Completely Jonesing For A Corvette

[ASH]

yeah  they are good choices , the z models ive looked are sweet ,

[Silentpoet]

On 3/13/2019 at 6:08 PM, astepup said:

I've been a member of CorvetteForum for quite awhile. Usually a great group of guts that are experts on these cars. Then again I'm usually in the C4 part. The newer vettes are crazy performers to be sure but I'd have no luck ever working on one.

I would like to own one of the ZR1s from the early 90s, but a 96 grand sport is probably a better deal.  

[ASH]

man i would to have the 1990  sledgehammer  corvette .  

[Kyle]

I’m also thinking of picking one up.

I’ll wait till summer probably get a new 1LT for 45k 0% for 72. Inventory is stacking up because of the C8 coming.

 

 

[M&P15T]

Still lusting. 

Still on the Corvette forum reading and reading and reading.

 

[ASH]

lust on over and get one  

[Zonny]

My 70 year old brother just bought one. He parks it beside his golf cart I know nothing about them so I can’t give details/specs. It’s white that’s all I know. Lol. 

2017 and had 5k miles on it. 

Edited March 18, 2019 by Zonny

[SC Tiger]

On 3/14/2019 at 7:43 PM, Silentpoet said:

I would like to own one of the ZR1s from the early 90s, but a 96 grand sport is probably a better deal.  

IIRC the orginal ZR1 - if it had a problem - had to have the engine removed and sent off for repair.  Not sure if that is still the case.  

The only other issue I recall on them was that the starter would sometimes die because it's in the "V" of the engine.

13 hours ago, Zonny said:

My 70 year old brother just bought one. He parks it beside his golf cart I know nothing about them so I can’t give details/specs. It’s white that’s all I know. Lol. 

2017 and had 5k miles on it. 

Not that unusual to find a Corvette that has aged out of warranty (that one likely hasn't) with miles left.  I work with a lady who bought one 3 years old with 12K miles.

[SC Tiger]

On 3/14/2019 at 10:01 PM, ASH said:

man i would to have the 1990  sledgehammer  corvette .  

That thing was a monster.  There are still precious few cars that can go as fast as that thing could.  

I seem to recall though that sometimes when the driver let off the throttle it would keep accelerating for a second because of how big the turbos were.

[SC Tiger]

On 3/13/2019 at 10:53 PM, blueiron said:

http://www.thedrive.com/news/26920/chevrolet-corvette-c8-is-so-powerful-it-keeps-bending-its-frame-shattering-glass-report

I'd buy the C7 based on the electrical issues alone.

Honestly - for what is likely a quantum leap in performance (otherwise they wouldn't be doing this) I'd give them a year with the C8 and then pick one up.

Plus first-year GM stuff tends to be ...... odd.  It's not uncommon to see different instructions in a Haynes manual for a first-year car (of a given generation) vs later years.

[M&P15T]

On 3/18/2019 at 8:09 AM, SC Tiger said:

Honestly - for what is likely a quantum leap in performance (otherwise they wouldn't be doing this) I'd give them a year with the C8 and then pick one up.

Plus first-year GM stuff tends to be ...... odd.  It's not uncommon to see different instructions in a Haynes manual for a first-year car (of a given generation) vs later years.

I really don't think there will be much of a leap in performance. The Corvette is already a mid-engined car, and I think that GM moving the drive-train behind the seats isn't going to make much of a performance difference.

If they really wanted to improve things, going with a DCT that is really sorted out would be the ticket. That, and different tires.

[SC Tiger]

9 minutes ago, M&P15T said:

I really don't think there will be much of a leap in performance. The Corvette is already a mid-engined car, and I think that GM moving the drive-train behind the seats isn't going to make much of a performance difference.

If they really wanted to improve things, going with a DCT that is really sorted out would be the ticket. That, and different tires.

The Corvette formula has been engine in the front, two seats, rear wheel drive.  It's been that formula since birth.

