x2

The C7 looks like a matchbox car with so many sharp edges and highlighted scoops and edges.
I Really liked the C2 and C3 (early ones) didn't like the C4 and C6 and LOVED the C5 from the 1st time I saw it!!
Now mine has spoilers, fender flares and a smooth transitioning hood that makes it FAR better looking (and meaner) than the C7 in my opinion. And in regards to speed..., not even the C7Z has a chance other than top speed
I'll drive my C5 for a while longer...

 

You can probably guess which way I'm leaning.

 

GM made a statement with the C7. They publicly stated they wanted to appeal to a younger buyer. NOTE, the didn't say young buyer, but younger. They want to appeal to the 40's crowd that are successful, have a large disposable income and can afford a high priced sports car. Judging buy the sales figures, the C7 is a huge success. Consider that the price to dealers went up with the 2016 model year, the warranty was cut back for that model year, the discounts to buyers have been slashed and/or eliminated and with all these changes, the plant is working overtime to keep up with the demand.
Face it, whether we think the C5 or C6 is a better design, GM's decision to make a radical change has been correct to date. Personally, I'm very glad the marque will march on.

 

I never quite understood this sentiment... I think the C5 interior is actually very nice, miles ahead of most other cars (working at a large used car dealer, I see a ton of em). It's not overdone and flashy, and doesn't detract your attention from driving. Hell, I sold a 2007 Porsche Cayman back to the dealer in favor of another C5 because the Porsche interior felt like something that should be in an early 90s Nissan Sentra. But to each their own i guess

 

 

2007 Porsche interior is that of an early 90s Sentra? Lol, you are trying too hard here.

Also,

You are extremely wrong. The 996 era interiors are crap, but were still savable with the full leather option. Anything after that is miles and miles ahead of any C5 interior. Some of the comments coming out of the C5 section lately are unbelievable

 

C5 interiors are straight out of the dark age of Chevy interiors

 

A Grand Prix cost more than double the Sunfire from the same year

The interior of the C5 is definitely quite advanced compared to the Sunfire... The Grand Prix could be optioned nicer than the C5, but we all know GM spent their money on other things

 

I had a 2000 Boxster S with full leather and it was very nice, certainly better that anything GM has ever done.
The Porsche purists got their noses out of joint because some of the switches/etc had VW part numbers, but the upholstery and fitment were top-notch.
(Yes, the newer ones are even better, but they damn well ought to be: my neighbor's 991 Carrera 2S cost more than my house. )

 

You are smoking some really powerful crack rock if you think a C5 interior can even hold a candle to that of a 2007 Cayman.

The C5 interior is garbage compared to literally every other car I've owned.

1. What's with the gigantic gap between the dash and door? Did we lose our one and only tape measure the day that was designed?

2. How about those sun visors made from cardboard that come apart after a few years? I've never owned another car with the "floppy dog ear" syndrome. Or is that a GM feature?

3. Don't get me started on the chintzy console frame that didn't fit right from day 1. I don't think I've ever seen a C5 where that thing wasn't popping loose. (at least not where someone hasn't taken it apart and fixed it)

4. Both of my door reflectors popped out when the tiny little plastic tabs that holds them in snapped off. I fixed mine with magnets.

5. Both of the little hole covers behind the door pull in my car are AWOL. And once again I don't think I've ever sat in a C5 that still had both of the originals.

6. The foam of your seat rests directly on a series of wires with 0 backing and 0 protection of any sort from those wires cutting through it over the years. This is why the C5 seats loose their cushioning over time. I fixed this by gluing a layer of denim to the bottom of the foam.

7. Speaking of seats, GM must've genetically engineered cows with extremely thin hides to make the C5 seat covers. I have never seen leather seats that wear thin, tear, and separate so easily as in a C5.

8. Gotta love the plastic bag of goo that GM used for a horn button. Over time the goo leaks out, and then your horn blows until it either burns up or you yank out the relay. I fixed this on my car by wiring in 2 momentary switches mounted on either side of the steering wheel cover.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg. I could go on all day.

The C5 interior is comically bad. I have never had to make so many repairs and had so many issues with a car's interior before and this INCLUDES other GM offerings.

