C8 hot take: Corvette pricing has remained remarkably the same over the years.

"ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com" (ita97) 07/23/2019 at 16:40 • Filed to: None

2

21

With all the talk about how affordable the starting at roughly $60k C8 is compared to it’s fellow big boy, mid-engined sports car competition, its easy to miss how remarkable I find it that corvette pricing has remained basically the same for at least the last 30 years. That is to say, GM knows their market for the corvette and has steadfastly resisted the urge to go upmarket and chase different buyers with a higher price tag.

Take my former 1993 LT1/6-speed car that I owned and used as a daily driver a couple of years ago. I bought it from the original owner (my parent’s next door neighbor), and the car came with every piece of paper from the time it was new. Even the temporary tag from 1993 was in the file. Thinking back to the window sticker and purchase order, this car stickered for $38k and change, with a negotiated a price of right around $35k. It was a relatively lightly optioned car. It was a base vette, with the only options being dual, power leather seats, the optional CD AND tape player B ose audio system, automatic climate control and an early TPMS system. It lacked more expensive sport seats, an auto transmission, the FX3 electrically adjustable shocks and transparent roof panel that were extra cost options found on most 93 vettes, to say nothing of the 40th anniversary package, the Z51 suspension package (or the $31,000 ZR-1 option package). That is also to say that except for the lack of Z51/Zo7 slightly lower and stiffer/bigger front brakes and suspension package, this is exactly how I would’ve speced this car myself  had I been of vette buying age and means in 1993 instead in of 3rd grade.

Take that $38,000 in the 1993 dollars and plug it into an inflation calculator, and we get $67,359.40 in today’s money. That’s around what they say a C8 will sell for, and in the range of what a C7 started at. If anything, the Corvette has gotten slightly cheaper over time. Sure, there’s going to be some dealer markups on the C8 for awhile, but that’s been the case with many a new generation of vettes. They won’t last. I’d wager a year or so from now you’ll have no problem picking up/placing an order for the C8 of your liking from the GM dealer near you and negotiating a little something off the MSRP.

!!! UNSUPPORTED LINE BREAK IN HEADER !!!

For Sweden > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 16:46

3

Corvette hot take: GM will give the C8 a manual after a Youtuber puts the first generation Ford GT transaxle in one.

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > For Sweden 07/23/2019 at 16:47

1

That is scorching .

For Sweden > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 16:52

4

Yes, once it is burnt, Tavarish will take over the project.

InFierority Complex > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 17:01

2

I agree, which is probably why I’m not sure this is much of a hot take, it’s just how the Corvette has always been. I think my dad’s 61 would have been 5k or so new which is in the 40k range after inflation which seems about right.

It’s always (or at least since the Corvette became the Corvette, ya know?) been the attainable performance car which could punch above its price point. I think that’s part of the reason why so many people love them.

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > InFierority Complex 07/23/2019 at 17:08

0

Your right. This is probably more of a luke warm take.

Textured Soy Protein > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 17:16

5

The other thing GM has been really good at with the Corvette is making it into something resembling a legit performance car.

The C4 started out as a total crapcan but the chassis has some potential and by the end of its run at least had some interesting engine options.

The C5 had a legit good chassis with none of the ridiculous mini-feet-only footwells and chunky side sills, legit motors, and still GM crapcan quality, even though the chassis itself with the hydroformed frame rails and aluminum suspension arms was kinda advanced.

C6 and C7 kept refining the C5 formula and making it increasingly competitive with normal real cars that weren’t GM crapcans.

C8 all of a sudden is a $60k Ferrari/Lambo/McLaren. 

Ash78, voting early and often > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 17:16

0

I’m gonna say it has gotten more expensive, but reasonably so. I don’t think inflation (post-1990 or 95) really applies to cars, since you can objectively get so much more car for the same absolute dollars today than you could back then.

Computers (Moore’s Law) are a big part of it, but also just consolidation and improvements in manufacturing materials and techniques (JIT, Kaizen). It’s really amazing. If GM really wanted to sell the new Vette for $45k they probably could make it work, but it would just be stupid. $60k is a great starting price point. And it’s relatively cheaper than your C4 example — icing on the cake!

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > Textured Soy Protein 07/23/2019 at 17:20

0

I feel like you may be biased.

Textured Soy Protein > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 07/23/2019 at 17:24

2

When I say the older vettes are crapcans, that doesn’t mean they’re not also good! It is entirely possible for a car to be both a pile of crap, and great. See also: the WJ Grand Cherokee, which I love, in spite of it being a pile of crap.

Daily Drives a Dragon - One Last Lap > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 17:43

2

S omeone did the math and used the corvette to compare sports cars using the corvette as a reference for comparison. I cant find it now though

Grindintosecond > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/23/2019 at 17:52

1

Also remarkable, the relatively little model bloat through decades, unlike the 911, the z, any suv, any truck. It’s still the gt  coupe it always was and never really got fat.

