If you could make the C7
02-23-2009, 12:42 AM
#1
Pro
Thread Starter
If you could make the C7
If you were in charge of the C7, what would you have your team make? If it were me:
I'd take a very similar approach as was done with the C6. The C5 was so good that it would have been dumb to start over. The same can be said with the C6. I'd start out with a C6 and make it an inch or two shorter and more narrow. I'd knock off a couple hundred pounds while I was at it. I think the C6 is beautiful so I'd leave the styling very similar execpt with even more exaggerated curves like an early C3. I'd keep the same engine range except I'd try to squeeze a few more mpg out of each one. Finally I'd spend a lot of time on the interior. The C6 was a huge leap ahead inside but it's time to end the Corvette interior jokes once and for all.
Then I'd start planning on how to make the C8 the world's best electric sports car!
I'd take a very similar approach as was done with the C6. The C5 was so good that it would have been dumb to start over. The same can be said with the C6. I'd start out with a C6 and make it an inch or two shorter and more narrow. I'd knock off a couple hundred pounds while I was at it. I think the C6 is beautiful so I'd leave the styling very similar execpt with even more exaggerated curves like an early C3. I'd keep the same engine range except I'd try to squeeze a few more mpg out of each one. Finally I'd spend a lot of time on the interior. The C6 was a huge leap ahead inside but it's time to end the Corvette interior jokes once and for all.
Then I'd start planning on how to make the C8 the world's best electric sports car!
02-24-2009, 08:54 PM
#2
Instructor
Member Since: Jan 2009
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How you describe the exterior is pretty much what I would have it look like (sorta like a longer version of the saturn sky). I would give it a more modern look though, with headlights like an Audi R8, large oval exhaust tips at the sides of the back (like the C4), but would still keep the four oval tail lights. As for the interior it would be more modern also; deep set digital gauges along with driver info center, recaro-like seats, and a more curvy dash. For the engine it would be 5.5L DOHC V8 with VVT, cylinder deactivation, direct injection, etc. I don't know how much horsepower it would have (300-400 maybe) but it could probably get somewhere close to the 35+ requirement in 2020. IMO the Corvette should become more of a modern sports car than using old technology, I think it could really benefit from it.
02-26-2009, 09:19 PM
#3
Instructor
Member Since: Dec 2008
Location: Aspen Colorado
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first thing that I would do is throw all of the current concept plans in the garbage. The concept that will be in the upcoming Transformers movie is not what the next vette should be. The C6 is a great platform to use to generate the next vette. Use the styling cues that have made the Corvette what it is. Don't make any really radical changes that will make the Corvette the laughing stock of the performance car world.
05-12-2009, 02:37 AM
#4
Drifting
Right Hand Drive
G'day,
I agree with the above about it being shorter and lighter, but I would definitely design AND build it with the steering wheel and pedals on either side. That way, it would generate sales in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, etc.
I would not put in a DOHC engine, the current SUHC engine is just fine. Don't forget, that DOHC Formula One engines buzz to 18,000 rpm and put out 900 h.p., while Top Fuel SUHC engines only rev to about 7,000 rpm but put out 900 + hp from each cylinder!!! However, neither are suitable to drive on public roads.
A properly designed pushrod engine is more than adequate, as the Gen 3 + engines have proved. DOHC engines can put out a BIT more hp from the same engine size, but have to drive two camshaft chains, four camshafts, 32 valves and springs and are both wider and heavier than a SUHC engine. The friction alone from moving all of those extra parts adds significantly to fuel consumption, so where's the advantage?
Oh, they also have to have both a right AND left cylinder head, which adds to the cost of production, and therefore MSRP. Where's the advantage?
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regards from Down Under
aussiejohn
12 weeks to go
I agree with the above about it being shorter and lighter, but I would definitely design AND build it with the steering wheel and pedals on either side. That way, it would generate sales in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, etc.
I would not put in a DOHC engine, the current SUHC engine is just fine. Don't forget, that DOHC Formula One engines buzz to 18,000 rpm and put out 900 h.p., while Top Fuel SUHC engines only rev to about 7,000 rpm but put out 900 + hp from each cylinder!!! However, neither are suitable to drive on public roads.
A properly designed pushrod engine is more than adequate, as the Gen 3 + engines have proved. DOHC engines can put out a BIT more hp from the same engine size, but have to drive two camshaft chains, four camshafts, 32 valves and springs and are both wider and heavier than a SUHC engine. The friction alone from moving all of those extra parts adds significantly to fuel consumption, so where's the advantage?
Oh, they also have to have both a right AND left cylinder head, which adds to the cost of production, and therefore MSRP. Where's the advantage?
