First things first...who knows if I'll live long enough to see the C8...or be able to plop my old a$$ into one!

 

guessing you cant pop the hood anymore, cu z i see no hood lines lol
silly autoweek

 

I believe C8's will be mid engine and revolutionary in design - frankly being past peak oil now, it'll probably be a hybrid running on french fry oil!
They've been kicking the mid engine idea around for so long.

C7's I hope will be revolutionary, but honestly I believe it will be evolutionary mandated by the economy - sorry folks.
The bills have got to be paid to keep the lights on right now.

 

I think it looks great. There's too many fuddy-duddies in this Corvette camp that want the future to look like the present or the past. GM will just have to drag you guys and gals kicking and screaming into the future! I'll bet the C7 will look like the transition between this and the C6.

 

fugly101's

 

First off, no... By the time GM gets around to actually designing a C8 (if the Vette makes it to the 8th generation) there will be a lot of newer aerodynamic technologies that will HOPEFULLY have already revolutionized the automotive industry. In addition, by that time, hybrid technology may be mandated as a requirement, and therefore this design would not be worth a poop in a pot.

Finally, a mid-engined Corvette, is NOT a Corvette. It's European garbage. What possible reason could there be to make a car more complex by making it mid-engine? There's absolutely NO benefit to mid-engined cars. It just makes them more difficult to work on, more expensive, and puts the driver closer to the front wheels. BAD DESIGN.



This would be an epic fail. Mid-engine has 'bad' written all over it. No joke, I'll never buy another GM ever again if they make a mid-engine Corvette... I mean it. NEVER.

 

I feel compelled to point out once again that the Corvette is mid-engined. It is mid-engined with the passenger cabin behind the engine.

There are advantages and disadvantages about engine and cabin placement depending on if you are talking about, engine cooling, crash safety, street driving, track driving, nose and vibration, handling, traction, steering feel, cost, etc...... It is all about trade offs.

I would happily buy a Corvette with the engine behind the cabin if it didn't compromise some of the things I like about Corvettes. Most notably is performance per dollar. Also simplicity. roar versus scream. Torque. Low speed tractibilty. Everyday driveability. Cost of maintenance. Durability.

I don't want to have a "garage queen".

It is possible to have a lower cost mid-engined car with a forward cabin position (think Fiero).

 

The Ford GT had the motor behind the cabin and that wasn't a bad car!

 

The Ford GT is quite expensive. It's a fantastic car. But can you get one for $80K?

The Corvette is "TECHNICALLY" a mid-engine car, but there's quite a difference between the motor being feet and inches behind the front wheels. The car is already well balanced. I don't see any benefits from sitting in front of the motor. And I see a lot of draw backs from it. Not to mention that I like to work on my cars myself. Having the motor behind the driver makes it very difficult to work on.

But my biggest beef with the motor being behind the driver is because at the moment the Corvette is kicking LOTS of butt on the track at a fraction of the price of the cars it's beating. If we wanted to replicate what the Europeans are doing, we should go slower while we're at it. In the mean time, Chevy has proven that, regardless of being RWD and the motor being in front of the driver, the Corvette will kick LOTS of butt at a small fraction of what the exotics cost. The main question is: If the formula works, why change it? We don't need to be like the Europeans to build an awesome car. /story

 

I see that you "/storied" this discussion so don't beat me up for adding a counter argument.

For one thing, the FGT was never mass produced in the same numbers as the Corvette. I think that alone has more to do with the higher price tag than the mid-rear engine placement.

It seems to me that if Porsche can build one (Boxster) for well under $100K, then GM should have no trouble doing it as well. Why does eveyone assume a mid-rear Corvette would cost $150K just because of the engine placement?

Also, the mid-rear weight bias has at least one big advantage that I can think of - that being traction under hard acceleration.

...and for the record, I don't want Corvette to change the formula either. But still, I don't believe for a second that Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Koneggsseeeggggg, etc all got the formula wrong by placing the engine behind the driver.

 

People keep ignoring the Fiero in the lower cost rear mounted mid-engined cars. It had a L4 and V6, but V8 will fit. By the time they discontinued it they fixed a number of the "commuter car" suspension issues.

