Shno's House of Z

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Sure, sure you do............a downloadable photo of a Z/28 is available on this site just for you.

[*007]

Best Wishes to all of you folks in this thread!~ Wild couple of years for everyone. Lot's of learnings, lots of yearnings! Dreams that got realized, dreams that capsized. We are all lucky and grateful for what we have and thanks to all of those who share and contribute to that end. May you all be blessed and avoid the potholes and rubber debris of the road and information highway!

Peace and Harmony to all! GO 2014!!

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by *007

Best Wishes to all of you folks in this thread!~ Wild couple of years for everyone. Lot's of learnings, lots of yearnings! Dreams that got realized, dreams that capsized. We are all lucky and grateful for what we have and thanks to all of those who share and contribute to that end. May you all be blessed and avoid the potholes and rubber debris of the road and information highway!

Peace and Harmony to all! GO 2014!!

[LOWDOWN]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Volume is the key differentiator even between the ZL1.

1,500 (assumed) vs. 5,000 including a convertible.

Just look at any new part on the car that isn't on any other car. That part requires tooling and fixtures or "capital expense" to produce.

If GM simply invested in tools for parts and tools at Oshawa to build the Z/28 in a high quality fashion let's just guess a number of $15,000,000. That would be $10,000 per Z/28 to simply recover that investment. Now I have no idea how much GM invested in the Camaro Z/28. Maybe it was a lot less, could have been more. But it wasn't zero.

Low volumes destroy business cases and low volumes make it harder to put a product through an assembly plant.

Just imagine a car that is 2% of production. That means for very 100 cars that go by 2 get something unique or special. That means you have to have 2 special unique parts at line side for the operator to install on the car. You have to have line space to have those parts available, you have to have a fork truck driver bring those parts to the line, you have to have in some cases special training for the unique parts. An efficiently laid out plant doesn't have extra space for this. On and on it goes and it all can cost money.

How about this simple one. On a part that goes on every car, the supplier can run the tools every day. What do you think happens on a part that supplier makes 6 per day? Do you think the supplier sets up the tool and makes 6 parts and stops? For the most part there are set up costs associated with the tools. I'm sure we have enough members on here that have small businesses that can elaborate. A supplier may simply run the years worth of parts. But then you have box them up and store them. GM doesn't accept and store a years worth of parts. No modern OEM does that. They accept parts as needed. But either you are paying for way more set up on the tools for low volume or you are paying way more to store parts in a warehouse someplace. Either way, it's more cost than on a "normal" part.

Again, these are all simply generalities and I have no idea what GM did or didn't do. But low volumes matter and they matter a lot.

So no, it might not make sense when you say $75,000 for a Z/28. That number in and of itself is quite daunting. But that is also less delivery of $750 or whatever a Camaro has and another $2,000 or whatever GG Tax might be and you are around $72,500 for the car.

Even if you use the ZL1 for the starting point, keep in mind the LSA is a mass produced engine, the LS7 is not. There is a premium. The CC brakes, another premium. Those 2 alone are at least a $10,000 increase over a ZL1. A ZL1 is $58,000 so add a simple 10 on top of that and you are at $68,000. Grasp the impact of the much lower volumes and your in the low 70's. It's pretty simple.

Look, I'd love one in my garage. The risk here was always that making the car this track focused would price it out of most peoples budget. It did mine for a non DD. And I'm not intending to start going to track days (although that would be fun). So I think most people are just crazy that it can't be a reality for them and they are questioning the cost. They want it to be a 1LE with a small $2500 engine option. I would frankly have bought a 1LE with an LS7 option and been happy of it even with a hug premium. That isn't reality. Or they want a Z/28 without the special parts and without the CC brakes. Well that's a car that is about as fast around the track as a ZL1 and having 2 cars in the showroom that do the same thing is not good business. Volumes for the ZL1 would simply drop.

The car is priced in a way to add value to the brand, add show room traffic, but not cannibalize many ZL1 or Corvette sales. It was contented and priced for a very specific buyer and we (including me) are simply having to come to the reality that we weren't it.

Number 3, in the halcyon days (or daze!) of the Z/28 development thread(s), we readily played "plug 'n play", here, just to encourage SOME activity on GM's part. "1LE with LS7" became the cry, and "$50ish" became the scream!

Well, as we found out on 3/27/13, this car was going to be sooooo much more than even we might have suspected (other than one quiet voice that surreptitiously suggested "COPO for the street-track") or, dare I say, wanted to pay for...

I think the end result, and it's resulting price, are "fair" for both consumers and the company. Low volume works to the benefit of both, and low volume, with so little time before Gen-6 arrives, was always a given...

"But ya gotta wanna do it!", said ol' BIG mouth. They did. BIG mouth forgot to add "NOW!", 2 years ago...

That extra volume would have got the price below $70 (before add-ons), as equipped. But fine wine takes time...

Now, where's my damned Powerball-winning ticket?!

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by LOWDOWN

Number 3, in the halcyon days (or daze!) of the Z/28 development thread(s), we readily played "plug 'n play", here, just to encourage SOME activity on GM's part. "1LE with LS7" became the cry, and "$50ish" became the scream!

Well, as we found out on 3/27/13, this car was going to be sooooo much more than even we might have suspected (other than one quiet voice that surreptitiously suggested "COPO for the street-track") or, dare I say, wanted to pay for...

I think the end result, and it's resulting price, are "fair" for both consumers and the company. Low volume works to the benefit of both, and low volume, with so little time before Gen-6 arrives, was always a given...

