Maybe GM should have just stuck to the Z06 formula for the..... erm, Z06.
We believe we’ve found GM to be guilty of a classic bait and switch – one that cost thousands of consumers dearly, up to $120,000, and broke state consumer protection laws. GM enticed race enthusiasts with bells and whistles, promising a car that could maintain safe speeds and power when tracked, but we believe what it sold them was far from what it promised. This defect not only damages the Z06 engine, but endangers drivers.
The defect in question markedly limits the car’s performance – the sole reason these hotrod enthusiasts bought the Corvette Z06 in the first place. If they’d known of this defect at the time of purchase, they likely wouldn’t have spent six figures on the Z06.
I think that suit will have a tough time proving that it "damages the Z06 engine" or "endangers drivers" since the limp mode protects the engine from damage, and even Z06s in reduced power mode have set faster lap times than the majority of sports cars.
There's definitely a real issue with some '15/'16 cars, but many are driven by very fast drivers with no issues as well. Reports of tracking the manual '17s have been good so far, but we haven't gotten to the hottest part of summer yet. The A8 not having the extra cooler or the ability to add it means it's definitely at a disadvantage on the road course temperature wise though.
It will be interesting if anyone but the lawyers end up getting anything out of this one. GM was already working on an upgrade for '15/'16 owners to the newer designed supercharger housing with improved intercoolers, and GMPP already sells the auxiliary cooler for the '15/'16 M7 cars that can be installed without voiding warranty and seems to let them run without issues up to 100 degrees ambient.
From what I've read, a plug was not in all in all the way and cause the cooling pump to intermittently fail. I hardly call this as poor engineering as is suggested here.
In one test with Best Driver's Car, they did find that the intercooler coolant pump was unplugged as a result of R&R work that had to be done after the car was crashed during C&D Lightning Lap (where it set one of the fastest times ever, btw).
There has also been cases where cars didn't have sufficiently bled intercooler coolant loops, which also caused issues with cavitation that shuts the pump down.
Owners have experienced elevated oil and coolant temp when tracking in hot ambient conditions. Other owners that post just as fast lap times have not had issues. It seems like there's some hit or miss manufacturing variability going on, but overall design issue less so. That said, per GM the design criteria was to be tracked up to 86* F ambient conditions, which turned out to be insufficient for what owners ended up using the car for. The 2017 model was increased to 100*F ambient and seems to work well up to those temperatures.
The issues are real but I think they are also somewhat overblown.
Yet another class action by the law firm Hagens Berman. We've talked in other threads about how this firm is well-known for being over-aggressive and filing lawsuits with little or no merit.
They have a good chance of winning this one, I can't remember which interview however in a interview Tadge admitted that the Z06 was only able to track in 85 degree temperatures (or less). They admitted it and now they have even fixed it, but yes I feel like that they lied (but what marketing doesn't lie?) about calling this a track car.
They couldn't at the time commit to producing a Z06 and a ZR1 so they should have just picked one and not build them both into one car. the Z06 should have had a fixed roof with reduced mass and a more powerful normally aspirated engine. Now look at what we have, we have a stated coming ZR1 Corvette that is even more track focused then the Z06 so where does that really put the Z06 at this point?. This leads me to a criticism I have with Tadge as chief Corvette engineer, he lacks a focus producing vehicles that are always a jack of all trades. This works out well for the base car however with the special cars they really need to be more focused. If you look at the Porsche 911 at the top you have the Porsche 911 turbo which is an ultimate GT and high speed cruiser while you also have the GT3 which is the ultimate track machine. Hell look at what Dodge did with the Dodge Challenger as you now have like 15 different trims with some serious difference in focus for the car. You now have two models of T/A Challenger (one with a 392) so you now have a track focused Challenger (even if it isn't as good as what the Camaro or Mustang offers). Hell even the Mustang has differentiation between the Mustang and the GT350R, why couldn't the Corvette do this one basic thing?.
I can't help but agree with your thoughts on Tadge. It's apparent that he strives to make all Corvette models jacks of all trades, eschewing the opportunity to use special models as brand building differentiators. If Tadge ran Porsche, the GT3 would just be a more expensive 911 Turbo.
Note to GM: Why can you not look after your most die-hard customers? There should be no reason you can't go above and beyond for the people that buy these cars instead of having them resort to lawyers. (No, I don't own a Corvette).
That said, GM did release a kit to improve the cooling abilities of the Z06 and added the parts standard to 2017. They also claim to be working on a parts swap program for the supercharger housing and intercooler bricks from the 2017 car to 2015 and 2016 owners, so they are at least trying to work with their customers.
You spend six figures on a car warranted to be "track ready," yet, when you take it to the track, it isn't. These customers shelled out big money and should have been taken better care of.
More then the lawsuit, I think this is the real issue. If these high end customers feel screwed they're likely going to be hesitant to give GM more of their money in the future. So even if GM can defend itself successfully in court they need to find a way to make things right with these folks.