Yeah yeah sure, I've heard the "they spent money on the drivetrain" nonsense a shmillion times by now, but the honest truth is they could've addressed the vast majority of complaints people have with the interior for pennies and in some cases for nothing if they'd just had some better attention to detail.

And if you want to call b.s. on that pennies statement, just know that there is a GM engineer who worked the C5 project and posts often to the C5 tech forum who has gone on record as saying that were design changes to the C5 interior which were made to save as little as $0.05.

Now don't get me wrong. I love my C5, but I don't delude myself as to its faults. Its interior is horribad. And to defend it is either delusion or blindness.

 

Obviously a guy who has no clue about automotive manufacturing... when the C5 was built, like any other car, the demographic is the first consideration, then the budget is established, then the car and the 6,000 parts it takes to make one, are separated into projects, each having a budget and a budget manager who is the go no go for upgrades or revisions.. and is also the on time manager. GM had no trouble selling the 1/4 million C5's that were produced, and the closest thing to it at the time came from Stuttgart Germany at a cost of 100K. Considering the C5 was half the price to the consumer and was able defeat the gas guzzler tax, with card board sun visors, and fiber board sub straights. This guy trashes this car but says he lovs his C5?????? is it because of the drive train??? because for sure his C5 interior is a piece of junk ( His words Not mine ) If you want 100K quality buy something else, but Buy an American Icon that can stand toe to toe with the Porch 911 turbo at twice the price ) then a C5 is the best value on the planet... we built the car on time, within budget and produced a 100K car for 50 K... if the C5 was perfect. most here could not afford it...
I hate is when a guy bad mouths GM and disrespects those who are thrilled to own a C5, and then trashes the car and then says he loves his??
The only thing I find delusional is why this guy is on this forum trashing a car he loves?
He brought me into this thread with a reference to the cost of a revision I designed but was shot down.. and he took my post out of context and tried to make it seem GM didn't care..
The project manager shot down my rev. because it did not make it lighter or correct a safety issue... It was a good thing that the Project mgr. shot it down, because without their oversight, we could have never produced this car for this price, and deliver it on time, and without a gas guzzler tax. Gm hit a home run with this car.. The LSX motor is the benchmark by which other engines are measured...the first to be benchmarked to 200,000 miles.. with so much in the drive train, and a targeted MSRP, and cost to manufacture, only a delusional person would complain and not understand how this 50K car is so good. Most people even with pedestrian knowledge of automotive manufacturing processes. would understand... Some people complain about the radio, the seats, etc. but most understand what this car represents, No one expects a 50K American Icon to be perfect...especially for 50K
With all my love and the End
Bill aka ET

 

Wow. Very well explained.

 

I apologize to wcsinx for allowing my passion to take over my emotions.

I wont post in this thread again... IM too sick to allow my emotions to upset me..
Sorry wcsinx ... IM not going to go back over my text and edit it... it will only crate more issues... the fact of my post are still correct, with respect to manufacturing process.

 

I'm I the only one who thinks the c6 z06 is the best looking of all. that's what I'm leaning towards for my next car. I can't stand how they did the front fender flares on the c7 z06. it's like they just added a piece to the fender it doesn't flow at all. besides that I love the c7 just not the back end or tail lights.

 

I heard all this talk about the crappy C5 interior but when I began looking to buy one, I immediately liked the interior the first time I sat in one. It reminded me of my C3. Only better. I love the sight lines. The gauge cluster is perfect. The steering wheel and seat are extremely adjustable. The AC is cold even in the hot desert. What more do you need ? It's not over the top luxury. But I don't need that from a sports car. The C7 interior is much nicer, closer to what you'd expect in a Ferrari. I love the 2LT trim with the carbon fiber dash trim. But the C5's interior is adequate to me.

 

Bill...awesome post I have owned 11 vettes in my 52 years and the C5 is by far my favorite...bought a brand new C6 Z51 vert and after a ride in my friends 02 Z sold it and bought my 04 Z16 and my wifes 01 speedway white Z...best decision ever. I dont get all the complaints on the C5 interior...i think it is great...simple but comfortable and very functional. I know from your posts you have not been feeling well lately but if you want to come to East TN and cruise the dragon... give me shout and ill buy dinner. Thanks for all your contributions to the forum over the years and I have learned a ton from reading your posts. Thanks, Mike

 

It's fine, ET. We've had this discussion before. And I absolutely agree that there is simply was no comparison to the C5 on a bang for buck basis. THAT is why I bought one. Not because it had a good interior. I love the car yet I'm not so blinded that I can't recognize the faults in it. I don't know why this is so difficult for you understand?

