[No65mph]

Originally Posted by Year's_End

Honestly the first time I've heard an opinion like this about the C7. I've seen nothing but praise about it.

It's a nice car don't get me wrong, but I have been down the vette road far too long for with far too many issues. The reason why I am gunning for an M3 is because it's simply a better built car. The C6 to was a terrible machine in my opinion. I know many people will say it's great and whatnot and to them it is, but when GM builds a car, their accountants and lawyers build them. Cheap plastic this, crappy seats, rubber and plastic interior, leaf springs, creaks and moans when you run it hard, terrible fit and finish. I really have tried to like this car but cannot. Every time I jump into an m3 or C63 I feel like the car is built with far more engineering and care with much better materials. This is just my take guys, I figured I would toss in my 2 cents of useless advice.

[No65mph]

Originally Posted by Petros

Speaking of "cheap" build, my M3 has the rubber coating on the steering wheel totally peeling off, the coating on the door handles beginning to peel off, the powersteering reservoir oozes fluid at the track because of the crappy oil cooler not up to the task, and those fabulous monopiston sliding calipers that fade after a couple of laps on the track.

And speaking of better drives, definitely nothing better than persistent understeer like my M3 does at the track.

Yea, you're right. Corvettes are so "cheap" and "inferior" to the M3 indeed

On my old C6 I had the left side blinker stick break off, rear breaks stuck on after a track session, drivers side seat bolster completely break away from the seat, cracked roof panel, AC leak, oil leak from rear main seal area (Never found out if it was the main seal) Drivers side window completely fall off it's track and shatter inside door frame, rear bumper misaligned from factory could never figure out how to fix, and bad computer set up with regards to timing and slightly bad fuel issues. I bought the car new and I am very good with care and driving. Can you beat that?

[hellrotm]

I don't like the C6 either, would not own one. But I do respect the performance of the C6 Z06.

I have a different opinion on the C7. The one I test drove was nicer inside than my M3 (it was 3LT trim level, Z51). It was a blast to drive. It could be my first American car.

[No65mph]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

I don't like the C6 either, would not own one. But I do respect the performance of the C6 Z06.

I have a different opinion on the C7. The one I test drove was nicer inside than my M3 (it was 3LT trim level, Z51). It was a blast to drive. It could be my first American car.

I have very mixed feeling for obvious reasons. The seats in the new car are vastly better than in mine. It is a fun car to drive, don't get me wrong. But the entire body has not changed and is very cheap feeling. You can push in the rear plastic bumper cover in 3 inches. It was the same on mine. I don't know, after going through what I went though and seeing some others just as bad, I have big reservations on the vette. Just the feel of the buttons on my old car felt very cheap and ready to break at any time. Which one of them did, but that was an easy fix, but I still think the m3 is a better overall car. It's not faster, but it's better. To me there that is a big big difference.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by No65mph

I have very mixed feeling for obvious reasons. The seats in the new car are vastly better than in mine. It is a fun car to drive, don't get me wrong. But the entire body has not changed and is very cheap feeling. You can push in the rear plastic bumper cover in 3 inches. It was the same on mine. I don't know, after going through what I went though and seeing some others just as bad, I have big reservations on the vette. Just the feel of the buttons on my old car felt very cheap and ready to break at any time. Which one of them did, but that was an easy fix, but I still think the m3 is a better overall car. It's not faster, but it's better. To me there that is a big big difference.

Yup, difference of opinions. I am over M3's for a while, owned too many BMW's. My C7 experience was far different from yours. I like the new look of the C7, basically because it breaks the tradition. I enjoy seeing some of the old farts hating on the new C7 styling. While someone like me who has never liked any previous generation Vette, now likes this one. The exterior definitely has a Ferrari look to it. By the way you can push the bumpers in on my M3 as well, they are plastic.

