[oldman]

Originally Posted by genxer

Why wouldn't they have just made more $ per crank window, cloth seat vehicle? They wouldn't have knocked more than a couple hundred off anyway.

Maybe you and #3 missed GM's design styling wasn't that great, to the younger crowd then. The SSR? Better looking bodies went to the Boss Hog badge.

I'd think with chip shortages and rising prices, there'd be more disdain out there for the now favored products. If there's ever a buyer push for getting the f'n tech out of our f'n cars... count me.

Not intending a too sour tone. Merry Christmas to all.

I think IMO of course a slimer C8 with a better ride and ground clearance, cheaper, would look better AND be so much better of a driver's car.

I have a Miata CS BBS as my daily driver and yeah it is getting a little hard to get in and out, and the ride on the runflats ain't the best and no it don't come with a spare.

I thing there is a market demand for a 2/3 C8, especially if it better looking. My bro (he races Boxsters) and my son both are thinking about C7 because they detest the C8's squashed look, especially from the back. I don't hate the C8, I think it is OK, I think the C7 is a really nice looking car.

I could see a V6 auto C8 based Camaro and a SS M6 C8 based Camaro. Right now today, I'm sure my son and brother would order a slimmer C8 with OHV V8 manual, as long as it looked good and ehm had the manual. Performance completely irrelevant.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by oldman

I think a slimed down C8 with a true auto or M6 option would sell as many units as the Vette itself. I HIGHLY doubt a M6 or auto is going to be as expensive as a DCT. I HIGLYT doubt that a 327 400 HP is going to be more expensive than a LT2 or LT6. Assuming there is production capability at the plant, a slimmer version is some where between easy and a "retool". It is the same platform.

I'm well aware of the M6 won't fit.. I'm sure there are "ways". GM would just have to search for a M6 tansaxle. Not like they build the DCT anyway,

There is a HUGE following of people that want an M6 and it is NOT an issue of performance.

I think it is rather funny that you are fundamentally stuck on "no way" without taking into the context of future demand for a OHV V8 and manual in ANYTHING. A slimmed down C8 with the right drivetrain would fill a market left over by the pony cars and the Charger going away. That niche IMO is huge, much bigger than the Vette niche.

Note I have the easier road, I think there is a way and a market; but I'm not saying Chevy will do it. You are saying there is no way or market, which is fundamentally untrue. Maybe there is not enough market or the cost are indeed too high (demands on market eh?).

I’m looking at it as a product planner who would have to make a business case to get GM to invest the money to make it happen. That’s because for many years that was my job. So I’m well acquainted with the things that would stop the proposal in its tracks. Because I’ve had to work to get programs beyond those same barriers. I do know for a fact that Tadge and his team did look hard for an MT manufacturer and could not find one. My team gave the Corvette team detail on MT manufacturers that were supplying European supercar manufacturers. Let me just say that even if one of them could come up with a high enough torque capacity in the required configuration, GM’s price to acquire was in the high 4 digits range. Which would mean it would “price out” at roughly double that to the end consumer. You ready to pay $8-10k for an MT option? And in all actuality, at least one well known manufacturer said it wasn’t worth it for them to even study it.

There are a number of factors that go into the cost of a feature. A Challenger has engine options including 3.6L V6, 5.7L Hemi V8, 6.4L Hemi V8, and 6.2SC Hellcat. Which do you think is least expensive for Dodge to put in the car? Not the 3.6L. It’s actually quite expensive, especially compared to the 5.7L and the 6.4L. They are made in higher volume for a much longer time span at a plant in Mexico with little labor cost. Of course they make more money every time someone checks the box for a Hemi, but it doesn’t mean it costs them more. Similarly, for GM to just suddenly make a new 327 for a small percentage of a low volume car would cost a heck of a lot more than an LT1 that is used in moderate volume in Camaro, has years of usage in C7 and is very, very similar to the L87 that has hundreds of thousands made every year for trucks and SUVs. That’s a business case that I wouldn’t even put in pencil if I was still on the job. LT6 will be an expensive engine, but it will pay for itself.

