[Techn9cian805]

so is it official that all of us who ordered the SS are screwed out of the OEM blade?
I don't very much care if I get it from chevy or from an aftermarket company, I just want one. sucks that GM screwed us tho with their negligence.

[G Fo12ce]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

so is it official that all of us who ordered the SS are screwed out of the OEM blade?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

I don't very much care if I get it from chevy or from an aftermarket company, I just want one. sucks that GM screwed us tho with their negligence.

See post #204, 1 solution already in the works.

[RenegadeXR]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

so is it official that all of us who ordered the SS are screwed out of the OEM blade?
I don't very much care if I get it from chevy or from an aftermarket company, I just want one. sucks that GM screwed us tho with their negligence.

I hate to say it, but as people have already said multiple times now: Yes, you can't get the OEM blade on your SS or it will leave an exposed hole. Only newer orders will begin to ship with the LT decklid pre-installed so the dealer can install the blade without any fitment issues or need to drill.

Your only option is to wait until the aftermarket has a solution, which we have no timeline for. If you want to get OEM, you're looking at paying for an LT decklid. paint, and installation fees, which is going to be pretty expensive. Probably well over $1,000 when all is said and done.

GM didn't screw anybody over. The blade spoiler was never intended for the SS when the 6th gen launched. I've even spoken to GM engineers in person at their Find New Roads tour last year and gotten this same response. Others have talked to engineers at other events and gotten this consistent response too. It was never planned which is why there are fitment issues on the normal SS decklid. They changed their decision later on.

It makes about as much sense to complain about this as it does to get upset if the 2017 has some new feature that the 2016 model year didn't. If you're an early adopter, you need to be prepared to get burned on features and quality control. This is an inherent risk with any product, cars or otherwise.

[Modshack]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

so is it official that all of us who ordered the SS are screwed out of the OEM blade?

Actually no one screwed you out of anything. You got what was available when you took delivery (Which was before they figured out how to accommodate these requests.)

Negligent? Nah, I don't think so..

[Techn9cian805]

Originally Posted by RenegadeXR

I hate to say it, but as people have already said multiple times now: Yes, you can't get the OEM blade on your SS or it will leave an exposed hole. Only newer orders will begin to ship with the LT decklid pre-installed so the dealer can install the blade without any fitment issues or need to drill.

Your only option is to wait until the aftermarket has a solution, which we have no timeline for. If you want to get OEM, you're looking at paying for an LT decklid. paint, and installation fees, which is going to be pretty expensive. Probably well over $1,000 when all is said and done.

GM didn't screw anybody over. The blade spoiler was never intended for the SS when the 6th gen launched. I've even spoken to GM engineers in person at their Find New Roads tour last year and gotten this same response. Others have talked to engineers at other events and gotten this consistent response too. It was never planned which is why there are fitment issues on the normal SS decklid. They changed their decision later on.

It makes about as much sense to complain about this as it does to get upset if the 2017 has some new feature that the 2016 model year didn't. If you're an early adopter, you need to be prepared to get burned on features and quality control. This is an inherent risk with any product, cars or otherwise.

but why? what was the logic behind that decision? and now its planned for the 1LE, which is supposed to be a track ready package, so does it actually provide better down force or whatever than the stock SS park bench spoiler? I don't get these engineers...

[RenegadeXR]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

but why? what was the logic behind that decision? and now its planned for the 1LE, which is supposed to be a track ready package, so does it actually provide better down force or whatever than the stock SS park bench spoiler? I don't get these engineers...

Because of market demand and money. Trust me, I'm equally as confused about their 180 because engineers were explaining how only the SS wing provides the proper aero for track use according to wind tunnel testing. All that got swept to the side when the 1LE was announced to have the blade by default.

All I am saying is that, as another poster said, when you placed your order this was not an option at the time. You can't fault them as if they withheld something or messed up the order. They did what they could at that specific time before they made changes to their factory process to allow an LT decklid to be installed in lieu of the stock decklid.

[Techn9cian805]

Originally Posted by RenegadeXR

Because of market demand and money. Trust me, I'm equally as confused about their 180 because engineers were explaining how only the SS wing provides the proper aero for track use according to wind tunnel testing. All that got swept to the side when the 1LE was announced to have the blade by default.

