Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

GM News, New Models and Market Share

1604605607609610631

Comments

  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    edited January 2013
    Your dealer was a putz--clearly a possibility.

    It wouldn't be the first time a dealer didn't know his product line. I've had that experience several times.

    It defies logic that a modern vehicle along the lines of the Cruze would not have factory installed cruise control available...

    Edit:

    http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/cruze/2011/features-specs.html?sub=sedan&style=- 101329352

    Cruise was available on the 2011 Automatic trans. model...
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,277
    It defies logic that a modern vehicle along the lines of the Cruze would not have factory installed cruise control available...

    I agree. I have seen the same thing on stripper versions of other makes tho, like the last gen Honda Civic DX and some base model Scions/Toyotas.

    But it was humerous to me how a car called "Cruze" would omit a feature of the same name. Just seems like they left the door wide open for criticism... :P
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    I wasn't. He really has had trouble with his Honda mower.

    I also had a Honda self-propelled mower, which I fortunately no longer have.

    I always felt the HP stated on the engine was highly overstated, and the gearbox had an average 3-4 year lifespan (my lawn is approx. 1/4 acre). After the second transmission played out, I let the mover go to the landscaping product graveyard.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    Again, they didn't omit it. It was available in 2011 from the factory.

    And from the order guide in the Yahoo link, it apparently was available in the Eco that year as well.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    If it wasn't for the Corvair, there very well could have been no Mustang, Barracuda, or Camaro/Firebird. It was the Corvair that uncovered the market for an inexpensive domestic compact, and thus served as some inspiration for the Mustang.

    Wonder about that. Could it be that Euopean sports cars were the inspiration for the Mustang?
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,192
    Thirteen cars and 32 years later, I still don't regret never buying one.

    That is a lot of cars for 32 years.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,192
    I've had 5 cars (personal daily drivers, not counting kids or wife's car) in 40 years.

    I guess that's why I'm concerned about long term reliability. ;)

    For someone who trades in every 3 years or so, it doesn't really matter much.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Posts: 23,789
    edited January 2013
    >Your dealer was a putz

    If that was what the dealer actually said. Unbelievable about the stories some will perpetuate about GM. Even the ECO has cruise control standard.

    I did notice that Cruze does what toyota does on the Corolla and probably the Camry, Cruise is an option on the lowest model for price competitiveness.

    I also notice the Corolla is only rated at 34 highway. The Cruze is 36 and the Malibu is 33. Corolla or Malibu? Malibu is much better optioned. Same for the Cruze for me.

    2015 Cruze 2LT, 2014 Malibu 2LT, 2008 Cobalt 2LT

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    That's buying for me and my wife.

    I've had three with over 100K miles (108K, 112K, and 129.6K), one with 94K, one with 93K, one with 75K, and the others with less. Way back when, as a bachelor, I traded every three years as I wanted to. I have 62K and 23K on our two Chevys now.

    My first new car, an '81 Monte Carlo, I had for 18 mos. and 35K miles as it was stolen and not recovered. I replaced it with an '82 Monte Carlo that was the dealership owner's demo. It was a V6 which I did not like as well as my previous V8.

    In 2002, I bought two new Chevys...one for my wife in January, and one for me in April.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,192
    I also notice the Corolla is only rated at 34 highway. The Cruze is 36 and the Malibu is 33. Corolla or Malibu? Malibu is much better optioned. Same for the Cruze for me.

    The Corolla is definitely not very competitive. They're riding on their company reputation and I'm sure it is very reliable. Just not very appealing at all.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,192
    That's buying for me and my wife.

    Ok, not quite so many, then!

    I guess my biggest gap was buying my first car used and waiting ten years for another. Then keeping the next one for another 9 years.

    I've just passed 8 years on my current ride. Thinking about a change in the next couple of years or so. :P
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    Wonder about that. Could it be that Euopean sports cars were the inspiration for the Mustang?

    Not really, when you realize how few European sports cars were being sold in this country at that time, and how the Mustang was priced low--way low--compared to them.

    I think andre left the term 'sporty' out of his sentence.

    The Corvair Monza was the first domestic small car to have (for the time) luxurious and sporty appointments; e.g., bucket seats and deluxe vinyl trim inside. It spawned the Falcon Futura and Lark Daytona and Valiant Signet and eventually the Mustang, which in turn spawned the Camaro and Firebird.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 8,863
    Not really, when you realize how few European sports cars were being sold in this country at that time, and how the Mustang was priced low--way low--compared to them.