This is a forum of enthusiasts and I get that. Most here are not industry insiders or MBA-equipped business managers, so I totally get the passion behind the “why not just do “x” point of view. Since I am at the intersection of being an enthusiast that wants many of the same things and a business manager with an engineering and manufacturing background that recognizes what it would take to get them I try to bring to this forum the other side of the coin. The understanding of why some of the great ideas might not actually ever see the light of day. I desperately wanted to see LT5 drop into Camaro and Escalade once C7 was done with it and I actually included it in our forecasts when I was forecasting powertrains for my current company. Then I got good intel from some of my contacts on the issues that were making that not happen. Doesn’t make me want it less, just helps me understand why it won’t be. So what I try to do here is bring some of the understanding of why some things happen and some things don’t.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m looking at it as a product planner who would have to make a business case to get GM to invest the money to make it happen. That’s because for many years that was my job. So I’m well acquainted with the things that would stop the proposal in its tracks. Because I’ve had to work to get programs beyond those same barriers. I do know for a fact that Tadge and his team did look hard for an MT manufacturer and could not find one. My team gave the Corvette team detail on MT manufacturers that were supplying European supercar manufacturers. Let me just say that even if one of them could come up with a high enough torque capacity in the required configuration, GM’s price to acquire was in the high 4 digits range. Which would mean it would “price out” at roughly double that to the end consumer. You ready to pay $8-10k for an MT option? And in all actuality, at least one well known manufacturer said it wasn’t worth it for them to even study it.

There are a number of factors that go into the cost of a feature. A Challenger has engine options including 3.6L V6, 5.7L Hemi V8, 6.4L Hemi V8, and 6.2SC Hellcat. Which do you think is least expensive for Dodge to put in the car? Not the 3.6L. It’s actually quite expensive, especially compared to the 5.7L and the 6.4L. They are made in higher volume for a much longer time span at a plant in Mexico with little labor cost. Of course they make more money every time someone checks the box for a Hemi, but it doesn’t mean it costs them more. Similarly, for GM to just suddenly make a new 327 for a small percentage of a low volume car would cost a heck of a lot more than an LT1 that is used in moderate volume in Camaro, has years of usage in C7 and is very, very similar to the L87 that has hundreds of thousands made every year for trucks and SUVs. That’s a business case that I wouldn’t even put in pencil if I was still on the job. LT6 will be an expensive engine, but it will pay for itself.

This is a forum of enthusiasts and I get that. Most here are not industry insiders or MBA-equipped business managers, so I totally get the passion behind the “why not just do “x” point of view. Since I am at the intersection of being an enthusiast that wants many of the same things and a business manager with an engineering and manufacturing background that recognizes what it would take to get them I try to bring to this forum the other side of the coin. The understanding of why some of the great ideas might not actually ever see the light of day. I desperately wanted to see LT5 drop into Camaro and Escalade once C7 was done with it and I actually included it in our forecasts when I was forecasting powertrains for my current company. Then I got good intel from some of my contacts on the issues that were making that not happen. Doesn’t make me want it less, just helps me understand why it won’t be. So what I try to do here is bring some of the understanding of why some things happen and some things don’t.

In this case, I would guess that a business case could have been made. GM wanted to focus its resources in another direction.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by hotlap

In this case, I would guess that a business case could have been made. GM wanted to focus its resources in another direction.

