Addicted2Speed

Agreed 100%. A C6 Corvette with twin-turbo kit will wipe the floor with a ZR1 for 1/2 the cost. I seriously doubt that they will find many buyers for a $100,000 Corvette, especially with such strong aftermarket support these cars have. Supercharger is nice, but for the ultimate power, twin-turbo is the only way to go

c2jones

They have so many buyers piling up on the list that dealers are asking as much as twice the price in some areas. I am doing the dance with dealers now to get on that list. The beauty of ZR1 is that one is getting all those supercar attributes (handmade carbonfiber panels and hood, special personally built engine like AMG, same brakes as 599/Veyron, etc., etc.) all under factory warranty, serviceable at any GM dealership. (Those brakes are options on Ferrari at $20K and standard only on the $1M Veyron, by way of example.)

If one is willing to go aftermarket, and roll the dice, well, then everything changes. If its just a case of performance for the money, one could have a 800-1000 BHP crate engine on boost, etc., and have racecar like capability. Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, Toyota, Honda, etc., all will gladly accommodate you.

The trick is to get as much as you possibly can without voiding the warranty and otherwise altering the car too much. ZR1 offers quite a package - a supercar under warranty that can be serviced practically anywhere. Also bear in mind that at Barrett Jackson auctions, ZR1's have already sold for $1M plus. (I posted links in this thread on that.)

Just something to consider.

Imahobo

I guess if you're intent on buying one of those pieces of crap you might want to do it soon. I'm sure that when Obama becomes President, he'll increase CAFE standards enough to discourage GM from "hand-making (ha-ha)" gas sucking engines.

c2jones

Another half-wit spouting off about things they know nothing about. That "piece of crap" has better reliability ratings than any MB you own and, are you referencing gas-sucking?

Corvette does not even suffer a gas-guzzler's tax.

Is that the case with your 55 or 550?

But what would you know.

transferred

Wow. Lot of anger.

Z06 will put power down better than ZR1 from a stop.

SL2003driver

strange how everyone that disagrees with you is a idiot

c2jones

Sometimes I get frustrated with all these dated, primitive perceptions on Corvette. The "piece of crap" thing triggered that. If that person had bothered to read this thread before they uttered their waywardly erroneous comment, they would see the preponderance of evidence fully countering such silly notions. There is a bulk of information totally flying in the face of this person's ridiculous comment.

And on the gas-guzzling issue, this person, along with many of the uninformed (and the MB people here are just as bad as anywhere else) on this topic, is clearly wrong.

Tell that to all the MB people who buy 65's and are surprised that the 600's are beating them in the 1/4 mile because of the 65's inability to hook up. This thread was supposed to be about 65 and ZR1. And, as far as this "putting down better" aspect, not sure where you're going with that, but the bottom line is that ZR1 is superior to Z06 (and most production cars anywhere) in the 1/4 and well beyond.

c2jones

Nothing strange about it, because we're not talking about opinions to be agreed or disagreed upon. We're talking about facts. Quality for Corvette is right on par today and as a forum sponsor just stated here, Germans report GM more reliable and desirable than MB, in Germany. Corvette suffers no gas-guzzler's tax. This is not true of any MB, "handmade" engines and all from AMG. This is fact. Making ludicrous comments usually will draw some countering. It goes with the territory. If not from me, then someone else. People not agreeing with me does me no disservice. I merely react to credulous comments in the same manner in which they were casted. That's all.

And you are amongst the last here to be leveraging points about the mannerisms of others. Just reread your comments about ***** sizes and all that other weak, petty juvenile content, with substance at the nil level.

Germancar1

Yep which is why you need to turn the record over. Likewise there are many who drive Corvettes and deal with their ****-poor quality interiors and cheap rattling bodies because the car can "peform".




Yep, which I why I don't know why you keep bringing this BS up with ME. I haven't made any excuses. I have clearly and fully admitted that MB made some clunkers during their darkest years, roughly 1998-2005, depending on the chassis/model.

But the lights damn near went out for GM didn't they? Other than performance cars like the Corvette have nothing else to stand on which is why their most ardent fans really can't comprhenend anything beyond the dollar/hp ratio.

True, doesn't apply to me though. I want a VW GTI for a daily driver and I couldn't care less what anyone thinks of it.