[Petros]

Originally Posted by No65mph

It's a nice car don't get me wrong, but I have been down the vette road far too long for with far too many issues. The reason why I am gunning for an M3 is because it's simply a better built car. The C6 to was a terrible machine in my opinion. I know many people will say it's great and whatnot and to them it is, but when GM builds a car, their accountants and lawyers build them. Cheap plastic this, crappy seats, rubber and plastic interior, leaf springs, creaks and moans when you run it hard, terrible fit and finish. I really have tried to like this car but cannot. Every time I jump into an m3 or C63 I feel like the car is built with far more engineering and care with much better materials. This is just my take guys, I figured I would toss in my 2 cents of useless advice.

Do you think BMW or Merc don't have accountants and lawyers making decisions as well? All cars are built to a price point. Even an M3. Heck, they even switched the sunvisor material from fabric to plastic FFS, just to save a few bucks! And what about the crappy brakes, the small ineffective PS oil cooler, the cheapo trim coatings that always peel off, the flimsy plastic switches (my cruise ctrl stalk rattles like a mofo), are these not cost-cutting measures?

And the biggest cost-cutting move of all: the fact that an M3 or C63 are based on a grocerygetter/familycar platform, and not built on their own sportscar platform (something even a lowly FRS has).

For reference, the base C7 corvette that costs only 2/3 the cost of an M3 now comes with an aluminum spaceframe, the same as the Z06 and the C7R racecar! The F80 M3? Still the same big fat steel unibody of the average 3 series grocery getter. But for some mysterious reason it will cost 1.5 times the price of a C7 Vette

Originally Posted by No65mph

On my old C6 I had the left side blinker stick break off, rear breaks stuck on after a track session, drivers side seat bolster completely break away from the seat, cracked roof panel, AC leak, oil leak from rear main seal area (Never found out if it was the main seal) Drivers side window completely fall off it's track and shatter inside door frame, rear bumper misaligned from factory could never figure out how to fix, and bad computer set up with regards to timing and slightly bad fuel issues. I bought the car new and I am very good with care and driving. Can you beat that?

Wow, that sounds bad. But are those issues common and well known problems? Or did you just get a lemon? If it's a lemon then it doesn't really mean much since there are lemons in every car model. But I do agree the interior of a C6 is rubbish. Everyone knows it. But the C7 is totally different. I sat in it and it was amazing how good it is. It was far more attractive than the M3 interior.

[No65mph]

Originally Posted by Petros

Do you think BMW or Merc don't have accountants and lawyers making decisions as well? All cars are built to a price point. Even an M3. Heck, they even switched the sunvisor material from fabric to plastic FFS, just to save a few bucks! And what about the crappy brakes, the small ineffective PS oil cooler, the cheapo trim coatings that always peel off, the flimsy plastic switches (my cruise ctrl stalk rattles like a mofo), are these not cost-cutting measures?

Does the comp car have better brakes? To be honest at Laguna Seca I have never faded the brakes on a competition m3 and I have hammered it pretty good. The oil cooler can be changed out, but yes they should have a bigger one if it's a problem on the track. I had a transmission oil cooler for my 67 Camaro when I ran it. I never thought the switches and dials felt cheap like they do on a vette. That was my problem with GM cars and Ford. They always felt cheap.

And the biggest cost-cutting move of all: the fact that an M3 or C63 are based on a grocerygetter/familycar platform, and not built on their own sportscar platform (something even a lowly FRS has).

I think the market is changing from a sports car world to a "do all" world where you have super sedans and super coupes with 4 seats. Sales seem to suggest this somewhat with all the new and high HP cars sedans. 10 years ago I was always looking for the fastest this or the best handling that, but now that I am 43 I want a do it all car. The c63 and m3 do that. You can track them, and you can get the kids from the sitter and have ice cream while taking the family out.

