GM waking up????
#1
Follower of CHRIST!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM waking up????
So many top level people getting paid SO much money, and yet now they are realizing the below...
CNN reported...
Duhhhhhhhh....
When quality is compromised, when non-car people run the company, and when your company functions only to survive and instread of trying to lead..this type of stuff happens.
Wake up GM...wake up FORD, or else...
CNN reported...
GM's mass-market brand wants to turn back the clock to the days when exciting design sold cars.
December 17, 2005; Posted: 10:40 p.m. EST (0340 GMT)
By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com staff writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - There was a time when a big Chevrolet was considered cool. With fins, chrome and lots of style and flash, 1950s models like the Bel Air were made to be noticed.
"Chevrolet used to be the exciting affordable car," said Jim Hall with the automotive marketing consultancy AutoPacific.
Chevrolet is still affordable. But exciting? Not quite.
Today's Chevrolets, even executives at General Motors will admit, do not inspire pounding hearts and raw desire. The brand's most successful products, its SUVs and trucks, dazzle only through sheer size. Even otherwise good cars, like the Impala sedan, have the visual excitement of a decent sport coat.
Now GM is looking back to the 1950s for inspiration as it tries to recover from declining market share and a seemingly unbreakable reliance on cash incentives to sell cars.
Not that future Chevrolets will necessarily sprout tail fins or dozens of pounds of glittering chrome, but they won't look like every other car on the road.
"For a while there I think there was a feeling that people who bought Chevrolets cared about a lot of things but they didn't care a lot about design," said Tom Wilkinson, communications director for GM design.
Eye-catching design has certainly worked for the Chrysler Group of DaimlerChrysler. Cars like the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum sell well without heavy incentives. Both cars are proportioned to look as if they could have driven straight out of a comic book.
But, those cars are not intended for mass appeal. They are designed for strong appeal among a relative few. The same can be said for GM's Hummer and Cadillac divisions, which have also used a more radical design approach to appeal to those who really want to stand out in a crowd.
But what about a car like the Chevrolet Impala, one of GM's most popular cars? Hundreds of thousands of Impalas are sold every year to consumers and fleet buyers like police departments. Are those buyers likely to want flash and style in their big family car?
"Something that's well designed doesn't have to be radically designed," said Wilkinson.
The change
Expect the change to start in the next couple of years.
While no images of the vehicles have been publicly released yet, a look ahead at upcoming Saturns and a look back at the classic Chevys of the 1950s gives an idea of the sort of thing Wilkinson is talking about. And, some experts say, it's just what Chevrolet needs in an era when building better cars just isn't enough.
Saturn, GM's youngest division, has always been known for a kind and gentle dealership experience with no-haggle pricing. It has never been known for particularly desirable or interesting automobiles.
Saturn's new line-up of cars, beginning with the two-seat roadster called the Sky, followed by the Aura sedan and the redesigned Vue SUV, will get a new, futuristic look. Saturn will also be introducing a larger crossover SUV called the Outlook.
With these vehicles, Saturns are going to start looking very interesting. Much of the vehicles' design will be shared with GM's European Opel brand. The designs will be edgier and more artful than American buyers are used to seeing from GM.
Chevrolet will get things rolling with its own version of the Aura sedan, said Hall, who was treated to a peek at the new Chevrolet sedan. He called the new Chevrolet design even more striking than the Saturn.
The Saturn Aura shares its engineering underpinnings with the current Chevrolet Malibu. The next generation Malibu will be much more aggressive-looking, said GM's Wilkinson, who allowed that the current Malibu is "kind of blah."
Still, improved appearances won't be enough to succeed. Cars like the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum, rear-wheel-drive cars with extremely powerful optional engines, are also fundamentally different from functionally similar vehicles in their price ranges. Also, from the standpoint of driving dynamics, they perform better than most cars they compete against.
