Vellum Venom Vignette: Ridin' Spinners (Part II)

Sajeev Mehta
by Sajeev Mehta

I’d be a day late and a dollar short if I cared about being professional automotive journalist. To wit, we recently discussed how the digitally rendered C7 Stingray droptop Vette’s 5-spoke wheels look like a last-minute “virtual” hackjob for a looming deadline. The nice folks at Corvetteblogger show otherwise during their visit to the New York Auto Show: these hoops made production spinning the wrong way.

This is a new Corvette from the New GM, son. But this ain’t right.

We assume that the new, invigorated, not-beancounted General Motors does everything possible to make the C7 a credible threat to “le package totale” of sports cars, the Porsche 911. We know the stunning chassis and brutally elegant power train gets the job done. LT1-FTW? Obviously. And the styling might be beautiful in the real world. Hard to know on this thing called the Internet.

Except when the wheels are spinning the wrong frickin’ way on the passenger side!

I suspect that computer assisted rendering makes left/right directional wheels an easier cost to stomach, but The General still forks over big cash for extra work on the production/inventory management side. But these (according to Corvetteblogger) are optional, not part of the appealing, easy-to-market base price.

So what is the incremental cost for two different castings? An extra $50 per car, MSRP? Even if it was quadruple, don’t you think Corvette buyers–folks that gladly pay extra for Museum delivery–would fork that cheddar over in…wait for it…a heartbeat?

The Corvette is a halo car; a Flagship for the entire company. And it’s the real damn deal: the quintessential Vulgar Ass-kicking American ever since the uber-wedge, Z51-equipped 1984 Corvette put down Porsche stomping numbers. Ferrari scaring numbers, at the least. All for a fraction of the price. But cheap for a reason.

Instead of being (maybe) 20% cheaper than a baseline Porsche 911, why can’t the C7 be (maybe) 15% cheaper with better design and superior attention to detail? Flagships deserve better, even if the numbers aren’t ideal for a balance sheet.

Off to you, Best and Brightest.

Sajeev Mehta
Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 51 comments
  • Lichtronamo Lichtronamo on Apr 05, 2013

    I was looking at the specs for the Mk7 GTI on the VW-UK site and noticed the standard 18" wheels, which are an updated version of the "Detroit" wheel but with a spin, are not L/R directional. I might not have noticed (right away) but for this article. Now I'm irritated!!! Do you suppose you can get snow tires for the 18s...???

  • Racingmaniac Racingmaniac on Apr 05, 2013

    As pointed out the new MK7 GTI wheel are not directionally matched. Neither were the VW "Interlago" wheels on the CC. And from the cited competition, the 911, we had the 996 Turbo wheels which were not directionally matched also. I am sure you would be glad to know though the Pagani Huayra's CNC wheels that takes 2 days to machine are. But at that price point, and with their manufacturing method(machined from billet) that is the correct way of doing things...unlike where you are trying to cast tens of thousands of wheel and to save P/N variation and cost....

    • See 1 previous
    • Racingmaniac Racingmaniac on Apr 06, 2013

      @Sajeev Mehta The new Audi "RS" wheels too, the ones on the TT-RS/RS3/RS5 with the 5 thin-ish spoke and a twist bladed look has the same issue.... Money and cents makes more sense than styling sense these days....the amount of "quality issues" that can arise for a car rolling down the line with the wrong wheel for a "defect" just makes no sense from a design for manufacturing perspective.... Personally I am not a fan of those styling thing one way or another...

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next