavin at the wheel and the sun dawning over the French horizon. (Or are they leading just because they have better tires?)
Also, if all you care about are the quality of the plastics on the dash then you, sir, are no car guy.
Go to my website http://www.nitrostreet.com and I’ll guarantee I’m more of a car guy than you’ll ever dream of being.
(Er, I wasn’t referring to your comment…)
Sorry, never been called not a car guy before LOL
They don’t consistently win Le Mans because they have better tires, they consistently win because GM dumps about twenty times more money into the program than their next nearest competitor. The farce that is GM’s racing effort was never more apparent than their crowing over winning GT1 when they were literally the only car left in the class. They spend something like $6 million on new BUILDINGS each year at La Sarthe, they bring enough spares to literally build more than 20 complete new race cars, their “two” race cars actually come from a global set of six physical cars, etc. … this is exactly how Nissan put the final nails in the GTP coffin, by the way.
Sure, in the end it’s all just advertising, but I have to imagine that even for the die-hard Vette fans, the fantasy wears thin after awhile.
P.S. Real car guys know how to drive around corners.
@M1- From your presumption about Mero’s driving it is evident that you have never actually raced or even hot-lapped a track!
I think Mero’s driving is A-OK. He’s going frighteningly fast, after all, and using the rumble strips to take the turns wider, and thus faster.
Actually doc olds, I was referring to nitrostreet’s all-drag-racing “real car guy” web page. Hassling car guys whose choice of motorsport involves driving in a straight line for the shortest possible period of time is kind of a hobby of mine.
@M 1- Sorry, I though you were piling on Mero!
That’s okay, not the first rich person to ever look down their nose at us, if you’d rather race Biff around the track in your Viper that’s fine with me, heck if I was rich I’d probably be out there on the track with ya, LOL
GM is playing the value equation and I think it works.
With everyone on-line today, it only takes a search to validate that.
In the past GM did not do a good job at bench-marking their competitors and taking action. I think this shows proactive forward direction rather than trailing action.
They should get Sabine Schmitz to go for a few laps in it. She doesn’t hit nearly as many rumble strips and is generally much smoother in the videos I’ve seen.
Sabine can hit my rumble strips…well, you know where this is going…
Can someone tell me why you can have Recaros in a GM luxury car (Cadillac) but you can’t get them on their ultimate sportscar (Corvette)????
So you are bashing GM for making a youtube video of a ring run? They tune it there so it doesn’t cost it any more to make it. There are several sites were people were talking about how the GTR is so much better because of a Ring run. Granted, I doubt many of the people on those sites are every going to buy a ZR1 or GTR new. But it gets people talking.
I bet this video cost nearly nothing to make. There are plenty of people who do care about Ring times (I don’t personally because when you have this kind of money to spend on a car, the Ring time isn’t important to the buyer).
I think way too much is being made of this. But, Jack, talk to GM. I would love to see you in a video. But then, would you be bashing them for flying the car out there and marketing the video? Sounds like you are just a bit jealous :)
I know plenty of people with the money for a ZR1 (or nearly any other car), and to a certain extent I am one… and while I wouldn’t say the Ring lap time is “important” to us, it’s certainly *interesting* to us.
Like it or not, the bottom line is that the video does say something about what GM has achieved with the Vette. Everyone can agree that the best late 90s Vette would have simply shaken itself to pieces out there, to say nothing of trying to compete with EurAsia’s best sports car offerings.
And as you observe, it gets people talking. Come to think of it, these Ring videos are probably the only thing that keeps Vettes on the radar of some of the car owner’s forums I visit…
And if it sells two or maybe three Vettes, it has more than paid for itself, right? How many Aveos do they have to sell before they pay for one commercial?
@M 1- You are right to applaud the performance, but Corvette has been about the fastest track car since the release of the C4. They may have rattled and squeaked some, but Corvettes became so dominant on the track that the Corvette Challenge series was born when they were banned from show room stock racing due to their dominance. In fairness, the Porsche 944 Turbo was subsequently also banned when it dominated after Corvettes were excluded.
I am not sure what you mean by, to “a certain extent I am one”. I could pay cash for one, but am still saving for retirement!I currently make monthly payments well over what a ZR1 would cost. But I have three vehicles for the price rather than one! I don’t consider myself in the “deep pockets” group, by any means.