Now you want to speak to the target demographic, well I think you'll lose that debate 99 times out of 100. GM has continually proven a disconnection with their demographic in recent history. Just look at how much more hate than love there is right here with regards to the C7 for proof of that. And I would just guess that if you asked the 1997 Corvette buying demographic if they'd like to pony up $500 more for better seats, and visors that aren't made of cardboard they would've gotten a LOT more takers than not IMHO. If you disagree, then explain why the C6 interior got SO much more attention and higher quality components than the C5? Because if it was all about penny pinching for the sake of devoting time and money into the drivetrain, then by all rights the C6 should have a worse interior than a C5 seeing as the base price barely changed from '05 to '06. :

 

I like the looks of my 02 z06 interior. I can't understand why more cars don't use the hud display. As wcsins pointed out there may be some cheap shortcuts done which is regrettable. My car only has 11k miles and was babied so no issues yet. I'm more worried about the electronics as it seems complicated for that gen auto.

 

I was not gping to further fuel my emotions.. When I was leaving GM most of the sr engineers that were looking at retirement were not happy with the direction, our American Icon was taking... New direction was being keyed by EuroAsian design... To an Old guy like me, this was Corvette Heresy... No one liked the money going into a much more Euro look, after all the Corvette was always a muscle car in sports car trim...with such refinements, it appealed to the consumer looking at Euro Cars ... IN my opinion the plushness and attention to comfort was a step backward in American design... I think the c6 pales in comparison to the C5... at my age and my financial situation I could buy a C6 or C7 at any time... but why would I spend 70K to get the same wood I get now every time I start my car... the designs are going Euro exotic, as seen by the C7... I'm too old to appreciate this as a replacement for American muscle.. Gm is going the way they feel will appeal to the targeted market.... when the C5 was a dream late 1993, then when the team was assembled, like myself in 1995, we had two years to hit the mark... and we hit it out of the ball park.. Evident by the love and longevity of C5's in this forum.. I have at least a dozen people in PM who have in excess of 300K miles on their C5 and have not had anything internal to the engine go bad... I have 4 people with 400K., there is a thread some where on this forum with high mileage members who are insanely satisfied with their C5. I cant speak for the direction of the Corvette, but I know how the design starts,, I don't know who the target market is now... I also know that GM does Poll many former Corvette owners when developing the concept... many people ( former owners )get a nice package of information and a survey.. and GM uses this to help mold the concept.. GM does listen. The development of the LSX motor was a costly enterprise, now that the money was invested into the C5 budget, the C6 and seven don't have to spend as much in New development.. IM not going to defend GM or the C5 other than to say. GM took the cost to manufacture, and got every penny out of that budget to produce an American icon that hit all the design queues it set out to complete. Delivered it on time, and within budget. Not as easy as it seems... OK I think Ive answered part of your question about the short body, much less flowing design of the C6.with the nicer interior. The C7 is a different animal all together... But it still has a pushrod motor.. not sure when we will see that change but when and if we do.. it will be a 13K red line DOHC engine that wont have half the longevity of the LSX design, but maybe by them the target demographic wont care...
Its not my place to guess what GM will do... I think you are of the belief that people like me are blind to the faults of the C5.. believe me we are not... but most accept the trade offs, considering the original cost factor.. incidentally... how many owners of 16 year old cars with 100,000 miles can brag about people willing to offer them 20,000/ 25,000 dollars for a car with such longevity and mileage. MODs and their cost are rarely a factor in the price of a used car... in many cases, mods are a negative factor in resale..

Bill aka ET

 

I still have trouble with this concept. Yes, the C5 was the initial application of the LSx engine, but it's not like it had to carry the R&D costs for it. It was designed in a completely separate division and intended from the get-go to be used on multiple platforms, most (all?) with much higher production rates than the Corvette to amortize the nonrecurring costs.