96LT4

Like I mentioned earlier, had plenty of C4s, 2 C5s (worst Vettes I've ever owned), and now the C6s....the C6s by far do everything bigger and better. Love my 427!!!!

mark970

see...I'm not the only one that thinks this

confab

C5.. The "Kardashian Show"

Sponsored by GM.

aklim

Mechanical wise or what?

Tom400CFI

I can imagine that 500+hp C6's would "fix" (or make up for) many of the issues of the base C6....and the wide body version totally "fixes" the appearance of the C6 (IMO of course). But it sounded like the OP is comparing base C6's to ZR-1.

aklim

Buy base and someone like LPE can make it better

mark970

I'm going to get flamed ROYALLY for this but...

but here's my thing with the C5 (other than its ugly as all sin)...

Chevy/GM went through some automobile changes and they changed the quality of their vehicles across the board. i'm not sure what the time period was but for example my 2011 Malibu LTZ was "not" what Chevy used to be, in fact that was a GREAT little car with the V6...or the Cruiz is a good example of a new direction with a totally refined interior (and yes i know the Cruiz was a different base car...but it was the beginning of something good for GM). I mean the early 2000's Impala's and Monte Carlos couldn't compare to imports when considering interior refinements and factory options. Almost everything that GM offered as an "option" was standard on imports (simple example was a/c...it wasnt that long ago that a/c and abs were options on domestic cars but standard on asian imports).
So with all that said...I don't view a C6 the same as I view a C5.
plus it seems to me that most people that have never driven or owned a Corvette ALWAYS gravitate towards the C5, especially when comparing to a C4. MY theory on that is because when they see a C4...it's such a dated look that most associate with the late 80's and THAT was a long time ago folks!!! and the "new and fresh" curvy lines of the C5 just seemed to appeal to the younger people.

i actually VERY MUCH enjoy the look of the C6 (although i have never driven one) and not so much liking the C7 at all (i think its just over engineered and way over the top and the "Stingray" emblem is so tacky it's embarrassing)

back to the C5...when i sit in one (yes i've driven many of them) i see a stereo, power window switches, heater controls ect ect ect that were identical to what you found in a Cavalier (or Cobalt) and that didnt sit well with me at all since when you sit in a C4 you will be hard pressed to find ANYTHING that they shared with another GM vehicle of that generation...in other words the C4 Corvettes were CORVETTES.
There is LOTS of hate for the C4 Bose stereo's but if I'm not mistaken the C5 Bose stereo's are ...worse? is that even possible?
It's because GM went CHEAP with the C5...after all the C5 was just a test car to see if the Corvette brand was going to continue past 1996 (hence the limited production numbers for 1997...the delay in production was a result of GM making the decision to move forward). and for people that dont know...1996 was being tossed around at GM as the last year of the Corvette because they were so expensive to make. the "dwindling sales" argument isn't very solid as they only averaged around 22k units per year for late model C4's (and it was the era of Gas Tax and Fuel Economy)

So I will give the C5 ONE bit of credit...it did save the brand!!!! but thats it...otherwise I'm not interested in owning one at all.

1996 was the LAST REAL CORVETTE

FASTAZU

I think the C4 ZR-1 put the performance back in the Corvette brand and brought it to the super car status, everything after was learned from this.

96LT4

They just drive better, handle better, better radio, etc...more room, good for road trips.

I have 2 complaints on the C6s...
The GPS system is horrible...garage/trash/junk. The system in my Raptor blows it away
And, the 427 tracks the road pretty badly..."follows grooves in the road".

The C5 just felt cheap, and the headlights were horrible. Throw in the saddle bag tanks that had software issues, and it just wasn't for me. Had a 2001 and a 2002 convertible...both for the wife.

96LT4

I'll agree, but that little LT4 was a strong puller too. I ran with one headed to a car show once....kinda looked like your car.

mark970

correct...that's by design...GM needed to save money on the manufacturing of the Corvette or they wouldnt be able to continue the brand...so they turned it into an impala with a big motor and better suspension

("impala"...thats just an expression...we all know the Impala wasnt built on the Corvette chassis).