@doc, “to a certain extent” was really more a commentary on my relative standing versus my “car guy” friends and associates I mentioned. Many of them have much deeper pockets than I do. It’s very relative. I could certainly buy a ZR1 (although when work permits me time to race, I run a Viper) or practically anything else in the six-figure range if I was so inclined. On the other hand, I know somebody whose daily-driver decision involves a McLaren F1 and a Veyron. Very, very relative.
I clearly don’t have to tell you this, but if you have to dip into retirement, then no, you can’t afford it. That’s one step removed from thinking you still have money because you have blank checks left!
@M1- You should really drive a ZR1! It has almost 100HP more at 3,500RPM and averages almost 50 more over the operating range. The 602HP Viper does come within 20 HP at 5,900, but redlines at 6,000 while the ZR1 is still making 510HP at 6,500. I have driven Z06’s, which are pretty incredible in their own right, and would love to try a ZR1. btw-My track prepped C5 dusted the last Viper I ran with on the track! Kidding aside, the Viper is an incredible car.
Are there any deer running around in there?
Jack… agree with your premise here, but I do think Morea is on to something (maybe it’s because I’m sitting here watching 24 heures du mans on DVR at the moment …).
Or maybe it’s because the corvettes blew my mind every time they roared and rumbled by the grandstand at the ALMS race in Long Beach a month or two ago.
All I know is that I’m a guy who has always owned BMWs and a Miata and would have never been seen dead in a ‘Vette, but damn if I don’t think I’d like to have a yellow Z06 sitting i the driveway right now. Maybe I’m just getting old. Plus they’re slathering the inside in alcantara or equivalent now ;)
Disagree. The ZR1 is a halo car. Like every other 600HP wondermachine, it’s ridiculously overengineered for public roads. What else can they do but run it around the Ring? The video didn’t cost much and it keeps the Corvette in the public eye with perhaps the most legitimate performance credential for any sports car.
As to all that stuff GM bragged about in the past, yes, it’s ridiculous to bother when your target audience doesn’t care about it. But the audience buying ZR1s probably does get some pride knowing that their piece of Americana laid the smack down on a bunch of high-dollar foreign exotics, regardless of what you might attribute the success to.
A comparison of the 638HP LS9 torque curve to the 602HP Viper discloses the ZR1’s huge advantage. An average of 49 ft-lbs more throughout the RPM range with a whopping 97 ft-lb advantage at 3,500 RPM. The ZR1 in the video is stock except for the added weight of safety features. The lap in the video is bested by only one other “production” car, the Porsche GT2 and then by only 1 second. So what if the improvement is in tires. The others use dry road performance tires, too!
I suspect none of the commenters here will every be in the target market for this car, or any other $100K vehicle. A friend who has deep pockets used to drive a BMW M5 6 speed manual as his sedan with a late model Ferrari sports car. I once asked him what Cadillac could due to attract him. He politely smiled and said he did not think that possible. He traded the M5 for a current CTS-V!
These are halo cars, that also pay for themselves even at very low volumes. They are doing a great job for GM, as they command the highest retail prices of any full line maker and are gaining market share.
“I suspect none of the commenters here will every be in the target market for this car, or any other $100K vehicle.”
Why? Do you believe we simply don’t communicate with the outside world or something?
@M1- I’ve been around a long time, and know people who buy these kinds of cars, not that I am in their deep pockets group.
No, I don’t think there are many new car buyers here, from the tone of the comments, and even fewer with the means to afford a vehicle of that price. As a matter of fact, there are really not many cars of that price sold throughout the country. You know that, don’t you? Have you ever paid $100K for a car?
$100K isn’t really all that much in many circles.
My E55 was the largest cash vehicle purchase I’ve made, that was around $85K, if it makes you feel any better about my qualifications. My Viper ran me about $70K ten years ago, I’d guess that might be around $100K in today’s dollars. Heck, my Suburban was about $70K.
A $100K limit would keep you out of about, what, maybe a third of the Benz show room these days?
My point, though, is that there was no solid basis for your assumption. I know a billionaire who is very active in several well-known forums, but he isn’t a name anyone would recognize, and you’d never guess he was sitting on a Scrooge McDuck sized checkbook from his day-to-day banter.
@M1- I don’t doubt there are wealthy folks on blogs, I am happy to believe you can buy whatever you want, though anyone can be a billionaire in the blogosphere!
