Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015 October 26

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 26

Why are Corvettes so low maintenance?

Reading various car articles and reviews online, the Chevrolet Corvette is commonly recommended for individuals seeking to purchase an affordable, low-maintenance sports car. Many talk about how the maintenance cost of a Corvette is not significantly higher than regular Chevy sedans. Why is this?

Why would a Corvette require lower maintenance than some of its competitors like the BMW M3 or Mercedes C63 AMG when they are all roughly equally powerful? Acceptable (talk) 01:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

They might have similar power, but that's only a small part of the story. How you can control that power is the real question. The European models you mentioned are significantly more complicated, and handle significantly better. You get what you pay for! 131.251.254.154 (talk) 14:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

It should also be noted that many of the parts which make up the Corvette are not necessarily unique to just that model, for example the 'Vette's engine is one of the base GM small-block engines (recently from the LS series), which are used in many other GM models; one would expect similar reliability out of it. Secondly, in the U.S., the Corvette is a domestic car, and thus has domestic parts which are more readily available. GM, Ford, and MOPAR parts are usually much less expensive than European or Japanese brands, so the Corvette would be cheaper to fix even if it was equally as reliable to comparable non-U.S. cars. Thirdly, and for similar reasons, the Corvette is really unique among mass-market U.S. high-performance sports cars: it's really designed to go up toe-to-toe with high-performance European models such as those built by Ferrari, Bugatti, Porsche, etc. While Ford and Chrysler have their own similarly-positioned models (i.e. the Dodge Viper or the Ford GT, as an example), there really ISN'T a mass-production American built equivalent of the Corvette, or at least not with a comperable market share. --Jayron32 17:34, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't know about comparing it with other sports cars, but as for comparing with general purpose cars, you would have to be crazy to drive a Corvette in snow and ice (and expose it to salt) or even rain. A vehicle which is tucked safely in a garage all winter should have predictably lower maintenance costs. StuRat (talk) 19:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I read this as the blind leading the blind. Let us break this down to practical experience gained by automobile owners. Follow the money. Who wants to make it appear that Corvettes have low maintenance costs? Well, Chevrolet and car salesmen for a start. Do they have any evidence? Sure: Corvettes are build to be more beefier than most mid-range sedans in order to provide that extra performance. So. Do they really require less maintenance because of that? Well, that depends. If your Old Uncle Tom buys one on his retirement and just drives it around at the city speed limit of twenty five miles an hour (with soft plugs -to avoid sooting at low rpm) like a mid-priced sedan. Then sure, it won't need much maintenance. Yet, if you drive it like a sports car then Oh. You can bet, that whilst Susie had fun, fun, fun before her daddy took her t-bird away -it had visited the auto-repair shop frequently. Corvettes are no different, the are mechanical contrivances that suffer wear & tear, dependent on the stresses they are put under. Maintenance Throughout The Life Of Your Corvette. Likewise. A Formula One racing car engine only survives one race – and sometimes not even that long... --Aspro (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Re: your last comment, that would be why a Formula One driver is limited to 4 power units over the 19 races if they don't want to occur a grid penalty this season (except for the newbies Honda) I take it? Nil Einne (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes. The basic engines gets striped down and rebuilt after every race. But that level of overhaul can't be compared to taking a Chevrolet in to a auto-shop for a routine 5,000 mile service. I'm sure there must be a mechanic out there that can dot the i's and cross the t’s as to what is and what is not allowed. Yet, it will probably go back to the OP's question. Drive a Chevrolet hard and it will definitely need even much more maintenance than a sedan. Drive it very gently and you may be able to pass it on to one's grandson. The bigger problem may lay with the internal knickknacks. Handles and knobs break off. The upholstery splits, corrosion appears in places you don't want and so on. This may be what 131.251.254.154 was getting at when he said "You get what you pay for ". A Chevrolet is great when you're young and have money to burn but a European equivalent (for a family man) is a better long term investment, because Corvettes are just machines that the sales and marketing men have targeted at a small sector of the buying public.--Aspro (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

No stripping or rebuilding of Formula 1 engines is permitted. Each component of the drivetrain is sealed and must remain so. See Article 28.4.h of the F1 Sporting Regulations.--Phil Holmes (talk) 09:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the answers. Could someone explain why the more expensive German counterparts have better handling? Is it just because they're engineered differently? Also, I was under the impression that most cars, with the exception of exotic supercars, are not usually good investments in the sense that their values will depreciate over time. Acceptable (talk) 01:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It's a classic American muscle car - you put the biggest engine you can find on the cheapest, chunkiest frame & suspension and stick a pair of really, really wide tyres on the back. You wind up with a car that goes like stink in a straight line...but loses horribly in the corners. Cars that handle well have to be built to be light and to have sophisticated engineering in steering and suspension. These two properties are at odds with each other - you can't build a lightweight car with a big engine (certainly not cheaply) - so your acceleration isn't generally all that good - and all of that technological sophistication makes for maintenance issues. The mindless brute-force approach of the muscle car gets you something strong and easily maintainable, but too heavy and brutish to get around corners quickly. The few cars that manage both are either horribly expensive - or wildly impractical. My favorite example of the latter is the Ariel Atom - some versions of which handle superbly and get sub 3 second 0-60 times that are purely theoretical because nobody can shift them fast enough with all of those g forces! It's cheap enough that you could probably own one if you wanted...always assuming you don't mind driving something that looks like a Formula 1 car to work and having literally nowhere to put your briefcase! SteveBaker (talk) 02:03, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

• I think Aspro means "investment" in the sense of "something worth spending your money on for a long-term benefit" (rather than "something that you can sell later for a profit"). In other words, the European car will probably last longer and be more versatile (assuming you want to do more than show off your shiny sports car, BMWs, Mercs, Porsches, Jags etc are – if not exactly family cars – a bit more convenient for city driving), so you'll get more out of it for the same amount of money. Smurrayinchester 10:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Quote of the OP: Could someone explain why the more expensive German counterparts have better handling? Answer. The Public Land Commission in the US divided the land up so most roads go in straight lines from north to south or east to west in straight lines. The US car designers therefore, built cars for the common straight roads. In Europe we have loads of bends and Nuns driving Citroën 2CV's in the middle lane at 25 mph. Both requiring European cars to have good road handling to avoid sending the Nuns to meet their maker before their time and get round all those curves in the road. Also, as an aside. US vehicle manufacture where late in adopting radial tyres (tiers -those rubber boots that one has at each corner). That why American cars in old movies, squeal as the go round corners. The steering geometry was more simple and different. --Aspro (talk) 17:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)