Meanmyz

I was with most of what you said up to this point. GM was all in on the C5 and had too much invested to take a "wait and see" approach at that point. They had more orders than they could fill in '97 and the production delay was just in in trying to get the "wheels rollin" with the production process and quality. Besides, it was a very short production year. This is only from memory, but I don't they they really got any cars in quantity until Dec. '96 or January '97 (point is, it was not a typical new production in 3rd quarter of model year).

Yes, I hate the fact that the Blazer's etc., had much of the same interior. They touted their increased quality over C4 and touchy feelie soft bits on the C5 interior as more "luxurious", but after the newness wore off, I think many could see it as a step backward from the quality of the C4 interiors.

With C5, GM got the Corvette structure breakthroughs and the LS motors moved them into a new small block era for which to build upon. The interior is where they saved some of their money.

My own opinion is that I am not even a fan of the C6 interiors. The instrument cluster is Chevy Silverado and the interior design lacks inspiration. The seats look cheap with their vinyl side bolsters and the leather looks like vinyl.

The C7 interior makes me finally say, yes, this is a special car. If the C6 had a C7 inspired interior, I would be much more inspired to want a C6. MOHO!!!

mark970

great input! i cant and will not argue the improvements to the C5 chassis structural improvements nor will i bash the LS1 (however enthusiasts claim the LS1 motor feels terrible through the power band)


I havent been in a C6 so i cant speak for the dash...but i am crazy about the C6 ZR-1 look...it makes me drool.

as far as my info regarding C5 productions...i guess we read two different articles or we both took different things away from our respective articles...after all you seemed to agree with just about everything else i said...so we can agree that maybe I'm not totally clueless?? haha

and thank you for the like!! much appreciated

aklim

That is what I would deem the deal breaker or maker. I can build up on that.

mark970

i actually read an article shortly after the release of the C5 that they claimed the chassis was 4x stronger than a C4....
what baffles me now after all these years is that people seem to track C4's more...and the 80's C4 base model (with 16" tires) pulls the same G's on the same test track as a C6 Z06, so does the C5 chassis really make any difference?

i dont know..i dont race or track cars...just have to listen to what others have said or what i read. i do have a friend thats tracked built C5 and C6 Z06's and he's since sold both of them and is exclusive to the C4 now

Tom400CFI

Not 4x stronger, it's 4x stiffer, in torsion -stiffness and strength aren't the same thing. The C5 chassis is the execution of Dave McLellan's vision for the C4, that didn't come to fruition (in the C4) due to time/money/politics.



Torsional stiffness of the frame doesn't necessarily affect at limit handling of the car. What frame stiffness does contribute is passenger perception of bumps rough roads, and it allows the OEM to use softer springs (better ride quality) to achieve the same performance criteria.

So w/the C5^ you get a better "ride" experience, while maintaining about the same or even better handling limits.

mark970

THANK YOU, thats a well executed response and again, i learned something (i was using the wrong term for all these years haha)

"stiffness...not stronger"

Cool Runnings

Yeah, Base C6 vs ZR1 (C4).


EDIT: Thinking in a couple years time, I may start a long slow search for that well maintained, low mileage 6M LT5 for under $20k. I sure the LT5's are going to hold value while the C6's will continue to drop as the C5's are now. Also, I'm betting the garage queen C4's are going to hold value for some time to come.

mark970

my next newer corvette will be a C6...i just have no idea when that will be, not until they are much cheaper than they are now, so another 10 years maybe!!!

I'm hoping i can give it a ZR1 appearance (which means i hope i can put ZR1 fenders on a base...hopefully its not wider that far forward)

Meanmyz

Yeah, the C6 ZR-1 look does that for me too. The last couple of C6 production year seats, to me, look much better. If it had the C7 interior, too, I'd have to sell my "wee wee" and get one! Although they are coming down in price.