2015 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Order Guide Leaked

[Uber V8]

Originally Posted by Petros

many DCT cars are limited in how much tuning and power upgrade you can do.



And fifthly, the only real reason why DCT took off in performance cars recently was because no one can get a torque converter automatic to shift quickly enough to keep up with a DCT, so the DCT had a performance edge. That changed with the new 8L90, chevy figured out how to make it shift even faster than the PDK in the Porsche.

I can attest to this as my built Evo X SST tranny can safely handle up to 380AWTQ. After that, it needs clutch packs.

Yes, and I believe that's why GM patented the 8L90. It's tech that doesn't exist anywhere on the planet.

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by Petros

You don't seem to know much about car design or engineering, and keep repeating the snobbish tired old crap Euro car "enthusiasts" often repeat. So let me explain simply, the 8L90 auto in the corvette is a SUPERIOR gearbox to the double clutch gearbox in a 911 or an M3.

Firstly, torque converters are much smoother on engagement than the somewhat clunky double clutch units and are thus more refined in daily driving.
Secondly, when starting from a stop and the torque converter is slipping, it multiplies torque and helps the car accelerate from a stop a bit faster than a clutch unit.
Thirdly, torque converter autos are simpler and more reliable, not to mention cheaper to fix than DCT trannys.
Fourthly, a torque converter auto usually is more durable and handles more torque than a DCT, which is one of the reasons why many DCT cars are limited in how much tuning and power upgrade you can do.
And fifthly, the only real reason why DCT took off in performance cars recently was because no one can get a torque converter automatic to shift quickly enough to keep up with a DCT, so the DCT had a performance edge. That changed with the new 8L90, chevy figured out how to make it shift even faster than the PDK in the Porsche.

Exactly! And if it doesn't shift faster and more reliably, we'll know...in 10 years...when they issue the recall. Be confident! It's GM! What's the worst that could happen?

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

Exactly! And if it doesn't shift faster and more reliably, we'll know...in 10 years...when they issue the recall. Be confident! It's GM! What's the worst that could happen?

How long did it take for BMW to finally do something about the HPFP?

How long did it take for Toyota to deal with their faulty gas pedals?

The only recall that matters is the ignition switch. And it matters because GM ignored it from the start of development. The rest of the recalls they have been doing is simply damage control. Most of them would probably just be TSB's if it wasn't for the ignition switch issue. They are only issuing the other recalls for PR purposes to show they are being transparent, open, etc. Toyota did the same thing during their gas pedal scandal.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Petros

You obviously seem to have some repressed hatred of automatic drivers. Funny thing is I don't see a manual car in your garage list. You have an X1, only available in automatic, and a bicycle.

Correct, I sold my M Coupe (poor unloved thing). I'm glad someone so cutting edge as a Canadian M3 driver can set me straight though. You're correct, I don't like two pedal cars and I haven't decided what I actually want. Is the C7 impressive with an automatic? Yep. Do I care since it's available with a transmission I greatly prefer? Nope, not at all.

But, just because I'd like to hear your answer, while a torque converter auto is all well and good, and the C7 Z06 with one is plenty fast, is there any doubt that a true DSG wouldn't be preferable for track duty? The linear power delivery of a DSG vs the lockup and non linear delivery of an automatic sure seems like a losing trade off on an actual sports car, not just something like the thankfully dead XLR or an SL.

If your hyperbole about the pure awesomeness of torque convertors were true, why has AMG spent so much effort on moving to a clutch pack on their MCT transmissions when from a purely numerical standpoint, they were doing fine with conventional automatics prior to that?

[Petros]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

You're correct, I don't like two pedal cars and I haven't decided what I actually want. Is the C7 impressive with an automatic? Yep. Do I care since it's available with a transmission I greatly prefer? Nope, not at all.

