vader1

Isn't most of this more about engineering and testing than it is parts?

You can haved forged internals all day long but if the tuning and design are terrible what does it matter?

Although I will say that pretty much all manufacturers require very tight tolerances on the parts they spec. In the seventies piston rings had to be a certain spec within a foot or two and car would burn oil right out of the dealer.

Mr.E.G.

I think that you're speaking in generalities about someone else's conjecture, and that's always going to result in a less than accurate appraisal.

As to the validity of the conjecture, people often cite the Corvette's cheapness, but I don't think these people typically know what they're talking about. Cheap feeling or low quality (read: flimsy) is not the same as cheap (read: inexpensive). For instance, the stock seats in the C5 Corvette are probably the ugliest item ever produced by any carmaker, ever. They look like something you'd buy at Pep Boys. Yet they are leather seats, have electric motors, memory function, etc. I think it's very easy for Joe Car Enthusiast to look at these seats and proclaim them to be an example of GM cheaping out. I'd argue that they probably cost a fortune to build and develop, so they're not an example of GM's cost cutting, rather they're an example of GM's piss poor design capabilities, which is a whole other problem having nothing to do with cheapness.</p>

It's hard to deny that other Corvette interior pieces are cheaply made. My Cadillac, by contrast, makes liberal use of leather and nice-looking fake leather on things like the center console. The Corvette? Well, they just throw in some crumby plastic and make no attempts to make it nice. That's a bona fide example of GM cheaping out on the Vette. Conversely, the radio and HVAC area of the dash in my Cadillac uses what they call their "piano black" material, which is just high gloss shiny plastic, with machined metal pieces surrounding it. It looks very nice. Meanwhile, that section of my Corvette's dash is just cheap plastic that they make no attempts to dress up. This, I would argue, is not an example of GM being cheap on the Corvette and not cheap on the Cadillac. Both are cheapish materials, one is just designed to look fancy and the other makes no bones about being crappy plastic.

You see my point? It's tricky to unilaterally say which cars a manufacturer cheaped out on and which ones just look crappy.

Further, I could very easily make the argument that Porsche cheaps out big-time on their cars (let's assume we're talking about the 911 and Cayman, just for clarity sake). The 911's chassis is a standard, nothing fancy stamped steel unibody chassis that's made by robots. It's no different than a Honda Civic in that respect. Barring the composite panels used on some of the fancier 911s, the doors, trunk/engine cover, hood, etc. are also just stamped metal, no different than a Honda Civic. Meanwhile, the Corvette has a very advanced chassis and composite body panels all around, both of which are much harder and costlier to produce than what you find on the 911. Yet, the Corvette seems "cheap" to the touch and the 911 seems like it's carved out of moon rocks.

The same thing is true of the suspension. The 911 uses Macpherson strut front suspension, like you'd find on an economy car. Meanwhile, the Corvette uses unequal length wishbones like you'd find on any serious race car or super car. Yet, the 911, with it's "cheaper" suspension feels much more refined than the Corvette with its "higher-end" suspension.

Where I'm ultimately going with this is that A) cost isn't everything, B) the perception of cheapness is the result of a normative analysis, not something concrete, which makes it fallacious to speak of it in purely economic terms, and C) ALL CARS are one big rolling compromise. In one of my favorite suspension theory books, the author talks about the competing ideologies of trying to create a suspension system that will be firm enough to resist body roll, soft enough so that you can maintain a good contact patch (had suspension bounces over imperfections rather than squishes the tire into it), and have tires with enough contact patch so that you can get maximum grip, yet thin enough that you don't reduce the sensation that drivers feel through the wheel and/or so that drivers aren't punished with a larger performance envelope that drops off a steep cliff in terms of the traction budget. He states that suspension design is like standing in the middle of a triangular shaped room and trying to touch all three corners at the same time. I think that metaphor can be extended to all aspects of automotive design. All carmakers must compromise in some respect.

jeffbrig

Like buying wheels. Lightweight, Strong, or Inexpensive. Pick 2.

Mr.E.G.

Haha. Yup.

2000ths

i see what you did there.

TheDonEffect

Porsche had the d chunk issue which was due to poor casting from cheaping on qc. Jags have really nice materials and yet...
I think what the op is looking for is something like the Aprilia where each piece is a work of art (so I saw on the documentary).

mosesbotbol

Jag's suspension parts are really nice looking. Using double wishbones on all corners and control arms are sharp looking. Great job on the rivet bonding and aluminum panel shape and fitting. They are building them in same ethos as Aston and McLaren, but with the most automation and not as exotic/fancy materials per the price point. Britain is the Mecca for automotive design and engineering.

windhund116

I was amazed at the quality of casting and tight tolerance in 911 engines, when I first rebuilt them. These were early air-cooled versions. And I had redone BMW and Mercedes engines (4 and 6 cylinder models). But, Porsche's level of engineering was above these two... for sure.

Justapickup

http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1298195

rwheelz

Mr. E.G. are you comparing the C5Z? And what year/model Cadillac? The C7 interior is very nice, and leaps and bounds ahead of the C6, but I still feel the materials used are somewhat "cheap." The competition seats do look amazing. Perhaps I should have sprung for a 3LZ package.