Why GM Needs a Supercar

"RightFootDown" (rightfootdown) 01/14/2014 at 15:22 • Filed to: None

12

72

It's auto show season in the good ole United States of 'Murica. Damn right, time to show the world how awesome we are at building cars. And we are pretty good at it, !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ? It's pretty badass. With 625 horsepowers and 635 torques, it will be a track beast to be sure. But it's not a supercar, and GM needs one.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Image: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Um, shut up! the Corvette is a supercar!
No, sadly it's not. You can find a lot of internet arguments (what else is on the internet besides arguments and pornography?) about what a supercar is, and admittedly I'm using a hybrid of several popular ones. The term goes back to 1920 or so but I'm more interested in the modern day definition. If you go the dictionary route, the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , circa 2003 states that a supercar is " a very expensive, fast or powerful car with a centrally located engine ". That last bit seems to be the kicker, a centrally located engine. So we're talking mid-engine performance. Can front or rear engine car perform comparably to a mid-engine car? Most certainly, but the image has never quite been the same has it? Porsche owns the rear engine market and 911s are great cars, no doubt. But when Porsche decides to build something special, like the Carrera GT or the new 918, where does the engine go?

Image: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Yeah, but what about the LF-A? That's pretty super!
Agreed. So while almost every manufacturer of high-performance cars puts the engine in the middle, there are exceptions. The Brits took a crack at it for the London Motor Show catalogue in 1985 when talking about "secondhand supercars". They claim that supercars " should be sleek and eye-catching " and when describing price, it should be " one in a rarefied atmosphere of its own ". Ah, so exclusivity matters, welcome to the club Lexus. You're more likely to catch a pass from Tony Romo (that was intended for you) than to see an LF-A in person. It's made of exotic materials and at $375,000, costs more than the average American's house. Pretty super. And its made by a one of GM's key rivals who was even willing to lose money on each LF-A sold just to improve its brand. GM are you listening?

Image: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

So why does GM need a supercar damnit?!
Calm down, I'll tell you, I'm just setting the scene. The General has proven it can engineer a fantastic car. I make no qualms about the Corvette being a world beater. But there is a reason they have threatened to move the engine to the middle in the past. As a large, international company, GM needs to command respect. They need to show that they are on par with the best automakers in the World, they need a "halo car". And Cadillac needs to sell them in their showrooms. I just hope the accountants will buy off on the business case for a mid-engine Cadillac supercar.

We've already talked about !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . In order to go from great to elite, car buyers need to see Cadillac, and by extension GM, as engineers. Generally speaking, we buy German cars because we consider them well engineered. I would say that holds true outside of the USofA as well, they have been able to build an image of engineering achievement and excellence that we haven't. You can buy an Audi that features things that were bred on their race cars. In fact, visit the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and the first thing you read is " The racetrack has repeatedly been a laboratory for successfully developing revolutionary Audi innovations, including Audi quattro® all-wheel drive, TFSI® gasoline and TDI® diesel engines ".

Image: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Imagine a Cadillac supercar built from GM racing expertise. The header image, as well as the one above shown (alongside an LMP racer) is the Cadillac Cien. It's over 10 years old and debuted in 2002 in Detroit. It had a longitudinally mounted 60-degree, 7.5-liter V12 which produced 750 horsepower and 450 lbft of torque. Yes, this is what I am talking about. You don't even need a V12, it's nice, but you don't need one. GM could raid the parts bin for, oh let's say a supercharged V8 with 625 hp and 635 tq. Do they have one of those? Oh right, they just showed it today in Detroit under the hood of the new ZO6. Keep your hands in that same parts bin for some carbon ceramic brakes, magnetic ride suspension, and whatever else the Corvette wants to donate to it's bigger brother.