Yep just like GM did when they thought trucks and SUVs were invincible and that their sales would never dry up. GM has heaved so many POS cars on the road and made a profit on them for so long that when things changed they had to damn near go out of business to only begin making better cars. A

Please spare me this BS with singling about Mercedes-Benz. ALL luxury car markers appeal to vanity. Have you seen a Cadillac commercial lately? For that matter sports car do to. There is no where on an U.S. road that you can use a 638hp Corvette anywhere near its full potential so it all has a twinge vanity and want, not need and sensibility. Like GM doesn't pander to this same crowd or at least wants too.


It isn't, but what you constantly ignore here is that I haven't made any excuses for MB. I fully spelled out their problem children and the years they were made.

Here is the problem. Again forget Mercedes-Benz. Your average GM car isn't put together as good as your average Toyota, Honda, or VW. If a person who drives a Buick Lacrosse thinks it is high-quality they obviously don't know what a high quality car is! People can be "satisfied" all they wan't, doesn't mean that what they have is class leading or even head of the class.

No I don't label what you've just stated as excuse making. I'd say it is was just a person who doens't know any better. YES, what you've tried to do here is make an excuse for the Corvette. Just because it can perform or outperform it doesn't have to be as well built as other sports cars. That is your excuse.


Some people are. You mean you can't see that? Of course you can't. When GM built their worst junk people still said "they're good cars". Now you have guys like Lutz who tells the truth from time to time when it admits that GM did a ****-poor job for years and year.


M

Germancar1

We wouldn't be having this discussion if that were possible.

Nope, it starts when you sit in one. The sheer smell of cheap plastics and rubbermaid materials. It is reality, nothing "preconceived" about it. Benz interiors are superior when it comes to build quality. Only the most ridiculous of GM excuse makers would even question this. Erogonomics and other things such superiority isn't assured for a Benz, but build quality. Man it isn't even a contest.

I can't help but laugh here. Here is that problem again, not knowing what interior quality is about. You point to a "upgraded leather option" as justification for a 100K. God man you're lost. I can get leather in a Hyundai! Performancewise yes the ZR-1 is worth every penny of that 100K, but all I'm saying is that the interior should at least be better than a run of the mill 30K GM car! A CTS has a better interior!



Why in the world should I have to do that on a 100K car. When you don't get it you really don't get it. What other 100K car on the market do you need to run to the aftermarket to make the interior worth of the original asking price? That is just plum ridiculous.

M

Germancar1

You just don't get it do you? More leather on top of cheap plastics and flimsly seats do not an upgrade make. You really need to spend some time in some of GM's newer cars. Try a CTS on for size, arguably the best interior GM has at the moment and its superiority has nothing to do with leather! My god. This "its upgraded" because it has better leather is the lamest thing I've yet heard.


Likewise you're willing to accept shody build and flimsy materials because of greater peformance.



ANO I DID NOT! What part of that don't you get? If I'm doing that you're doing the same thing, only the other way around. You'll put reliability and performance on a pedestal, while accepting junky build quality and cheap plastics crammed everywhere.


Nice tap dance around the fact that Porsche is a sports car maker with 100K sports cars that shame your Corvette in overall quality. Last I checked Porsche didn't build a "luxury car". Only a luxury SUV and that is something new for them. For you to sit here and try to call Porsche a luxury car maker is just disingenuous to say the least. You know damn well they made their name and continue to make sports cars morseo than luxury cars. Porsches could be call luxury goods, but they aren't luxury cars.

True, because they scrimped out on everything else to get it to that price point, that is the point nothing more.

You get what you pay for, blistering performance and cheapo everything else that isn't related to that performance.


M

Germancar1

Really? The Mercedes S-Class just ranked #1 in JD Power's Initial Quality Survey as did the E-Class and get this.....SL. BOOM. You don't know what you're talking about. You've got to get a new set of facts or better yet actually research them before posting! FYI these are the very same cars that in previous years were at the bottom of this very same survey!

SL: http://www.jdpower.com/autos/mercede...07/Convertible

S-Class: http://www.jdpower.com/autos/mercedes/s-class/2007

E-Class: http://www.jdpower.com/autos/mercede...***/2007/sedan

These models have been big problems for MB in the past, even in this little "initial quality" survey, especially the E and SL. The S-Class was a brand new model for 2007 yet it placed ahead of every other car in the survey. If that doesn't at the very least say Mercedes quality is changing for the better I don't know what does. At the very least it is a start. Even you should be able to understand that since you believe everything a survey tells you about a Corvette.