I prefer to shift my own gears too, and that's why my M3 has 3 pedals in it, as will any other performance car I get if the manual is still available on it. But I'm under no illusion that the automatic isn't superior in every possible way to the manual. I don't mind to sacrifice a few tenths of a second in performance for the pleasure of rowing my gears. But it's your implication that the 8L90 is an auto for those who can't drive and isn't as good as a DCT that is wrong and erroneous.

But, just because I'd like to hear your answer, while a torque converter auto is all well and good, and the C7 Z06 with one is plenty fast, is there any doubt that a true DSG wouldn't be preferable for track duty? The linear power delivery of a DSG vs the lockup and non linear delivery of an automatic sure seems like a losing trade off on an actual sports car, not just something like the thankfully dead XLR or an SL.

No clue what you're talking about here. The automatic in its most aggressive setting will totally lock up the torque converter as soon as you reach second gear and keep it locked up indefinitely until you slow down enough to almost a total stop. It will be just as linear as a DCT. The torque converter is essentially bypassed. And with the way the friction bands inside the gearbox engage the next gear as they ease off the current gear, you will get a seamless upshift much like a DCT. Once again, we're not talking about a 3 speed slushbox in a 20 year old Buick. Chevy claims the 8L90 will shift in a mere 80 ms, which is a 20% improvement over a DCT like that in a 911 or an M3. 0.08 seconds saved every time you upshift is a great accomplishment and an advantage like this can make you win a Formula 1 championship.

If your hyperbole about the pure awesomeness of torque convertors were true, why has AMG spent so much effort on moving to a clutch pack on their MCT transmissions when from a purely numerical standpoint, they were doing fine with conventional automatics prior to that?

No idea. But I don't remember reading any positive feedback for Merc's auto boxes in general. They were always called slow, lazy, unengaging. That's probably why they went with the MCT with the clutch unit instead of a torque converter. But Chevy somehow figured out how to make a plain auto with a torque converter shift in 80 ms. That's almost as fast as an F1 car. Good for them if that is true.

[1chanc3]

its always the same argument: manual vs auto. blah blah blah.

autos nowadays shift faster than any human can ever do and eliminates the potential for the "money shift" error.

Manuals are more "fun" to drive because they require more driver engagement and input.


pick whatever floats your boat.

[Uber V8]

Originally Posted by 1chanc3

its always the same argument: manual vs auto. blah blah blah.

autos nowadays shift faster than any human can ever do and eliminates the potential for the "money shift" error.

Manuals are more "fun" to drive because they require more driver engagement and input.


pick whatever floats your boat.

I agree that manual vs. auto is a never ending argument, but I think this one is a tad different. We're talking about an 'auto' that shifts faster than the fastest 'autos'...(i.e. DCT, PDK, DSG, etc...)

It will always be to each its own.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Does anyone recall that we were actually discussing the impact of the change from a six speed automatic to an eight speed and the direct value hit the first year six speed auto cars might feel? I still vote for nearly nil, as all those folks that can't manage to drive with both feet probably can't count all the way to six, much less eight, so they'll all be fine.

If you are to believe the press. The difference between the 6speed and 8speed are night and day. Like it has been mentioned before, shifts are being advertised quicker than the Porsche PDK. So, resale value of the old 6speed auto should definitely take a hit.

[Year's_End]

Red, I usually agree with your opinions but I have to pick on you.

Originally Posted by Red Bread

The M3 and 911 at least come with three pedal options and dual clutch as an option. The Corvette is a regular torque convertor automatic, not a dual clutch. Ferrari has sold their soul, having driven a few gated shifter Fezzae, I will always miss that and really don't care what sort of baloney tie in they offer to F1 or chasing magazine numbers, manuals will always be my preference.

Don't measure an automatic transmission based on build type; base your opinion on the actual performance of the unit. Not all dual clutch units are alike, and neither are those with torque converters. There are plenty of duds and stars out there for both types.

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Does it have a torque converter? Let's just leave it at that, no matter how fast it is. It's got a heck of a lot more to do with a slushbox from a 20 year old Buick than it does with a DSG.

Elitist attitude. It's not like they're putting a Power Glide in these things. Guess what, technology doesn't sit still.