    IIRC, Iacocca was influenced by the 2 seat European cars brought back by WW II vets but he was more interested in their children. Those baby boomers were now reaching an age (18+) where they would be buying their first new cars and had grown up with Dad's import.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    edited January 2013
    The Corvair Monza was the first domestic small car to have (for the time) luxurious and sporty appointments; e.g., bucket seats and deluxe vinyl trim inside. It spawned the Falcon Futura and Lark Daytona and Valiant Signet and eventually the Mustang, which in turn spawned the Camaro and Firebird.

    The Corvair Monza spawned nothing. From its failure and demise in mid-late 60's to this very day, there has not been a single American branded auto using the Corvair's rear-engine, rear-drive layout. Perhaps the closest though was the failed mid-engine Pontiac Fiero, produced for about 5 years in the mid 80's.

    No way did the Monza spawn or eventually lead to the Mustang. The Mustang design was front engine-rear drive, long hood and short deck. Not close to resembling the Corvair.

    GM has had many failures in car designs, brands over the years. Corvair, Fiero, Saturn. Then, the company itself failed, went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by we taxpayers.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    Just before going bankrupt, GM gave us Solstice and Sky. These cars reportedly had many problems and the divisions that produced them, Pontiac and Saturn, were eliminated by GM.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    No offense xrunner, but you really need to read some histories on the Monza and the Mustang and which spawned what, and on the explosion of the compact car market in the U.S. at that time.

    BTW, the only problem I ever heard about the Solstice and Sky was that the top was clunky.

    Lots of revisionist history going on here lately.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    Nothing in history showing a connection between Corvair and the original 1965 Mustang which went on sale in Spring of 1964. Mustang is more of Ford's idea for the creation of a brand new market segment. If anything, Mustang was Ford's affordable answer to higher priced "real" sports cars from Great Britain of that era. Such as Jaguar XKE. Two years later, GM answered with Camaro and Firebird.

    Chrysler/Plymouth introduced the Plymouth Barracuda sporty compact based on the Valiant about the same time that the Mustang went on sale. It too was front engine, rear drive. No connection to the Corvair.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    Nothing in history showing a connection between Corvair and the original 1965 Mustang which went on sale in Spring of 1964

    That may be the most ridiculous statement I've read on this forum...and there have been plenty...maybe only outdone by the Mustang being influenced by the Jaguar XK-E. Note to xrunner: The Mustang was a Falcon underneath.

    I'm done with this particular discussion. It's getting deep in here.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,568
    Well, if you want to get picky, the first "sporty" compact was probably the 1957 Rambler Rebel...a compact car with a 327-4bbl V-8 and dual exhaust. But, it was more sporty in the tough, brawny musclecar sense, than in the more European-style, "less-is-more" tossable type of sportiness. And by 1958 with the onset of recession, all of a sudden "performance" was becoming a dirty word. So the Rebel was about seven years too early.

    The Corvair Monza did not directly spawn any imitators, in the sense that the Mustang, Barracuda, et al were all conventional front engine, RWD, cars. However, it definitely established a niche for itself as a sporty compact and made Ford and Chrysler sit up and take notice.

    Now, the creative geniuses at Ford might not have said "hey, that Covair's a hot little item, let's copy it, but make it more conventional, and call it "Mustang!" But, Ford no doubt noticed that, as the Corvair showed, there was definitely a demand for compacts that were fun and sporty, yet affordable. And not just plain-jane and cheap.

    So, we may be splitting hairs here, but basically the Corvair accidentally uncovered a market for smaller, sporty compacts, and then everyone else jumped on it, but massaged and evolved their own designs.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 48,397
    I don't know if I can really buy a direct Corvair -> Mustang link either. I see the Corvair as much more similar to European cars - more modern and bleeding edge. The Mustang was of course just a rebodied Falcon, which wasn't exactly high technology. The Monza coupe might have shown there was a market for small sporty American cars, but I don't know if the same people bought both it and the Mustang.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    That's simply not true.

    The "Fairlane Group" was a team of ten executives assembled by Lee Iacocca to explore how Ford could tap the youth market, which was projected to grow dramatically in the 1960s.

    When the radical-for-Detroit Corvair sedan appeared in the fall of 1959, it was whipped in sales by the utterly conventional Ford Falcon. GM was seriously disappointed in the Corvair's initial sales performance.

    The Corvair Monza show car appeared in the spring of 1960, and was approved for production for the remainder of the 1960 model year. The first Monza was a specially trimmed Corvair coupe with bucket seats. It was a big hit, and for the 1961 model year, the Monza was the most popular Corvair model.

