When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It confounds me any Corvette owner would be such an a-hole to flip the bird at another from simply waving. That kind of behavior is childish and uncalled for.
Hell, I was taking a walk one day and got a return wave from the driver of a C2.
I think your interpretation of "biggest jump" is just as "nuts." The C4 damn near single-handedly saved the Corvette, and it also brought it back to world wide performance prominence after what happened to the late C3. It was also the first to start to be considered an actual sports car by some of those outside the US.
And no, the base C5 was not equal to the C4 ZR1 in every way. I agree the C5 was a great step forward in technology and performance, but I think you're way overstepping the reality of it. In the manner of performance, the jump from C5 to C6 was just as pronounced.
I have 2 magazine tests that say otherwise. The C4 almost killed the corvette. The C5 almost did not happen. I was one of the many who bought a new C3 when the C4 was unveiled. It was not loved. I remember it being much like the way things are now with the C7. Again I like all Corvettes and have my preferences as do you. But stick with the facts and don't get so butthurt. When the C5 came out I was thrilled that the Corvette was back.
I have 2 magazine tests that say otherwise. The C4 almost killed the corvette. The C5 almost did not happen. I was one of the many who bought a new C3 when the C4 was unveiled. It was not loved. I remember it being much like the way things are now with the C7. Again I like all Corvettes and have my preferences as do you. But stick with the facts and don't get so butthurt. When the C5 came out I was thrilled that the Corvette was back.
this is soooo much bologna.. stop reading magazine articles written by morons.
These "generational" discussions are so silly and useless, especially to our hobby/sport. My understanding has always been that the reason our beloved car was nearly discontinued was due to the inability to obtain budgeting to engineer an all new car, because of GM's financial woes. I was working in a Chevrolet dealership when the C4 was introduced, there was a lot of excitement. Chevrolet sure sold a lot of early C4's for being such lousy cars.
The C5 was a huge step forward (LS engine, transaxle, etc) and I hope to add one to my garage one day, parked along side my early C4. Imagine what the C5 would have been if production began in, say, 1992 insteard of '97. Probably would not have been the car we know today.
I love all Corvettes, period. Always have. I recognize each generation for what it brings to the table. Time moves on, and hopefully our beloved car and hobby will as well.
I have 2 magazine tests that say otherwise. The C4 almost killed the corvette. The C5 almost did not happen. I was one of the many who bought a new C3 when the C4 was unveiled. It was not loved. I remember it being much like the way things are now with the C7. Again I like all Corvettes and have my preferences as do you. But stick with the facts and don't get so butthurt. When the C5 came out I was thrilled that the Corvette was back.
...Unlike the C3, the C4 was actually well beloved by critics, and has a long, storied, Successful racing history. Being unloved by a bunch of old fogeys, who actually thought the C3 was a superior car is hardly "divided opinion". The Corvette Faithful don't like change in any incarnation, period. It happens with Every generation.
Every review I've ever seen of the C4 is a positive one. From the 84, to the 85, to the 92, to the ZR-1s, to the GS cars.
By the way most people love the C7. The Sour Grapes C6 owners, aren't even a minority.
The C4 also sold like hot cakes.
Commercially the C4 was a huge hit. Which means guess what? most people loved it. Without the C4 there would be no C5, much less a C7.
The C3 was nearly the death nail of the brand, with gutless 160 horsepower wonders and a 3500+lb curb weight.
It's only Now that the C3 is getting any love, and only by dint of the car's aesthetics, not because of any actual performance ability of the limp noodle chassis, and gutless engines, that a modern 4 banger without a turbo puts down more power than.
The only C3s that a serious performance enthusiast thinks are cool, are heavily modified.
All a C4 needs to keep up in the handling department? modern tires. They still get it done on autocross, in stock trim no less. In everything else? modern tires and power.
A C3? Just to make it autocross worthy compared to a C4...to make it worthy of note in anything else past that, requires the same steps THAT is how outdated the car is. First it needs a roll cage. Second then it needs custom fenderwork so it can actually have tires bigger than what's found on a modern economy car. Then you have to go through the suspension...most likely by simply tossing it in the garbage and buying an IRS out of a GTO, Gen 5 Camaro, hell even Gen 3 or 4 Camaro's torque arm suspension, or...even the Devil Unbeloved Unloved C4's suspension which everyone loves to use in hotrods, to this day. Toss the front suspension for a modern one.
Then it needs brakes.
And then you have to put in a real engine, because whatever it came with is a sub 200 horsepower boat anchor.
The C3 was lamented start to finish of it's production run, because of it's already outdated when new chassis. By the end of it's run it was out right called a joke by the entirety of the industry, because it still had the same chassis and suspension that was new in 1963, and to make it worse had crap for power.