Meanwhile, Toyota and other Japanese competitors are seen as having better quality and long-term durability than the Detroit-based carmakers. Although GM can legitimately claim to have narrowed the gap in quality against those competitors, that's been a tough sell with consumers.
"There's a lot of sour past experiences that the domestics are going to have to get through," said James Bell, publisher of the automotive consumer guide IntelliChoice.
Better design could be enough to get buyers to consider a GM vehicle when, in the past, they would have gone with a Toyota or Honda as, simply, a safer bet.
"It's a question of who's got the right car at the right time," said Bell.
December 17, 2005; Posted: 10:40 p.m. EST (0340 GMT)
By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com staff writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - There was a time when a big Chevrolet was considered cool. With fins, chrome and lots of style and flash, 1950s models like the Bel Air were made to be noticed.
"Chevrolet used to be the exciting affordable car," said Jim Hall with the automotive marketing consultancy AutoPacific.
Chevrolet is still affordable. But exciting? Not quite.
Today's Chevrolets, even executives at General Motors will admit, do not inspire pounding hearts and raw desire. The brand's most successful products, its SUVs and trucks, dazzle only through sheer size. Even otherwise good cars, like the Impala sedan, have the visual excitement of a decent sport coat.
Now GM is looking back to the 1950s for inspiration as it tries to recover from declining market share and a seemingly unbreakable reliance on cash incentives to sell cars.
Not that future Chevrolets will necessarily sprout tail fins or dozens of pounds of glittering chrome, but they won't look like every other car on the road.
"For a while there I think there was a feeling that people who bought Chevrolets cared about a lot of things but they didn't care a lot about design," said Tom Wilkinson, communications director for GM design.
Eye-catching design has certainly worked for the Chrysler Group of DaimlerChrysler. Cars like the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum sell well without heavy incentives. Both cars are proportioned to look as if they could have driven straight out of a comic book.
But, those cars are not intended for mass appeal. They are designed for strong appeal among a relative few. The same can be said for GM's Hummer and Cadillac divisions, which have also used a more radical design approach to appeal to those who really want to stand out in a crowd.
But what about a car like the Chevrolet Impala, one of GM's most popular cars? Hundreds of thousands of Impalas are sold every year to consumers and fleet buyers like police departments. Are those buyers likely to want flash and style in their big family car?
"Something that's well designed doesn't have to be radically designed," said Wilkinson.
The change
Expect the change to start in the next couple of years.
While no images of the vehicles have been publicly released yet, a look ahead at upcoming Saturns and a look back at the classic Chevys of the 1950s gives an idea of the sort of thing Wilkinson is talking about. And, some experts say, it's just what Chevrolet needs in an era when building better cars just isn't enough.
Saturn, GM's youngest division, has always been known for a kind and gentle dealership experience with no-haggle pricing. It has never been known for particularly desirable or interesting automobiles.
Saturn's new line-up of cars, beginning with the two-seat roadster called the Sky, followed by the Aura sedan and the redesigned Vue SUV, will get a new, futuristic look. Saturn will also be introducing a larger crossover SUV called the Outlook.
With these vehicles, Saturns are going to start looking very interesting. Much of the vehicles' design will be shared with GM's European Opel brand. The designs will be edgier and more artful than American buyers are used to seeing from GM.
Chevrolet will get things rolling with its own version of the Aura sedan, said Hall, who was treated to a peek at the new Chevrolet sedan. He called the new Chevrolet design even more striking than the Saturn.
The Saturn Aura shares its engineering underpinnings with the current Chevrolet Malibu. The next generation Malibu will be much more aggressive-looking, said GM's Wilkinson, who allowed that the current Malibu is "kind of blah."
Still, improved appearances won't be enough to succeed. Cars like the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum, rear-wheel-drive cars with extremely powerful optional engines, are also fundamentally different from functionally similar vehicles in their price ranges. Also, from the standpoint of driving dynamics, they perform better than most cars they compete against.