MB’s volume sellers are priced less than your Suburban, even Tahoe. The $100K plus volume for every new car maker combined is miniscule. That makes it an easy bet! My opinion is based on simple demographics!
Many commenters cite their way past model this or that as proof of how smart they are not to buy new, and some world views expressed make it difficult to understand how the writer could possibly generate the top 3% incomes I associate with buying $100K+ cars. My assumptions may not be valid, but they are not un-considered.
FWIW, our demographic data says over half of TTAC’s reader base makes more than $75k per year. Just thought I’d throw that into the conversation.
Thanks Ed. I did not intend to demean TTAC’s demographics, just to say that $100K+ new car buyers are very rare.
“I did not intend to demean TTAC’s demographics”
…
“I suspect none of the commenters here will ever be in the target market for this car, or any other $100K vehicle.”
I’d say that’s exactly what you intended. Your assumptions are neither valid nor considered.
@Alexdi- Sorry if you think not being in the $100K car demographic is demeaning. It is a lot more than self proclaimed, $75K+ a year.
Sorry ‘if I think’? Why even bother with a nonapology? You already look like a cad, why confirm it? My assumption, based on your grammar and vocabulary, is that you barely made it through high school. But hey, I apologize in advance if you might find that demeaning.
Alexdi- I am truly sorry to make you feel demeaned.
It was a poor choice of words to say “none”. My logic is along the lines that SVX pearlie lays out. Folks with the means to buy this price vehicle are a tiny segment of the population.
As old as I am, I do not know what a cad is.
“I suspect none of the commenters here will every be in the target market for this car, or any other $100K vehicle.” – Dr. Olds
“FWIW, our demographic data says over half of TTAC’s reader base makes more than $75k per year” – Ed.
My rule of thumb says that the car you buy is no more than 1/3 of your income. So, if you are actually *buying* a $100k car, NEW, you should be making around $300k. That’s a pretty big number, and not a lot of people make that much.
$75k is a pretty darn good family income, and easily doable with two working spouses ($40k + $35k). Of course, that also limits a new car purchase to around $25k.
It is a pretty big step up from the typical $25k new car price to the median GM transaction price of $33k. It is a *much* bigger jump to $100k, which is why new Porsches are typically only bought by executives and doctors.
IMO, Dr. Olds overstates things, as there probably are a few readers with that kind of coin on hand. But I think he’s much more than 95% correct.
Commenters on the Youtube vid are around mid 20s as I suspect most Corvette fanbois are. Marketing’s job is to get them to showroom so sales staff can perform their magic and get them committed to anything from a Cobalt to an LT Camaro since mid 20’s usually lack the income or credit for a Corvette. Problem is they are more likely to end up owning a slammed Acura.
Chevy wishes it could tap that young a market, even for used Vettes…go to any Corvette forum and it is obvious the age of the owners/fans are much higher…which is fine by me as the kids would drive up Vette insurance rates even higher than they are now…
“go to any Corvette forum and it is obvious the age of the owners/fans are much higher…”
Well, duh.
How much does a Corvette cost, and how much does the average 20-something kid make?
Lets ask if the GM staff who went there had great time or not. I would bet yes, and hence I approve overall of the effort.
Compare this to the team which detailed out the specs for a racing stripe for the Vega. Who can’t wait to get home and drink off the misery of talking to the marketing and advertising people about an utterly awful idea. Although a Vega is a better car with a mildly cheerful paint job than without.
Chevrolet Corvettes win both the GT Pro and Amateur classes at the 2011 Le Mans.
GT Pro: Chevrolet, Ferrari, BMW
GT Am: Chevrolet, Porsche, Ford
@Morea- And to think the Le Mans car has 150+ HP less than the stock ZR1!
Pffff, don’t bother us with your facts and things like race results in the real world. Hyperbole, bashing of marketing, and hand wringing makes much better schadenfreude.
What would the story be if GM didn’t make videos at the Ring. Would the story then be how chicken GM was to take the steaming pile of crap Corvette out on the track because everything else was faster.
Who is to say in this world of product placement, co-marketing, and MDF, that Michelin didn’t foot part of the bill, seeing how the tires are pimped heavily through the video. I don’t know any company out there that gives this kind of co-marketing pimping out for free. Michelin Pilot Sport Cup Tyres must be mentioned a dozen times in this video. So GM was supposed to say, nah, we don’t want your MDF because if we prove we have a faster car, the haters will blow a blood vessel and have to rant about it.