The C3 in stock form is the ultimate truism of all Show and No Go. And it's universally held as such.
The C4 gets no love from the so called Purists because it beats the cars that came before it like red headed foster children, and started the tradition that each successive generation has to be Better. It took the fight to European exotics and won. And won out so big that it even had to be banned from competition because 8 out of the top 10 cars each weekend were C4s, for three years straight.
To the rest of us? Who are actually fans of all high performance cars? The C4 is cool as hell. I want a C3. But I know full well that a Cobalt SS will Trash even a big block C3, so bad it'd look like the C3 was standing still. Which is why it'd get a complete overhaul. Any C3 that I buy is going to be a huge money pit, because it's frankly Archaic.
Put it this way, even the lowliest performing C4. The much maligned 84, is as good or better than the Best C3 was. You put a 1971 454 up against an 84 on willow springs, laguna seca, or any other track that actually has curves, and the 71 will be crying and wishing it never rolled off the assembly line.
To say nothing of what it would do to the C3s that came later. Especially the C3's lowest point... the gutless 160 horse wonder.
...Unlike the C3, the C4 was actually well beloved by critics, and has a long, storied, Successful racing history. Being unloved by a bunch of old fogeys, who actually thought the C3 was a superior car is hardly "divided opinion". The Corvette Faithful don't like change in any incarnation, period. It happens with Every generation.
Every review I've ever seen of the C4 is a positive one. From the 84, to the 85, to the 92, to the ZR-1s, to the GS cars.
By the way most people love the C7. The Sour Grapes C6 owners, aren't even a minority.
The C4 also sold like hot cakes.
Commercially the C4 was a huge hit. Which means guess what? most people loved it. Without the C4 there would be no C5, much less a C7.
The C3 was nearly the death nail of the brand, with gutless 160 horsepower wonders and a 3500+lb curb weight.
It's only Now that the C3 is getting any love, and only by dint of the car's aesthetics, not because of any actual performance ability of the limp noodle chassis, and gutless engines, that a modern 4 banger without a turbo puts down more power than.
The only C3s that a serious performance enthusiast thinks are cool, are heavily modified.
All a C4 needs to keep up in the handling department? modern tires. They still get it done on autocross, in stock trim no less. In everything else? modern tires and power.
A C3? Just to make it autocross worthy compared to a C4...to make it worthy of note in anything else past that, requires the same steps THAT is how outdated the car is. First it needs a roll cage. Second then it needs custom fenderwork so it can actually have tires bigger than what's found on a modern economy car. Then you have to go through the suspension...most likely by simply tossing it in the garbage and buying an IRS out of a GTO, Gen 5 Camaro, hell even Gen 3 or 4 Camaro's torque arm suspension, or...even the Devil Unbeloved Unloved C4's suspension which everyone loves to use in hotrods, to this day. Toss the front suspension for a modern one.
Then it needs brakes.
And then you have to put in a real engine, because whatever it came with is a sub 200 horsepower boat anchor.
The C3 was lamented start to finish of it's production run, because of it's already outdated when new chassis. By the end of it's run it was out right called a joke by the entirety of the industry, because it still had the same chassis and suspension that was new in 1963, and to make it worse had crap for power.
The C3 in stock form is the ultimate truism of all Show and No Go. And it's universally held as such.
The C4 gets no love from the so called Purists because it beats the cars that came before it like red headed foster children, and started the tradition that each successive generation has to be Better. It took the fight to European exotics and won. And won out so big that it even had to be banned from competition because 8 out of the top 10 cars each weekend were C4s, for three years straight.
To the rest of us? Who are actually fans of all high performance cars? The C4 is cool as hell. I want a C3. But I know full well that a Cobalt SS will Trash even a big block C3, so bad it'd look like the C3 was standing still. Which is why it'd get a complete overhaul. Any C3 that I buy is going to be a huge money pit, because it's frankly Archaic.
Put it this way, even the lowliest performing C4. The much maligned 84, is as good or better than the Best C3 was. You put a 1971 454 up against an 84 on willow springs, laguna seca, or any other track that actually has curves, and the 71 will be crying and wishing it never rolled off the assembly line.
To say nothing of what it would do to the C3s that came later. Especially the C3's lowest point... the gutless 160 horse wonder.
And people wonder why... have seen many C4's on the AutoX - yet not a single C3.
If any Corvette generation could be a stepchild it should be the C5 which will be remembered for not ever offering anything special other than perhaps the Z06. C5 will always be the "used car" Corvette
I'm not a C4 hater, in fact I may be warming to the fact that I like it's exterior better than the C7. But this statement is just asinine. Never offered anything special? Really? Dude, nothing was carried over to it from the C4.
