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.
I cannot stand the "hooks" that hold the rear cargo cover in place. It just does not work. I saw that Ecklers sells something that holds the cover in place. Does this work? Anyone have one of these?
The modified hooks? yes those work well, I have them in mine (if we are thinking of the same ones that is). I still have issues with latching it occasionally, but once its in place it doesn't budge. They were a PITA to install though as I couldn't quite match the screw holes up correctly the first few times. They are also made of metal, the originals were plastic so they wont be breaking any time soon.
As to the OP: I think the entire VATS system is the most poorly designed part of the entire car.
You're getting warm but the high door sills were a required result when Lloyd Reuss, then Chevy Gen Mngr "declared" that the C4 would be a targa top without the intended center tie bar under a one-piece roof panel. That one stupid, cosmetic decision caused the sill problem, the "shake-rattle-roll" without the top in place and the cracking of both the "glass" and the solid tops. If anyone ought to be burned in effigy at C4 rallies, it should be Reuss. He single-handedly screwed-up a whole generation of 'vettes.
The very existance of the C5 and C6 proves the C4 could have been better but that is true with any old car. C4 was hands down the best available in its class back in the day and like every car made got better each year. Why not place the blame where it belongs? If we are limited to buying old used cars due to our own personal economic condition does that give us the right to complain about a twenty year old car? Some C4's are now eligible for horseless carriage tags for crying out loud and here we are complaining about some antiquated thing Chevy did a long time ago. If you feel you must complain about your C4 why not step into the 21st century and get a new Z06? Let's see if you can find anything to complain about on that one!!
The C4 deserves its place in history and is one of several important steps in the developmental process of the Corvette leading up to the model they build and sell today. Why not just leave the C4's alone anyway? If you insist on building a hotrod try to at least get a 2001 Z06. They are getting pretty cheap to buy now and you will be starting out far ahead of someone who has already been spending money updating and modifying an old C4. Additionally it has the potential to accomplish far more than you could ever do with a C4 regardless of dollars spent (unless you just like the way a C4 looks, and I am admittedly in that camp).
Last edited by Greg Gore; Oct 17, 2007 at 10:28 AM.
To Greg Gore's point...
There will be something I will be complaining about 25 years from now when I can actually afford a new ZO6... By then it should be around 1000 HP and Im stuck tooling around in a 500 horse tub. I cant wait!
The modified hooks? yes those work well, I have them in mine (if we are thinking of the same ones that is). I still have issues with latching it occasionally, but once its in place it doesn't budge. They were a PITA to install though as I couldn't quite match the screw holes up correctly the first few times. They are also made of metal, the originals were plastic so they wont be breaking any time soon.
As to the OP: I think the entire VATS system is the most poorly designed part of the entire car.
It takes that long or longer just to get to the opti.......
The opti "is an engineer marvel" that lasted only 4 years?
It's been around quite a bit longer, just didn't stay on GM cars for long. The earliest I've seen an Opti-like design (inside the distributor, not where they put it) is the '82 Datsun 280ZX Turbo, and it may have been used earlier.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
10 Ugly Corvettes That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
It's been around quite a bit longer, just didn't stay on GM cars for long. The earliest I've seen an Opti-like design (inside the distributor, not where they put it) is the '82 Datsun 280ZX Turbo, and it may have been used earlier.
And Crane stills a performance distributor with that feature today. Difference is it is installed in a conventional distributor and subject to timing errors due to being driven in the back of the block in the conventional location.
Reason Opti is driven directly at front:
Solves Imprecise timing due to distributor shaft end play with helical gears
Solves Imprecise timing due to camshaft end play
Solves Imprecise timing due to camshaft distributor drive gear not concentric on cam core (run out- .005 not uncommon)
Solves distributor gear run out
Eliminates timing errors due to various operating clearances and gear backlash
Last edited by Greg Gore; Oct 17, 2007 at 11:55 AM.
It's been around quite a bit longer, just didn't stay on GM cars for long. The earliest I've seen an Opti-like design (inside the distributor, not where they put it) is the '82 Datsun 280ZX Turbo, and it may have been used earlier.
Didnt know that but I only buy American cars. Never wanted a Datusn Turbo. Its funny the only problematic ignition on the Corvette is Japanese.
Toyota just lost its realiabilty standings with Consumer Reports.
It seems the new Camary isn't even up to average, the Tundra same thing.
As for the opti GM was too lazy to do thier own engineering, but that maybe a good thing.
I would have to say the tall frame rails that you have to physicly lift your foot up and over everytime you get in and out of the car. I can't imagine for a older person trying to make this a daily driver. What was GM thinking???? I realize that their budget got cut early in the developement stages, but what the heck! Oh well, I bought one anyways.
Afriend of mine got t-boned in drivers side in his C4. He did suffer some injuries however the Highway Patrol the first on the accident scene stated that the side rail configuation saved my friends life. So although a pain at times the high rails do have some redeeming value.
Ok Ok, I have a 23 year old car... and i understand that somethings are my car are crappy or that are just plain wore out. For the most part i read these things and would never have to worry about, like opti... But as for the things i can relate to, i just accept it. I love my car and would never change a thing... i just need to fix it :P
The B.S. targa top that has to be removed with a ratchet and a t-40 torx bit.
I would like to thank them for saving $15.00 bucks on every automatic car by putting in the Dana 36 instead of the Dana 44
I was wondering when someon would mentio the targa with the bolts..... anyone that has ever taken the ttop off a c3 or the targa off of a c5 has to wonder why they used the bolt system on the c4?
I was wondering when someon would mentio the targa with the bolts..... anyone that has ever taken the ttop off a c3 or the targa off of a c5 has to wonder why they used the bolt system on the c4?
Unfortunately for C4 owners C5 implemented some really slick new advanced technology one piece hydroformed main frame rails. C5 frame is so good it was carried over without changes to C6. C4 has a fabricated welded assembly made up of many pieces which resulted in stiffness measured in Hertz in the low teens. C5 was so stiff with Hertz measured in the low twenties no additional help with bolted down roof was needed hence easier to get roof off. Performance handling does suffer on C4 with the roof off, a good reason to trade up I guess which Chevy would certainly encourage owners of all older Corvettes to do. So what do we do in the meantime? Give Chevy an earful I guess and everyone elso who will stand around and listen to us rant!