It’s the kind of blog entry on TTAC by Mr. Baruth that brings out the “B” word here.
My complaint with JD Power is their “initial quality study” measures the quality of a car after only 90 days of ownership. These days, quality in the first 90 days should be a given and ANY problems are inexcusable. Unless you only plan to own each new car for only 90 days, this metric is meaningless to the buyer. As a buyer, I want to know how many problems I will have 5 and 10 years down the road. Until GM cracks the code on this, I am not interested.
@Rob- You mention only one of JD Power’s many surveys, which is intended to measure initial build quality. Any problem is inexcusable, but all carmakers still have some!
JD Power also has a long term dependability survey that monitors three year old vehicles. Last year, 2007 MY Buick beat Lexus in this survey, though 2008 Lincoln is currently the best nameplate and Buick has fallen from the top 5. I am not aware of anyone who surveys older vehicles.
Doctor Olds, Consumer Reports does long term reliability surveys. And while Buick has been competitive with Japanese brands with respect to long term reliability, it has been the rare American exception.
@Rob- The survey results are fluid, leaders often changing, and Lincoln is currently at the top. The real message is that American brands are no longer just backmarkers, but competitive with the best of the best.
Ring times seem, or at least seemed pre GTR, to carry much more weight in Europe. In America, there is also strong correlation between caring about ‘ring times, and giving a damn about Jeremy Clarkson.
In the bigger picture, the whole ‘ring time obsession is just a subset of some people’s fascination with how street cars are “on the track.”
And in the even bigger picture, this, like most follies and idiocies, are yet another example of progressive indoctrination having taught the world’s gullibles to look for validation for all they do from “experts.” “Some expert can drive my car fast around the track the experts claim is the bestest track in the world, so I spent my money wisely…..”
Or, at the risk of being less overanalyzed, maybe it just has to do with the idea that if the Americans are competent enough to build a car that can outrun virtually every European sports car ever built on their own playground; maybe they’re competent enough to build regular cars, too.
Remember, US automakers are also trying to break into the European markets, and for decades the anti-US sentiment has always been “US can’t even build a car that can go around a track”
Yes we can
@ Stuki
Or, at the risk of being less overanalyzed, maybe it just has to do with the idea that if the Americans are competent enough to build a car that can outrun virtually every European sports car ever built on their own playground; maybe they’re competent enough to build regular cars, too.
And you’re right, Ring times do carry much more weight in Europe, but also realize that US automakers have been trying to break into the European markets for decades, and the anti-US sentiment has always been “US can’t even build a car that can go around a track”
Yes we can
I spent time in a ’09 Corvette. The cockpit is far from the best. But guys if you only judge this magnificent piece of machinery that can outcorner, out-accelerate, outhandle and out perform most of the very best, you just don’t get it. I’m completely ok with GM leaving the interior the way it is since they promise much better for the C7 debuting in a scant 2 years. I just don’t see complaining about something that won’t change at this point.
This article is just another way to take the bat to GM – a favorite past-time on this site. However, to me it’s a swing-and-a-miss. No doubt, GM has a long way to go to restore it’s luster as an automaker: They’ll need three more years to fully remodel their line-up (new Impala, new Corvette, new Cadillac full-size and ATS, new Buick GS) as well as require the passing of a whole generation of Toyota and Honda lemmings to have a fair chance with the buying public. Meanwhile, no one else is sitting still waiting for GM to right its ship. So, what’s a GM marketer to do today? I think posting the ‘Ring lap video a couple of days before LeMans and then seeing Corvettes win in both GT categories is damned good timing. But of course, TTAC wouldn’t never see it that way.
How did the promotion and advertising of General Motors automobiles become reduced to a series of meaningless comparisons, numbers, and statistics?
Taking after Ford?
Nope, if they had taken after Ford then they wouldn’t be a government and union owned bankrupt company.
Bravo. And so true. And they take the bat to themselves. No one else has to do it. (Their cars self-destruct, that is.)
@ Jack Baruth, I just noticed this comment of yours in your article:
“Were I lucky enough to own my personal favorite RIng-wrecker, the Viper ACR, my first thought would be, “Hey, let me get those tires, and I can still beat Vettes.””