I would not be one to argue against you on that.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m looking at it as a product planner who would have to make a business case to get GM to invest the money to make it happen. That’s because for many years that was my job. So I’m well acquainted with the things that would stop the proposal in its tracks. Because I’ve had to work to get programs beyond those same barriers. I do know for a fact that Tadge and his team did look hard for an MT manufacturer and could not find one. My team gave the Corvette team detail on MT manufacturers that were supplying European supercar manufacturers. Let me just say that even if one of them could come up with a high enough torque capacity in the required configuration, GM’s price to acquire was in the high 4 digits range. Which would mean it would “price out” at roughly double that to the end consumer. You ready to pay $8-10k for an MT option? And in all actuality, at least one well known manufacturer said it wasn’t worth it for them to even study it.

There are a number of factors that go into the cost of a feature. A Challenger has engine options including 3.6L V6, 5.7L Hemi V8, 6.4L Hemi V8, and 6.2SC Hellcat. Which do you think is least expensive for Dodge to put in the car? Not the 3.6L. It’s actually quite expensive, especially compared to the 5.7L and the 6.4L. They are made in higher volume for a much longer time span at a plant in Mexico with little labor cost. Of course they make more money every time someone checks the box for a Hemi, but it doesn’t mean it costs them more. Similarly, for GM to just suddenly make a new 327 for a small percentage of a low volume car would cost a heck of a lot more than an LT1 that is used in moderate volume in Camaro, has years of usage in C7 and is very, very similar to the L87 that has hundreds of thousands made every year for trucks and SUVs. That’s a business case that I wouldn’t even put in pencil if I was still on the job. LT6 will be an expensive engine, but it will pay for itself.

This is a forum of enthusiasts and I get that. Most here are not industry insiders or MBA-equipped business managers, so I totally get the passion behind the “why not just do “x” point of view. Since I am at the intersection of being an enthusiast that wants many of the same things and a business manager with an engineering and manufacturing background that recognizes what it would take to get them I try to bring to this forum the other side of the coin. The understanding of why some of the great ideas might not actually ever see the light of day. I desperately wanted to see LT5 drop into Camaro and Escalade once C7 was done with it and I actually included it in our forecasts when I was forecasting powertrains for my current company. Then I got good intel from some of my contacts on the issues that were making that not happen. Doesn’t make me want it less, just helps me understand why it won’t be. So what I try to do here is bring some of the understanding of why some things happen and some things don’t.

Hate to admit that you are right, James, but, working for a giant corporation myself, I completely understand

Don't get me wrong, it's not because you are saying these things but the mild disillusionment of not being able to have nice things anymore unless the crowd wants them, too. Looks like the 6th gen was a serendipitous last hurrah.

Thank you for these insights, as always, much appreciated.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m looking at it as a product planner who would have to make a business case to get GM to invest the money to make it happen. That’s because for many years that was my job. So I’m well acquainted with the things that would stop the proposal in its tracks. Because I’ve had to work to get programs beyond those same barriers. I do know for a fact that Tadge and his team did look hard for an MT manufacturer and could not find one. My team gave the Corvette team detail on MT manufacturers that were supplying European supercar manufacturers. Let me just say that even if one of them could come up with a high enough torque capacity in the required configuration, GM’s price to acquire was in the high 4 digits range. Which would mean it would “price out” at roughly double that to the end consumer. You ready to pay $8-10k for an MT option? And in all actuality, at least one well known manufacturer said it wasn’t worth it for them to even study it.

There are a number of factors that go into the cost of a feature. A Challenger has engine options including 3.6L V6, 5.7L Hemi V8, 6.4L Hemi V8, and 6.2SC Hellcat. Which do you think is least expensive for Dodge to put in the car? Not the 3.6L. It’s actually quite expensive, especially compared to the 5.7L and the 6.4L. They are made in higher volume for a much longer time span at a plant in Mexico with little labor cost. Of course they make more money every time someone checks the box for a Hemi, but it doesn’t mean it costs them more. Similarly, for GM to just suddenly make a new 327 for a small percentage of a low volume car would cost a heck of a lot more than an LT1 that is used in moderate volume in Camaro, has years of usage in C7 and is very, very similar to the L87 that has hundreds of thousands made every year for trucks and SUVs. That’s a business case that I wouldn’t even put in pencil if I was still on the job. LT6 will be an expensive engine, but it will pay for itself.