Meanwhile, Toyota and other Japanese competitors are seen as having better quality and long-term durability than the Detroit-based carmakers. Although GM can legitimately claim to have narrowed the gap in quality against those competitors, that's been a tough sell with consumers.
"There's a lot of sour past experiences that the domestics are going to have to get through," said James Bell, publisher of the automotive consumer guide IntelliChoice.
Better design could be enough to get buyers to consider a GM vehicle when, in the past, they would have gone with a Toyota or Honda as, simply, a safer bet.
"It's a question of who's got the right car at the right time," said Bell.
When quality is compromised, when non-car people run the company, and when your company functions only to survive and instread of trying to lead..this type of stuff happens.
Wake up GM...wake up FORD, or else...
#2
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: los angeles, ca
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as thier idea of "cool" isn't gluing more plastic bits to the sides like semi recent Pontiacs this will be a good move. I am a huge fan of the Cadillac overhaul. The CTS is such a handsome car, so they do have the ability. If only they'd upgrade the materials too.
#3
I agree with map...I love the CTS. It was actually a tossup between that, and the RX-8 as when GM had their 'pay what we pay', out local pontiac/cadillac/buick dealer had a small discount off of that as well, and I could have walked out the door with one for 29k.
#4
Follower of CHRIST!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only they'd upgrade the materials too.
You know the Cobolt (Cavalier replacement), most of the interior is pretty good but when you look at the door panel (the switches to be specific) I almost vomited. It looks like plastic from a cheap $1 store toy.
You can't have pretty good quality in everything but one thing, that one part will spoil the rest of the car.
Take a look if you see one...just awful. The worst thing about it is that it was the SS version!
#5
Totally confuzzled...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^I agree... One of the biggest factors that got me in this car is the fit-and-finish of the interior. I'd never seen an interior like the 8's in my life... At this point, I honestly can't stand sitting inside any american-built vehicle, with the exception of some of the newest Chryslers.
#6
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LostAngel
I agree with map...I love the CTS. It was actually a tossup between that, and the RX-8 as when GM had their 'pay what we pay', out local pontiac/cadillac/buick dealer had a small discount off of that as well, and I could have walked out the door with one for 29k.
Wow... what a deal. Would have been even better if it had been 29k for a CTS-V. I'd love to own one of those.
#7
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vectorwolf
^I agree... One of the biggest factors that got me in this car is the fit-and-finish of the interior. I'd never seen an interior like the 8's in my life... At this point, I honestly can't stand sitting inside any american-built vehicle, with the exception of some of the newest Chryslers.
Actually I was disappointed the first time I saw the 8's interior. I thought the plastic quality looked cheaper than I expected. But it got better after I saw the Demio (Mazda2) and rented a Civic. I actually like the plastic used in my S-Wagon (Protege5) better than what Mazda is using now. But that's me.
Chryslers? Never would buy one. MB isn't one of the best for reliability and Chrysler is notorious for bad reliability. Not to mention crappy. Just tap on the panels... the black plastic on the dash and such (like in the mini vans and trucks). As cheap as an aftermarket stereo "dash kit." Utter lack of manual transmission... if the 300, or better yet Magnum, came with a manual transmission... I might consider looking at them... no "4 on the floor" and I'm not interested in the least.
#8
Extraordinary Engineering
GM and Ford will wake up the same way Chrysler did in the 70's and 80's. They got their backs to the wall. It took a long time to get to the Chrysler you see today.
#9
I think all American cars suffer from the same problems, they all have a lack luster exterior and interior. They seem to all end up mainly as a rental car and that is who they are marketing to. American companies will always have the "loyal" buyers who have and always buy American. But that will only last so long. American companies try to make up for the lack of quality with horsepower. They are also stuck on using styling from the past, personally if I wanted a mustang that looked old I would just go buy one. I want new cars that well look new, not a twisted shape of something 30 years ago. Hopefully they will figure it out before lots more lines start folding.