For reference, the base C7 corvette that costs only 2/3 the cost of an M3 now comes with an aluminum spaceframe, the same as the Z06 and the C7R racecar! The F80 M3? Still the same big fat steel unibody of the average 3 series grocery getter. But for some mysterious reason it will cost 1.5 times the price of a C7 Vette

Well there are 2 sides of this. What Aluminum is GM using? Is it a high end alloy or a cheap one? I can tell you without a doubt that the interior components, the wiring, the computers, the software, the suspension design are all better on the European cars. The use of plastic, rubber and the terrible leather GM uses are no where near the quality of the M3 and mercs. Vette owners typically see leather issues on seats after 40k. There is not any other leather in the interior other than the seats from what I can tell. Maybe there is on some higher end models, but my c6 had it just on the seats with vinyl everywhere else. The Vette even the C7 still had a LEAF SPRING set up for gods sake. I am trying not to bash the Vette, I know there are a ton of happy Vette owners that would blast me for saying this stuff, but I have had my issues with American cars, and the Mustang and Vette top my list of poorly built cars that just are not built up to what I would call a good standard. It took till 2014 to put an IRS on a mustang for pete's sake. Even the 80's civic had an IRS. But do this for a test. When you drive down the streets on a day to day basis, look for 70's and 80's bmw's, Porsche 911's Merc's and look for the same year in the Vette. You just don't see that many older Vetts that made it this long. At east here in the bay area. Sorry for the rant guys. I didn't mean to jack this thread with my venom, but after driving a few M3's and dealing with Vetts, I am or will be a converted M3 owner.


Wow, that sounds bad. But are those issues common and well known problems? Or did you just get a lemon? If it's a lemon then it doesn't really mean much since there are lemons in every car model. But I do agree the interior of a C6 is rubbish. Everyone knows it. But the C7 is totally different. I sat in it and it was amazing how good it is. It was far more attractive than the M3 interior.

Yes it's possible I had a lemon, which is why I sold it for a big loss after 10k miles. I hated that car.

[No65mph]

Whoops, I wrote this a bit wrong inside the box. I hope everyone can read it. Sorry guys.

[hellrotm]

3LT Brownstone interior is amazing. I want this on a black Z51 coupe. New C7 interiors absolutely own the C6.

[MikeRR]

I am totally happy with my Z06, but I don't use it on daily basis. Yes it is not build like a german car but when it comes to pure driving pleasure, I forgive it all its minor flaws.
I have driven all actual M cars and none comes close, it just gives me a grin everytime I put the pedal down.
Now when it comes to a daily driver, here in Switzerland id go for the M4 because it is more practical, more comfortable, better built. But having visited the US, a C7 won't be a problem to drive arround, your roads are more suited.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by No65mph

It's a nice car don't get me wrong, but I have been down the vette road far too long for with far too many issues. The reason why I am gunning for an M3 is because it's simply a better built car. The C6 to was a terrible machine in my opinion. I know many people will say it's great and whatnot and to them it is, but when GM builds a car, their accountants and lawyers build them. Cheap plastic this, crappy seats, rubber and plastic interior, leaf springs, creaks and moans when you run it hard, terrible fit and finish. I really have tried to like this car but cannot. Every time I jump into an m3 or C63 I feel like the car is built with far more engineering and care with much better materials. This is just my take guys, I figured I would toss in my 2 cents of useless advice.

With all the articles I've read on the C7 from journalists who are far more versed in the Corvette and BMWs than most of us are or will be, all of the issues you cite have been addressed with the complete redesign of the C7 Stingray. There has not been one article I've read that has not said the C7 is an entirely different car than the C6 in terms of drivability, performance, design and build quality. One article did suggest the exterior design is "busy" and the rear end is too big (doesn't hide its "tallness"), but that is subjective at least; I find the C7 rear design much more detailed than the C6.

You think BMWs and Mercedes are built with better materials, but they are built with the same materials as most every other automobile. The effective use and design of the materials may be better engineered in some cases. The major cost element of any car is manufacturing cost, be it in labor rates and labor hours and the factory machinery used to make parts, sub assemblies, and final assembly. From the off-the-road evaluation I've done on how the C7 is engineered and built, it looks to me GM gave the designers and engineers (and I mean the manufacturing engineers too) free reign to make the most effective use of the budgets provided to them to design and manufacture the C7 at the target price point set for it.

