well it was my only car and I wanted to keep my already high insurance rates as low as I could.

as for how better C5/6/7 are compared to C4 you simply need to drive them. but anyone I ever talked to about how newer ones handle and perform is the car comes alive over 100 but normal everyday driving you wont notice

 

So I guess as Tom400CFI hinted, the C4 is probably a more fun daily driver.

 

That was exactly my learning experience, when I had a C6, then bought a C4. The C4 was/is way more fun on the street...which is where we all use them.

On the track, the C6 was substantially faster...but they were both the same amount of fun; they were both at the limit and they both felt the same. Shift points even occurred at the same places on the same track. Everything was the same, except the number on your lap time.

 

Yup! True. But, the down side of that was the stiff springs - especially the Z51 packages. Later years had softer spring rates - all the way to 96s But, the FX3 adjustable shocks in the latter C4s was controlled partly with a switch on the console, and partly by computer which considered wheel rpm: faster = stiffer. The Vette benefited from a much better frame with the into of the C5 - which is clearly a better platform for a track car than the C4. But, compared to the std C3,..there is no comparison, IMO.

 

I have stiffer than stock springs and I don't see the issue with them. I have new shocks too. The ride si no where near as rough as my fox body mustangs int eh 90's with lowering springs from bbk or whatever "race springs"

 

 

How tall are you?

 

6'4" once I was in it was one of the most comfortable cars. but getting in and out was a chore some days. you can only hit your head and knees so many times before you want to sell it

 

Oh ok. I'm not nearly that tall. I'm 6'1". So should be fine in a C4 based on what you said.

 

The same for me except some C5's instead of C6.

The C4's are may favorite drivers. They just have a "feel" that I like. The C5's + seem more civilized and not as fun.

The C5's are very good cars and for some things they are better. (Easier trunk access, easier top removal, Great LS engines, better frame, etc) I have had a couple and still have one with some mods. It is a very quick car and a good performer, but when I want to enjoy the drive I take the C4. When I need a grocery getter I take the C5. If on a track, the C5 would win, but the C4 would be fun.

 

This is all good to hear. But when it comes to safety, how ahead is the C5 and C6 compared to the C4?

And on a different note, how good is the FX3 selectable suspension setting which came with the C4? It's pretty old tech by now. Is it really good or useful? Do they still work today or are they problem points to watch for when buying a C4 today?

 

FX3 would be nice to have if it worked. It's not nearly as good as the F45 and beyond. Parts are getting scarce and expensive ; so as failures appear many times the actuators and shocks are removed.

 

The C4 was a giant leap forward for Corvettes, and for all sports cars in some ways. I hear many people who are considered Corvette authorities saying that the C5 and later cars would never been as good as they are without all the advances introduced by the C4. It had excellent handling, real power, and introduced some advanced styling & technology. In the day it was radically futuristic especially the "Atari" dashboard.

 

I think on most "sport's cars" the driver is the limitation I know I am

 

^
These are the key words, right here.
People ask me if it's fast, I say "In it's day, it was a rocket ship that out-handled the comparable Ferrari. By today's standards? It's a fun car to drive that looks really cool."

 

Look up NHTSA ratings. It's hard to imagine how a C5 could be anything but more safe than a C4, though.

 

To the OP and others, by far the best way to actually evaluate and appreciate any car's handling (or lack thereof) is to autocross it. That's the cheapest, safest way to get a feel for a car's limits and how it behaves as it approaches and exceeds them. BTW, we need to clarify that "grip" and "handling" are two different things. Grip is a skidpad number, pure and simple. How a car handles at its max lateral acceleration is another matter entirely. Cars that have a narrow range of slip angles around max grip, with rapid falloff on either side of the best slip angle, are perceived as edgy and difficult to drive safely. Ditto cars that tend have non-linear handling: e.g., cars that rapidly and unpredictably transition from understeer to oversteer. Luckily for us, the C4 is generally capable of high grip while being pretty benign in its handling qualities. It's also easily capable (even happy) of dealing with much more power than it ever came with stock. And it handles a lot stickier tires than the engineers could imagine back when they designed it in the dawn of the 80s. The later (88-96) C4s are probably a little more benign, but either version is good.

The C5 generally improved on these qualities. I was stiffer, lighter, and had a more rearward weight bias than the C4. In the rear, it stopped using the halfshafts as upper lateral suspension links, which freed up the engineers to use better suspension geometry (it also means a broken halfshaft u-joint is a lot less catastrophic). But don't forget, the engine was a quantum leap also: the LS1 was lighter and had a lot more power potential than the LT1, which itself was a big improvement on the L98. Anyway, it's incrementally better in lots of ways, and that adds up to significantly better handling and performance for equally prepped cars.

It does seem that the C5/6 has more potential to set better lap times in an autocross or road course than a C4 with equal mods. I'm not sure I fully understand all the reasons why. But to put that in perspective, a well-prepped/modded C4 still dusts most cars on a road course or autocross. One problem with modding/prepping a C4 is that the aftermarket for suspension parts is no longer very robust. There is a lot more out there for C5/6 cars than C4s. It's not impossible - there are just fewer choices.

 

Matt,

What have you observed on the Auto x circuit? That C5's typically outperform C4's? My C6 was a huge disappointment from a SOTP perspective on the Auto X course. And backing up the SOTP, it didn't do that well relative to other cars at the events that I took it to. In fact, I felt that my F-bods that I'd had previously were better and more driveable. Felt.

Later, I autox'ed the C4, then compared it and my previous F-bods to the C6, more objectively than "feel". I did this by comparing times and rankings that I got in each of my cars vs other cars, compared to times and rankings that I got in the C6...compared to those same other cars. Anyway, the upshot of that comparing was that the both the '86 Camaro Z28 I'd had, and the C4 were faster than than the C6 in Auto x -both cars stock other than wheels/tires.

On the road course, the C6 killed the C4 (on paper), although they both provided the same "experience" at their limits. With 33% or 100 more HP, I'd expect the C6 to pummel on the C4 on road course.

So back to my question...what have you seen, stock for stock (ish)?


.

 

I'm not sure I understand you.

And by the way, I didn't mean safety as in crash tests only. But also safety equipment. Passive and active. For example, of course it had airbags and ABS. But what about traction control? I would think ESP not. But what else? Thanks.

 

What a great write up!

Really? that's interesting to hear, since the C4's cabin is more backwards and it has a longer front. I guess it's because the C5 has the gearbox in the rear?


How is the LT5 from the ZR-1 compared to the LS1?

I have never driven either. But I often hear a MX5, even the first generation is one of the best handling cars and one of the best for Autocross. Have you driven one? How do you feel it compares to a C4 and C5?


Being thinking about investing in the C4 platform, I'm sorry to hear that.