    This was a huge surprise to Detroit in general, and GM in particular. The top-of-the-line Corvair, with bucket seats, nice interior trim and upgraded exterior trim, was the most popular model. GM had planned the Corvair as a small, economy model, as its mantra was that "small cars were cheap cars." People who bought small cars were not thought to be interested in style or looks, and given the success of late 1950s Ramblers, one could hardly blame GM for making that conclusion.

    The Monza had (temporarily, as it turned out), saved the Corvair. As Hal Sperlich (who was then at Ford) later said, GM turned a failure into a success with the Monza.

    Ford scrambled to keep up with the 1961 Falcon Futura, a specially trimmed, bucket-seat version of the Falcon two-door sedan. The 1963 1/2 Falcon Sprint convertible and hardtop were additional responses to the Monza.

    The original Monza showed the Fairlane Group that there was a large market for a small, sporty, but not very expensive, car. Lackluster sales of the specially trimmed Falcons, however, showed that Ford needed to offer more than a Falcon with bucket seats and a different roofline. As Sperlich later said, putting a different roofline and bucket seats on the prosaic Falcon was like "putting falsies on grandma."

    In the early 1960s, the popularly priced European imports that still sold reasonably well (import sales had essentially collapsed when the Big Three compacts debuted in 1960) were the VW and various British two-seat sports cars. The VW as an economy car, while Ford knew that the market for something on the order of a MG was too limited by its standards.

    Reaction to its Mustang I showcar, which was a radical, two-seat sports car, confirmed this. Iacocca noted that the real buffs loved it, but they were not a large part of the market at that time (or today, for that matter). The Monza showed Ford which direction to take. The failure of the special-edition Falcons showed that Ford needed something more than a tarted-up Falcon.

    There's a very good chance that, without the success of the first Monza, the Fairlane Group would not have been able to push through the original Mustang.

    Read Mustang Genesis by Robert Fria and The Reckoning by David Halberstam to obtain a complete account of the Monza's influence on Ford's actions during this time period. The first Monza was a hugely influential car in early 1960s Detroit.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 5,192
    I don't know if I can really buy a direct Corvair -> Mustang link either. I see the Corvair as much more similar to European cars - more modern and bleeding edge. The Mustang was of course just a rebodied Falcon, which wasn't exactly high technology. The Monza coupe might have shown there was a market for small sporty American cars, but I don't know if the same people bought both it and the Mustang.

    Agreed. The Corvair was more like GM's VW Beetle or Karmann Ghia. The Mustang doesn't really have much resemblance other than being "sporty".
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    Ford wasn't copying the Corvair's drivetrain layout - it was copying the concept of a stylish compact coupe with bucket seats, console, and up-level exterior and interior trim. That was a radical concept for Detroit at that time.

    The general consensus in Detroit, prior to the debut of the Monza, was that small cars were primarily purchased by people too poor/cheap/dumb to buy a "real" (meaning, full-size) car.

    If you wanted style, you were supposed to buy an Impala or Galaxie hardtop coupe with all of the trimmings.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    if you're going to be that general then the Corvair was actually GM copying the VW Type 1 "Beetle."
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    The Corvair part of the equation is the Monza, not just the Corvair.

    Really, articles have been written about the Monza concept (deluxe trim, bucket seats in a compact car) influencing the rest of Detroit, for decades. I mean, such articles have been around for decades.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    Yeah, but who wrote those articles, the GM PR department? ;)

    All cars influence each other to various extents, even abject failures like the Aztek. But at a certain point one just stretches the relationship too fat.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    I have thirty seconds invested in finding the below article on the net, and copying the link here.
    http://wardsauto.com/news-amp-analysis/mustangs-birthing-pains-iacocca-scores-hi- - s-third-pitch-henry-ford-ii
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    The first Corvair was GM's response to the VW Beetle, and was influenced by its layout.

    Ed Cole had long been enamored with a rear-engine layout.

    Cadillac had built several rear-engine prototypes in the immediate postwar period, when Ed Cole worked on the development of Cadillac's milestone ohv V-8 for 1949.

    Booming sales of the VW Beetle after 1955, along with the severe recession in late 1957, enabled him to get a greenlight for what became the Corvair. It's safe to say that, if the VW Beetle hadn't scored its big sales increase in the late 1950s, there never would have been a Corvair. At best, in response to rising Rambler sales, GM probably would have went with a "safer" (and cheaper to build) design on the order of the 1962 Chevy II.

    This is all part of the historical record. There is no denying that the success of the first Corvair Monza had a tremendous influence in Detroit, and played a key role in Ford's decision to greenlight the Mustang. Even former, high-ranking Ford executives such as Hal Sperlich readily admit this on the record.