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regards from Down Under
aussiejohn
12 weeks to go
05-12-2009, 10:34 AM
#5
Plain and simple. Lower production number, Light weight, DOHC with a VVT and lift control setup, push rod is great but DOHC has proven itself with me, possible direct port injection and a possible redesign of front end, and scrap the leafspring setup, yes it works but the technology is more benificial in a coilover. It might mean the price would be higher but well worth it. If i wanted fuel economy I would buy a camry.
GM, FORD, and all the auto makers stateside need to quit dishing out so many cars off the assembly line. I went to a chevy and a ford dealership in TX where I live to look around and jesus christ there were atleast 50-75 cars of each model and each trim level in every color on the lot. No wonder everyone is falling under, Too many cars not enough people. Same goes for the realestate problem. now im just blabbing on....lol
Just keep the corvette exclusive, and keep it a flagship for the auto industry.
GM, FORD, and all the auto makers stateside need to quit dishing out so many cars off the assembly line. I went to a chevy and a ford dealership in TX where I live to look around and jesus christ there were atleast 50-75 cars of each model and each trim level in every color on the lot. No wonder everyone is falling under, Too many cars not enough people. Same goes for the realestate problem. now im just blabbing on....lol
Just keep the corvette exclusive, and keep it a flagship for the auto industry.
05-21-2009, 08:10 PM
#7
Race Director
Member Since: Jun 2002
Location: Troll Free Zone
Posts: 19,882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CI 4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09
C7?
If I had absolute free reign to do it, there is ONE term on which it all would hinge.
MID ENGINE. No excuses, No BS. Unlike any Corvette before.
GM knows how to do it, CERV III & INDY.
The C6 can carry on for a while yet.
Sadly, I don't see it happening.
If I had absolute free reign to do it, there is ONE term on which it all would hinge.
MID ENGINE. No excuses, No BS. Unlike any Corvette before.
GM knows how to do it, CERV III & INDY.
The C6 can carry on for a while yet.
Sadly, I don't see it happening.
05-21-2009, 11:58 PM
#8
Pro
Thread Starter
You see, gasoline engines' days are numbered. As much as I hate to say it, electric is the future of all cars... even sports cars. That means that the C7 is going to have to be a transitional generation that bridges the gap between the current pavement thumping gas powered C6 and what I believe will be an electric C8. If I'm right, then spending a ton of money to develop a mid engined C7 would be waste.
Look at it this way... GM wants desperately to be seen as the leader of green automobiles, and I truely believe that is their primary goal as a company these days. Tesla has proven that exciting electric sports cars are possible, and I'm sure that GM is salivating at the chance to make a Corvette the world's best electric sports car in the not so far off future.
05-22-2009, 12:15 AM
#9
more drama
make it more exotic but still with corvette cove,round tailights,and
dimensions.
awd option
upgrade interior and speaker system
adapt gt-r technology to make every corvette brutally fast.
keep the coupe around 47,500k
bring back lmb and monterey red, a more dramatic atomic orange
FORBID ANY DEALER TO SELL OVER MSRP
dimensions.
awd option
upgrade interior and speaker system
adapt gt-r technology to make every corvette brutally fast.
keep the coupe around 47,500k
bring back lmb and monterey red, a more dramatic atomic orange
FORBID ANY DEALER TO SELL OVER MSRP
05-26-2009, 09:04 AM
#11
Race Director
Member Since: Jun 2002
Location: Troll Free Zone
Posts: 19,882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CI 4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09
You see, gasoline engines' days are numbered. As much as I hate to say it, electric is the future of all cars... even sports cars. That means that the C7 is going to have to be a transitional generation that bridges the gap between the current pavement thumping gas powered C6 and what I believe will be an electric C8. If I'm right, then spending a ton of money to develop a mid engined C7 would be waste.
Look at it this way... GM wants desperately to be seen as the leader of green automobiles, and I truely believe that is their primary goal as a company these days. Tesla has proven that exciting electric sports cars are possible, and I'm sure that GM is salivating at the chance to make a Corvette the world's best electric sports car in the not so far off future.
http://www.teslamotors.com/
Frankly, I have no interest in a vehicle where performance diminishes by the mile and ends in forced down time for recharging. Mapping out suitable charging locations as part of any traveling is not appealing, in any fashion. Ever use an electric golf cart?
Regarding GM, I have serious doubts the company will survive it's current problems, so what GM "desperately wants" is, in all likelihood, moot.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/22/b...nto-bankruptc/
The best thing that could happen to Corvette is to be spun off and gain freedom from the General. The XLR is finally gone, BG is once again exclusively Corvette.
05-26-2009, 02:18 PM
#12
Pro
Thread Starter
Regarding GM, I have serious doubts the company will survive it's current problems, so what GM "desperately wants" is, in all likelihood, moot.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/22/b...nto-bankruptc/
The best thing that could happen to Corvette is to be spun off and gain freedom from the General. The XLR is finally gone, BG is once again exclusively Corvette.