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Does anyone recall that we were actually discussing the impact of the change from a six speed automatic to an eight speed and the direct value hit the first year six speed auto cars might feel? I still vote for nearly nil, as all those folks that can't manage to drive with both feet probably can't count all the way to six, much less eight, so they'll all be fine.

Pointless use of ad hominem aside, the MY14s with the 6AT will definitely take a hit, and that's not just based on enthusiast viewpoints. Those added gears and increased shift speed will improve performance and fuel efficiency. Better performance numbers and a plausible improvement in driving characteristics will improve the overall outlook of its value as a sports car, and the increased efficiency will look good to your typical consumer.

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Correct, I sold my M Coupe (poor unloved thing). I'm glad someone so cutting edge as a Canadian M3 driver can set me straight though. You're correct, I don't like two pedal cars and I haven't decided what I actually want. Is the C7 impressive with an automatic? Yep. Do I care since it's available with a transmission I greatly prefer? Nope, not at all.

But, just because I'd like to hear your answer, while a torque converter auto is all well and good, and the C7 Z06 with one is plenty fast, is there any doubt that a true DSG wouldn't be preferable for track duty? The linear power delivery of a DSG vs the lockup and non linear delivery of an automatic sure seems like a losing trade off on an actual sports car, not just something like the thankfully dead XLR or an SL.

If your hyperbole about the pure awesomeness of torque convertors were true, why has AMG spent so much effort on moving to a clutch pack on their MCT transmissions when from a purely numerical standpoint, they were doing fine with conventional automatics prior to that?

Have you kept up with torque converters lately? Did you know that most [even slightly] performance based autos usually lock up the torque converter from a point that's not far above idle. Hell, the ZF6HP in the now old-ish 335i that debuted in 2007 locks up at 1000-1100 RPM. There's no slop during lock-up. The IS-F, which also began sale in 2007, featured a transmission with a lock-up clutch that could operate from 2nd through 8th, reducing both shift times and the old "slushbox" sensation you used to feel during shifts. Those transmissions were available almost eight years ago.

Originally Posted by 1chanc3

its always the same argument: manual vs auto. blah blah blah.

autos nowadays shift faster than any human can ever do and eliminates the potential for the "money shift" error.

Manuals are more "fun" to drive because they require more driver engagement and input.


pick whatever floats your boat.

This is the bottom line. I'm personally tired of automatics and plan on ordering my next car with three pedals, but I will never doubt the latest stable of auto choices we have to pick from. The best these days will respond to your inputs almost immediately, followed by a lightning-bolt-quick shift. Some will hold gears at the limiter. The PDK in the GT3 will even let you clutch kick, so aside from being able to modulate actual clutch progression, it leaves literally nothing on the table compared to a three pedal setup.

[F1Venom]

It's good that GM is offering an auto transmission for the Z06. Have you seen the sales of the MT only SRT Viper? They're not good at all.

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by quagmire

How long did it take for BMW to finally do something about the HPFP?

How long did it take for Toyota to deal with their faulty gas pedals?

The only recall that matters is the ignition switch. And it matters because GM ignored it from the start of development. The rest of the recalls they have been doing is simply damage control. Most of them would probably just be TSB's if it wasn't for the ignition switch issue. They are only issuing the other recalls for PR purposes to show they are being transparent, open, etc. Toyota did the same thing during their gas pedal scandal.

As I recall, BMW addressed the problem in a year. As far as Toyota goes, well, not an area of interest for me.

Do you mean the ignition switch that caused the engine to die and disabled the air bags? The one that all the top execs at GM, including their current CEO, knew about for years and actively hid data they had for YEARS until they got caught? Well, as long as they're recalling all these other cars for PR reasons, I've seen the light. They've changed. I completely trust them now.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

As I recall, BMW addressed the problem in a year. As far as Toyota goes, well, not an area of interest for me.