    As I've said in a previous post, read Mustang Genesis by Robert Fria and The Reckoning by David Halberstam to learn how the huge success of the Corvair Monza spurred the development of the first Mustang. And, no, Mr. Fria and Mr. Halberstam did not work for the GM PR department.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    Thanks for posting. That's the kind of stuff I've heard and read since I was a teenager...maybe younger.
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    if you're going to be that general then the Corvair was actually GM copying the VW Type 1 "Beetle."

    That's a very good point.

    The Corvair may have identified a previously unrecognized market segment potential, so give it credit for that.

    On the other hand, I could give credit for the Corvette to Henry Ford, who identified the market demand for faster, more reliable transportation than a horse and buggy.

    In the end, it all simply boils down to a measuring contest to see who has the biggest one. Like everything manufactured, each generation is built upon the foundations of previous generations. One can "bob and weave" if they wish, but at the end of the day, its just plain silly...
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    Several Ford executives have gone on the record as crediting the success of the first-generation Corvair Monza with enabling the Fairlane Group to push through the car that became the Mustang. The debate on that point is over and done.

    This information has been out there for decades. The Reckoning was published in 1986, and articles in Special Interest Autos since the 1970s and Collectible Automobile since the 1980s have told the same story.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    keystonecarfan, trying to get certain folks to admit stuff here is...like trying to buy a Model T that wasn't black! ;)
  • This information hasn't exactly been hidden in Indiana Jones's secret jungle cave.

    Mr. Sperlich and Mr. Iacocca, in particular, have openly admitted the influence that the Corvair Monza's success had on Ford's direction in the early 1960s. Several articles and books have been written about this, which isn't surprising, considering that the Mustang was one of the most successful American cars ever built.

    It's not as though we are discussing the history of an obscure car like the Henry J...
  • andres3andres3 Southern CAPosts: 11,082
    BTW, the only problem I ever heard about the Solstice and Sky was that the top was clunky.

    Come on now, has anything positive been said about either of those cars?

    They certainly didn't help GM avoid bankruptcy, nor their makers from extinction.
    '16 Audi TTS quattro 2.0T, '15 Audi A4 quattro 2.0T, '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion AWD
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    Did anyone think a two-seat car was going to save GM from bankruptcy? We discussed sales performance of these cars ad-nauseum compared to the competition here, before. They were not abject sales failures.

    Frankly, I always heard good things about styling and price of those two, and I agree.
  • andres3andres3 Southern CAPosts: 11,082
    THEN why were they both discontinued, never to be seen again?

    The Miata is still available.
    '16 Audi TTS quattro 2.0T, '15 Audi A4 quattro 2.0T, '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion AWD
  • I remember reading that there were problems with the operation of the top.

    Of course, the real problem was that they diverted precious development dollars from more critical GM vehicles at a time when cash was rapidly becoming scarce.

    Malibus and Impalas aren't exciting, but those are the type of vehicles that help pay the bills for successful car companies, not two-seat sports cars. GM needed to make the Malibu and Impala its priority, and, unfortunately, it did not do this.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Looks like a small RWD sports car is back on the radar again, FWIW.
  • Because there isn't a large market for two-seat sports cars in this country. GM did not have the time or the money to further develop the Solstice or the Sky. (At any rate, one of them should have been sold as a Chevrolet - it would have been a better fit.)

    Note that the Toyota MR-2 and Honda S2000 are also long gone.

    Also note that, even with the success of the original Miata, Mazda would have gone under in the 1990s if it hadn't been bailed out by Ford. Now that Ford has divested most of its stake in Mazda, the company is in a precarious position yet again. Any full-line company that stakes its fortunes on a two-seat sports car won't be around for long.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,729
    edited January 2013
    Looks like a small RWD sports car is back on the radar again, FWIW.

    Knowing GM it will still be 500 pounds heavier than the FR-S.
  • berriberri Posts: 10,166
    edited January 2013
    One thing America has always been strong in is innovation and invention. GM took the VW and extended it by offering sporty options like the Monza. Same thing with Chevy II and the Nova. So I agree with Keystone that in many ways Corvair was a precursor to Mustang. At first, Ford extended the Falcon with the Futura and I believe Mopar did the same thing with Valiant and Dart, just like GM did with their Chevy's. The Barracuda was I think technically the first true pony car, but was issued as an extension of the Valiant line. The Mustang then came out shortly thereafter. What it did was bring the Pony car into it's own segment, and quite phenomally if I might add! Another point that I think bolsters the argument is that GM pursued the niche initially by expanding marketing for the Monza and Nova and the affordable small, sporty car concept. It was only after Ford's great success with Mustang that GM subsequently came out with the Camaro. Back in those days Detroit and the auto biz was almost small town like in that word frequently got out quickly about what was going on with the competitors. If GM thought the Mustang was going to catch on so big, I think they would have phased out the Corvair and brought on the Camaro much earlier than '67. Now, I don't want to get Uplander too excited, but there might be an argument that some of the base Studebaker Hawks were first in this segment actually.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    Now, I don't want to get Uplander too excited, but there might be an argument that some of the base Studebaker Hawks were first in this segment actually.

