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 really do think the C5 profile looks more coherent. Sure, the C6 appears more "now," but there are a few things that just don't look quite right to me in profile. The first is the upper cove line being longer than the lower. Perhaps I'm just too used to the C5. The part of the front fender just aft and above the wheel appears a little too beefy. Finally, I thought a smaller butt would be better, but I would have scooped a little beef off that front fender and added to the rear.....it looks to high from the ground. The improvements I see are the concave rear horizontal surface and the slightly shorter front overhang. I can't believe they didn't consult me before the final design was approved! :crazy:
Soemthing I whipped up in Photoshop...
I hope you're not claiming my work as yours, Scott (just checking).
Absolutely not! I used your C6 (A little better than my attempt at removing the crease from in this thread: http://forums.corvetteforum.com/zerothread?id=715623) and added the C5 on the top. Thanks for providing the base :)
Also notice how the roofline in front looks to "wrap" over the windshield more, ending about midway point of the rearview mirror. C5's roofline starts a little further back it seems. Gives C6 a little more aggressive scowl.
I've griped about the C6 design, but the side profile really looks great. Not sure yet which I like "better" though. Hope I like it when I see it in person.
Can one of you choppers put those C6 rims on the C5 and maybe lower it a bit too? Just curious how much of a difference the wheels make in the overall "modernness comparison" of these two.
Combination and reworking of BKuper's and ScottH's "collaboration." ;)
With added perspective by GX624
NOTE: This is not scientific. I shrank the C6 so that the door lengths were a match. The overall length ratio between the two is closer in this pic.
Another thing worth mentioning is that the C6 mirrors are NOT C5 mirrors.
The taller height and less steep windshield also give the perception of a slightly airier cockpit.
I overlapped the two last night and found two things:
-Both windshields are canted back at the same angle. In other words, same rake.
-The C6 windshield is shorter. Or, rather, the base of it appears to start at a higher elevation.
Though Cd is reported to be down ten points (a "point" is .001, and these numbers are likely rounded down), frontal area could be a bit greater, so overall Cd times frontal area may be a wash.
Whether all the c/d numbers were obtained identically and from 'stock' cars (or scale models thereof) with all the details and warts is unknown, and all wind tunnels, even properly-calibrated ones vary somewhat.
The c/d difference could be inconsequential- as little as the .002 between hypothetical figures of .284 and .286. As you say, it's totally meaningless without frontal area information and, although it's unlikely, the drag could even be marginally worse.
As for the comparison pics, they're great, but I wouldn't read too much into them since those are GM pics. They're heavily retouched and either or both may have been altered to make the car appear longer or minimize perceived problem areas. That happens all the time. Different focal length lenses and different camera heights also render relative sizes, shapes and positions slightly differently even if the intent is to portray reality.