I mean when you think of exciting cars how many of them are American made?
now when you think of bland cars how many of them are American made?
I mean when you think of exciting cars how many of them are American made?
now when you think of bland cars how many of them are American made?
#10
I don't think domestics are the only ones that produce **** poor exterior designs. Sporty cars aside, the regular people movers look like crap on both sides. As bad as the impala looks, the camry and accord look way worse (the body roll on the camry never ceases to amaze me), the fusion is the only one that actually looks good. All the current lexuses except the new IS look like ish. Acura is no better.
Maybe it's just me but exterior design needs work on both sides. Having said that, sporty cars look best from the imports. S2000, Z, RX-8, Z4, and M3 to name a few look fantastic.
Maybe it's just me but exterior design needs work on both sides. Having said that, sporty cars look best from the imports. S2000, Z, RX-8, Z4, and M3 to name a few look fantastic.
#11
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wait a minute... I think most would agree there is "good" retro and there is "bad" retro.
Let's take the Corvette or even the Z for example. Their designs have changed over the years, but from one model to the next there was some sense of continuity. The biggest jump in design (to me) was from the 280ZX to the 300ZX. For the Vette it was probably during ther 60's and 70's. Since the late 70's the design has only evolved.
Let's take the import lovers favorite car to bash... the Mustang. The '73 was a POS. It neither performed, nor looked good. It held no resemblence to previous models.. no sense of evolution or continuity. Again with the change to the Fox platform in '79 (or was it '78?). At least this design finally just evolved again (as it did from '64 to about '71) until the platform was revised in '94. Then this restyled Mustang seemed to try to blend the original Mustang ('64 - '71) with the Fox body cars ('79 - '93) and its design evolved until the current car with the first new platform since the inception of the Fox in '79. Anyway, the point is that the Mustang totally deviated from what LOOKED like a Mustang. Ford only finally tried to return to original styling cues in '94... and even then... The current Mustang is "retro", but rather than thinking of it as trying to recapture what was lost because of bad sales (the Mustang has pretty much always sold decently... out sold the GM F bodies by a lot at the end... so it wasn't sales), or doing so because of a lack of design ideas. We should be looking at it as Ford trying to make the Mustang look like a Mustang again. For some the Fox body is a Mustang to them... because it ran for so long it's what they know... but that still isn't the REAL Mustang DNA.
What kind of a design would YOU have proposed? Another evolution of the Fox body design? How? It already had a change from rounded in '94 to "edge"... addition and change of the hood scoop and side vents/scoops.
Let's take the Corvette or even the Z for example. Their designs have changed over the years, but from one model to the next there was some sense of continuity. The biggest jump in design (to me) was from the 280ZX to the 300ZX. For the Vette it was probably during ther 60's and 70's. Since the late 70's the design has only evolved.
Let's take the import lovers favorite car to bash... the Mustang. The '73 was a POS. It neither performed, nor looked good. It held no resemblence to previous models.. no sense of evolution or continuity. Again with the change to the Fox platform in '79 (or was it '78?). At least this design finally just evolved again (as it did from '64 to about '71) until the platform was revised in '94. Then this restyled Mustang seemed to try to blend the original Mustang ('64 - '71) with the Fox body cars ('79 - '93) and its design evolved until the current car with the first new platform since the inception of the Fox in '79. Anyway, the point is that the Mustang totally deviated from what LOOKED like a Mustang. Ford only finally tried to return to original styling cues in '94... and even then... The current Mustang is "retro", but rather than thinking of it as trying to recapture what was lost because of bad sales (the Mustang has pretty much always sold decently... out sold the GM F bodies by a lot at the end... so it wasn't sales), or doing so because of a lack of design ideas. We should be looking at it as Ford trying to make the Mustang look like a Mustang again. For some the Fox body is a Mustang to them... because it ran for so long it's what they know... but that still isn't the REAL Mustang DNA.