Do you mean the ignition switch that caused the engine to die and disabled the air bags? The one that all the top execs at GM, including their current CEO, knew about for years and actively hid data they had for YEARS until they got caught? Well, as long as they're recalling all these other cars for PR reasons, I've seen the light. They've changed. I completely trust them now.

So Toyota can hide defects that has killed people since they don't interest you?

You have proof of Barra knowing of the defects? So far everything I have read says she hasn't.

I'm not defending GM over covering the ignition switch up. That is one big screw up. But why the double standard of not caring about Toyota when they did the same thing? They knew of the defective gas pedals. They tried their best to avoid a recall of it. People did die from the defect that Toyota knew about. Only difference is GM got away with it for longer. And they also recalled everything including the kitchen sink as damage control. Why use the other recalls as saying GM sucks when you know it is a PR move?

And BMW dealt with the HPFP failures in the fall of 2010.... That's 4 years....

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=447262

[Efthreeoh]

I'd like to throw in a few comments.

The convertible market in the US is about half a percent of vehicle sales, so any convertible will sell in low numbers regardless of the ratio-changing device between the engine and drive wheels.

The GM ignition switch recall has more to do with driver behavior (keeping a pound of keys on the key ring) than a failure of the company to issue a recall. And the unfortunate people who may have perished because the ignition turned off and the key (loaded with a pound of keys) fell to the floor has more to do with the driving situation and unfortunate timing, and perhaps driver panic. Shit happens when you drive and most people are ill prepared to deal with it.

Ask BMW owners how the level of anxiety increases when their HPFP dies on them suddenly. BMW only got concerned after 60 Minutes made an issue of it and a class-action lawsuit was ensuing.

BMW has a faulty air-bag seat mat sensor in a lot of E9X's (and other models) that took them 8 years to issue a recall notice, but maybe that's not of interest to anyone on this Forum...

Stop believing the spin a bunch of ambulance-chasing lawyers are saying about an engineered product (when they probably know nothing about engineering, manufacturing, and product development) and listen to both sides of the story.

And finally, BMW and Mercedes have been buying automatic transmissions from GM for various applications for over 40 years.

[KingOfJericho]

Originally Posted by The HACK

That is absolutely not true. There are only about 2,000 MZ4 roadsters in North America, and 1,800 MZ4 coupes. And the roadster was on the market for 6 more month. It ABSOLUTELY did not sell well. BMW had to cut back dramatically on their forecast and production and were practically giving these cars away. The roadster and coupe both had a $10,000 trunk cash incentive by 2007, the 2nd year of production. The 3.0Si roadster, on the other hand, sold well. In fact, 2007 and 2008 sales of the 3.0Si roadster outpaced the E89 sDrive35 significantly in the first 2 years of production.

The fact that with a $10,000 trunk cash, that the MZ4 Roadster would have been only $2,000 more than a equivalently equipped Z4 3.0Si Roadster but with 70 more HP and significantly more performance elsewhere, that the 3.0Si Roadster sold MORE in half a year than all 3 year's MZ4 Roadster production should shed light on the subject.

The 3.0Si Roadster is available in AUTOMATIC.

You're very fixated on that one factor alone, however I believe there were more at play. The M coupe and roadster were fairly polarizing in design in their first and second generations (coupe only on the first gen, the roadster sold like hotcakes) and the market for small, expensive vehicles is very slim. By the time that the M iterations came out, the Z4 was already a three year old design which wasn't exactly flying off dealer lots in the first place, even with the automatic as an option.

You did remind me of the time I was shopping for my 135i and I think I'm a glaring example of why the car was something of a sales flop. When I went in to option out my 1er, they kept saying that I could get the Z4MC with super-low lease payments and that they were offering heavy discounts. To me, a young performance oriented buyer (the target demo), I still passed it over in favor of a back seat and more subtle design despite the fact that it was an M car and offered a performance edge. It had absolutely nothing to do with the transmission.