There are plenty of reasons not to go rear mid. Snap over steer is dangerous on the street with inexperienced drivers. Crash safety. Do you really want to be between the mass of the car (engine) and the object you are striking in a frontal crash? Engines are mobile in crashes. They are essentailly held by 2(?) bolts.

The reason not to go there for the Corvette is the engineering and tooling costs. It is not the best time to be justifying large expenditures for a low volume car. For the C8 maybe. Reuse of components. the cost of the Fiero was greatly influenced by the reused of a LOT of components. The first front suspension was from a Chevette, the rear driveline was the front end of a Citation.The only novel thing was the spaceframe and mill and drill panel placement and flexible body panels. It was expected to be used for other products.

The Corvette has the hydroformed frame which was essentially R&D for its future use in other products (trucks, the largest volume vehicles).

I do absolutely believe that GM could engineer a value priced rear mid Corvette if they wanted. I don't think they have the stomach for it in this economy.

 

It's not necessarily the placement of the engine behind the driver that would make the car more expensive. It's the work on the car that would make it more expensive. I personally do all the work on my cars. But the more difficult they make it to get to the motor, the more reason to take it to a dealer and just be done with it.

I don't know too many Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bugatti, or Porsche guys that work on their own cars. Maybe more 911 Porsche guys since the rear-mounted motors are pretty accessible. However, to get deep into the engine compartment on those mid-engined cars, you need to either lift the car, pull the back clip off or lift the body. The Corvette is a sports car for the common man who can't afford a Lambo, Ferrari, etc. And putting the motor out of reach doesn't make any sense in that case.

The advantage of putting the weight on the back tires during hard acceleration isn't a great argument since the car already does this, just in a smaller degree. It wouldn't justify how much handling you're removing just to get more rear-end traction during hard acceleration.

So can you afford a "Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Koneggsseeeggggg (LOL)"? I can't. I could afford a Lamborghini Countach... maybe. But I wouldn't be able to afford the upkeep or gas. LOL So essentially, owning a Corvette is both economical (especially since I can work on it myself) and already out-performs many of the high-end exotics.

If Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Koneggsseeeggggg got the formula right, how come a car half the price is beating them on the track? The ZR1 is still king of the hill, especially when you compare cars dollar for dollar.

Granted, if I had the money for the ZR1, I wouldn't ever have to worry about affording maintenance, but I still like the idea that I could easily work on that car myself. Know why it's expensive to upgrade mid-engined cars? Because they're a PITA to work on.

And by the way, even if the Boxster is a $30K mid-engined car, it's still a pile. Ever been in one? I'd rather drive a F-body. I used to work at a Porsche shop. Those things are absolute garbage. Yes, they go well around the track. Would I drive one? Only if it was the alternative to walking in the rain.

I believe Racer X is correct about the cost of making a rear-biased mid-engined Vette. I still don't think they should do it. If GM wants to make a mid-engined car, call it something else. Keep the Vette a Vette.

 

I like it! Nice styling cues, sharp lines and what Zora always wanted in a Corvette, mid engine. I'm for both front or mid, so it doesn't matter. As long as the quality is top notch and not your typical "Cookie Cutter" put together sports car.

 

Those must be the most useless side mirrors I've ever seen.

If the car is driving for me, I wont need a Corvette.

 

Very astute! It opens like the C4 does. (Clamshell type.)

 

wooooooooooooooooooooow. Almost none of that is a valid arguement. The upkeep you dont know how much it would cost. You have to sell another car just to fix a Ferrari because well... its a Ferrari. Almost any mid engine car costs tons to touch because they cost tons to buy. Are all hard to get to? Most maybe but not all no. Fieros are darn open because they left the V8 option on the table so they had to keep room for it. My buddy even had a turbo MR2 and for all the piping and junk you could reach pretty much any part of the engine with room to spare. Now yes dropping a rear mount trans might be difficult, but heck, the price difference between working on a rear mount c5's 4L60 and a frount mounted c4's 4L60 is huge. The corvette being the working mans car is slowly slipping through the cracks. Fact is if you want a nicely optioned Corvette now you are looking at $60,000. Cheap to go fight ferrari's yeah, but not outright cheap for most. Plus with the next gen engine, technology is finally catching up to the Vette and will make it much more difficult I would imagine. The time will come when only the select few will be able to even touch an engine(or the internal combustion engine will dissapear altogether).