What kind of a design would YOU have proposed? Another evolution of the Fox body design? How? It already had a change from rounded in '94 to "edge"... addition and change of the hood scoop and side vents/scoops.
#12
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
I don't think domestics are the only ones that produce **** poor exterior designs. Sporty cars aside, the regular people movers look like crap on both sides. As bad as the impala looks, the camry and accord look way worse (the body roll on the camry never ceases to amaze me), the fusion is the only one that actually looks good. All the current lexuses except the new IS look like ish. Acura is no better.
Maybe it's just me but exterior design needs work on both sides. Having said that, sporty cars look best from the imports. S2000, Z, RX-8, Z4, and M3 to name a few look fantastic.
Maybe it's just me but exterior design needs work on both sides. Having said that, sporty cars look best from the imports. S2000, Z, RX-8, Z4, and M3 to name a few look fantastic.
The sports cars are about the only nice looking cars any manufacturer is making these days except Mazda.
#13
Has the whole shit.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,772
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chevy seems to already be testing the waters with making a higher quality product - just look at the C6 Vette. That thing looks like it's taken a huge leap forward in both build quality and material quality over the C5 and people seem to be happy with the styling for the most part. Hopefully they'll take the hint from what people are saying about the Vette and transfer that over to their whole line.
#14
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
I don't think domestics are the only ones that produce **** poor exterior designs.
Last edited by TODreamer; 12-18-2005 at 10:24 PM.
#15
Originally Posted by rx8wannahave
and when your company functions only to survive and instread of trying to lead..this type of stuff happens.
Wake up GM...wake up FORD, or else...
Wake up GM...wake up FORD, or else...
#16
Originally Posted by Japan8
Wait a minute... I think most would agree there is "good" retro and there is "bad" retro.
What kind of a design would YOU have proposed? Another evolution of the Fox body design? How? It already had a change from rounded in '94 to "edge"... addition and change of the hood scoop and side vents/scoops.
What kind of a design would YOU have proposed? Another evolution of the Fox body design? How? It already had a change from rounded in '94 to "edge"... addition and change of the hood scoop and side vents/scoops.
As for GM lets look at a few different styles of cars and compare them to other cars. Lets start with the xlr the closest competition is probally the sl500 MB. The Mercedes is years ahead in the interior build quality and exterior quality. Yes you can argue the MB is more expensive, but the xlr is not cheap by any means. Then the Escelade, the seats are very comfortable but the appointments are very cheap I will always look at the cup holders and any other moving panls inside the car. Any Cadillac is sub par to even the Lincoln's in build quality, just look at the gaps at any body panel on the cars or trucks. If GM's higher end models are of lesser quality just imagine how their standard models are.
Also for the argument of the Camry and Accord they can at least say with the owner pretty hassle free, and hold their value much better than ANY GM car will. I do agree they are nothing special, but there is a reason why they outsell the american models worldwide.
#17
Follower of CHRIST!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think all American cars suffer from the same problems, they all have a lack luster exterior and interior.
They are also stuck on using styling from the past, personally if I wanted a mustang that looked old I would just go buy one.
I want new cars that well look new, not a twisted shape of something 30 years ago. Hopefully they will figure it out before lots more lines start folding.
I want new cars that well look new, not a twisted shape of something 30 years ago. Hopefully they will figure it out before lots more lines start folding.
Again, I like the new Mustang…but I don’t love it. I think most of it’s quality is pretty good but once again the door panels disappoint and the interior style or look is just…OK.
Anyway, the point is that the Mustang totally deviated from what LOOKED like a Mustang. Ford only finally tried to return to original styling cues in '94... and even then... The current Mustang is "retro", but rather than thinking of it as trying to recapture what was lost because of bad sales (the Mustang has pretty much always sold decently... out sold the GM F bodies by a lot at the end... so it wasn't sales), or doing so because of a lack of design ideas. We should be looking at it as Ford trying to make the Mustang look like a Mustang again. For some the Fox body is a Mustang to them... because it ran for so long it's what they know... but that still isn't the REAL Mustang DNA.