I'm not saying that the transmission isn't a factor at all, I just think you're overstating it a bit. The 135i had a pretty decent manual take rate and the 1M was manual only and sold out immediately, many times at a premium.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

The GM ignition switch recall has more to do with driver behavior (keeping a pound of keys on the key ring) than a failure of the company to issue a recall. And the unfortunate people who may have perished because the ignition turned off and the key (loaded with a pound of keys) fell to the floor has more to do with the driving situation and unfortunate timing, and perhaps driver panic. Shit happens when you drive and most people are ill prepared to deal with it

I feel that is a bit too much of a cop out to shift blame to the drivers. Yes most drivers suck at handling emergency situations. The car is still perfectly controllable to get it to the side of the road even if you lose power assist. Yes people put way too much crap on their key rings.

But, it's like blaming the drivers that were killed due to the defective gas pedals in Toyota's because they couldn't figure out how to hit the brakes, shift into neutral, or shut the car off when it happened and saying it's not Toyota's fault. GM should have fixed the issue during development knowing people put a pound of crap on their key rings. The part cost 57 cents. I'm sure a slightly bigger spring would not cost that much more. Phone manufactures still design their phones to be somewhat durable after a drop knowing people abuse the crap out of them. There are obviously limits, but I don't feel like GM went to proper lengths in designing the ignition to handle a decent amount of weight. And the fact they hid it, tried to avoid a recall, etc makes it worse and the biggest issue I have.

The fact is they focused too much on the cost-benefit analysis that was done most likely and they handled it in a completely horrible manner. Recalls are not a negative reflection of a company. Hiding defects and avoiding a recall at all costs is. It is deplorable when a company decides it is better to deal with a lawsuit due to the defect killing people then to issue a recall to fix the defect. I also realize most companies do this. It's just not GM. Ford did it with the Pinto's fuel tank issue, Toyota did it with the gas pedals, etc.

I don't mind Convicted going after GM for that. They absolutely freaking deserve it. And if it ever is found out that Barra knew of the defect, then history will remember her as the shortest reign as CEO of an automotive company. Also the fact Congress hasn't brought in Akerson, Rick Wagoner, and Ed Whitacre to grille them over it instead of the new CEO who just took charge ( this was a calculated move by GM most likely) is also confusing. They would be better than Barra to ask questions to. What I can't stand is using the other recalls as a way to say GM sucks. I can't stand he does not care about the Toyota's own scandal of doing the same thing as GM because Toyota is not an area of interest for him. It just goes to show he already hates GM and this situation gives him more ammo in that anti-GM quest.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

And finally, BMW and Mercedes have been buying automatic transmissions from GM for various applications for over 40 years.

Not to mention Ferrari using GM sourced magneto-rheological shocks.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by quagmire

I feel that is a bit too much of a cop out to shift blame to the drivers. Yes most drivers suck at handling emergency situations. The car is still perfectly controllable to get it to the side of the road even if you lose power assist. Yes people put way too much crap on their key rings.

But, it's like blaming the drivers that were killed due to the defective gas pedals in Toyota's because they couldn't figure out how to hit the brakes, shift into neutral, or shut the car off when it happened and saying it's not Toyota's fault. GM should have fixed the issue during development knowing people put a pound of crap on their key rings. The part cost 57 cents. I'm sure a slightly bigger spring would not cost that much more. Phone manufactures still design their phones to be somewhat durable after a drop knowing people abuse the crap out of them. There are obviously limits, but I don't feel like GM went to proper lengths in designing the ignition to handle a decent amount of weight. And the fact they hid it, tried to avoid a recall, etc makes it worse and the biggest issue I have.

The fact is they focused too much on the cost-benefit analysis that was done most likely and they handled it in a completely horrible manner. Recalls are not a negative reflection of a company. Hiding defects and avoiding a recall at all costs is. It is deplorable when a company decides it is better to deal with a lawsuit due to the defect killing people then to issue a recall to fix the defect. I also realize most companies do this. It's just not GM. Ford did it with the Pinto's fuel tank issue, Toyota did it with the gas pedals, etc.