I guess you’re not very well informed, the Viper ACR was running these same Pilot Sport Cup tires 3 years ago when it set it’s 7.22 time at the Ring.
The ZR1’s special tires are a “ZP” version of these tires, which means Zero Pressure, these are run-flat versions of the Cups, which even makes it more interesting because normally run-flats don’t perform as well as the regular versions do, (if they did there would be no reason to have non-run-flats), so would there still be more time to be had with the regular cups on the ZR1?
I don’t understand… are they the same tires, which makes me not very well-informed, or are they different tires, which would make your post irrevelant?
Completely changing the sidewall structure of a tire has some effects beyond run-flat capacity. They are traditionally bad ones. Maybe this time they are good ones. Who knows?
I’m assuming that the run-flats will not handle as well as the non-run-flat tires or there would not be any reason to make a run-flat version and a non-run-flat version, they would discontinue the regular Pilot sport cups and make only Pilot Sport Cup run-flats.
In other words (in my opinion) the Viper still was running better tires than the ZR1 is now, maybe someone will do a test and prove me wrong, but until then……
By the way here’s the Motor Trend link that says it was running Sport Cups in 2008:
http://www.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0808_2009_dodge_viper_acr_nurburgring_record/breaking_the_record.html
I don’t know what everybody is getting worked up about, this is a cheap to make spot about a performance product featuring a hot lap on the Ring. It’s hardly indicative of GMs entire marketing direction, so unless they start doing this for the Cruze, I would not be too harsh on it.
PS: The “I can drive better than you” comments are really getting old.
http://ahrensracing.de/wp-content/gallery/nring1/2010-04-11-cruz-cup-nurburgring-402-gros.jpg
Okay, go ahead and be harsh on it.
Wait, isn’t the Panamera Turbo S the fastest saloon (sedan) now? whatever.
The problem I think GM faces is that their cars are seen as grocery store brand, no frills, to most people on the coasts at least; a Chevrolet isn’t aspirational. There is, it seems, a modicum of aspiration for a Honda, Toyota and now even a Hyundai. Ford, too, is making some inroads in this regard (to Lincoln’s detriment probably).
These aren’t luxury brands, to be sure; however, there is an ethos that each conveys. You’re smart for one reason or another depending on what you chooose. One picks Nissan or Mazda because, ostensibly, you care about driving, for example. Subarus are 4 season capable. Hyundais have great warranties and offer great value. Etcetera.
What is the Chevrolet brand ethos? Other than white bread? People accuse Toyota of that, but that Prius halo still shines pretty bright despite the Volt’s best efforts. (I guess not owning the fact that the ICE is indeed directly connected to the wheels wounded its chances. Perhaps the whole episode would faired better if they called the Volt what it is – a “SUPER Hybrid”…I’m serious.)
To top off the lack of identity is a reputation of a lack of reliability. That’s going to take more time it seems. How ever good the cars are now GM is going to have to try and go a decade without messing up the product, putting their foot in their mouth, insulting their competitors or insulting consumers. In other words respect everyone that have to deal with for 10 years.
I hope they understand that for 90% of population buying a car is not like buying a PC or a Kenmore, but more like buying a house. Memories get to be a bit longer at that point.
“What is the Chevrolet brand ethos?”
It’s supposed to be value.
The Corvette is the best sports car FOR THE MONEY.
The Malibu is a great car FOR THE MONEY.
The Traverse is an amazing hauler FOR THE MONEY.
Just add “FOR THE MONEY” to any Chevy comparo, and you’re golden at understanding the psychology.
I wonder if that might be the problem…
The Corvette is the best sports car FOR THE MONEY.
Except that for the Corvette (base, Z06, and ZR1) each can be considered best-in-class, or best-in-horsepower-range if you prefer.
They perform in all aspects as good as, or better, than sports cars that cost 50% to 100% more.
The only question is, does GM make money from them or are they loss-leader halo cars?
Yes, there will always be fanboys and haters, but if you look at the car in a unbiased way it is quite an achievement.
@John: There is nothing wrong with providing good value. I see no problem there.
____
@Morea: For whatever reason, the ‘vette isn’t obviously best in class, without a price qualifier. Especially if you’re looking at cars costing 50% to 100% more.
A base ‘vette starts at $50k. A 911 Carrera 4 stickers around $100k.