Wait, didn't GM make a bigger brother for the Corvette already? Yes, and it failed. Based on the C5 Corvette, they essentially put a new body on it and called it an XLR. They sold (12) in 2011. Yes, " twelve " and never cracked 4000 sales in any year of its 2004-2009 lifespan. It wasn't special and people knew it. But this isn't about volume alone. Supercars don't sell that many units. It's about developing a brand that people respect and look up to. And most of the large mainstream companies that have spent the development monies to build a supercar, including Toyota, VW, Mercedes, etc. have done so to improve their image and ensure that people see them as more than just the makers of conveyances. They make cars that people want to put on posters. And I want my son to have a poster of an American car. Perhaps then !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Read original article on RightFootDown

Will is an automotive writer and regular contributor to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . Based in Maryland, he contributes to Jalopnik's Opposite Lock under " !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! " and has had a long history of founding failed automotive sites and spending way too much time on car forums. He has owned "too many Mustangs" according to Josh and has a fetish for RWD V8s. He spent most of his 20s on tracks in the mid-atlantic and killing cones in parking lots and has even taught at a teen performance driving school.

Sources: Wikipedia, Collins English Dictionary, Audi Motorsport, Jalopnik
Header Image: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Baber K. Khan > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:25

1

While nearly after after quite a few decades, supercars such as Lambos, Astons, Ferrari, et all have finally arrived into profit (some 'just'), I doubt that GM has money to spend in such a program unless it plans a proper and separate supercar unit.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:27

4

Technically the Corvette is mid-engined, just front mid...

Victorious Secret > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:28

4

America hasn't had a supercar since the Ford GT.

That is just sad.

RazoE > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:30

2

A supercar would be awesome. The Ford GT was the last (and arguably only) American Supercar (from a major company, not specialty such as the Saleen S7, Mosler MT900, Hennessey Venom, etc).

All GM has to do is stretch out a Corvette chassis, slap an LT4 in the rear and slap on a Cadillac badge on it. Done and done.

HiredDriver > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:30

3

I have to admit I laughed on several occasions of spotting an XLR on the roads of northern Virginia. The problem with the XLR in my mind was that it was nothing more than a mediocre C5 Corvette underneath the sharp edged design and Caddy badge. It's the same reason I could never buy a Lexus ES — it has Camry written all over it.

HammerheadFistpunch > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:31

2

The GM brand doesn't need a supercar as most of its future sales increases will happen in BRIC countries, and European and American car sales are reaching saturation. The gain to GM is minimal and as much as I would LOVE to see it. IT doesn't make even a little bit of financial sense. As a bonus, GM makes some great Supercar engines already.

pauljones > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 15:32

4

THIS.

There is so much bullshit misunderstanding about what a mid-engine car really is, and it's constantly used (egregiously erroneously) as a justification for saying that the Corvette cannot be a supercar.

That, along with the rest of his somewhat flawed reasoning, seems to come up notably short of justifying his assertion that GM does not currently have a supercar, and therefore needs to develop one.

Goshen, formerly Darkcode > HammerheadFistpunch 01/14/2014 at 15:33

3

The Saleen S7 was powered by a Ford engine.

Casper > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 15:36

1

True story.

Party-vi > Victorious Secret 01/14/2014 at 15:37

2

We have, they just haven't been from any real manufacturer. Take the Saleen S7, SSC Ultimate Aero, Falcon F7, and Hennessey Venom GT.

For Sweden > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:38

7

Pipe down. If the Ferrari 458 is a supercar, the ZR1 is most definitely a supercar.

Sean > HiredDriver 01/14/2014 at 15:38

0

I agree 100% but I can't help myself from looking for a good used bargain. For some reason I like it! But admit no matter how much money I have (in my dreams) would never have bought a new one

HammerheadFistpunch > Goshen, formerly Darkcode 01/14/2014 at 15:38

1

Dad gummit, you're right. I don't know why I thought it was an LS. Probably because everything is.

Casper > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 15:39

1

I don't really care if they make a super car or not (I am leaning toward not because they don't have the expertise). They have finally made a good Corvette again, just be happy.

Casper > RazoE 01/14/2014 at 15:43

1

No. That's exactly what they would do, and it would be terrible. They have a horrible habit of penny pinching the wrong things and this would be one of them, just look at the XLR. If they aren't going to source talent to make a proper supercar the likes of a Venom, Ford GT, S7, etc. There is a certain level of bat shit crazy and engineering that need to meet up to do it right.

pauljones > For Sweden 01/14/2014 at 15:46

1

Amen.