The C5 brought out the hydro formed frame rails that made the frame structure so rigid that C5 verts didn't need any extra bracing like previous gens. Read about it.
The C5 is slightly wider and longer than the C4 and manages to weigh close to 100lbs less.
The C5 was the first generation to offer the transaxle transmission design (transmission is in the rear of the car if you don't understand what that means) to enable a near 50/50 weight distribution.
The C5 was the first generation to offer the LS series engines. And PLEASE, don't tell me THAT isn't something in the "offering something special" category.
Those are just some cherry picked items from what the C5 brought to the table. I'm not here to nor do I wish to put down any C4 stuff. But to say the C5 didn't offer anything special when it was in fact a completely new car from the C4... Even the C6 was basically just a body make over with a slightly tuned up engine.... whatever man.
...Unlike the C3, the C4 was actually well beloved by critics, and has a long, storied, Successful racing history. Being unloved by a bunch of old fogeys, who actually thought the C3 was a superior car is hardly "divided opinion". The Corvette Faithful don't like change in any incarnation, period. It happens with Every generation.
Every review I've ever seen of the C4 is a positive one. From the 84, to the 85, to the 92, to the ZR-1s, to the GS cars.
By the way most people love the C7. The Sour Grapes C6 owners, aren't even a minority.
The C4 also sold like hot cakes.
Commercially the C4 was a huge hit. Which means guess what? most people loved it. Without the C4 there would be no C5, much less a C7.
The C3 was nearly the death nail of the brand, with gutless 160 horsepower wonders and a 3500+lb curb weight.
It's only Now that the C3 is getting any love, and only by dint of the car's aesthetics, not because of any actual performance ability of the limp noodle chassis, and gutless engines, that a modern 4 banger without a turbo puts down more power than.
The only C3s that a serious performance enthusiast thinks are cool, are heavily modified.
All a C4 needs to keep up in the handling department? modern tires. They still get it done on autocross, in stock trim no less. In everything else? modern tires and power.
A C3? Just to make it autocross worthy compared to a C4...to make it worthy of note in anything else past that, requires the same steps THAT is how outdated the car is. First it needs a roll cage. Second then it needs custom fenderwork so it can actually have tires bigger than what's found on a modern economy car. Then you have to go through the suspension...most likely by simply tossing it in the garbage and buying an IRS out of a GTO, Gen 5 Camaro, hell even Gen 3 or 4 Camaro's torque arm suspension, or...even the Devil Unbeloved Unloved C4's suspension which everyone loves to use in hotrods, to this day. Toss the front suspension for a modern one.
Then it needs brakes.
And then you have to put in a real engine, because whatever it came with is a sub 200 horsepower boat anchor.
The C3 was lamented start to finish of it's production run, because of it's already outdated when new chassis. By the end of it's run it was out right called a joke by the entirety of the industry, because it still had the same chassis and suspension that was new in 1963, and to make it worse had crap for power.
The C3 in stock form is the ultimate truism of all Show and No Go. And it's universally held as such.
The C4 gets no love from the so called Purists because it beats the cars that came before it like red headed foster children, and started the tradition that each successive generation has to be Better. It took the fight to European exotics and won. And won out so big that it even had to be banned from competition because 8 out of the top 10 cars each weekend were C4s, for three years straight.
To the rest of us? Who are actually fans of all high performance cars? The C4 is cool as hell. I want a C3. But I know full well that a Cobalt SS will Trash even a big block C3, so bad it'd look like the C3 was standing still. Which is why it'd get a complete overhaul. Any C3 that I buy is going to be a huge money pit, because it's frankly Archaic.
Put it this way, even the lowliest performing C4. The much maligned 84, is as good or better than the Best C3 was. You put a 1971 454 up against an 84 on willow springs, laguna seca, or any other track that actually has curves, and the 71 will be crying and wishing it never rolled off the assembly line.
To say nothing of what it would do to the C3s that came later. Especially the C3's lowest point... the gutless 160 horse wonder.
To you, I reply simply that you seem to be excluding the first C3s. As in 68-70. Don't talk to me about that '71 454 nonsense... the HP wars had already started to decline at this point and emissions garbage and gas crisis worries were on the rise. I'm not excusing the late and ESPECIALLY the mid year C3s, I had one of these gutless wonders (a '76) and I'm pretty damn sure my daily beater '94 Honda Prelude could have put a beating on it (non Vtech, 2.3L). It has a whopping 15HP less but weighs a metric F-ton less as well.