A ZR1 starts at $112.5k. $225k buys a *lot* of car. A 911 Turbo is under $200k.
Well, Motor Trend gives the nod to the ZR1:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1011_2011_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_2010_porsche_911_turbo_comparison/index.html
while Car and Driver gives it to the 911 Turbo:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/10q1/2010_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_vs._2010_porsche_911_turbo-comparison_tests
and Road and Track gives the nod to the 911 Turbo by a slim margin:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/comparison/culture-clash
So I would say they must be very close in abilities even without considering price. By admission of the article’s authors the scoring differences too small to reliably measure, i.e a tie.
Yes, “50% to 100%” more is overstating the price difference, the 911 Turbo is about 25% more expensive than the ZR1.
Here’s what I think everyone is missing: throwing together a competitive analysis and marketing bragging rights is far, far easier to do than it is to cost effectively engineer and manufacture a more reliable product.
End of story.
GM’s hope is that they can sell a story that will get you to overlook all those reasons why people jumped ship to foreign brands. It’s a lot easier to do that, and significantly less expensive, than re-engineering.
You sell what you can sell and avoid comparisons to that which you are not able to match or exceed your competition on. There’s a reason why Audi does not try and market its vehicles side-by-side to BMW, so instead they give you an A4 that is substantially larger than the present 3-series, or an S4 that doesn’t *really* compete with an M3. This permits you to avoid direct comparisons.
Technology transfer? How about a tech transfer of paddle shifters?
GM develops vehicles at Nurburgring. They videoed the runs. These notions that the video understanding of reality.was “produced” as an ad piece belie understanding of reality.
Development “runs” don’t look anything like that, FYI. It also costs nontrivial money to have the main straight opened and turn off the public traffic.
I believe you Jack and stand suitably chastised!
As a matter of fact, I’d bet most development was done at the Milford Proving grounds and Nurburgring was more like a final proof of design. Wouldn’t you love to have Mero’s job!
I still contend it is damn cheap exposure compared to the $billions spent on advertising by GM and is a trivial sum in the scheme of these things. This kind of data point, along with a $20K price advantage, moved a buddy from an M5 to CTS-V. A data point of one, for sure, but GM is making money on these carlines and enhancing the corporate image in the process.
I wouldn’t take Mr. Mero’s job. I love driving fast cars but being responsible for the Corvette would be like holding the master tapes for Led Zeppelin II — too much responsibility for too many dreams :) There are so few genuinely special things left in this world, and amazingly, the Corvette is still one of them.
Truly, the JD Powers rankings are nearly worthless. Take for example ‘long term ownership’: They classify it as 3 years – whereas the average age of a car on US roads is 10 years. A car that utterly destroys its transmission is wieghted equally to a car that has a mere transmission fluid leak: ‘faults reported’ is a lazy, pathetic way to uncover reliability issues, and yet it is their standby method.
@evan- Where do you get knowledge of long term dependability and why does the industry rely on JD power surveys if they are so bad?
Really? All this talk about JD Power and nobody has thought to talk about True Delta? I think Michael Karesh has done a fairly thorough job of shooting down both JD Power and Consumer Reports’ methodologies.
At least Consumer Reports doesn’t have OEM money paying for it.
Doctor Olds, the industry doesn’t “rely” on JD Powers, it just uses JD Powers in its marketing when it is beneficial – and they would be foolish not to, whether it is useful or accurate or not. In the April 2011 issue of Consumer Reports, the long term reliability of the largest manufacturers (over ten years) from best to worst was: Toyota, Honda, Subaru, Nissan, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Hyundai, GM, Volkswagen, Chrysler. Maybe this was part of the reason Ford didn’t need a bailout.
Obviously, some models are better or worse and newer cars by a given manufacturer may be better or worse than the ones they made ten years ago. So, if GM has finally cracked the code on reliability and maintains that excellence for the next ten years – I might actually buy one. We’ll see.
The geezers that can afford the ZR1 aren’t in it for speed. The ZR1 is a car GM made for itself. Nobody asked for it. Ford built the Ford GT to stroke its own ego in wisely limited numbers. It was a winner at the track but a loser at the cash register. Sure they get the young to the showroom but it’s not the ’50s anymore. Too many choices out there. Time to focus on the mainstream cars, GM. Playtime’s over.