This is a forum of enthusiasts and I get that. Most here are not industry insiders or MBA-equipped business managers, so I totally get the passion behind the “why not just do “x” point of view. Since I am at the intersection of being an enthusiast that wants many of the same things and a business manager with an engineering and manufacturing background that recognizes what it would take to get them I try to bring to this forum the other side of the coin. The understanding of why some of the great ideas might not actually ever see the light of day. I desperately wanted to see LT5 drop into Camaro and Escalade once C7 was done with it and I actually included it in our forecasts when I was forecasting powertrains for my current company. Then I got good intel from some of my contacts on the issues that were making that not happen. Doesn’t make me want it less, just helps me understand why it won’t be. So what I try to do here is bring some of the understanding of why some things happen and some things don’t.

The business side of things rarely over rules the heart here.

To further your point on powertrains, going back to the Colorado/canyon/H3, the 5 cylinder engine was wildly more expensive than the V8 they eventually put in. Yet as I recall the V8 was a $1500 option.

A DOHC has so much more content and machining operations than a good old push rod engine. But we aren’t paying for that or lusting for that, it’s the HP torque and the other intangibles.

I do recall asking Tadge once why the TT V6 wasn’t considered for the Corvette. He said the FE gains were negligible and the cost was ridiculous.

As for the LT5 discussion, it’s the same as the Blackwing. And the same for the Omega architecture that GM wasted. Imagine a Camaro off of Omega rather than Alpha. Same weight but a bigger car with a back seat and trunk space. Killer thought.

But now it’s clear GM is making a hard right turn to EVs. Several rumored products with spy photos seem to have just evaporated. Vehicles due for even a mild refresh are getting nothing. The 2 row Acadia? 3 row Blazer? GMC Gamma SUV? Seemingly no longer happening. All the people and resources diverted.

Brightdrop? In 2 years GM quietLy blew past Rivian and has shipped vans to FedEx this week. Granted it’s a delivery van with not much interior work but done so quickly.

And at CES we get to see GMs pickup.

[Efi69Cam]

Originally Posted by Number 3

The business side of things rarely over rules the heart here.

To further your point on powertrains, going back to the Colorado/canyon/H3, the 5 cylinder engine was wildly more expensive than the V8 they eventually put in. Yet as I recall the V8 was a $1500 option.

A DOHC has so much more content and machining operations than a good old push rod engine. But we aren’t paying for that or lusting for that, it’s the HP torque and the other intangibles.

I do recall asking Tadge once why the TT V6 wasn’t considered for the Corvette. He said the FE gains were negligible and the cost was ridiculous.

As for the LT5 discussion, it’s the same as the Blackwing. And the same for the Omega architecture that GM wasted. Imagine a Camaro off of Omega rather than Alpha. Same weight but a bigger car with a back seat and trunk space. Killer thought.

But now it’s clear GM is making a hard right turn to EVs. Several rumored products with spy photos seem to have just evaporated. Vehicles due for even a mild refresh are getting nothing. The 2 row Acadia? 3 row Blazer? GMC Gamma SUV? Seemingly no longer happening. All the people and resources diverted.

Brightdrop? In 2 years GM quietLy blew past Rivian and has shipped vans to FedEx this week. Granted it’s a delivery van with not much interior work but done so quickly.

And at CES we get to see GMs pickup.

I think I read somewhere that the bigger engines additional cost has partly to do with the cafe credits. The cost needs to either subsidize the price of an economy type car, or buy credits e.g. from Tesla. Is this correct?

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Efi69Cam

I think I read somewhere that the bigger engines additional cost has partly to do with the cafe credits. The cost needs to either subsidize the price of an economy type car, or buy credits e.g. from Tesla. Is this correct?