05-29-2009, 09:33 PM
#13
Instructor
Member Since: Feb 2005
Location: Franklin WI
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My C7
Body/Chassis:
-Use Aluminum frame rails from Z06
-More CF in body for weight redux
-Trim about 4-5inches in length and 1-2 inches in width
-LED head lights/driving lights/tail lights
-Exhaust on rear corners and through the body. We are NOT copying Ferrari, Ferrari copied us since our C1's had it this way in the 50's
- Lighter weight means smaller tires/wheels/brakes are required for same performance
Interior:
- Recaro or Sparco seats. No exceptions!! If the CTS-V can have recaros (along with the Mitsubishi Evo), so can the C7.
- Alcanterra option
Engine:
- No DOHC. Adds weight and complexity. Save the extra cost for a better interior
- 327 Direct Injection, AFV, Dual continous valve timing (Viper has it). Turbo/Blower on Z06/ZR1. 7500-8000 RPM
-6speed manual or 7 speed dual clutch auto
- Dry sump for ZO6/ZR1. Wet sump for std.
Styling
Agressive, creased fenders. A mix of C3 and C6. FUNCTIONAL rear diffuser.
Weight Target: 2750 lbs.
The frame rails alone save pver 100 lbs. Smaller wheels and tires can save another 50-60. Smaller carbon ceramic brakes can save another 40 lbs, and a generally smaller car should save another 75-100 by default. That alone is 300 lbs without significant effort. Forget about flip up head lamps and driving lights. They add cost and weight.
With less weight, less drag due to a smaller vehicle, less inertia due to lighter wheels/tires/brakes, DI, AFV, and a ridiculus tall top gear, this should be able to hit 35+ on the hwy. Considering a c5/c6 can get 30, this should be able to deliver both perfomance and economy.
-Use Aluminum frame rails from Z06
-More CF in body for weight redux
-Trim about 4-5inches in length and 1-2 inches in width
-LED head lights/driving lights/tail lights
-Exhaust on rear corners and through the body. We are NOT copying Ferrari, Ferrari copied us since our C1's had it this way in the 50's
- Lighter weight means smaller tires/wheels/brakes are required for same performance
Interior:
- Recaro or Sparco seats. No exceptions!! If the CTS-V can have recaros (along with the Mitsubishi Evo), so can the C7.
- Alcanterra option
Engine:
- No DOHC. Adds weight and complexity. Save the extra cost for a better interior
- 327 Direct Injection, AFV, Dual continous valve timing (Viper has it). Turbo/Blower on Z06/ZR1. 7500-8000 RPM
-6speed manual or 7 speed dual clutch auto
- Dry sump for ZO6/ZR1. Wet sump for std.
Styling
Agressive, creased fenders. A mix of C3 and C6. FUNCTIONAL rear diffuser.
Weight Target: 2750 lbs.
The frame rails alone save pver 100 lbs. Smaller wheels and tires can save another 50-60. Smaller carbon ceramic brakes can save another 40 lbs, and a generally smaller car should save another 75-100 by default. That alone is 300 lbs without significant effort. Forget about flip up head lamps and driving lights. They add cost and weight.
With less weight, less drag due to a smaller vehicle, less inertia due to lighter wheels/tires/brakes, DI, AFV, and a ridiculus tall top gear, this should be able to hit 35+ on the hwy. Considering a c5/c6 can get 30, this should be able to deliver both perfomance and economy.
05-30-2009, 12:16 AM
#14
Drifting
Member Since: May 2006
Location: Santa Barbara California
Posts: 1,842
Received 139 Likes
on
83 Posts
I viewed the concept published in Motor Trend. What I saw was not the mid-engined concept I had hoped for but simply a cross between a C-6 and a 68/69 morphed into something (IMO) very very ugly. G.M. has a unique opportunity to take their dinosaur of a company in a new and progressive direction. Why not take this opportunity and run with it rather than revert back to the same old same old and watch the restructured G.M. fall back into the same abyss that it now has the chance to emerge from.
05-30-2009, 02:31 PM
#15
Drifting
I'd make it a mid-engine V8. Very similar to the C6, but a little longer in the back (due to the mid-engine), and a slightly shorter hood. I may also add some styling cues similar to the F430, but nothing to make it look like a Ferrari-Chevy mutant. I would also give the option of upgraded seats. A year later, I'd release the Z06 with twin turbos.
06-11-2009, 11:09 PM
#16
Safety Car
I'd make it a mid-engine V8. Very similar to the C6, but a little longer in the back (due to the mid-engine), and a slightly shorter hood. I may also add some styling cues similar to the F430, but nothing to make it look like a Ferrari-Chevy mutant. I would also give the option of upgraded seats. A year later, I'd release the Z06 with twin turbos.