My issue is, how long do you keep after a certain type of look? While I agree in evolving the look for a certain amount of time if you do it for too long all it does is hold back the possibilities for a new “legend” look or design.
I know it’s hard for the auto companies with cars like the Mustang and Vette because the loyal customers in the past will often not want things to change much but at the same time it keeps your car stuck in a design rut.
You know what I would want to see, a “future” Mustang…now or a future Vette now. I remember a concept Vette from back in the 90’s that still looks cool and futuristic for a replacement. The car never happened…it was like a modern version of the Stingray Vette. I guess customers also are to blame because when your customer base freaks out about exposed lights that only forces GM to be conservative. I love the look of the Vette today but I would love to see a whole new direction, especially with the Mustang.
What do you do with a retro look after it’s initial release? Go back to how it evolved the first time and do it again? I just think that it’s not the best design direction they can take. I would love to see a more “sports car like” look for the Mustang which tends to look a little boxy. I’ve seen aftermarket kits for the Mustang that make it look “mean” as heck and I love that, but I wish we saw something completely new instead of the same or almost the same regurgitated look.
Concept cars always meant to show us “today” what tomorrows car would look like, sometimes even coming to market almost exactly the same, but sadly it seems either they are too scared to try something new or they ran out of idea’s.
Why not aim your designs to give the common person an exotic "looking" car. The Lambo Bat (it’s actually bat in Spanish but I can’t spell as you all know, Spanish or English…lol, V-10 smaller brother of the bigger lambo) looks amazing. I saw one at the movies and MY LORD...just SEX pouring out of the windows type of stuff, build something "similar" to that in looks and price it so it's not unattainable and you will sell half a million of them.
Sure some will say an exotic has to be rare, but I would suggest they build exotic “looking” cars instead of the same old shape…from the same old clay mold.
#18
Blackbelt Thread Hijacker
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas!
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rx8wannahave
The Lambo Bat (it’s actually bat in Spanish but I can’t spell as you all know, Spanish or English…lol, V-10 smaller brother of the bigger lambo).
#19
Originally Posted by rx8wannahave
I know it’s hard for the auto companies with cars like the Mustang and Vette because the loyal customers in the past will often not want things to change much but at the same time it keeps your car stuck in a design rut.
Dont get me wrong I think the C6 is great... but from a styling point of view there is still a lot of room for changing
#20
Follower of CHRIST!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe your talking about the Lambo Gallardo,
ironically, many of the people who whould buy the car are the same ones who are ruining it because they just cant let go and try something new
#21
Originally Posted by rx8wannahave
Exactly, so maybe the old customers are keeping new customers from comming into the Vette or Mustang fold. So...some of the blame is on their shoulders.
yup...But at the same time GM has to be able to see the big picture. Sometimes you gotta break a few eggs to make a basket.
If I were a shot caller at GM the vette with get a makeover inside and out (save for the engine- the LS7 is a great engine).. sure the oldies will be pissed but hey.... tough cookies... GM will be getting a **** load of new customers... you cant be affraid to step out from time to time
#23
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by playdoh43
glad youre not running GM then, if all youre thinking about is vett vett vett, sports cars, performance cars :p hehe, j/k
#24
guys it was just an example since someone previously brought it up... sheesh
What makes you think they couldnt do it?... vette is a great car but it aint rocket science
Originally Posted by babylou
There isn't a manufacturer that would not love to have the Vette in their portfolio.
#25
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TODreamer
What makes you think they couldnt do it?... vette is a great car but it aint rocket science
Secondly, I didn't say another car manufacturer can't make a car as technically good as a Vette. The technology differences from one car company to another are minor. I said they would love to have THE VETTE in their portfolio.