Jeremy Clarkson's Car of the Year: Corvette ZR1
Yada yada yada. “And then out of nowhere came the ZR1, which has a supercharged V8 that manages to be both docile and extraordinarily savage all at the same time. I’ve been trying to think of a dog that pulls off a similar trick, but there isn’t one. And anyway, this car is not a dog.
“Oh, it’s not built very well. After just three days in my care, the boot lock disintegrated and the keyless go system refused to acknowledge the keys were in the car, but I didn’t mind because there is simply no other car that looks this good, goes this fast – in a straight line and around corners – and that most of the time bumbles about like a forgetful uncle. And when you throw in the price tag of just £106,690 – lots for a Corvette but modest next to a similarly powerful Ferrari – the case for the defence can sit down and put up its feet knowing that the prosecutor simply has nowhere to go.
It is an epic car and I’m only sad that unless the healthcare and pensions company that makes it can be turned around, it will be the last of the breed.”
More by Robert Farago
Comments
Join the conversation
Ok, so I'm not done. Landcrusher, do you think there is something magical about smaller cars that cannot be learned by Detroit companies? Are foreign engineers better than US engineers, or do they go to schools that teach them how to build great fours or sixes while US schools teach how to build great eights? We can build great vehicles . . . when the management decides that we should and when they put actual resources into those projects. Oh, about the bench, I added over 100 pounds to my lift. While I sure was not world class, I became a much better rugby player.
It doesn't have to be magical, only different. So you became a better rugby player, how did your marathon time improve? You are an athlete? What is so magical about the difference between rugby and distance running? If the business was as simple as you make it out to be, anyone with the money to hire the engineers could make a competitive car in a couple years. It's not that easy. I am not in the car business, but I have been in the plane business. Many things take years and decades to move even little bits. It's not just about ability. There is culture, desire, experience, prestige, suppliers, processes, egos, etc. You think that in the eighties, that if somebody wanted to gamble the future on a great small car he could have moved all of GM to do it? And why would he have? You have to know that most of the best people are going to avoid that whole division like it will kill their careers. Everything that is different, at all, will be a big stumbling block. You will have to spend more to make a cheaper car because most of the parts on the shelf aren't really right. You have to spend more time and effort getting the suppliers to do something new, when they doubt you are really committed anyway. Try talking to someone who has been in the business. Or a similar business. Heck, look at the PC industry where whole companies just die because they can't make shifts and compete anymore. Add to all that the constraints of massive regulatory intervention and union issues. It's ugly dude. Sure it could have been done, I am not saying they didn't fail, or that they could not succeed. However, I am one of their harshest critics, and I am telling you right now the deck is stacked against them, and has been for decades. I will blame them for a lot, but I give them a pass on the small car thing. It's not their game, and the field isn't level.
Landcrusher, Here is the deal, while I could not run a marathon, there were three guys on the team that did. While I could not squat 700 pounds, we had two guys on the team that could. While I could not run an hundred yards under 10 flat, we had a guy that could. A giant like GM or Ford can hire experts in all areas--if they want to--and that is my only point of contention with you. You seem to argue, at times, that Detroit can build big vehicles well, but not small ones. I argue that they have chosen this.
I will agree that they chose it, too. I won't agree that they can simply unchoose it. They maybe could, but it wouldn't be easy. Reasons include all the other interference into the process supported by laws that unintentionally make it harder for them. I also think it will take more time than any gas shortage ever seems to last. I would also argue that perhaps if you were a car company you might find that the guys on your team that could run marathons were Toyota and Honda. The guys on your team that were sprinters were BMW and Porsche. If the market change supported marathoners, and the government said you had to sell a marathon car for every sprinter, that BMW and Porsche might be in trouble. OTOH, Toyota and Honda don't have any new challlenges and keep on running. ****Edited to make the analogy make some sense, I hope****