Oh yeah I forgot, Ferrari uses the same shocks as the Corvette because they got them from the same supplier. WOW. Yeah the Germans are copying GM. Uh...you know that Ferrari isn't German right? Oh yeah Audi uses the same fluid shocks in the R8. WOW. Stunning.


No arguement from me there. It has the makings of a true collectable if GM doesn't cave into market demands and build too many of them.


Just like you think that adding more leather to what is a bascially ill-built interior qualifies as some type of "upgrade" as far a MB's quality I just proved you don't know what you're talking about. Just like you think the problems with the Corvette's interior is solved by slathering on more leather. Yep it does go both ways, only this time it doesn't because your notion about MB's quality not improving wrong as hell.


Same old song and dance. Reliability and peformance is great, but it can be built like crap. Again your hadit of your preference as a EXCUSE.


What are you talking about? You have the specs on the SL65 Black Series already? Due tell. Guy carbon fiber and composite materials have been used for years before now. Mercedes has tinkered with this for a while now, the previous generation CL from 2000-2006 for one, used composites:

http://www.mbusa.com/overview/2001/C...ClassCode=null

This has been in use long before the ZR-1! The SL65 BS isn't "duplicating" squat from a Corvette.


If I'm not mistaken Audi and Acura did this years ago with the first generation A8 and NSX.


Well I have offered proof of just that concerning the SL. See above.


Oh right its just the Corvette that is perfect right?


Just like you'd tell all the Corvette owners that nothing else matters other than hp and 0-60 times and G's on the skidpad. You'd tell them that they have the best interior upgrades going because more leather has been stapled onto the cheap dashboard and that the seats are flimsy because they're "lightweight". Yep the GM excuse makers would love you, some here already do.



Nope, wrong again. The evidence presented hints at the former and any sane person sitting in Corvette can confirm the latter.



And what the hell are you doing about all the JUNK Corvettes that are still on the road? Do we need to get into what previous generation Corvettes were like. PURE CRAP, RATTLETRAP JUNK. Benzes were not! If Benz's previous boo-boos are still releavent then so are the Corvettes. I didn't say that the past didn't matter, I'm saying that you're stuck in it with the continued used of outdated information. If a past Benz was junk than a past Corvette was OMG less than that. The C5 and C4 were nothing but TRASH.


Then why don't they try to at least present it as being as "expensive" as it is. I have never seen a car so "expensively built" (per you) that felt, smelled and looked so cheap. You're still lost in thinking that leather dashboards is what makes quality. That is just icing on the cake for the world's best when it comes to interior quality. Tell me what is your excuse for the Corvette having such flimsy seats? Do seats not factor into performance? Just dying to hear what excuse you'll come up with now! You mean to tell me that the might GM couldn't ok some better seats and plastic that don't reek or Rubbermaid material in their 50K+...100K sports car? Oh I forgot the ZR-1 will have all this plastic wrapped in leather. The GM loyalist definition of an "upagrade". Sad.


Likewise.


Great exaggerated. Neither is build quality I gather from you latest excuse making round of posts.





Ahh..the grandest signoff (EXCUSE) of them all. No one said the Corvette should have a luxury car interior, only one that is better than 40K Cadillac seeing as how the 2 cars are built by the same company. One shouldn't have to run to the aftermarket for interior work on a 100K!!!! That is beyond said that you proffer such an option! The SL65 Black Series isn't "duplicating" anything that hasn't been done before on other cars! Period. You just keep chanting about reliability and I'll just keep harping about how junky the Corvette is. Keep thinking that just because the same interior supplier is used that this automatically means a Corvette and a Benz have the same interior quality. Nothing could be more ridiculous. Any sighted person can tell that this isn't the case.

Yet I bet that because Ferrari and other used the same supplier that doesn't automatically mean they deliver the same peformance does it?


M

Germancar1

Correct it isn't. I can't believe you're that lost to actually believe that same supplier = same interior quality. Read what you posted! The supplier in question only supplies certain pieces for Mercedes and Corvette. This the same thing GM has done with the STS-V and XLR-V only to come up short against the class leaders in interior appointments for those vehicles. What part of this don't you get? The same supplier doesn't mean the same quality or overall presentation.

May not be, they aren't even close!

What does this have to do with wether or not it is high quality or not. People had no misgivings with many of GM's clunkers? What does this prove other than a) they don't know what interior quality is or b) they don't care?

Advanced composites and handmade engines and panels have what to do with interior and build quality? Again, more smear tactics for the discussed issue.


Lame, lame, lame. This shouldn't have to be done on a 100K.