Not really. Cost of compliance has not, to my understanding, been driven down to the engine level. At GM it is managed at the platform level. So Alpha would be looked at wholistically from 4-cyl CT4 to V8SC Camaro and weighted by volume. That’s the cost side of it.

Eventually the platform math rolls up to Car fleet and Truck fleet, so product content and volume decisions are made more on the basis of achieving compliance in each fleet without having to pay fines. Also, there is some amount of trading of credits across fleets.

So it doesn’t get down to a “compliance adds $47 to an LT1” level, but it does get down to an “x,000 Chevy Bolts sold enable an extra y,000 Escalades can be sold” level. It’s all about balancing within and across the Car and Truck fleets, with the points of control being at the Platform level.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I do know for a fact that Tadge and his team did look hard for an MT manufacturer and could not find one. My team gave the Corvette team detail on MT manufacturers that were supplying European supercar manufacturers. Let me just say that even if one of them could come up with a high enough torque capacity in the required configuration, GM’s price to acquire was in the high 4 digits range. Which would mean it would “price out” at roughly double that to the end consumer. You ready to pay $8-10k for an MT option? And in all actuality, at least one well known manufacturer said it wasn’t worth it for them to even study it.

I would not be looking for a high HP / high torque North South engine, with a east west drive axle transaxle, because little old me knows the are rare. Like you said supercars

I would be looking for a 400 HP 375 ft lbs transaxle, from Audi, defunct Sabb and even Honda had a few.

This may or maynot broaden the range of off the shelf transaxles, as noted it is not a standard configuration. I'm just point out that the layout has been used in "normal" cars and it is a big world. I still remember the Vector used an Olds transalxe.

I will say that Dodge did a closely related opposite engineering with the Charger and the 2009 V6 Challenger and that was to take a transaxle to turn it into plain north / south trans in the 42RLE / 44RLs. Then this is an assumption used some geewiz magic and got the Challenger / Charger V6 into 4WD.

So what is doable is dependent on market demand, cost and needed strength. We are in a world were soon there will be NO US made front engine RWD Muscle / Pony cars and maybe nbo manuals at all for this market segment. How big is that market? I know for sure my son and brother would no consider a performance car without a manual. For me I thought I was done with a manual too, but once I drove a Miata CS BBS I was convinced the proper way to have that car was with a manual.

I'm saying there is a market for a drivable (ride, ride height, looks) manual car that I will admit once again will NOT be in the samne performance envelope as a DCT.

Not saying that you are not right. I'm 95% sure you are dead on accurate. I'm also sure over my lifetime of cars I'm been correct on many occasions.

There are a number of factors that go into the cost of a feature. A Challenger has engine options including 3.6L V6, 5.7L Hemi V8, 6.4L Hemi V8, and 6.2SC Hellcat. Which do you think is least expensive for Dodge to put in the car? Not the 3.6L. It’s actually quite expensive, especially compared to the 5.7L and the 6.4L.

I have no doubt an all aluminum DOHC 24V variable duration V6 is more expensive that a cast iron OHV. All other factors aside. The trans and diff on the Hemi are more expensive even though the trans are all Nag5. The V6 diff is a 7.5 open cast iron unit and the Hemi has some tricked out aluminum LSD german dear, same with the shafts et al. All of which will be same on a 400 HP C8 based Camaro vs a 670 HP Vette.

TSimilarly, for GM to just suddenly make a new 327 for a small percentage of a low volume car

come now put a 5.3 liter (325.17 CID) in are you happy? "new" is too funny you actually used that word, NEW What you mean a 396 was a 402? The Dodge HEMI does not have hemi heads? Chevy can't call a 325.17 CID a 327...

This is a forum of enthusiasts and I get that. Most here are not industry insiders or MBA-equipped business managers, so I totally get the passion behind the “why not just do “x” point of view. Since I am at the intersection of being an enthusiast that wants many of the same things and a business manager with an engineering and manufacturing background that recognizes what it would take to get them I try to bring to this forum the other side of the coin.