And making it mid engine will hurt handling to help accelleration? It wont hurt handling at all. And in fact it will GREATLY help traction. The ZR1's only real problem is getting traction. The shocks help a lot but fact is with its clear front weight bias, it may squat great but not enough weight pushes down on the rear axle. I am amazed at just how fast it is out of the whole with its weight distribution and that much power. I will say out of all this I agree that it doesnt NEED to become mid engine. It embaresses cars that it shouldnt.

But as for your F-body over Boxster comment... I wont even touch that. Ill just ask which one's seats are half plastic...

 

OK, first off, I've worked on mid-engined cars. They're a pain in the *** to get to anything if the car is worth a damn. Fieros and MR2s are TINY cars. Ever work on a Ferrari? Notice how tall and wide the body sides are before you get to an open hatch? Same with the Lambos. Also, a Fiero is a car you're not worried about dropping things on the side panels so much as a Corvette. Hell, I don't even like to let any fluids drop on the fenders of my Corvette when I'm changing the fluids. However, Fieros and MR2s aren't wide cars. They're not a pain to get into the sides of. Corvettes are wide cars. Quite a bit different from narrow and short mid-engined cars.

Arguing that Corvettes are getting more expensive isn't a good argument at all. Camaros are $40K these days optioned out. Remember when Vettes were that much? Yeah... All cars cost more these days. Now think back to the days when a Vette would cost $5K; you think "Damn that's expensive," when you're only making $5K a year. Everything is relative. Annual income goes up as inflation pushes minimum wage up. (You never really move out of the same place, but it feels like you're making more money. LOL)

A Corvette costs $60K+ but the days of Ferraris being less than $300K are gone. $60K honestly isn't that much money in the grand scheme of things. That's why more GSs and Z06s sold than coupes/verts.

And, yes, putting ALL the weight of the car on the wheels DOES hurt handling. The front wheels will push and under steer more because there's hardly any weight on them while accelerating. This is a road course car. Not a drag car. Yes, you'll get more traction out of the hole. But this is NOT an out-of-the-hole car. Road courses are constant acceleration/braking tracks where the weight needs to be more balanced than all the weight sitting in the back of the car. Imagine accelerating out of a turn with all the weight sitting in the back of the car because the motor and weight shift are all in the back of the car and no weight is on the front tires to help grip out of the turn.

I'm still not sure how people got it in there heads that mid-engine rear weight biased cars are better for handling... I guess when you buy a $300K Ferrari, you expect it to do everything better than anything else.

Still, the ZR1 is tearing up EVERYBODY on the road course and people still think the formula needs to be changed. I just don't get it. Oh, and the only car I can think of that's whooping the ZR1 is that ACR Viper which is - you guessed it - NOT MID ENGINED!

So lets see, $300K+ supercars are getting whooped by front-biased cars on the road courses at 1/3rd the price. Well, SOMETHING isn't right about that, I guess. Better make a mid-engined Corvette to fix that and make sure they're ALL slower, and not just the super expensive cars are slow.

 

I love the mid engine idea but come on guys, the c7 isnt even out yet

 

Actually inflation is hurting things. Fact is a lot of people are feelng the fact they make 1% more each year, but every two years the price of things go up 5%... the opposite of what you said. There is a 50k vette two years ago... and one year later there is a 105k vette... I understand each has its place, and for that 105k you need a 500k car to beat it. But none the less the prices are just steadily climbing. Put it like this. Ive seen tons of lt1 vette original stickers showing high 30k prices. Now vettes will cost you pretty much a minimum of 55k. Has your income gone up 65+% If you made 60k in 96 do you make 100k now? Like I said its the opposite of what you said.

The wide car thing isnt up for discussion yet. DOHC v10s are wide. The ls3 isnt... relatively. Heck the Fiero isnt wide, and its engine even sits horizontally. So if they design one there is no reason to believe it will be astronomically wider. If there is more weight over the rear wheels you may be able to reduce a z06's wheels to 10.5 inch wheel or 11 inch wheel istead of 12's. Now there is an extra 2+inches of space to either fit the engine under current dimensions, or shrink the width 2 inches. The rear of the corvette could be similar in width to the current front of a vette. Might I be wrong? I could be. There are a bizzmillion different factors that engineers have to factor in and design. But just using simple lodgic, and LS mid engine vette wouldnt have to be wider no. Again, in production I could be wrong.