.

No it didn't. No one, or at least I, ever questioned the ZR-1's value regarding peformance. You brought value and reliability up because you needed something to counter the Corvette's junky build.

What you refuse to address is that lesser GM cars are better built as are other SPORTS CARS, yet you'll keep bringing up that MB is a luxury car when in fact other makes aren't luxury car and they're better built. You have yet to address this other than a half-arsed attempt to call Porsche a "luxury car maker".


M

Germancar1

Yet at the end of the day your 100K Corvette still has a ****-poor quality interior compared to the a run of the mill 70K Benz or, or, or any other comparably priced SPORTS CAR!


Really then you apparently you didn't look hard enough and the people you "corresponded with" don't know squat! READ THIS FROM MOTOR TREND'S DIRECT COMPARISION OF THE CLS55 AMG AND THE STS-V:

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING HERE. SAME SUPPLIER DIFFERENT OVERALL PRODUCT PRESENTATION!!!!!!!! Again you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about and neither do you your correspondents!

Motor Trend sums up exactly what I've been saying, you can't add leather and fancy sticthing to an interior that was a cheap mess to begin with and expect it to match the competition. POOF! There goes your same supplier = same quality theory. This is the same reason why adding leather and other trinkets to a Corvette interior DOES NOT put it on the same level with other 100K cars no matter what other brand is.

Your correspondents says that it "works for them"? Insert laughter. Hell the interior a Saturn ION "worked" for a lot of people too! What does that prove or mean?


I wish I had this issue in front of me because they don't give the fit and finish scores online. Where did the Cadillac rank in this regard with them?


It does, just doesn't match a Benz or Audi.



I love it! Is that all u got? The woulda, shoulda, coulda excuse. If this had happened and if that had happened. Guy that is so lame. It didn't happen. The CLS has a better interior. Period. Get over it. Yet you forget to post the entire quote where MT gets to the root of the problem, trying add quality to a originally cheap design! That is the problem, which you'll never grasp. Uh...Motor Trend didn't "wish" for anythings, that is your nonsense. They called it as they saw it.


I love it, more deflection. You just can't admit that your weak same supplier = same quality theory has been blown out of the water can you you? Yeah the Corvette has improved


So once again, the assertions that reviewers have “pointed out over and over” supposed lesser standards of Draxlmaier’s work with Cadillac and that “This isn't news to me, Cadillac made a big deal about it with the STS-V only to have the same old complaints about GM's interior being cheap come right back,” are, again, repeatedly incorrect.

You'd like to think this because YOU DIDN'T POST THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH FROM MOTOR TREND! They clearly stated that a "PATCH JOB" doesn't cut it when Mercedes started out with a higher quality interior to begin with.

Did you really think I wasn't going to remember that comparo and not post all of what Motor Trend acutally said? Oh you GM excuse makers are so easy to prove wrong its laughable. You left out the meat of the quote!!! Which was:

"The v treatment is added to an STS interior, but falls short of its luxury intentions. This (admittedly good) patch job can't match an interior designed richly from the carpeting up, especially now that Mercedes is rebounding on interior quality."


BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Which is exactly what you tried to do here by posting half of the quote MT made on the STS-V's interior quality!!! Talk about BS artist.

You're way to hard on yourself. You couldn't help but post half of the quote in question because other other half blows your theories right out of the water.


Yet what does this mean? Do you really think GM is paying the same price a Bugatti is? Do you really think the supplier ships out the same quality of work no matter what the price is? Do you really think a Corvette has anything in common with a Bugatti? This may be your most delusional statement or sly implication yet. A CORVETTE DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME INTERIOR QUALITY AS A BUGATTI OR MERCEDES-BENZ BECAUSE THE SAME SUPPLIER SUPPLIED CERTAIN COMPONENTS. Those car's interior unlike the Vette were designed with quality from the start, not added latter. The supplier in question HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STANDARD CORVETTE INTERIOR, WHICH IS THE STARTING POINT FOR THE UPGRADES!!! Which is why those Cadillacs and the Corvette still can't match the competition on the area of interiors!


They aren't equal. What part of that don't you get! You brought up a MT quote and then left the main part of it off!!! If that is trying to cover up and dismiss the facts then I don't know what is!!!!!

Perception? BS. It is fact, you just elected not to post all of them.

M

Germancar1

Yep you have no trouble posting that. I've said right here from the very begining that the CTS has a great interior, especially for a GM car.