For GM to change it NOW - and take the associated risks - tells me they have figured something out.  Some sort of marked improvement ("quantum leap" may be a stretch I admit).  I've no idea what it is but they have hit on something or at least think they have.

It also appears this car will have a DCT.

[ASH]

On 3/18/2019 at 8:07 AM, SC Tiger said:

That thing was a monster.  There are still precious few cars that can go as fast as that thing could.  

I seem to recall though that sometimes when the driver let off the throttle it would keep accelerating for a second because of how big the turbos were.

man i wanted one bad ,  i still have the motor trend magazine with it on the cover.   it was called the 200mph grocery getter   lol

[M&P15T]

20 hours ago, SC Tiger said:

The Corvette formula has been engine in the front, two seats, rear wheel drive.  It's been that formula since birth.

For GM to change it NOW - and take the associated risks - tells me they have figured something out.  Some sort of marked improvement ("quantum leap" may be a stretch I admit).  I've no idea what it is but they have hit on something or at least think they have.

It also appears this car will have a DCT.

A DCT would be a game-changer. Transmissions are where the Big 3 are really lagging behind their rivals in performance. The GT500 is going to have one too.

I was thinking about how long DCTs have been around, how silly it is it's taken Ford & GM this long to get in the game, and how horrible Aston Maritin's attempts have been. Porsche, Ferrari, Lambo, Audi, VW.........I'm sure I'm leaving some out, but they've all made DCTs work well.

Hell a 911S isn't anymore powerful (power-to-weight) than a C7, but it smokes it 0-60 due to it's DCT.

As far as moving the engine to the back, my guess is Corvette engineers were pushed that way by the marketing guys. But when there's the opportunity to test a C7 manual versus a C8 manual (if they make one) then we can really see if there's any benefit. 

[SC Tiger]

6 hours ago, M&P15T said:

A DCT would be a game-changer. Transmissions are where the Big 3 are really lagging behind their rivals in performance. The GT500 is going to have one too.

I was thinking about how long DCTs have been around, how silly it is it's taken Ford & GM this long to get in the game, and how horrible Aston Maritin's attempts have been. Porsche, Ferrari, Lambo, Audi, VW.........I'm sure I'm leaving some out, but they've all made DCTs work well.

Hell a 911S isn't anymore powerful (power-to-weight) than a C7, but it smokes it 0-60 due to it's DCT.

As far as moving the engine to the back, my guess is Corvette engineers were pushed that way by the marketing guys. But when there's the opportunity to test a C7 manual versus a C8 manual (if they make one) then we can really see if there's any benefit. 

Something else moving the engine rearward does is help tighten the polar moment of inertia.  I mentioned this before but forgot to account for the driver and passenger.  The center of a person's mass is in their torso (probably right around their bellybutton).  Putting the engine behind the passengers means that there is less distance between this center of mass, and the center of mass of the engine.  You don't have to account for legroom (ie dead air space) between them).

I forgot my slide rule so I can't say exactly how much the benefit will be but it could be something.  Passenger and driver combined are probably 400+ lbs on average.  Considering companies are moving the 20-lb battery to the trunk to help with weight distribution......

 

GM has made some duds and this might be another one.  But I believe that THEY believe there is a real benefit to doing this.  It could be to be more Porsche and Ferrari-like in appearance and layout, but I think there is likely a performance benefit too.

Edited March 20, 2019 by SC Tiger

[SC Tiger]

12 hours ago, ASH said:

man i wanted one bad ,  i still have the motor trend magazine with it on the cover.   it was called the 200mph grocery getter   lol

200mph wouldn't have gotten that thing into top gear.  254 was the max I think.

[M&P15T]

3 hours ago, SC Tiger said:

Something else moving the engine rearward does is help tighten the polar moment of inertia.  I mentioned this before but forgot to account for the driver and passenger.  The center of a person's mass is in their torso.  Putting the engine behind the passengers means that there is less distance between this center of mass, and the center of mass of the engine.