Future next gen S2000 owner > For Sweden 07/23/2019 at 17:59

0

Why then didn’t do that is beyond me. A new housing and input shaft and be done with it.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > Textured Soy Protein 07/23/2019 at 18:09

0

Sa ying that a ma ny-hundred horsepower v8 RWD Coupe “resembles” a performance car makes it sound like you somehow don’t consider it one?

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > Textured Soy Protein 07/23/2019 at 18:27

0

I find one the interesting things along these lines is how evolutionary the vette was. The C4 rear suspension was a fairly mild evolution of the C2 and C3 rear suspensions. Sure it was mostly aluminum and played with the traverse spring mounting scheme and the way the trailing arms were executed, but the basic idea was the same. The C5 adding rear upper control arms to the transverse leaf-spring design and having the rear axle shafts no longer load bearing was the first to really go about the idea differently than had been done since 1963. The C4 front suspension established the basic design used all the way through the end of the C7 today. The C4 was mostly aluminium suspension components like the C5.

The frame this was all mounted to did get vastly better after the C4. The chunky side-sills were an interesting engineering workaround on the C4. It was originally supposed to be T-top car, with a very structural member connecting the windshield frame to the main hoop. Management dictated the car had to be a full targa fairly late in the design process. Apparent way too late to design the car to have actually been a targa, so the late-stage work around was the increase the height of the frame rails going down the sides of the car in an attempt to maintain some degree of rigidity with the top removed. Even still, the targa tops actually bolt in at each of the corners on a C4, because they’re a structural member of the car. They drive like a wet-noodle if you take top out. I did it exactly one time on my car. It also makes for a foot tall side sill and the fall-in/climb out experience.

The overall performance difference and handling between a later LT1 or LT4 C4 and a non-Z06 C5 isn’t tremendously large, but the ergonomics got tremendously better. The ride also got way better once the suspension didn’t have to be sprung stiff enough to make up for a wet-noodle chassis.

Textured Soy Protein > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 07/23/2019 at 19:09

0

Maybe I didn’t say that so well . The early C4 was, well, crap. And even when they started making it better, the car has many compromises that couldn’t really be overcome. It’s capable of performance but even by the early 90s, despite the V8, it was severely outclassed by the Japanese competition.

But they kept evolving the Corvette and everything C5 on up is legit performance. They’ve become increasingly less shitty with each generation and the C7 is the first one I’d say with no real compromises in areas like having an interior that’s above shitty rental car grade.

I actually really like the C5 on up.

Turbineguy: Nom de Zoom > Future next gen S2000 owner 07/23/2019 at 21:42

0

I read Tadge Juechter said putting in a manual would have meant their trans supplier designing and producing a bespoke transmission for that car, which would’ve been ‘ spensive. And the take rate for shifty Vettes is only 15%.

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > For Sweden 07/23/2019 at 21:45

0

you guys do realize that it requires more than just a transmission change, right?

Pedal box, firewall, shifter mechanism, linkages, hydrauling plumbing, or cabling routed through the center of the car, around the engine, to the gearbox, and remaining precise enough for tactile feedback.

What else is in that area? The electronic gear selector is relatively tiny, and needs only wires. Probably only a few for lighting and some CANBUS signals.

Not only that, but there aren’t hydraulics, cables, or linkages at the gearbox end, either, where it runs into exhaust routing, other drivetrain components, and the rear cargo space.

It isn’t just a clutch pedal, and a shifter right next to the gearbox.

It can be done, it has been done... but it takes up space, it takes up alternate parts count, design R&D, testing, and increased federalization to crash test and EPA certify two drivetrain options, rather than one. All that raises overhead costs... which raises MSRP.

For a diminishing take rate, and a statistical performance deficit, there are more cons than pros, all for a difference in experience between rowing a stick vs clicking a paddle behind the steering wheel.

The returns have diminished below a feasible threshold.

For Sweden > BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. 07/23/2019 at 22:10

0

Like life, the YouTubers will find a way.

shop-teacher > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/24/2019 at 08:37

1

Yep. The only big jump in price was really in the C3 to C4 transition. I’m too lazy to look it up, but I believe the price went from the mi d teens to the mid 20s with that transition. The price has pretty much stayed the same since ‘84 though, adjusted for inflation. While I’ve seen some people bemoaning that nobody is actually going to be able to buy a C8 for under $60k, I bet most C7s are already optioned over $60k anyways.

PS9 > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 07/27/2019 at 16:08

1

These things are gonna hit $30k used eventually. That’s ‘rich parents buying their irresponsible kids fast toys’ territory. 500HP + Snap oversteer = sharp decline in the jock/cheerleeder population approximately 10-15 years from now.

Poor things. They survived the rise of the V6 Mustangs to 13 sec. territory only for this to happen. 

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > PS9 07/27/2019 at 18:25

0

We'll see what happens when folks start driving these, but if previous generations are a guide the electronic nannies and suspension tuning of non-Z06/ZR1 type models is going to be very conservative.  That doesn't mean they're not capable, but tuned conservatively towards the undeesteer side of things with early and often electronic intervention.