"But ya gotta wanna do it!", said ol' BIG mouth. They did. BIG mouth forgot to add "NOW!", 2 years ago...

That extra volume would have got the price below $70 (before add-ons), as equipped. But fine wine takes time...

Now, where's my damned Powerball-winning ticket?!

I checked my ticket and I won $1.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Number 3

I checked my ticket and I won $1.

Congrats you did better than many millions did.

[ShnOmac]

I'm sure the Tech is going to be amazing...... but I'm not sure about racing without the roar of a engine.










http://www.fiaformulae.com/

[tramtwo]

We haven't heard much about the driving 'modes' or other specific programming.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by ShnOmac

I'm sure the Tech is going to be amazing...... but I'm not sure about racing without the roar of a engine.










http://www.fiaformulae.com/

You can just put a speaker on the car that makes sweet engine noises.

[2cnd chance]

The new Mustang's Chief Engineer Dave Pericak talks smack:

Road and Track, "So who's this car for?"

Dave P., "We used the 911 & M3 as benchmarks"

When asked why he didn't mention the Camaro, Dave said, "there's nothing wrong with that rivalry, but if you're going to better yourself you have to look beyond that kind of thing". We wanted to benchmark something else, something a little higher than that".

Oh it's on now! Go get 'em GM!

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

The new Mustang's Chief Engineer Dave Pericak talks smack:

Road and Track, "So who's this car for?"

Dave P., "We used the 911 & M3 as benchmarks"

When asked why he didn't mention the Camaro, Dave said, "there's nothing wrong with that rivalry, but if you're going to better yourself you have to look beyond that kind of thing". We wanted to benchmark something else, something a little higher than that".

Oh it's on now! Go get 'em GM!

Well if we are honest, if you were in the Ford camp and looking for where you wanted your car to be, it wouldn't just be "better than the Camaro". I'm a little shocked they would refer to the 911 as it has completely different handling characteristics that I would think they would be benchmarking. The M3 on the other hand is certainly where they should be thinking.

If you were doing your first IRS and wanted to pick the benchmark it would be at least the 3 Series coupe and on the upper end, the M3. Wouldn't really make sense to select a larger heavier car for your benchmark and I'm pretty sure if you asked GM would they like to be able go against an M3 they would by lying if they said no.

So, yes, it's kind of talking smack, and it recognizes the rivalry, but it shows where they are going.

I'd guess GM wasn't using the solid rear axle Mustang for any ride or handling benchmark either, even for the Gen 5.

But this has been my point all along. You have to make the Gen 6 a great car PERIOD. Yes that goes against everyone that wants "American Muscle" and only thinks a car is judged on 1320 feet.

GM must take the Gen 6 up a big notch and I'm sure they will. But if they hang on too hard to this antiquated concept of "American Muscle" we'll be seeing a loss of sales to the Mustang. Just my opinion.

And this is where GM has to be careful where Ford does not. GM has the Corvette and the Corvette will continue to be king. Ford has no upper bounds on the Mustang.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Well if we are honest, if you were in the Ford camp and looking for where you wanted your car to be, it wouldn't just be "better than the Camaro". I'm a little shocked they would refer to the 911 as it has completely different handling characteristics that I would think they would be benchmarking. The M3 on the other hand is certainly where they should be thinking.

If you were doing your first IRS and wanted to pick the benchmark it would be at least the 3 Series coupe and on the upper end, the M3. Wouldn't really make sense to select a larger heavier car for your benchmark and I'm pretty sure if you asked GM would they like to be able go against an M3 they would by lying if they said no.

So, yes, it's kind of talking smack, and it recognizes the rivalry, but it shows where they are going.

I'd guess GM wasn't using the solid rear axle Mustang for any ride or handling benchmark either, even for the Gen 5.

But this has been my point all along. You have to make the Gen 6 a great car PERIOD. Yes that goes against everyone that wants "American Muscle" and only thinks a car is judged on 1320 feet.

GM must take the Gen 6 up a big notch and I'm sure they will. But if they hang on too hard to this antiquated concept of "American Muscle" we'll be seeing a loss of sales to the Mustang. Just my opinion.

And this is where GM has to be careful where Ford does not. GM has the Corvette and the Corvette will continue to be king. Ford has no upper bounds on the Mustang.

If I was considering design that's understood, however I'm looking at capabilities. Ford already bested (they said) the M3 with the Boss. That being said the Camaro 1LE, ZL1 and especially the Z/28 are so far ahead of where Ford was. Or even the M3.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

If I was considering design that's understood, however I'm looking at capabilities. Ford already bested (they said) the M3 with the Boss. That being said the Camaro 1LE, ZL1 and especially the Z/28 are so far ahead of where Ford was. Or even the M3.

Looking forward to the when BMW uses either the Mustang or Camaro for their benchmarks.

M3 is only a bit over 400 HP if I remember correctly. Any V8 Camaro or Mustang is already in their for lap times, particularly a Boss or 1LE.

Ther is more to benchmarking a BMW chassis than just lap times. And we haven't seen the M4 yet either.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Looking forward to the when BMW uses either the Mustang or Camaro for their benchmarks.

M3 is only a bit over 400 HP if I remember correctly. Any V8 Camaro or Mustang is already in their for lap times, particularly a Boss or 1LE.

Ther is more to benchmarking a BMW chassis than just lap times. And we haven't seen the M4 yet either.

True.