RazoE > Casper 01/14/2014 at 15:47

1

That's what would make it great. The Ford GT has a F-150, Mustang, and Focus parts sprinkled all-over. It doesn't forget where it came from. Hell the original had tail lights from a Chevrolet Corvair. It needs to be a rattly piece of shit that'll try to kill you when it's not making you smile.

That's what America needs.

Casper > RazoE 01/14/2014 at 15:53

0

Sharing parts and being properly engineered are two different things. You can share parts, but be built correctly. The key to the GT was not the reused parts, it was the very well designed chassis with a great selection of engine and style.

What you are describing is outside the possibility for GM to create as well... since they are run by lawyers more than engineers/racers at this point.

Grindintosecond > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 16:10

1

the corvette is a medium sized light to medium fast(er) attack ship. Part of the definition is that any country eith a coast can build one with their normal commercial shipping industry. Meaning that ....anyone can build a corvette. anyone can build a fast attack sports car. A super car? takes more than the normal commercial car building industry. GM making a super car...would need to intentionally be high quality this time. make that mid engine vette and label it a caddy. 1500 units.

Danimalk - Drives a Slow Car Fast > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 16:23

1

Reverse engineer this:

BAM! Mid-engined Corvette.

PS9 > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 16:31

2

Ehh....I don't know about that. A supercar would be a time-energy-money sink that I'd rather see GM pour into more attainable products. Caddy's products are getting there, but they are not done at all. They need a true S class competitor along with a complete reformat of their SUV and crossover lineups before giving us an unprofitable MR supercar just yet.

JR1 > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 16:57

1

I like that you introduced the engineering component into the argument. That is a major factor that always seems to be overlooked. Companies like Cadillac are rebuilding their brand image from the bottom up and I hope they succeed. They will not however unless Cadillac or GM develops innovative technology. Magnetic ride was a good step but they must keep innovating to be taken seriously!

Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight > HiredDriver 01/14/2014 at 17:12

4

Hey, hey, hey... I don't appreciate all the hate on my car in some of these comments. C'mon, everyone knew the XLR was a halo car, not a supercar. And that's because of all the infighting at GM (long story). But lets set the record straight. It's not C5 underneath, its C6. It failed because marketing and the economy failed.

I agree I'd love to see them build a supercar. Here's one rendering that's awesome.

But like the others have said, limited production spelled exclusivity(200-500 cars), high quality, advanced design, barely street legal, just for brand image exposure probably won't happen. But it would be incredible to behold!

AthomSfere > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 18:00

3

The last thing we need is GM who barely returned to making a profit blowing all their cash on a doomed supercar and then returns to their miserly ways of the 90s...

avens > pauljones 01/14/2014 at 18:02

0

More than discussing over terms, the thing is the current "super" or "hyper" cars cannot be compared with Vettes (c'mon it's obvious) therefore the Vette is not one.

avens > RightFootDown 01/14/2014 at 18:05

0

Good read though I don't share the premise and would add some arguments.

Sun-Tzubaru - With Zoom-Zoom > JR1 01/14/2014 at 20:27

1

"Water, Fire, Air and Dirt. F**ing magnetic ride, how does that work?"

Manuél Ferrari > For Sweden 01/14/2014 at 20:34

1

But he's not talking about performance. He's talking about looks and exclusivity.

You can't dispute that the 458 is more exclusive. Not only because of the badge and the super aggressive looks that are achievable with the engine behind the driver. But because it has a bespoke chassis.

Cars like the ZR1, Porsche GT3, and BMW M3 can never be considered supercars by 100% of car fans because they share their chassis with the base models. Sure these cars look more aggressive than a base Corvette, 911 or 320i. But the resemblance is still there.

From a performance standpoint the Z06 and ZR1 are definitely supercars. They can beat most supercars on the track. But from an aesthetic and exclusivity perspective they are not. The Ford GT may be slower than a C7 Z06 but it's still more of a supercar because of its looks and exclusivity.