Rear weight bias IS a good thing I dunno why you dont get that. Moment of inertia and the willingness/ability/ease of getting the rear of the car to rotate around a corner is how it benifits. You want to essentially bend a car around a corner. To do that you want the front in and back out. Obviously a car can not bend so you need to plant the front, while swinging(no i dont mean drifting) the back end around. Not to mention if the weight is being planted on the rear tires then it may understeer more correct, but it will also help the rear driving tires keep traction without breaking free especially when throttle is applied. Giving gas to a ZR1 around a sharp corner I can only imagine is 100% focused balancing act. Vs a Cayman for instance, the car can keep going, maybe not as far as the ZR1 overall, but keep in mind that Cayman that competes with the ZR1 wears 245 rear tires, not 325.
And there are sub 300k ferraris everywhere. The 458 and Gallardo are 200k or less. The corvettes shtick is bang for the buck, always has been.

Yes the viper out does it, but honeslty around some tracks im sure a 458 italia would to depending on how many straights and how many curves. 2 things with the viper though. 1, it wears... well... slicks pretty much. And believe it or not the viper actually has a slight rear weight bias. Has for a couple years. Since the late 90's its been around 48/52 which has always amazed me untill you look at a z06 and a viper from the side. The cockpit in the viper sacrifices hatch space to shove the engine and seating back in the car. So you have a car on slicks with a rear weight bias and is considered brutal on the street by most. Im not surprised its faster on tons of tracks.

 

In my opinion, and this may seem close minded, the only track that matters in Nurburgring. It's the track that really tests a car's limits.

Lets not compare the Cayman - which is slower than a stock C5 Z06 - to a ZR1. If the Cayman made 600+HP, it would have the same issues keeping grip as the ZR1. Lets not lose focus that the Cayman isn't remotely as powerful as the ZR1.

Next, how is putting more power to the back wheels at the apex of a turn going to help make the front tires grip? When the car accelerates out of a turn, the weight shifts to outside back of the car. The wide tires would be needed regardless of how much engine weight is on them. That's why all the Lambos have super wide tires. The 500HP Diablos had 335's. The Enzo has 345's. These are both heavy-motored mid-engined cars. You're telling me that making around the same amount of power as the ZR1 they could have used narrower wheels and tires?! This just can't be!!! How is this possible?! Ferrari and Lamborghini are just WRONG!

Well, back to reality. There's a reason why the majority of the mid-engined cars are AWD. They need to pull their fronts in the turns because they lack grip with the weight bias in the back.

If the ZR1 didn't make as much power, it wouldn't be such a problem putting it to the ground. But it makes a ridiculous amount of power. There's no car with amount of power that you can just DRIVE how you want and not have to use real skill to control. The Bugatti is the closest thing I can think of, but we're talking over a million bucks to be a skill-free driver. But anything over 500RWHP is difficult to drive.

So, yes, you're right you need plenty of skill to drive the ZR1. But you're going to need just as much skill (probably more) to drive a mid-engined version. That's why all these rich morons with more money than skill crash their Lamborghinis and Ferraris on a regular basis. I live in Los Angeles, and I can tell you it's a regular occurrence.

I'll tell you what, though. You go buy a Factory Five GTM and put the LS9 in it. Then go drive it around the track. You'll basically have a mid-engined ZR1. Let me know if you don't crash.

BTW, the Ferrari's and Lambo's aren't wide and tall because of the motor. There's quite a lot of room on either side of their motors, actually. Our Corvettes don't leave that much room under the hood, but these mid-engined cars have a lot of room because the car is far wider in the back and because the body was designed to be wide in the first place. That's the only way to fit LARGE wheels on a car. The ZR1 and Z06 have wide-bodies on them for a reason.

Anyway, I'm too tired to keep this up with you. You want to argue that mid-engined cars are better? Fine. But I'm not buying it. I think you need to sit down with a 2 liter water bottle filled 50% with water and play with it on it's side so you understand the way weight shifts with inertia and gravity. While you're at it, think about the baffles in the gas tanks.