I forgot my slide rule so I can't say exactly how much the benefit will be but it could be something.

 

GM has made some duds and this might be another one.  But I believe that THEY believe there is a real benefit to doing this.  It could be to be more Porsche and Ferrari-like in appearance and layout, but I think there is likely a performance benefit too.

I'm certain you're right, that there is some benefit. And perspective owners will have to decide if the benefit is worth the $$ to them.

For me, they're ruining what the Corvette has always been, and for what I suspect will be rather little benefit. If they just took the C7, added a really good DCT, and got the car more tire options, it could be a real winner.

[SC Tiger]

20 minutes ago, M&P15T said:

I'm certain you're right, that there is some benefit. And perspective owners will have to decide if the benefit is worth the $$ to them.

For me, they're ruining what the Corvette has always been, and for what I suspect will be rather little benefit. If they just took the C7, added a really good DCT, and got the car more tire options, it could be a real winner.

Your last sentence is what makes me thing GM believes there is a big benefit.  Lots of people think like you do, and Chevrolet is taking a big risk by possibly alienating them.

GM at least thinks they know what they are doing here.  

[Mayhem like me]

On 3/19/2019 at 12:11 PM, SC Tiger said:

The Corvette formula has been engine in the front, two seats, rear wheel drive.  It's been that formula since birth.

For GM to change it NOW - and take the associated risks - tells me they have figured something out.  Some sort of marked improvement ("quantum leap" may be a stretch I admit).  I've no idea what it is but they have hit on something or at least think they have.

It also appears this car will have a DCT.

the C7 is actually mid engined engine behind front axle.

What they know is the closer they move the heavy parts to center the less rotational force they have trying to upset the car in transitions.

So all the heavy stuff in the middle with wheels pushed out to the corners will give handling prowess and ability to change directions quicker.

[M&P15T]

30 minutes ago, Mayhem like me said:

the C7 is actually mid engined engine behind front axle.

What they know is the closer they move the heavy parts to center the less rotational force they have trying to upset the car in transitions.

So all the heavy stuff in the middle with wheels pushed out to the corners will give handling prowess and ability to change directions quicker.

My counter would be, handling and directional changes are things that the Corvette does very well. It smokes it's competition in the figure 8 and on the skid-pad. Chevrolet is attempting to address issues the Corvette doesn't have, trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Again, Chevrolet would be much wiser investing the development dollars in a serious DCT and a few other small things, like better tires.

[GPM]

Went down that road a number of years back. Started with a 96 Mustang Cobra. It ran well, but a little short winded. A Vortech supercharger fixed that for awhile. After a bit I traded it for a C6 convertible. The wife really liked that car. It was nice, comfortable and after a bit of engine work it ran fairly well. But, again. I tired of it. Sold that and bought a Viper. Very different experience. Power was good but the torque was addictive. Totaled that one at Mid Ohio and bought another one. Made a few intake, exhaust and tuning upgrades and it was a blast. Not a comfortable car by any means, but a much more engaging experience that the Corvette.

 

Looking at that sport bike I remember a couple of encounters with those in the Viper. Both occurred on open, clear roads, (I mean closed tracks of course). Those bikes accelerate quite hard and got a jump on the Viper. That said, aerodynamics and cubic inches will usually prevail. They did both times. Of course most casual sport bike riders, to their credit, aren't willing to approach the bike's top speed potential. 

 

If you really want a Corvette, buy a Corvette. Its not like a marriage, no till death do you part pledges involved. If you don't like it, there's always something else out there. For now anyway. I can't help but think we're living in what will be considered the golden age of internal combustion engines. Enjoy it while you can.

[Mayhem like me]

2 hours ago, M&P15T said:

My counter would be, handling and directional changes are things that the Corvette does very well. It smokes it's competition in the figure 8 and on the skid-pad. Chevrolet is attempting to address issues the Corvette doesn't have, trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Again, Chevrolet would be much wiser investing the development dollars in a serious DCT and a few other small things, like better tires.