William Byrd > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 20:46

1

So it's just a marketing issue? Someone should tell GM! Haha

Seriously though, the argument that "it's already Mid engine doesn't work if people don't associate a vette with a Ferrari. People did with the Ford GT and I think it helped bolster Fords image.

JR1 > Sun-Tzubaru - With Zoom-Zoom 01/14/2014 at 20:46

0

And on the eighth die God said "let their be magnetic ride to make peoples butts comfy"

William Byrd > pauljones 01/14/2014 at 20:49

0

If buyers don't think it is, does it matter? Even if it can beat a Ferrari, will it be cross shopped? Likely no.

The argument wasn't "they don't, so they should", it was "they don't and they should because it will bolster their image and the respect of the world".

And as I said to archduke, just because you think it's technically mid engined doesn't really matter.

William Byrd > For Sweden 01/14/2014 at 20:51

0

Super, sure! But it's not a Supercar by definition. Ferrari buyers don't cross shop Chevys. I don't say that as an elitist, I have a Mustang, but it's true. They might shop for a Cadillac with the same engine and a more exotic look.

William Byrd > Manuél Ferrari 01/14/2014 at 20:52

0

Well said, you could have helped me write this. Haha

William Byrd > HammerheadFistpunch 01/14/2014 at 20:54

0

I don't know, China loves supercars. And the point isn't to sell the Supercar itself, but the image of a high end company.

William Byrd > Victorious Secret 01/14/2014 at 20:55

0

And a hell of a car it was. And it is sad.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 20:58

1

The issue people have with the Corvette is that it's too achievable of a car to be a supercar. It's not expensive, it's made in Kentucky, it can be used daily, and it's a Chevy. So, yes, it is very much a marketing issue.
Chevrolete has racing heritage from the founder himself, like Ferrari. It has the style that helps define many other cars, like Lamborghini. Make an ad campaign with those two points in it.

Manuél Ferrari > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:00

0

Thanks!

I love cars that are souped up versions of base models. I have an M3 myself so I'm not opposed to getting max performance out of a relatively common chassis.

But I understand that for the general public (not us enthusiasts) to think of a model as a supercar it needs to be somewhat rare and exotic looking.

Take the Gallardo. You can buy a 2005 for less than it will cost to buy a new C7 Z06. The Corvette will be a much better car. It will be faster, cheaper to maintain, and more modern. But show both to 10 random people off the street and ask which cars are supercars and I bet the majority say the Lambo and not the Z06.

Lambo may have sold a ton of Gallardos during its run but you still don't see a ton of them. Probably because the running costs are so high (especially if you have an early car with E-Gear). The small cabin and tiny frunk also make it a tough DD...

William Byrd > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 21:02

0

But it not being exclusive unfortunately rules out the super'ness. Attainable cars are inherently less super and I know technically some may say the C7s engine is in the middle but it's in front of the driver and (most) exotic cars aren't set up that way.

William Byrd > Manuél Ferrari 01/14/2014 at 21:04

1

I've driven a Superleggera on track, it's right inside. Especially with a helmet on.

Victorious Secret > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 21:05

0

Bingo.

The Corvettes problem is that it will never be exclusive enough to be a supercar. EVER.

Supercars are special. They are moments. The Corvette is honestly neither. Its just a Corvette. Its not a sleight against it, it just can't and won't have the same aura as a Murcielago or 430 or anything modern from Italy or whatever else.

Heck, the Ford GT is still the most modern supercar America can throw against the rest of the world. Not the Viper, not the Corvette.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:06

1

Even though it is better than most cars.
Is the Viper also not a supercar?

Manuél Ferrari > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:07

0

I bet it is tight in there with a helmet on!

The Gallardo seems like it has a smaller cabin than the F430. And my head nearly hits the roof of the F430 without a helmet on.

Victorious Secret > Manuél Ferrari 01/14/2014 at 21:08

2

100% agree.

For performance they put up supercar numbers but for what a supercar really is?