As others have pointed out, the C7 has an light-weight and superbly strong aluminum frame, and it uses advanced composites (nano carbon-fiber) for many parts of the body structure. On top of that the car employs advanced engine control technologies to develop a powerful, light-weight, compact and fuel efficient engine. You make the C7 sound cheap and flimsy, breakable, and poorly engineered (apparently by accountants and lawyers only), which none of the information released about the car, nor independent reviews of actually driving it and evaluating the execution of its design and manufacture, indicate is true.

I seriously doubt BMW could achieve the same result as GM has developing and manufacturing a car that offers the same performance and build quality at a similar price point.

[No65mph]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

With all the articles I've read on the C7 from journalists who are far more versed in the Corvette and BMWs than most of us are or will be, all of the issues you cite have been addressed with the complete redesign of the C7 Stingray. There has not been one article I've read that has not said the C7 is an entirely different car than the C6 in terms of drivability, performance, design and build quality. One article did suggest the exterior design is "busy" and the rear end is too big (doesn't hide its "tallness"), but that is subjective at least; I find the C7 rear design much more detailed than the C6.

Ok, well I have also driven the car and yes I do believe it is a total redesign, they had too. But if you go back and read road and track, car and driver and motor trend they all say that every new Corvette is a complete "redesign from the ground up". type of thing. In fact the C5 which is known to be a terrible car actually won the 1998 car of the year from Motor Trend so I don't put much stock into what journalists say. The car is too new yet to really know how it is.

You think BMWs and Mercedes are built with better materials, but they are built with the same materials as most every other automobile. The effective use and design of the materials may be better engineered in some cases. The major cost element of any car is manufacturing cost, be it in labor rates and labor hours and the factory machinery used to make parts, sub assemblies, and final assembly. From the off-the-road evaluation I've done on how the C7 is engineered and built, it looks to me GM gave the designers and engineers (and I mean the manufacturing engineers too) free reign to make the most effective use of the budgets provided to them to design and manufacture the C7 at the target price point set for it.

No, wrong on your first point. BMW and Mercedes are built with different materials than what GM puts in their cars. In fact I will go a point further. Japanese cars are built with different materials than both. Here is an example. My C6 that I only owned for 10k miles started to show wear on the drivers seats, a lot of vette owners have had issues starting at the 40k mark from rips and tears in the leather. The plastics GM uses are of cheaper grades that what Merc's or BMW's use. Google GM and cheap interiors and you will have enough reading for days, but here is a short little tidbit. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...eriors-solved/

As others have pointed out, the C7 has an light-weight and superbly strong aluminum frame, and it uses advanced composites (nano carbon-fiber) for many parts of the body structure. On top of that the car employs advanced engine control technologies to develop a powerful, light-weight, compact and fuel efficient engine. You make the C7 sound cheap and flimsy, breakable, and poorly engineered (apparently by accountants and lawyers only), which none of the information released about the car, nor independent reviews of actually driving it and evaluating the execution of its design and manufacture, indicate is true.

The new frame is a big step forward, but just because it's aluminum doesn't mean it's better. It should be, yes, but is it? Time will tell. The new engine is also something to watch, it's too early to tell how it is going to be. Is the new C7 better than the C6, yes it should be, but the new C6 was better than the C5 and both of those cars were very problematic. I also didn't say that the C7 was flimsy and cheap, I said it feels cheap. The buttons and interior materials still seem less than what I was hoping for out of the car. Again it does feel better than my C6 did, but still not as nice of an interior than an M3. I would like to see some long term testing from some people and magazines to see how it is to live with day to day. Will it be better than the old one, yes. Will it be better to live with than a BMW or Merc, very doubtful if history has a say, but time will tell on the M4 and C7.

I seriously doubt BMW could achieve the same result as GM has developing and manufacturing a car that offers the same performance and build quality at a similar price point.