All I am saying is that, as another poster said, when you placed your order this was not an option at the time. You can't fault them as if they withheld something or messed up the order. They did what they could at that specific time before they made changes to their factory process to allow an LT decklid to be installed in lieu of the stock decklid.

thats fine, I knew what I signed up for buying an early build first model year, but come on, this spoiler issue is just stupid; someone forgot something and dropped the ball, I will bet anything on it. bad planning from the gm guys.

still, looking forward to seeing what 6LE gives us as an alternative

[VanillaCams]

Well it's not just current SS owners but any NEW SS owners as well... keep in mind most people don't do custom builds and unless a dealer orders their cars with the 5ZU Blade (I'm guessing most orders won't) then even future SS owners are in the same boat. Doesn't really have much to do with being an early adopter, IMO. GM dropped the ball on the design leaving a hole exposed, something easily fixed during the design phase had it been caught.

[Techn9cian805]

BAM!!!!

I call bullshit to those who claim it was never planned for the SS. Here's your proof.



See what is different in this early design concept and the final release?

They added a 3rd leg!!! and what do you know, it happens to be the source of our problem!


the damned third leg that screwed us out of an easy swap. So, it was planned for both the LT and SS, but somebody decided to add a 3rd leg, and forgot to consider that it wouldn't work then with the blade...


so don't believe those liars about it never being planned for the SS... somebody dropped the ball, there is no defending and denying that.


/butthurt rant.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

but why? what was the logic behind that decision? and now its planned for the 1LE, which is supposed to be a track ready package, so does it actually provide better down force or whatever than the stock SS park bench spoiler? I don't get these engineers...

Early SS prototypes didn't have the center post on the stanchion spoiler. I was told Chevy wanted all the accessories ready for launch so I assume the blade was designed before they added the center post. Makes sense that the original SS and LT could both mount the blade. Now, SS must be LPO or 1LE to mount the blade. If you decide later, deck must be replaced or repaired.

When they first showed the blade they said "early 2016" and the situation was pretty apparent by late January.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by RenegadeXR

Because of market demand and money. Trust me, I'm equally as confused about their 180 because engineers were explaining how only the SS wing provides the proper aero for track use according to wind tunnel testing. All that got swept to the side when the 1LE was announced to have the blade by default.

I don't remember the GM engineers saying the wing was wind tunnel tested for track use. They just said that they spent X amount of hours testing and developing it.

The wing spoiler was probably developed to reduce drag by reducing turbulence behind the car, which will also help with high speed stability and better highway MPGs. The blade spoiler will have greater turbulence behind the car (and therefore greater drag), worse highway MPGs, but greater downforce (which is better for the track). Aerodynamic designs can be one or the other, but usually not both, because downforce usually creates more drag (but not always).

[RenegadeXR]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

the damned third leg that screwed us out of an easy swap. So, it was planned for both the LT and SS, but somebody decided to add a 3rd leg, and forgot to consider that it wouldn't work then with the blade…

This was pointed out and may be true as well. In the design phase, they probably did test the blade at one point with the SS before they decided to add a 3rd stanchion. The issue is that by the time the Find New Roads tour was ongoing and the designs were finalized, the engineers were pretty confident at that point that the blade wasn't going to be offered. So they may have not revisited the blade to make sure there weren't fitment issues on the SS.

It sounds like they flip flopped twice. They considered it during preproduction, decided against it, and then changed course again. Stuff like this is what causes engineering issues and fitment problems.

[RenegadeXR]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I don't remember the GM engineers saying the wing was wind tunnel tested for track use. They just said that they spent X amount of hours testing and developing it.

The wing spoiler was probably developed to reduce drag by reducing turbulence behind the car, which will also help with high speed stability and better highway MPGs. The blade spoiler will have greater turbulence behind the car (and therefore greater drag), worse highway MPGs, but greater downforce (which is better for the track). Aerodynamic designs can be one or the other, but usually not both, because downforce usually creates more drag.

Fair enough. My memory is hazy from a year ago, but they probably didn't say anything about the track. I think you're right that all they said was they spent a lot of time doing wind tunnel testing. The interpretation of that is totally open. They didn't go into any other detail. As you pointed out, it could be because they were actually trying to limit drag.

[Mike502]

Well team mustang has this up their sleeve.