Anyway, if you look up the stats on the early C3s, such as a 68, you'll see that the very base 327 had 300HP and the higher performance one had 350HP. I understand this was gross and not net HP back then, but that's still not weakling territory. Then there were the 427s. THOSE were the real Big Block Corvettes that made a name for themselves, not that 454 truck engine. The lower 427 was rated at 390HP and 460 FT-LBS. The next up was rated at 435HP and 460FT-LBS. And then there was the legendary L88 Corvettes. These were very underrated from the factory at 560HP. These cars are able to run mid 11s. Stock. On the crap, skinny tires. That would hand my slightly modded C5 it's a$$ at the strip.
Now, as for tracking C3s? I can't argue with you there. You're right, the chassis on the C3 was the same chassis that was under the C2 starting in '63. I will say this though; when the C3 first came out, that chassis design was only in it's 6th year. Not exactly ancient when you consider how long the C4 chassis ran (13 years) or even the C5/C6 chassis (16 years). Problem with the C3 was, it just ran the generation for too long.
And people wonder why... have seen many C4's on the AutoX - yet not a single C3.
We actually had 2 guys at different times try to run a c3 on the autocross track near here.
Its was ummm entertaining
First guy was an older guy and he ate more cones than Ive ever seen a car do. But at the same time there is driver ability involved there too. He had a blast from the way he acted but I think the body roll he was experiencing was what scared him into eating more cones than he should of.
Second guy was a young kid that had a chip on his shoulder right off the bat. Even at the inspection he was going on with how he was going to trash the old Toyota celica one guy was driving and all the other old cars were going to see how a real car ran.
The track was laid out that that day with a long run from the start line and then a sharp 90 to the right. Took us 20 minutes to pull his c3 back onto the track where it flooded when he tried to whip it to the right. Motor stalled and out thru the field he went.
2nd pass he floored it off the line and slammed the brakes for that 1st turn. Almost flooded then but he got thru it and then took it easy on the back side and when he got to the s pattern of cones it died over and over. Finally he just gave up and took a dnf. That had to be soo embarrassing. After running his mouth and all. C3 actually looked kind cool. Had the hole in the hood with the breather to look like it had a supercharger (popular late 70's look). Its been so long ago I cant remember what year the vette was. But the really cool part was watching him eat his words when that old 73 celica took to the track. That thing was completely stock and that driver was freaking awesome. That guy could run the course on 2 wheels most of the time with the body roll that thing had but he consistently turned in the fastest times of the day.
As for the c3 I want one now and more accurately the wife wants one. Course she would set her sights on a 68 to 72. Has the hots for the chrome bumper ones and wants side pipes. My wallet is cringing.
Now as for how the c3/c4 transition went, Im an older person so I know what life was like without the c4, what the c3 was thought of at the time before the c4 and how people acted when the c4 came out.
In the mid 70's the c3 was kind of like an oddity. There wasn't a ton of them around and they had a reputation as lemons. No one even thought of buying one for a daily driver as they were seen as a pain to work on and a money pit. Got to remember things were different then. By the early 80's they were kind of forgotten by the masses. Camaros, trans ams, 60's mustangs and some dodges were the thing. Smokey and the bandit still was fresh in peoples minds and the movie industry wasn't really doing anything with the vettes. Sure there was corvette summer but it really didn't go over like smokey and the bandit and others.
Then came those c4 commercials. That was all anyone talked about. Plus the price was VERY expensive for the time. Talk about drool city.
When it was released there wasn't anything in its ballpark that turned heads like it did except maybe a Ferrari or lamb.
So I don't understand how the poster further up could say it nearly killed the corvette line. Heck if anything it put an entire new generation in the corvette fold.
My two cents: If you doubt the importance of the C4, I doubt your knowledge of Corvette history. But honestly, just about every Corvette gen was important in its own right. Go back and watch some videos of critic/magazine road tests of the early C4's. They were in love with that car, with the only complaints really being the harsh ride of the '84 and a few other odds and ends. The performance was a huge leap forward, especially laterally (over .90 G's on street tires in the 80's from an American car was impressive, for instance).
Design wise, like any other gen, it will have fans and it will have detractors. Let's also remember - the atmosphere of the automotive industry AT THE TIME of release is the biggest factor and most important element of perspective. Comparing the release of a 1984 car to the release of a 1997 car is criminally uneven. Especially in the US.
I'll be honest, C5 and C6 drivers don't wave at me. Not that I give a flying *** Very rare that they do. If the C5/C6/C7 owners don't consider this to be a Vette, well then
01-14-2015, 08:54 AM
I agree the C5 was a great step forward in technology and performance, but I think you're way overstepping the reality of it. In the manner of performance, the jump from C5 to C6 was just as pronounced.
I'm on my 2nd one and looking forward to buying my third. 