Many times the MBA aka BEEN COUNTER are just is wrong. The whole performance car history (always wanted to go for a second terminal degree in the sociology and evolution of the performance car market.)
Pontiac GTO
Want to know complete failures that I called and will continue to call
Civic SI with 1.5T, no hot hatch racer wants a 1.5 liter engine
2023 Integra with 1.5T 30K for a ugly Civic please?
Civic Type R gut palin ugly
Supra (no M6 and bizarre styling)
Acura ILX 30K for an ugly Civic
Boxster with a topline 4 banger once the C8 was going mid-engine. I knew that they would be force to put a high HP flat 6 into it.

So there could be in the near future a large pentup demand for a V8, m6 RWD (along with the mandatory V6 auto executive assistant) American anything. How large dunno, I'll throw a ballpark out: Anywhere from .5x to 10x the current C8 Vette production.

For me the C8 offers a lot because as a youth I fell in love with the Pentara. But the drawbacks are big:
1) Im old and in great shape but that ride does not look like it is easy to get out of
2) It is too wide for the roads and parking spaces in farmland Hawaii
3) It is too low for the road quality
4) It is kinda ugly due to the needed downforce and cooling (assumed)
5) even though I probably would got the DCT, I can understand my son that this is a NO GO

A 327 m6 C8 base Camaro if and it is a big if Chevy can source the transaxle would be on my sell Miata, sell Camaro plate.

Martin thanks for all your input, brilliant as usual.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Number 3

The business side of things rarely over rules the heart here.

To further your point on powertrains, going back to the Colorado/canyon/H3, the 5 cylinder engine was wildly more expensive than the V8 they eventually put in. Yet as I recall the V8 was a $1500 option.

A DOHC has so much more content and machining operations than a good old push rod engine. But we aren’t paying for that or lusting for that, it’s the HP torque and the other intangibles.

I do recall asking Tadge once why the TT V6 wasn’t considered for the Corvette. He said the FE gains were negligible and the cost was ridiculous.

As for the LT5 discussion, it’s the same as the Blackwing. And the same for the Omega architecture that GM wasted. Imagine a Camaro off of Omega rather than Alpha. Same weight but a bigger car with a back seat and trunk space. Killer thought.

But now it’s clear GM is making a hard right turn to EVs. Several rumored products with spy photos seem to have just evaporated. Vehicles due for even a mild refresh are getting nothing. The 2 row Acadia? 3 row Blazer? GMC Gamma SUV? Seemingly no longer happening. All the people and resources diverted.

Brightdrop? In 2 years GM quietLy blew past Rivian and has shipped vans to FedEx this week. Granted it’s a delivery van with not much interior work but done so quickly.

And at CES we get to see GMs pickup.

This is an excellent post and your first comment was spot on.

I think when we talk about performance cars from sane to crazy, by definition they are passion cars. So would people pay MORE for a 327 slimmed down, softer C8 based Camaro? Dunno. I probably would because the Vette just is too low, too wide and (assumed) too uncomfortable for me to use as a DailyDriver. Lastly too ugly and I would gladly sacrifice a whole lot of "performance" for just a more normal looking body style. Is such a car worth more than a C8 Vette? To me it would be.

.5 to 1" taller ride height
.5 to 2" thinner
tone down the cooling aero doo-dads
fix the butt because it looks like somebody sat on my Camaro, the big butty craze is long over and it is like the C4 and C5..
design seats that rise 1" and pivot out 15 degrees with the side bolster sliding away so old people can get in
tire size more like a camaro SS
Engine: 327 M6 (Camaro SS), 327 auto (Firebird), and I4 with CVT +hybrid (sunbird) with some silly solar cells slapped on the roof add in phoney clock winder to boot

[redcoats1976]

i for one would have loved a C8 vette but as a retired old man i will stick with my 5th gen camaro...i fact i will drive the wheels off it.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by oldman

I would not be looking for a high HP / high torque North South engine, with a east west drive axle transaxle, because little old me knows the are rare. Like you said supercars

I would be looking for a 400 HP 375 ft lbs transaxle, from Audi, defunct Sabb and even Honda had a few.