I don't mind Convicted going after GM for that. They absolutely freaking deserve it. And if it ever is found out that Barra knew of the defect, then history will remember her as the shortest reign as CEO of an automotive company. Also the fact Congress hasn't brought in Akerson, Rick Wagoner, and Ed Whitacre to grille them over it instead of the new CEO who just took charge ( this was a calculated move by GM most likely) is also confusing. They would be better than Barra to ask questions to. What I can't stand is using the other recalls as a way to say GM sucks. I can't stand he does not care about the Toyota's own scandal of doing the same thing as GM because Toyota is not an area of interest for him. It just goes to show he already hates GM and this situation gives him more ammo in that anti-GM quest.

I get all that, but it is not like GM is the first and only company to perform a cost benefit analysis regarding a decision to issue a recall. And I'd like to add the difficulty of engineering to an unknown requirement. You say GM should know people put a bunch of weight on their key rings, but really it's not that simple. What is the correct weight that should be compensated for? Does it change over time as society changes, is it different amount of weight for different parts of the country, for women vs. men, teenagers vs. 55 year olds. It's an endless answer and in the eyes of a personal injury lawyer always the wrong answer. And then how does it affect the operation of the switch? Does it make it too hard to twist to start the car, too hard to remove the key? Will a car that is too hard to start affect sales and thus profits? Things are imperfect because humans are imperfect. Life has risks.

And when all the trash came out of the wash, it turns out the early '70s Ford Pinto was one of the safest small cars of the era.

[Gle8]

I love manual transmissions. I think they are great. I prefer them to most other transmissions.

That said, for all the bitching and complaining that goes on in this forum (and others), I assume most of the complaints are from people who haven't actually driven a PDK. Because if you had, and had experienced the shit-eating grin that comes from flying through the gears with that excellent transmission, well, let's just say you'd either change your tune or be lying.

I daily my M, so yes, I'm a fan of the row-your-own. But my next car will have a PDK or F1. Just saying.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I get all that, but it is not like GM is the first and only company to perform a cost benefit analysis regarding a decision to issue a recall. And I'd like to add the difficulty of engineering to an unknown requirement. You say GM should know people put a bunch of weight on their key rings, but really it's not that simple. What is the correct weight that should be compensated for? Does it change over time as society changes, is it different amount of weight for different parts of the country, for women vs. men, teenagers vs. 55 year olds. It's an endless answer and in the eyes of a personal injury lawyer always the wrong answer. And then how does it affect the operation of the switch? Does it make it too hard to twist to start the car, too hard to remove the key? Will a car that is too hard to start affect sales and thus profits? Things are imperfect because humans are imperfect. Life has risks.

And when all the trash came out of the wash, it turns out the early '70s Ford Pinto was one of the safest small cars of the era.

I agree everyone does it. It's a shame though when all because of it being cheaper, they will deal with lawsuits resulting from the defects killing people than recalling the part.

As I said, there is certainly a limit on how much weight the ignition switch should hold. How much is excessive, I don't know. But GM should build some robustness knowing people put crap on their key rings. Apple and co use gorilla glass to prevent the glass from breaking and scratching knowing people are clumsy idiots who abuse the crap out of their phones.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by quagmire

I agree everyone does it. It's a shame though when all because of it being cheaper, they will deal with lawsuits resulting from the defects killing people than recalling the part.

As I said, there is certainly a limit on how much weight the ignition switch should hold. How much is excessive, I don't know. But GM should build some robustness knowing people put crap on their key rings. Apple and co use gorilla glass to prevent the glass from breaking and scratching knowing people are clumsy idiots who abuse the crap out of their phones.