I agree, that's why the Merc and BMW are typically higher priced, because their better. The fit and finish is better, the interior materials are better and it just feels better driving down the road. They are better cars. I think it was Road and Track did a recent compare of the 911 Turbo and the new C7 and the Porsche won almost every single category going away, but when it came to price they decided to give the 911 a "0 and the Vette a "20" and the vette barley pulled out the win and everyone was in outrage that they did that to the Porsche. The new Turbo and Turbo S are substantially better cars than the new C7, no question about it, but they are also at a higher price. Porsche, BMW and Mercedes are considered a "Luxury" brand. GM is not.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Those quality BMW materials.

[swanson]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

Those quality BMW materials.

That comes standard in all their cars.

[The Automotive Enthusiast]

BMW's(Including M cars) are built around price. Now cars like Porsche are built around specifications.

[black335i]

Most C7 are going for 5-10 k at most socal dealers, so Im gonna hold off for a couple months and if allocation does not stop Im ordering one in Texas where I hear some dealers are charging MSRP or slightly less.

[black335i]

IMO the Z06 interior I have may look a little cheaper than the BMWs but at least its not as worn and all the electronics are working. My 335i quality on interior sucks, I had a 1980 trans am interior that didn't peel like this one lol.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by No65mph

Most of the magazines I've read conveyed that the C6 was not much of a redesign at all, and poorly executed at that and the C5 was not a significant step away from the C4 (which was a complete redesign).

Well the frame is better. It offers less weight and more rigidity, both are quantifiable measures. And you say BMWs and Mercedes are built with different materials, but limit your scope to the interior, so what. Pics here show BMW has not done well in that department, and there are hundreds of posts regarding noisy BMW interiors, let alone fuel and water pumps, cracked subframes, and Z8 cracked front aluminum structures. So lets call a spade a spade and not look through Roundel-colored glasses all the time.

I'll state again, I highly doubt BMW can come close to matching the Corvette performance and build quality at or near the same price. I will go further and say that GM is offereing equal performance product to BMW with the Cadillac ATS and CTS, and dare I say the XTS.

[majin ssj eric]

I absolutely love the new C7 but the interior still isn't up to par with other brands IMO. Don't get me wrong, its fine (and a huge improvement over any other Vette in that area) but its still too tacky looking somehow in design and material quality looks OK but just OK. At the same time I'd do almost anything to own a Z51 C7, interior be damned! It is a straight up incredible car for a straight up steal of a price (probably the real excuse for the just OK interior). Even though the E92 M3 remains my ultimate dream car, the C7 would be hard to turn down if it just had a back seat. As it is with a 3 year old I simply can't get a C7 no matter how much I'd love one...

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

I absolutely love the new C7 but the interior still isn't up to par with other brands IMO.

Let me know when BMW offers an alcantara interior option for the M3/M4.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

[Petros]

Originally Posted by No65mph

Um, no. BMW and Merc are not priced higher than GM cars because they are "better", they are priced higher because they have a badge that posers and snobs are willing to pay top dollar for. And dude, what kind of garbage are you smoking? A C7 aluminum frame is different but "not better" than an M3/M4 steel frame? An aluminum frame is racing technology. Just about the only thing better would have been a carbon fibre frame like a Mp4-12C, but the cost in that case would be prohibitive. Aluminum frames are just as strong as a steel equivalent while being significantly lighter and also having the benefit of being corrosion resistant. There are basically no downsides to aluminum other than cost, and that's the only reason why it isn't more widely used. For the reference, Ferrari also uses aluminum frames on their cars too.

Anyone can grab a run of the mill plain jane family car, drop a V8 in it, give it some stiffer suspension, and call it a day. That's what the likes of M3, C63, ISF, CTS-V are. It's a whole different beast altogether to create a bespoke purpose-built sports car platform from the ground up with the intention of performance and driving experience, and basing that platform on decades of racing technology to the point that some of the components of that car are almost identical to the ones used in the race car. It's even more impressive when all that is offered at a price point that any reasonably successful middle class person can afford; a price point that any average 3 series or C class can comfortably exceed.

[No65mph]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

Those quality BMW materials.

Ill take that over what I went though on my car. All day long. What year is this car btw?