This may or maynot broaden the range of off the shelf transaxles, as noted it is not a standard configuration. I'm just point out that the layout has been used in "normal" cars and it is a big world. I still remember the Vector used an Olds transalxe.

I will say that Dodge did a closely related opposite engineering with the Charger and the 2009 V6 Challenger and that was to take a transaxle to turn it into plain north / south trans in the 42RLE / 44RLs. Then this is an assumption used some geewiz magic and got the Challenger / Charger V6 into 4WD.

So what is doable is dependent on market demand, cost and needed strength. We are in a world were soon there will be NO US made front engine RWD Muscle / Pony cars and maybe nbo manuals at all for this market segment. How big is that market? I know for sure my son and brother would no consider a performance car without a manual. For me I thought I was done with a manual too, but once I drove a Miata CS BBS I was convinced the proper way to have that car was with a manual.

I'm saying there is a market for a drivable (ride, ride height, looks) manual car that I will admit once again will NOT be in the samne performance envelope as a DCT.

Not saying that you are not right. I'm 95% sure you are dead on accurate. I'm also sure over my lifetime of cars I'm been correct on many occasions.



I have no doubt an all aluminum DOHC 24V variable duration V6 is more expensive that a cast iron OHV. All other factors aside. The trans and diff on the Hemi are more expensive even though the trans are all Nag5. The V6 diff is a 7.5 open cast iron unit and the Hemi has some tricked out aluminum LSD german dear, same with the shafts et al. All of which will be same on a 400 HP C8 based Camaro vs a 670 HP Vette.




come now put a 5.3 liter (325.17 CID) in are you happy? "new" is too funny you actually used that word, NEW What you mean a 396 was a 402? The Dodge HEMI does not have hemi heads? Chevy can't call a 325.17 CID a 327...





Many times the MBA aka BEEN COUNTER are just is wrong. The whole performance car history (always wanted to go for a second terminal degree in the sociology and evolution of the performance car market.)
Pontiac GTO
Want to know complete failures that I called and will continue to call
Civic SI with 1.5T, no hot hatch racer wants a 1.5 liter engine
2023 Integra with 1.5T 30K for a ugly Civic please?
Civic Type R gut palin ugly
Supra (no M6 and bizarre styling)
Acura ILX 30K for an ugly Civic
Boxster with a topline 4 banger once the C8 was going mid-engine. I knew that they would be force to put a high HP flat 6 into it.

So there could be in the near future a large pentup demand for a V8, m6 RWD (along with the mandatory V6 auto executive assistant) American anything. How large dunno, I'll throw a ballpark out: Anywhere from .5x to 10x the current C8 Vette production.

For me the C8 offers a lot because as a youth I fell in love with the Pentara. But the drawbacks are big:
1) Im old and in great shape but that ride does not look like it is easy to get out of
2) It is too wide for the roads and parking spaces in farmland Hawaii
3) It is too low for the road quality
4) It is kinda ugly due to the needed downforce and cooling (assumed)
5) even though I probably would got the DCT, I can understand my son that this is a NO GO

A 327 m6 C8 base Camaro if and it is a big if Chevy can source the transaxle would be on my sell Miata, sell Camaro plate.

Martin thanks for all your input, brilliant as usual.

Oldman, I certainly appreciate the dialogue.

Just a couple thoughts here. I understand your point about there having been some normal applications of a North/South engine with an East/West transmission. The whole point of C8 going mid-engine is that normal no longer cuts it for the level of performance they are looking to achieve. The vehicle is engineered with the top variant in mind, and that would have to hold true for the transmission as well. Remember the “rumors” that launch was delayed while GM tried to fix the problem of the rear window shattering on dyno because of the 1,000+ hp engine? Engineering for the top variant.