Last I checked the only noteworthy and globally competitive piece of American iron that could've been called a Supercar was the Ford GT. Not the Viper ACR. Not the C6 ZR1. The Ford GT.

William Byrd > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 21:09

0

Nope.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:16

0

But it's not useable every day, has a huge V10, Side Pipes, costs over $100,000, loud, ostentatious in every manner, also has the motor located behind the front axle, so that's not a supercar?

William Byrd > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 21:17

0

It's closer but still kind of pedestrian (cheap) compared to most supercars.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:19

1

So, the GTR is out, as is the NSX, as is every 911, as is the R8 V8?

William Byrd > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 21:20

0

Mostly yeah.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:24

0

So, if the Corvette was priced at $260,000 it would be a supercar?

William Byrd > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/14/2014 at 21:31

1

That would help, yeah. But it needs to be exclusive as well, not high volume.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > William Byrd 01/14/2014 at 21:37

0

At $260,000 there would not be a high volume of cars.

Manuél Ferrari > Victorious Secret 01/14/2014 at 21:50

1

And that's why the Ford GT values have been going up. It's rare, low, and sexy. Newer American super sports cars might be faster but they are not more special. Just sitting in the Ford GT would make you feel like you're a Le Mans driver.

There are a lot of fast cars these days. Supercars aren't just about performance. There are a ton of cars that you can buy for semi-reasonable prices and tune that will spank the shit out of stock Ford GT, Ferrari 458, etc. But they won't have the same presence and sense of occasion as a supercar/hypercar. The C7 Stingray will be relatively common soon in some regions, just as the Porsche 991 has become common in some areas. Their track-focused counterparts will definitely be more special but not as special as a bespoke exotic.

And there is just something really special about a mid engine car with the engine between the driver and rear axle as opposed to the driver and the front axle. Both handle very well. Placing the engine behind the driver is not necessary for high performance and has real-world drawbacks. But it's also what allows the designers to create a cab-forward design with a small front end. The average person thinks an Audi R8 V8 is a supercar because it looks like one. A 991 GT3 will destroy the R8 V8 on a track but it will still look less special to the casual observer. IMO layout and looks impact the public's perception of what is a supercar much more than performance.

Victorious Secret > Manuél Ferrari 01/14/2014 at 21:59

1

And here is that all important rub with the Audi R8 - its actually considered a supercar.

Not a sports car. Not a speedy A4. Its a bonafide supercar regardless of which engine you went with. Because it has THAT presence.

The Ford GT is one of the few American cars to start creeping up in value and now look at them, 100% ROI on the car? Not bad for something on wheels eh? And thats regardless of the mileage on the car I've found.

The 458 is a supercar because it hits all the right boxes. It could've been powered by a 2 liter hamster, it still ticks the boxes a supercar demands. It has that 'other' feeling that no Corvette or Viper will EVER have (well, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt)

I do not discount the Corvette. It is a great sportscar. It is not a great supercar because it isn't a supercar at all.

And I think mid-engine is not a requirement entirely. Why? Ferrari 599. Ferrari F12. Those however retain that 'special sauce' that we expect from supercars.

See its hard to put into words, but we just know what is or isn't a supercar.

Manuél Ferrari > Victorious Secret 01/14/2014 at 22:18

1

Exactly. Presence is really important, especially to non-gearheads.

The C7 (in all forms) is an AWESOME sports car. All versions are track capable. All versions will smoke 90%+ of the cars you see on public roads during the daily commute. All versions will have class-leading maintenance costs. It's one of the best sportscar platforms out there today. It's not a supercar and that's not a bad thing. Supercars are impractical, expensive to run, and the attention they attract can get really annoying after a while.

Supercars are more about appearances than anything else. While there are definitely some true gearheads that buy exotics I would bet that a lot of buyers don't read car blogs everyday like we do. They just want to stand out in a crowd. I met this girl once about 4 years ago who lived in an apartment complex in LA that had a big parking garage. One of the residents had a F430 Spider that he parked there. I made a comment to her about it and she said girls who have never met the guy leave notes with their phone numbers on the car. The guy probably spent more per month on his car payment than his rent but his entry-level supercar probably met his objectives. Would a C7 Z06 achieve the same results?