Funny how you posted that, yet you left the part about the STS-V's interior being a patch job and how it didn't measure up, out of your posts.


Real food for thought!


M

ItalianStallion

I feel bad for the people who actually read all of these posts...

You boys need to chill!

c2jones

Its always voluntary. But I hear you. German was out of this thread for quite a while, then, out-of-the-blue, he now has all this to say, all well after the fact. He has nothing that isn't easily countered, but this thread is getting more into the quality standards and to what defines them than any real comparison between two cars (which are not even in the same target market unless we're talking 65 Black Series), at least with he and I.

Others want to talk GTR or juvenile content (***** sizes, etc.). So, not all is quality content - for what is, most of this has already been hashed and we're talking in circles now. I'll try to limit my responses to what is pertinent and hasn't already been covered.

novabenz

c2jones:
I'm baaaaaaaaaaaccccccccccccccccccck!
The GTR will eat the Corvette for lunch - especially when someone gets to drive and sit in each of them.
Let's see if Nissan will have to offer $7,000.00 incentives 4 years after the GTR is launched.
Most people under 60 will go for the GTR and it's MUCH BETTER interior, not to mention the hotter looking body styling.
If someone is looking to score looks from young women, the GTR is the way to go.
The Corvette is great for guys who answer to the name the "Fonzie" and rock out to "Happy Days" music while driving.
You can talk all you want, but the 'Vette (while an American icon) is still considered by many to be an older man's car.
Remember this saying - "you can sell an old man a young man's car, but you can't sell a young man an old man's car."
Also, if Corvette is using the same cow for leather as Mercedes Benz, then Benz is getting the filet mignon cuts and Corvette the rump roast.......

c2jones

German, I had a full response ready, and then there was a problem with the server as I lost all what I had. Full rebuttal coming, but efficient and countering the redundancy that you make pattern of. Will dissect you thoroughly.

c2jones

Reading through your responses, way too much of the time you are addressing items that are to be countered or readdressed in the same posting (just a few spaces down the page) and often (too often) you are addressing your own inquiries with my previous words that you (inadvertently but conveniently) quote that cover all what you presented. Too much redundancy. I will attempt to stick only to the central points, dealing with your typos, to translate intent.

You DO make excuses. You suggest that as long as build quality is sound, that reliability matters less, as if reliability was not part of the full quality aspect. Just wrong altogether. Once you admitted that everything makes up what quality is defined as, but true to form, you lose your way and go back to splitting them up. This is clearly reflective of an internally motivated ingredient within you, more than any clear consensus on the matter.

Nope. No excuses necessary. There is simply no consensus that it is not well-built, much less totally reliant upon performance to offset said quality. Simple.

Fittingly and tellingly, terms like "rattletrap, junky, cheapo," etc., are not intellectual terms. These are terms used by the bias intoxicants, and this undermines the overall wherewithal of the writer.

With regard to ZR1, the premise of this discussion, no one worth their salt, certainly no one within the major automotive journalism arena will even remotely concur with this outlandish assessment.

What is "plum" (a deep south term...) ridiculous is that somehow you have anything remotely resembling a worthy consensus that this car, interior and all, will not be worth the overall asking price, all things considered. Dealers are getting twice the asking price now and, auctions have acquired $1M USD. I know of no recent production MB doing this. So, "worth the asking price" is extremely relative to the consumer.

A very astute forum sponsor here made an important, very valid point that the remotely balanced and composed mind can easily appreciate: "...don't knock current GM quality against MBZ build quality. If you read AUTOMOTOR UND SPORT, and SPORT AUTO, the main enthusiast magazines in Germany, you will find that MBZ is rated about 10th in quality among the brands sold in Germany...by Germans. BMW is low too. Audi and the Japanese cars are higher, so is Cadillac and Buick."

This vendor has customers all over the world. On an overall scope, perceptions are as diversified as the people that have them. Everything must be kept in proper perspective.

c2jones

Oh please. What a desperate attempt at a point to leverage. Does anyone deny that Porsches are sportcars that are known for their luxury, too? Your luxury "goods" will work; message is the same. My point stands.

There will surely be no consensus here. Everyone whom is someone in the automotive industry, would cast no such preposterous allegation.