Just for giggles, MBA does not always = bean counter. My MBA concentration is Corporate Strategy with a minor in Marketing. I suck at Finance If I was a bean counter they’d hide the beans.

[oldman]

All right, I'd take a east west V8 and 6 speed. the Impala SS had a sideways LS V8 of yesteryear. So probably a sideways LT would "fit" Basically go from a Pentera layout to a Fiero layout. GM does have a bunch of sideways engines, don't know how many still have a manual though. I only know of a few Acuras with a decent engine and a manual in east west configuration. Honda makes good feeling / shifting manuals but sub 350 ft -lbs and AFAIK after 2020 TLX - S, there in no manual now in the Acura line, I don't count the joke Civic with Acura badge 1.5L.

On a side note my daughter got a Corolla SE, and wanted a manual (she drives a Civic SI K24 supercharged), there were less that 50 manual Corolla in the entire US 2021 model year for sale. She finally got the CVT.

[ZL1plumbin]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m looking at it as a product planner who would have to make a business case to get GM to invest the money to make it happen. That’s because for many years that was my job. So I’m well acquainted with the things that would stop the proposal in its tracks. Because I’ve had to work to get programs beyond those same barriers. I do know for a fact that Tadge and his team did look hard for an MT manufacturer and could not find one. My team gave the Corvette team detail on MT manufacturers that were supplying European supercar manufacturers. Let me just say that even if one of them could come up with a high enough torque capacity in the required configuration, GM’s price to acquire was in the high 4 digits range. Which would mean it would “price out” at roughly double that to the end consumer. You ready to pay $8-10k for an MT option? And in all actuality, at least one well known manufacturer said it wasn’t worth it for them to even study it.

There are a number of factors that go into the cost of a feature. A Challenger has engine options including 3.6L V6, 5.7L Hemi V8, 6.4L Hemi V8, and 6.2SC Hellcat. Which do you think is least expensive for Dodge to put in the car? Not the 3.6L. It’s actually quite expensive, especially compared to the 5.7L and the 6.4L. They are made in higher volume for a much longer time span at a plant in Mexico with little labor cost. Of course they make more money every time someone checks the box for a Hemi, but it doesn’t mean it costs them more. Similarly, for GM to just suddenly make a new 327 for a small percentage of a low volume car would cost a heck of a lot more than an LT1 that is used in moderate volume in Camaro, has years of usage in C7 and is very, very similar to the L87 that has hundreds of thousands made every year for trucks and SUVs. That’s a business case that I wouldn’t even put in pencil if I was still on the job. LT6 will be an expensive engine, but it will pay for itself.

This is a forum of enthusiasts and I get that. Most here are not industry insiders or MBA-equipped business managers, so I totally get the passion behind the “why not just do “x” point of view. Since I am at the intersection of being an enthusiast that wants many of the same things and a business manager with an engineering and manufacturing background that recognizes what it would take to get them I try to bring to this forum the other side of the coin. The understanding of why some of the great ideas might not actually ever see the light of day. I desperately wanted to see LT5 drop into Camaro and Escalade once C7 was done with it and I actually included it in our forecasts when I was forecasting powertrains for my current company. Then I got good intel from some of my contacts on the issues that were making that not happen. Doesn’t make me want it less, just helps me understand why it won’t be. So what I try to do here is bring some of the understanding of why some things happen and some things don’t.

A similar way to scale the cost of things imo is to look at options on more limited supercar/hyper car (even Porsche gt3 range).
A lot of those cars a “carbon pack” costs as much as a ZL1 1LE ! BUT when they only make 3k models a year its not just the name you’re paying for. Manuf. has a lot less cars to split that cost between.