I think what the OP is trying to say is that GM should produce a bonkers supercar that's exclusive and a true halo. One that millions of kids have posters of on their walls. It's true that these cars often lose companies money on a per-car basis. But their success can't just be looked at on a per-unit basis. What is the value of making kids dream of a Caddy instead of a Ferrari? What is the value of raising the prestige of Caddy so more businessmen pick the CTS over a Merc? If done right a true halo car can be a success even if GM loses money on each car they sell.

Axial > Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight 01/15/2014 at 01:05

1

It failed because its performance was actually worse than the less expensive Chevrolet. That is not good for what is supposed to be the epitome of your company's engineering.

Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight > Axial 01/15/2014 at 01:50

1

It failed because its performance was actually worse than the less expensive Chevrolet. That is not good for what is supposed to be the epitome of your company's engineering.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

And that's because of all the infighting at GM (long story).

I thought I said that..... maybe you said it better ;)

Axial > Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight 01/15/2014 at 01:51

1

I blame my lack of sleep and the effects of having had my wisdom teeth pulled earlier today. My apologies!

Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight > Axial 01/15/2014 at 01:56

0

We (my XLR club) got to talk to the lead engineer of the development team and he told us the long drawn out story of what happened to make Cadillac end up with the NorthStar engine and it wasn't pretty.

Axial > Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight 01/15/2014 at 02:00

0

As an enthusiast of the XLR's Corvette cousin, I will say that I'm actually rather fond of the XLR despite its flaws; it had great potential. What was up with the Northstar? It should have also been at least as good as the LT5, so I don't know where the ball was dropped. In addition, I've also read that the suspension was a let-down even in the XLR-V. The nail in the coffin, however, had to be Cadillac's mediocre (for luxury) interiors of the time.

It's really a shame. I hope Cadillac gets back on board with the luxury sports coupe; an SLS AMG fighter would quite amazing from GM.

Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight > Axial 01/15/2014 at 03:58

1

You're definitely OPPO: most Corvette "enthusiasts" hate us.

"Flaws"??? The XLR-V was the most powerful NorthStar Cadillac would warranty. A hasty decision at best, probably no time to develop a new motor and couldn't use the corvette one. The suspension is C6 base with custom mag ride for ride comfort. Having had both, the XLR is a great highway car cruising for hours in luxurious comfort as opposed to the vette that beats on you for hours. It was never meant to be a track car (although mine is now - Z06 springs/ZR1 sways underneath and 502 RWHP ) just a luxury convertible with Cadillac style.

I thing a sport coupe is shooting too low and will bring back the memories of the perceived XLR failures. Cadillac needs a SUPERCAR. It needs to be over the top. Way over the top! It needs to be low production. Exclusivity is everything! It needs to be sold out before the first one gets built. It needs to be owned by only the most elite collectors. It needs to perform. Someone else above hinted at a track only car.

Would that be cool or what - build it for 24Hrs of LeMans (too high, OK, maybe TUDOR championship), get everybody and his dog to write reviews along the way, win it, then sell 200 street legal copies to collectors, and ; booYaa!

Axial > Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight 01/15/2014 at 04:49

0

I'm just regurgitating what I've read in the review magazines, since I've never actually driven one. The XLR-V was considered too little, too late, and was still bested by the Z06, which actually still cost less than the XLR-V. It was a really unfortunate outcome. As for other Corvette enthusiasts hating the XLR: I dunno. Over on CorvetteForum, I've seen it acknowledged and accepted as a Corvette cousin and I've seen others say that Cadillac should try again, back when the C7 was rumored to be under consideration as a platform for a new Cadillac. I don't see how any Corvette fan can really hate the XLR. Be disappointed? Sure. But hate ?