Could you have me know what exactly this has to do with the price of tea in China? No initial quality report does anything in the way of offsetting the point. I am stating that the jury is still out. Initial means just that, not overall or longterm. Besides, all this does is confirm that the fit and finish issues left something to be desired previously, as I contended and you disputed. You kept dividing reliability and build quality, saying that the build quality was fine and that only reliability was of matter. So much for that. And for someone that put no stock in surveys to be using this of all things to attempt a point, speaks volumes. Time will tell. But let's hope things are bettering with MB. I have plans for further models. Their reliability would do well to rank where it should for all the expense of the car, all while you chastise Corvette while it has good ratings. Such double standards.

Yeah, despite all your alleged "research," you end up "forgetting" and being stunned quite often. We're not talking about just using the same supplier, we're talking about licensed components from GM. GM designed and engineered these components that other brands are now making use of. And it does not end with those shocks either. (You first implied that there were no such components, then when cited, you simply try to sweep it under the rug as if you had ample insight in the first place.)

As if reliability was not important to build quality. And I never concurred that Corvette was built like crap, those were your words, and that you place so much focus on interior cabins adorning you in luxury beyond all else (especially when we're talking about supercars no less) is absolutely pathetic, and again, quite telling.

Ferri

Holy smokes, a couple of you REALLY have some serious time to burn...

c2jones

Earth to German, this discussion is about the SL BS duplicating a performance design of Z06 and ZR1, which it has. SL's are power hardtop convertibles. You cite a CL link to make a point about composites? That was NOT the point, silly. The current SL (once standing for, are you ready? "super light," believe it or not) is anything but light, and the BS is going with fixed carbonfiber roof panels (like Z06 and ZR1) to reduce weight. No more convertible with this SL. It is going towards the supercar market and saving weight to do so in the SAME interest as Corvette. Very simple there Shurlock.

Being exclusive was not the point. You implied denial of what components it had that were being used or coveted by others.

You are saying that the past does not matter, and as evidence of this you're looking to relegate the recent past (with cars very much still on the road with plenty of payments remaining...!) to the distant past. The information is not outdated whatsoever. And this conversation was NEVER about comparing the history of these vehicles in terms of quality. Only that the Corvette is markedly improving and has made a special supercar worthy of the ticket, and as MB had its share of reliability issues, recent initial quality reports will not offset this. You elected to bash ZR1 with all this cheapo thing - this will not hold up.

There were some in this very thread that felt that their Corvette seats were amongst the best they've had. Certainly, this flimsy thing is just another personal dig more than anything else.

No one said that one MUST run to the aftermarket whatsoever. Many are quite pleased with the way one can receive the car straightup. What I said was, IF one must have their vain rear-ends wrapped in plush utopia in their supercar, one can do this much more reasonably in ZR1 versus the massive amounts asked of other exotics. One can have interior above the level of SL65 all with the performance of ZR1 and STILL do this for less than the cost of the former. That was the only point. Not all would need to do this with a supercar - just people like you.

Precisely. Its a personal matter with you.

At least you're admitting now that its more that just the supplying of leather and stitching as you said before. Its actually the console and other aspects, too. The vendor does not draw the distinction you are.

Sweet confirmation. Just look how ridiculously disparate you're becoming - worse than ever. The topic was the grade of interiors, not performance. So your example has no application, even if facetious. You cannot even stick within the topic as you reach for points. Talk about sad. That's it in a nutshell.

The particular discussion was about packaging; what one gets for the price. You were harping on the overall worthiness of the ($100K) cost issue. And talk about smear tactics: just reread your lowly self with all this "junky, flimsy, shoddy, cheapo, crap, trash" words. You are nothing if not a smear tactic traducer in the foremost degree. Makes you look like some of these puerile types here. Real shame. I thought you were better than that.

The topic, again, was overall worthiness of the price, something you have continued to malign. Reliability is important to most people. You would rather have your car broken down on the road, just as long as you can look at plush interior as its towed in. You can always show the towing crew that at least its not "junky" like all those cars that are driving by us right now. That's a real personal problem.

c2jones

Something like that I guess. I have been fortunate enough to place myself in position to where my money works for me instead of me working for my money. Still, the time could be used better elsewhere, no question. But this is really not so all time consuming as I type fast and can get this all out easily.

c2jones

This is not at all the case. I think the message is pretty clear to understand.

With regard to ZR1 (remember the thread premise - yeah, that one), they both share the same interior vendor and of course, let's not forget that they share the same brakes, standard. Of course, they don't share the same vehicle pricing, though. That's the value of ZR1.

Point is, this car, ZR1 has a complete package, all things considered, that is certainly worthy of the price. Everything else is pandering and posturing.