It's also funny that large chunks appear to be a copy/paste of their suit against the GT350 and therefore there are references to Ford being negligent on the design of the Corvette Z06...
A brief history on the Z06 might be in order so I think we can better understand where these customers are coming from.
The story of the current iteration of Z06 really starts with the C4 ZR1 Corvette, when that car launched it launched probably a year before its demise (the car just lingered for a few years after). What ended up hurting the ZR1 Corvette was its LT5 engine, the fact that the ZR1 Corvette had an MSRP near double that of an LT1 Corvette (when the LT1 car came around). However it didn't offer twice the performance of that car, combined with cars like the Viper, NSX, Supra, and others the market became crowded. Enter the C5 Corvette, the LS1 engine before it was even put into production GM had mules running at over 400BHP. This without all of the complexity and cost of the LT5 engine. C5 with Z51 package was even putting down faster lap times (according to their internal testing). After the C4 ZR1 the belief was that there just wasn't a market for a high end Corvette, they planned an entry level Corvette instead (what became the FRC C5). At first the plan was actually an even cheaper car with cloth seats and roll up windows but bean counters forced some features back into the car.
However sales were tilted to the top end thus creating a situation where there might be a market for a higher car. this time around you didn't see a 2X price prem. as the car started at $48,005 where as the base model C5 cost $37,495, they stuck with the FRC car as it happened to offer a lower mass and a stiffer structure. Obviously this was a hit and as a result it meant that the C6 Corvette was going to get a Z06 model, they largely stuck with the same formula of improving the car in every way. At first it was planned to have a 6.4L 450BHP V-8 engine until the 500BHP Viper was shown off which forced them up to 500BHP and 7.0L.
Now this is where things get messy, they saw a market for an even higher up market Corvette and set fourth to develop that car. Here is where I think things started to go wrong for the C7 Z06 Corvette, due to poor timing the economy went south resulting in a dramatic drop in sales for the C6 Corvette including the Z06 and ZR1 model. GM being cash strapped also probably played a role in this, when they started to develop the C7 Corvette I think it was partly a view that there might not be a market for both the Z06 and ZR1, however a desire to cover both models with one car. The decision to only certify the car to track at 85 degrees is a head scratcher, IMHO Tadge should have made the decision to either make a ZR1 or a Z06 (or both) instead the choice was made to combine and this has blown up in their face.
then there is the part that really drives me up the wall, with the C6 Corvette the base model was just an all around good car. The Z06 was the track car and the ZR1 was the GT/high speed cruiser able to maintain speeds of up to 210MPH. If they said we are going to do a C7 ZR1 Corvette and make a 650BHP 210+MPH car then I think they would have had huge success, they likely would have been forced to have adequate cooling on the car as well.
The thing is C6 was wildly successful in the super car world, it put Corvette totally in the same conversation with Porsche, plus, the real launch of Corvette was the C5, racing success and regit ferocious Z06...
Owning a performance car comes with warranty issues.
From a sales stand point the C6 fell on its face during the later years of its life, in its last year they only moved about 13,500 vehicles. The first year for the C7 saw some 37,000 units produced with the peak year moving some 40,000 units in I believe 2008. The Z06 saw a peak of 8,000+ units being sold while in its last year they only sold 471 Z06 and 482 ZR1 Corvettes, Honestly for me I don't see an issue with this as they were probably still making money selling them even at lower volume numbers. however obviously if you were to look into making a new one then I can see how it is tempting to make one car to cover both models.
The 'cooperation' GM is showing is because they know they are on the hook for the complaint.
They bonered the task, and they are making it right purely to reduce litigants. It's pure actuarial decision making rather than basic customer satisfaction.
C'mon, 86* degrees was the limit they engineered to? It's barely mid-June, and it's been in the 90's several times already this year, in Michigan. What about the SW US, the SE US, and the Desert Emirates?
Wapner/The Peoples Court would require more than an upgrade to new/100* specs, for having to deal with the issue and then having to sue for satisfaction.
If GM can't play in the major league, then yeah, don't play. They are so much better than this, but in every car, in every brand, AIM SO LOW.
For historic perspective, I'm surprised 124 people didn't have to die first.
I don't expect New Acorn Caddy to venture far from the GM Tree in this respect.
C'mon, 86* degrees was the limit they engineered to? It's barely mid-June, and it's been in the 90's several times already this year, in Michigan. What about the SW US, the SE US, and the Desert Emirates?
GM has historically undercooled high performance engines. Back when the radiator side tanks were the same and you could have 2 core, 3 core, or 4 core radiator, GM would always cheat you out of one core. Many cars in 60's and 70's suffered constant overheating in normal use.
Thanks for this great piece of information regarding the class action. My cousin is a Vette owner and may be affected. I'll give him the update.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
GM Inside News Forum
3.5M posts
83.7K members
Since 2003
A forum community dedicated to GM owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about General Motors news, concepts, releases, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!