1000 hp, Mid-engine C2 going to Barret-Jackson
03-22-2012, 05:21 AM
#23
Melting Slicks
Only a face a mother could love. God damn ugly as sin ! That's so ugly, it would make onions cry. That's so ugly, the tide wouldn't bring it in. That's so ugly, it would make blind kids cry. That's so ugly, it should be driven onto a farm and used as a scarecrow. I guess I think it's ugly ! Stewy
03-22-2012, 06:43 AM
#24
Melting Slicks
Only a face a mother could love. God damn ugly as sin ! That's so ugly, it would make onions cry. That's so ugly, the tide wouldn't bring it in. That's so ugly, it would make blind kids cry. That's so ugly, it should be driven onto a farm and used as a scarecrow. I guess I think it's ugly ! Stewy
And I do not think it could have been done much better, either.
Starting with a C2 design reference should have been scrubbed while this project was still "on paper." The iconic proportions could not have been maintained, not to mention inherently poor aerodynamics and lift from the nose design.
Other than +1000 horsepower positioned in the right place, what other redeeming qualities might this effort have delivered?
Front-engine icon = Sting Ray.
Mid-engine icon = Miura.
Here, ease your eyes....
Last edited by PaulUptime; 03-22-2012 at 06:58 AM.
03-22-2012, 08:39 AM
#25
I'm not sure I understand the desire to build the "mid-engined" corvette anyway. The car already has good balance with the engine set so far back. Unlike virtually all other front engined cars the entire motor sits behind the front wheel mid-point already anyway. I could argue it's already "mid-engine".
Am I missing something? Is destroying the car's appearance really worth the effort when the car's original layout is already a pretty good starting point for this level of performance?
As good as the builder believes this car to be......... I have to wonder.......if he were to put the same amount of money, new tech and effort into the original Grand Sport design, with the engine up front where it belongs, wouldn't the car be just as fast? ..........or at least close enough to prefer it anyway vs this horrible looking car?
Am I missing something? Is destroying the car's appearance really worth the effort when the car's original layout is already a pretty good starting point for this level of performance?
As good as the builder believes this car to be......... I have to wonder.......if he were to put the same amount of money, new tech and effort into the original Grand Sport design, with the engine up front where it belongs, wouldn't the car be just as fast? ..........or at least close enough to prefer it anyway vs this horrible looking car?
03-22-2012, 12:10 PM
#29
03-22-2012, 02:01 PM
#31
I don't like criticizing other peoples work but in this case I will make an exception. I would name it the "dung beetle" some how it fits 
03-24-2012, 09:29 PM
#32
Looks more like somebody hung Stingray panels on a Corvair.
Reminds me of some Hollywood chic who went overboard on the plastic surgery - sure all the right features are there, but they no longer look right....
Reminds me of some Hollywood chic who went overboard on the plastic surgery - sure all the right features are there, but they no longer look right....