06-13-2009, 08:52 AM
#17
Pro
Member Since: Aug 2005
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day,
I agree with the above about it being shorter and lighter, but I would definitely design AND build it with the steering wheel and pedals on either side. That way, it would generate sales in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, etc.
I would not put in a DOHC engine, the current SUHC engine is just fine. Don't forget, that DOHC Formula One engines buzz to 18,000 rpm and put out 900 h.p., while Top Fuel SUHC engines only rev to about 7,000 rpm but put out 900 + hp from each cylinder!!! However, neither are suitable to drive on public roads.
A properly designed pushrod engine is more than adequate, as the Gen 3 + engines have proved. DOHC engines can put out a BIT more hp from the same engine size, but have to drive two camshaft chains, four camshafts, 32 valves and springs and are both wider and heavier than a SUHC engine. The friction alone from moving all of those extra parts adds significantly to fuel consumption, so where's the advantage?
Oh, they also have to have both a right AND left cylinder head, which adds to the cost of production, and therefore MSRP. Where's the advantage?
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regards from Down Under
aussiejohn
12 weeks to go
I agree with the above about it being shorter and lighter, but I would definitely design AND build it with the steering wheel and pedals on either side. That way, it would generate sales in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, etc.
I would not put in a DOHC engine, the current SUHC engine is just fine. Don't forget, that DOHC Formula One engines buzz to 18,000 rpm and put out 900 h.p., while Top Fuel SUHC engines only rev to about 7,000 rpm but put out 900 + hp from each cylinder!!! However, neither are suitable to drive on public roads.
A properly designed pushrod engine is more than adequate, as the Gen 3 + engines have proved. DOHC engines can put out a BIT more hp from the same engine size, but have to drive two camshaft chains, four camshafts, 32 valves and springs and are both wider and heavier than a SUHC engine. The friction alone from moving all of those extra parts adds significantly to fuel consumption, so where's the advantage?
Oh, they also have to have both a right AND left cylinder head, which adds to the cost of production, and therefore MSRP. Where's the advantage?
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regards from Down Under
aussiejohn
12 weeks to go
Sir,The current SUHC engine sick
i swear i will not buy another corvette with same engine, it dosent give u the feel for sport car drive
06-13-2009, 04:09 PM
#18
Pro
Member Since: Aug 2005
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How you describe the exterior is pretty much what I would have it look like (sorta like a longer version of the saturn sky). I would give it a more modern look though, with headlights like an Audi R8, large oval exhaust tips at the sides of the back (like the C4), but would still keep the four oval tail lights. As for the interior it would be more modern also; deep set digital gauges along with driver info center, recaro-like seats, and a more curvy dash. For the engine it would be 5.5L DOHC V8 with VVT, cylinder deactivation, direct injection, etc. I don't know how much horsepower it would have (300-400 maybe) but it could probably get somewhere close to the 35+ requirement in 2020. IMO the Corvette should become more of a modern sports car than using old technology, I think it could really benefit from it.
06-13-2009, 11:25 PM
#19
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep the weight down, nicer interior matierals (new Cadillac CTS is nice), and keep racing in the American Le Mans Series.
http://www.compuware.com/about/lemans_racing.asp
http://www.corvetteracing.com/
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/2...ette-C6.R.html
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/3...e-Z06-GT2.html
http://www.compuware.com/about/lemans_racing.asp
http://www.corvetteracing.com/
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/2...ette-C6.R.html
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/3...e-Z06-GT2.html
06-17-2009, 11:53 AM
#20
Le Mans Master
To be in charge of the design of the next generation Corvette has got to be about the most stressful job at GM right now. Which direction do you go? More power/performance higher price smaller production? Or more efficient lighter less expensive to maintain marketabilty? This choice will make or break the Corvette.
If it were me, I would take everything we learned from the LS9 to extract 100hp/ltr. I would apply that along with direct injection, vvt, et-al. I would then take everything we learned from the C6 as a whole in terms of suspension, lightweight materials, braking, interior, sound dynamics. Then take the premise of the Solstice coupe, add the Vette tech to it, refresh the design to make it a little sleeker and meaner, maintaining the Corvette "signatures". I would go with a 4.6 liter for the base and 5.3 for the Zo6. I would try to produce it to sell for $45-$50K and put as many of them in as many garages as I possibly could.
If it were me, I would take everything we learned from the LS9 to extract 100hp/ltr. I would apply that along with direct injection, vvt, et-al. I would then take everything we learned from the C6 as a whole in terms of suspension, lightweight materials, braking, interior, sound dynamics. Then take the premise of the Solstice coupe, add the Vette tech to it, refresh the design to make it a little sleeker and meaner, maintaining the Corvette "signatures". I would go with a 4.6 liter for the base and 5.3 for the Zo6. I would try to produce it to sell for $45-$50K and put as many of them in as many garages as I possibly could.