You are listening to a bunch of money-grubbing lawyers, who throw out statements like "it's only 50 cents more to make the correct part". Well that's their estimate from "their experts" and doesn't include things like the cost of re-engineering the design, the non-recurring engineering to develop a new part and put it into production, and the re-testing of the assembly (which could now have a new issue); so it's not really "50 cents for the new part". All of which gets factored into the recall decision. And you just missed the point entirely, what is the right amount of weight to compensate for? The answer, if it caused someone to die, will ALWAYS be wrong in the eyes of a lawyer. Not sure what Gorilla glass has to do with this. Corning invented Gorilla glass not Apple anyway. I had a Motorola ATRIX phone made with Gorilla glass and cracked the living shit out of it being a dumb ass jumping out of the back of my pickup truck (in the back parking lot of Tischer BMW of all places picking up the convertible top for my wife's Z3 - LOL). should I sue Motorola for loss of perfect use of my phone because it had a product defect?

It is my understanding from what GM originally released as the reasoning the defect wasn't first addressed was the issue was discovered early in prototype vehicle testing by a test engineer with three instances of occurrence. Something as trivial as a key falling out of the ignition switch on a prototype vehicle probably correctly was over looked as an anomaly rather than a defect. However, trying to explain any of this, GM is in the position of lying of course, accused by people who really don't understand what they are talking about. Throw in the incident came at a time of vehicle development that was probably addressing a myriad of other more important development issues it could have been easily over looked. And I can counter this with, well what was the condition of the owner's key? What if the ignition switch works perfectly fine except if the key is bent and then re-straightened? Were the keys that fell out the original keys that came with the vehicle, or copies made by some teenager at a mall kiosk? Should GM be held liable for the operation of its ignition switch when used with a copy of the original key, the manufacture of which is beyond their control? Should the solution be that GM, now going forward, requires that key copies be made only by GM at the cost of $100 each? For the sake of safety, should Congress pass a law that makes it illegal to make key copies other than from the original manufacturer? Let's go further, maybe the law should dictate that when a key needs to be replaced, a new ignition switch MUST be installed with a new original key along with new door tumblers so all the keys on the vehicle match. There is a million places to take this argument (and the lawyers will take it there).

It is unfortunate that several people died because of the issue. It's a risk ALL of us take using an appliance to transport ourselves from place to place. Not to trivialize these deaths, but the lawyers say 13 people died because of the issue. 13 out of millions of vehicles that have traveled hundreds of millions of miles; its pretty low on the statistical scale any way you look at it. Far more people were killed in these same vehicle models over the same time period simply because of stupidity and poor driving acumen. And somehow all of this is exacerbated by the fact that GM took "bail out money" from the Government. Like somehow had GM fessed up to this one particular defect, the whole auto bailout action by the Fed would have been cancelled and GM (maybe Chrysler too!) would have gone under and we'd all be better for it. Christ, how stupid is that thought process.

The point is if you don't like it and want to believe a bunch of lawyer-speak then fine, don't buy a GM vehicle, but BMW is no princess either and does just as stupid shit as GM, or any other auto manufacturer, does. N54 HPFP being just one example. The person who started this whole conversation that the C7 sucks because GM made the car (and has a GM transmission in it is just ignorant.

[happos2]

Man, the order book looks nice!

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by quagmire

So Toyota can hide defects that has killed people since they don't interest you?

You have proof of Barra knowing of the defects? So far everything I have read says she hasn't.

I'm not defending GM over covering the ignition switch up. That is one big screw up. But why the double standard of not caring about Toyota when they did the same thing? They knew of the defective gas pedals. They tried their best to avoid a recall of it. People did die from the defect that Toyota knew about. Only difference is GM got away with it for longer. And they also recalled everything including the kitchen sink as damage control. Why use the other recalls as saying GM sucks when you know it is a PR move?

And BMW dealt with the HPFP failures in the fall of 2010.... That's 4 years....

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=447262

Barra lied, people died.
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/04/11/i...-trouble-2011/

And no, I feel for all the Prius tree huggers who died at top speed, but I don't have any interest in Toyota. How they handle their recalls is of no concern to me, as me and mine will never have one. Goes for GM too.

BMW ordered the fuel pumps be replaced in 2008. As I said, they addressed the problem.

Now tell me that Barra was busy, and didn't read the email. or like your clueless apologist buddy, that the ignition switch was the fault of the driver for having too large a key ring.