    I lean towards '60's Studes, but I cannot think of a passenger car with a back seat that did the long-hood/short-deck thing before the '56 Hawk. I grew up on GM, but they were doing short hood/long deck through about '64 (with an exception or two).
  • fintailfintail Posts: 48,397
    edited January 2013
    Many 1930s era cars were long hood/short deck, which was maybe an inspiration for the basic proportions of the Hawk/Starlight - jaunty rakish classics.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    You are absolutely correct, thank you. I tend to not even think about prewar cars, a mistake since there are so many beautiful ones out there.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,568
    I always thought those '53 Lowey coupes were one of the first incarnations of what would become the "personal luxury coupe" in later years.

    As for sporty compacts, I had forgotten about this, but on the Valiant, Mopar offered an option called the "Hyper-Pak" for the tiny 170 CID slant six. It consisted of a 4-bbl carb, improved exhaust flow(don't think it was dual though...hard, but not impossible to do with an inline engine), hotter timing, etc.

    It boosted hp from 101 hp to 148. It was only offered in 1960-61. For 1962 it's not showing as being offered in my old car book. I think that year, they started making the bigger 225 version optional in the compacts, and it was big enough to put out 145 hp with just a 1-bbl carb and no special tricks.

    For comparison, in 1960, the Corvair offered a 140 flat six with 80 or 95 hp. That year's Falcon had a 144 CID inline-6 with 90 hp. They made a 170 CID enlargement with 101 hp optional for 1961.

    Studebaker was shoving 259.2 V-8's under the hood of their compact Larks for 1960, offering either 180 or 195 hp, so they were the musclecars of the bunch in that day. A 169.6 straight six with 90 hp was standard.

    Ramblers came with a 195.6 CID inline 6 with 127 hp or 138 hp (there was a 90 hp version that was only used in the smaller 100" wb American), or a pair of 250 V-8's with 200 or 215 hp.

    Looks like Rambler actually created the mold of what would be the typical "standard" compact in later years, by offering a base 6-cyl engine of adequate power, at least, and with a V-8 option that would give pretty good performance. Studebaker was close, offering strong V-8's, given their displacement, but came up just a touch short in the 6-cyl department.

    But oddly, for 1961, Rambler quit offering a V-8 in their compacts.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 11,328
    edited January 2013
    But oddly, for 1961, Rambler quit offering a V-8 in their compacts.

    True. I think their '63 Classic was a handsome car, and Motor Trend's Car of the Year, but a V8 wasn't even available until mid-year and a hardtop, even in their Ambassador line, wasn't available at all.

    Studebaker offered V8's of 180, 195, 210, 225, 240, and 289 hp in '63 and 64. Well, they sold them in those horsepowers...plus this one 335 hp job:

    http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2004/08/01/hmn_feature20.html

    I've seen this car in person, and NPR actually played the sound of it running while visiting the International Meet in South Bend in '02. A total sleeper.

    All the production and retail sale paperwork the owner talks about were kept at a NOS parts place located in an old Studebaker factory building in South Bend, before they ended up in the Studebaker National Museum archives. That parts place is gone now, but until about ten or twelve years ago survived and you could see painted between the windows on the fifth and sixth floors, "Studebaker Carriages and Harnesses". My wife and I did production order research at that place in the early '90's--when she would still do that kind of stuff with me. ;)
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,664
    GM needed to make the Malibu and Impala its priority, and, unfortunately, it did not do this.

    Ageed. GM never leads. You'de think the new 'bu would have been far better then the Asians at this point.

    Simply not so, as usual. :)

    Regards,
    OW
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Malibus and Impalas aren't exciting, but those are the type of vehicles that help pay the bills for successful car companies, not two-seat sports cars. GM needed to make the Malibu and Impala its priority, and, unfortunately, it did not do this.

    A few issues back, Motor Trend had an opinion piece on that subject.

    It's the everyday, bread and butter vehicles that make the specialty cars possible.

    Over the years the Corvette has been as successful as any sports car, but I doubt it could have survived on its own (profitably, anyway) without the development costs spread out over the entire fleet of GM vehicles.
Sign In or Register to comment.