They are maxed out with what they can achieve with their Mid front design , the mid rear design will tighten up the rotational inertia and allow them to be even better it's principles of Motion economy.

Trust me when I tell you the engineers they  have working on this know a bit more about what those cars can do and what the new ones will be capable of.

The are stuck around 700 HP now because of limitations of their platform , look for the new big gun to have over 800hp and beat the old one in every area.

[M&P15T]

16 hours ago, Mayhem like me said:

They are maxed out with what they can achieve with their Mid front design , the mid rear design will tighten up the rotational inertia and allow them to be even better it's principles of Motion economy.

Trust me when I tell you the engineers they  have working on this know a bit more about what those cars can do and what the new ones will be capable of.

The are stuck around 700 HP now because of limitations of their platform , look for the new big gun to have over 800hp and beat the old one in every area.

The ZR1 and Z06 are both diabolical handling cars. You're fine.....fine.....fine.....fine.........HOLY **** LOOK OUT FOR THAT TREE!!!!!! So one could say that they are at the limits of their platform. Watching videos and reviews of those cars, as they're taken around race tracks, is comical.......and scary.

However;

That does not mean that moving the drivetrain behind the seats is the answer to make the platform better. 

Right now Corvettes, IMO, are hampered by truly shitty choices in tires. For the big-dog cars, you can only get the OEM tires, and they're run-flat PsOS. They're harsh & loud, and I definitely think they are the main factor in making the handling at the limits completely non-linear and un-forgiving. I've read many owners posts about changing to different tires (to not quite OEM sizes, but close) and seeing a dramatic difference in how the cars behave, in all respects.

But don't say that on a Corvette forum, they'll have a heart-attack and die.

C7s are hampered by bad tires that cause handling issues, but they are still the kings of grip, and toast 911s on track and at the skid-pad, as well as in braking. Imagine what they could do with a great gearbox and better tires/suspension?

So, improving the breed doesn't need to be a revolution in platform. It can be an evolution in many specific areas that would make the car as fast as any other, and at a seriously lower cost.

1. Better tires.

2. Stiffer structure (maybe, haven't actually read any complaints on this.)

3. Coil-overs in the back, ditch the leaf-springs.

4. A great DCT.

Do all that, and keep the prices near where they're at, and make that the C8.

 

Edited March 21, 2019 by M&P15T

[Wyzz Kydd]

I love the tires on my Camaro.  Very sticky, though as you mentioned a bit loud.  I would like to have a DCT, but until then the launch control and no lift shift feature are pretty nifty.  Kinda scary pushing the clutch in when you're at WOT though, not something I had ever done before. 

[M&P15T]

On 3/10/2019 at 9:57 PM, blueiron said:

As a second vehicle, the Corvette works well. If it is going to be a daily driver, expect your maintenance costs to go up. Tires, premium fuel, brakes, along with other costs particular to the Corvette - they historically tend to overheat and have weak cooling systems. Torque tubes are great for performance, but the maintenance costs aren't cheap. Total immersive emotion when it comes to purchasing a vehicle is a recipe for regret and a reduced bank account. 

I hope it works out in your favor. 

"Total immersive emotion when it comes to purchasing a vehicle"......lol!!! You see the car in my profile pic, right? I'm quite well-versed in the costs of owning and operating performance vehicles, and I've been doing my homework when looking at Corvettes.

Tires; Corvette tires are $105.00 more per set than my current car, for the same exact tires.

Premium Fuel; My current car is tuned, so I have to use 93 octane gas. A Corvette would get better MPGs.

Brakes; Wouldn't go up, should last longer. The car is lighter.

Cooling & torque-tube issues; Those aren't things with C7s. Years ago maybe, not now. Plus, warranty.

I'm not certain I will buy a Corvette, but I'm not worried about slight increases in tire costs. What I'm much more worried about, is just monthly payments. If I can earn a large enough of a down payment between now and the fall when I would be looking to purchase.

Edited March 21, 2019 by M&P15T