I also do agree that Cadillac needs a supercar, but it's not time yet. If they did it now, it will be seen as a publicity stunt and not a flexing of engineering muscle with serious cachet. They need to work up to that. Releasing cars like the Elmiraj would help, and then perhaps a smaller coupe as well. They first need to be seen, widely, as being near equal to the incumbents, and creating a super car right then and there would drive the golden stake into their railway of respect. But the key will be to push the envelope. It's Cadillac's way to be different, and as such their supercar would have to be different, pushing the envelope in more unexpected ways than simply being really fast and really classy.

Sunray09 > RightFootDown 01/15/2014 at 06:59

1

If they had the courage to build the things they trot out and show us as the ''future'' then their sales would be on an ever increasing uptrend but they dont. We wind up with watered down design cues. That 2002 study is better looking than anything they have produced since including the Z06. I would cut my left nut off to own that vehicle and if thats a sales metric they need to keep in mind when they have the beancounters around the table in the board room. ''yeah but would you cut your left nut off to buy one?'' If the answer is yes...PRODUCE IT.

Sunray09 > RightFootDown 01/15/2014 at 15:00

1

Take my money..here just take it..and my left testicle.

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > For Sweden 01/23/2014 at 20:54

0

Normally you and I see eye to eye but not on this on. For me the 458 is a sportscar, but not a supercar. Not even close. It's faster than a supercar from 7 or 10 years ago. It's not that rare, not that expensive and has a 'normal' car vibe. A lot of midwestern accountants can own a 458, or a Z06 or ZR1 (very very fast GT cars), but they couldn't touch an Aventador or a Pagani.

Bronomaly > For Sweden 01/24/2014 at 01:00

0

Same with an F12, people call it a Grand Tourer, but anything with a 700+ HP mid-front mounted V12 that is as batshit insane as that car is, is definitely a supercar.

evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) > AthomSfere 01/24/2014 at 01:10

1

Exactly, Toyota did the LF-A because they were swimming in cash and being attacked for losing their soul. GM is rebuilding themselves and cannot be accused of ignoring enthusiasts in any way. They need a Caddy flagship more than anything, which they're working on. Besides that, I'd say a BRZ fighter, which is still on the table.

AthomSfere > evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) 01/24/2014 at 06:41

0

I can't see a BRZ fighter making production for Chevy. I think it would cannibalize Camaro sales, at least the V6 sales.
But who knows... The brands that I think would have made sense under GM to carry a BRZ fighter are now dead (Pontiac and Saturn).

Ry-bones, FiST pilot > RightFootDown 01/24/2014 at 08:00

0

I like your argument but have to disagree. The LF-A did next to nothing for Toyota. Yes, it is a great car, arguably the best ever, but what were the benefits? If you blinked you missed the 2 year production run, it lost money on each one while costing an incredible sum and it didn't provide any cache to Lexus that wasn't already there. BUT take the Toyobaru on the other hand. That car has single-handedly given Toyota it's heart back. They are selling all they can make. That is what GM needs, not a money pit.

offroadkarter > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/24/2014 at 08:31

0

the corvette was never launched with the intention of being a super car. Hell I think its been around at least 20 years before that even became a term. It was and still is a sports car. I don't think they can just become super cars from gaining a bunch of horsepower.

evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) > AthomSfere 01/24/2014 at 14:58

0

Nah, the V6 Camaro would be bigger, heavier and more expensive. And if they did it just like the BRZ, there would be no V6 offered and it would handle way better being based on the Alpa platform. I highly doubt BRZ buyers are cross-shopping V6 Camaros.

AthomSfere > evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) 01/24/2014 at 15:12

0

I would. Despite the BRZ being overall a better car...

Both start pretty close to $25k, also in that range:

BRZ

FR-s

Camaro V6

Mustang V6

Challenger V6

Genesis 2.0T (3.8R isn't much more)

And with the V6 Camaro, its been out longer and has a better after market support ecosystem. Spend $25k get 100HP more and plenty of cheap after market parts to fit in a bigger engine bay...

evilfacelessturtle (Hooning a Ford is Domestic Abuse) > AthomSfere 01/24/2014 at 16:34

0

You would be in the minority though. It really depends on the next gen Camaro though because it will be based on a stretched Alpha platform and lose some weight.