Thats funny, I have lots of Ferrari buddies who say the exact same thing about Porsches.

Then they come up with the most amazing sounding excuses when the Porsches AND the Corvettes blow their doors off around the track.

When I want to drive a hand built, drop dead gorgeous, torque monster screaming V12 powered limited production exotic thoroughbred.... I drive my Ferrari.

When I want to go fast around the track, I drive the Porsche.

The second of those two choices may very well change when these ZO6's are a few years old.

Who cares what the publics perception of X or Y is? I want the best bang for the buck and that means the fastest lap times and most competitive racecar all things considered. I suspect this new ZO6 is going to be exactly that!

That does not mean I dont know where you are coming from. I could care less about driving a vette on the street. The looks of the car and the whole vette image are NOT me! So for a fun and fast street car.... I would pass.

But for a track weapon..... holy cow the ZO6 is a beast!

For the most part, this may be true. Yet public perception since the '80s has been Toyota and the others build better cars. So there's the problem; when it comes to dollar bills, Americans have very long memories about what has served well their cash outlay.

Yes, Toyota does build better cars, and it sounds like they are manuevering to buy GM.

The Japanese already raised the prices of their cars on a good-faith basis so the Americans could sell something with four wheels. I wouldn't buy GM, though. Look what happened to Mercedes-Benz when they bought Chrysler - Chrysler's crappy quality control infected Mercedes' product.

Ahhhh. Dude, that 7 liter monster gets better gas mileage, and produces less pollution then your antiquated outdated inefficient 1989 Carrera... So who's social responsible?

The Z06 is badddd assssss. Hats off for Americans producing something that is race worthy, and not just poser hype. It's the FIRST Corvette that I have actually coveted, and considered buying.

Ah, and on goes the discussion that has NO right answer........

Read a consumer report or two for the last three to five years, Brian. That should explain it to you.

Hey, what's "huh" spelled backwards? :rolleyes:

You are kidding right? I guess the next thing you'll say is that Ford had no impact on the Jaguar..err Taurus..err Jaguar...

Since 1980, wouldn't you agree all auto manufacturing has improved substantially, including U.S. manufacturing. You would? Yes, I thought you would. Some just improve not as quickly as others, right? Yes, right.

Or if you want to play the race track - both Cadillac and Toyota have won on the circuits this year...

So there you go! SmileWavy

I'll drink to that, but I'll drink to almost any thing. :)

To throw in two more really poorly though out cents: I acknowledge that the new ZO6 could likely beat my SC in any type of race. I'll even assume that the ZO6 will require less maintenance and will stay on the road forever. It is still a Chevrolet. Zero allure to me, even if it is wicked fast.

C'mon...have you no business sense? Think about the debt M-B has incurred with Chrysler's purchase, then consider the sharing of platforms, componentry, drivetrains M-B has had to go through to subsidize that debt.

Or is it beyond Mercedes to put a little Sebring in their S-Class?

Please, don't be naive. These are decisions made by accountants and more importantly, stock holders - not engineers.

No, it doesn't when both products blow pretty much the same chunks as far as quality control goes.

What Chrysler parts are being used in any MB cars?

Anyways, now you are changing what you initially said. You initially said that Chrysler's bad quality control practices infected MB cars. I said that Chrysler's quality control practices had no impact on MB's quality control practices.

Now you are saying that it was the debt incurred by Daimler Benz that caused MB's quality problems.

Two different things.

First of all..Chrysler DID NOT BUY Daimler Benz...It was a MERGER with Chrysler having a majority of shares.

If you have any experience at all with a Mercedes in the past 5 years, you felt the impact of that MERGER. Shared production parts, vendors and suppliers from Chrysler into the MB product.

Share a cigar or cocktail with a MB employee and they will assist you in understanding the impact of that merger.

However, the company is selling a car that goes the other way...i.e., some MB parts etc in a Chrysler product called the Crossfire.

[B]BAWHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

A CHRYSLER HEMI ENGINE IS MORE POWERFUL THAN ANY MBZ MOTOR TO DATE.

BAWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

THIS IS SILLY

You're right....

LOL! You really believe that "merger" BS?!?

That's funny.

Everyone knows it was no merger. The Germans publically let everyone in on that little joke after they acquired Chrysler and fired all their executives in Michigan, replacing them with Germans.

If you still believe the "merger of equals" PR lie, you are the only one left.

"Although investment bankers characterized the transaction as a merger of equals, Daimler-Benz effectively bought Chrysler for $38 billion." Duke Law Journal, 62 Law & Contemp. Probs. 87 (Summer 1999).

What Chrysler parts have been used in any Mercedes models?

I just drove a new CLS at the stealer today. A $75k rolling piece of plastic-fantastic. There *must* be a few Chrysler parts in there somewhere ;) But seriously, you'd think that after driving a car with that kind of price tag, there would be some sense of "wow"... but nothing, nada, zip. Just another rolling piece of plastic. But I'll bet that a 505 HP Vette would put a smile on anyone's face :) Sure its plastic. But it goes and stops and turns, like NOW. What more do you want?

"Two different things?" :confused: "Changing what I initially said..."

As you said in an earlier post: "huh?"

Can you not follow a linear point-to-point deduction? Bad quality control from merger or purchase can come from sharing of parts. If it was a purchase - would you think M-B's is going to buy AND supply parts to Chrysler without asking for anything in return. Yeah? That's a helluva *****ty business model.

And yes, as was explained, it was a merger, not a purchase, which further illustrates a greater propensity for Mercedes Benz and Chrysler to share parts and Mercedes to go downhill because of that. So "debt" I redefine as debt of quality control - on M-B's part - which is all anyone cares about. Who gives a damn if the company survives as long as they put out a nice rolling stock.

So my argument makes perfect sense, and you...you're in denial. I guess that's what happens when a guy gets a poor-quality M-B that's really nothing more than a high quality Crossfire.

I don't think so. Why is Bob Lutz at GM now? The Daimler-Benz people forced out the top management at Chrysler.