The poster I was replying to earlier was talking about supercars in terms of styling. I think you jumped into the conversation halfway through and don't get what the conversation is about sub.

 

To some of us, that's the appeal :P

 

That's your opinion. I don't agree and do not want AWD.

I have driven RWD cars, many of them as high performance as a road machine can be, since getting my license in 1958. Those cars have been driven on dry roads, in rain, in snow, and when need be (thankfully only a few scary times) in icy conditions. My current 'vette is driven year around, and done so safely.

I think folks have to respect any car they are in, and know how to drive them properly no matter the road conditions. An AWD car driven a little too fast in the rain will hydroplane just as easily as I can do in my Corvette or my wife can in her FWD sedan. Ditto for sliding in snowy conditions.

 

Yes, all true, and AWD vehicles don't stop any faster either. The benefits of AWD only show up when accelerating and cornering and can be dramatic in a well designed system. AWD is also better in the snow, especially when going uphill. These are real benefits but do come at a price.

I'd like to see an AWD Corvette but I'm not expecting it in the C7.

 

You must be new to this. You have ALLLLWAYS been able to get base coupe C6's new off the lot for at or VERY near $40k with no more than a smidge of patience. Always. Let's not talk MSRP, lets talk actual end user purchases. Nearly every dealer I have visited will have closeout 1SB/1LT C6's on their lot waiting for the following year's inventory priced down in the $42k range, which nearly anybody can work down to $40k flat. It has been done, done often, and is not an anomaly or far-fetched outlier. As you said, you can slather them in options for more money, but you can do the same thing with a Tahoe (Hybrid/Platinum Package/etc). What I said about getting into a brand new C6 for $40k or VERY close still stands. Poll this forum and you'll see it's been done.


I bought used because it allowed me to make $10k in desired modification within a few weeks of owning the car. There was a new, 1SB stripper LS3 on the lot for $41,995- and even a vert for $45,700. Still remember.

I knew I wanted a fairly solid LSX car, and stock for me is misery. I put $10k down on a $39k low-mile, loaded car. It actually sold a couple weeks ago. Had I kept it, it would be paid off this December, and still worth in the vicinity of $28k... and that recoup of equity would have easily put me into a "$50k" C7, had I desired to keep it that long. And in similar fashion, I'd have put $20k down, and used the other $8k for mods again.

And thanks for your support.

Wait... so the C6 is soft and numb, but the C5Z was raw, insanely reliable and full of character? Okay.

1. Nearly identical suspensions, nearly identical chassis, nearly identical drivetrain

2. Nearly identical engines, LS2 and LS6 rev nearly identically, make nearly identical power, and have nearly identical curves

3. Reliability? Identical column lock issues, nearly identical electrical glitches, nearly identical traction/handling management systems (and woes)

... I'm at a loss how you can create such a false contrast between the two cars. The C6 is practically a lightly polished C5, and people who've owned both almost always agree to that. It's not like you're comparing a Cadillac and a Vette, though it sounds quite like it. The biggest difference between the C5Z and the C6 was something as simple as spring rates. That couldn't be easier to fix.

 

Well the C5Z had a transmission ratio that accounted for a good portion of the difference. My convertible and Z are both 6 speeds and it feels much different in the first two gears. Now in 09+ z51 where they adopted the C5Z gearing you are right in that they are practically the same car and with the bigger ls3 and more refined everything, a better overall vehicle. If I were to buy a C6 base I would look for a Z51 car and I am sure I would like it every bit as much as my Z, minus the sexy hardtop shape of course.

 

Thats your perogative, and I respect that.

Depends how you define "a little too fast" and what kind of turns your making. Any car driven a little too fast can and will slide in the rain especially when road oil is most prominent. And unless you have steel spikes coming out of your tires there isnt any kind of drive or traction system that will help you on smooth ice.

Have you even driven an all wheel drive vehicle? I have a jeep 4x4 and if I put it in 4wd mode man I will vouch that it feels like its on rails in the rain. I dont over exceed the speed limit and I dont ever push its envelope especially on wet pavement but I can feel that it wants to stick to the road alot better than if I was using its normal 2wd mode in the rain.

 

I'm talking about buying a brand new c7 when it comes out. No one will be discounting them for a long time, in fact a lot of dealers will likely have "market value adjustments" in the beginning.

If you drove the c5z and c6 for any period of time you'd see they feel quite different. I think they over refined the c6..and something about the interior really bugged me.. chincey carbon fauxber everywhere.. I prefer raw and visceral cars. I cant explain it any better than that.. you either get what I'm talking about or you don't. It takes owning a few sports cars to realize it.

 

That WAS me, look back up.

 

I have indeed driven C5Z's and base C5s. The C5Z felt slightly more plasticky, rattled a bit more (naturally), and otherwise rode slightly stiffer. That's about it. I wasn't fortunate enough to pilot one around a track, but I have a fair number of laps around roadcourses riding shotgun in a few of them, in Hoosier/stock LS6 guise (T1) and street tire/blown (HPDE) guise.

The "faux fiber" didn't start until 4 model years into the C6 run, and really though, if the subdued pattern on a negligible piece of plastic trim around your HVAC controls has a measurable impact on your assesement of the car's overall personality, then well.... I'm not sure I can lend a fair amount of merit to that assessment- no disrespect intended, but it's my honest thoughts.

The margin of performance between the cars is much less than I feel you've implied. That's all. They're very similar, and I would wager that if C5Z leaves/shocks/sways were bolted to a C6 (given matching rubber of course), the lap times would be indistinguishable. They really are near-twins, and I along with most, applaud the updated interior that doesn't so closely resemble that of a '96 Sunfire.

 

Hydroplaning occurs at different speeds depending on many factors, but generally speaking mind-50s is my ‘pucker’ speed during rainfall. Hydroplaning occurs while driving in a straight line also; that’s when most are caught off-guard. Finally, smooth ice has never been a point in the AWD argument.

I have driven 4WD vehicles since '62 and speak from having that experience. You sound as though you drive yours properly and safely when the weather is poor. The AWD drivers I worry about are the ones who take what you posted as gospel at higher speeds.

 

Obviously we're comparing apples and apples, but like I said, if you've had any amount of driver's seat time in both cars, you'd know what I'm talking about. IMO the two cars are pretty different, different enough for me to not want one. When the c6 came out, I went in to trade my c5z for a c6 and I was like.. wtf is this car?! They ruined it!

 

I have the list of GM's officially published specs for every Vette model. And it was indeed 0-60 in 7.9 sec in 1982. Perhaps ironically, it was 7.3 sec in 1956.

But more relevant to your earlier point. If we stretch the 80's a tiny bit to 1990, the ZR-1 did it officially in 4.9 sec. And later on, if I'm to believe Wikipedia, did it in 4.4 sec.

 

Damn it, GM needs to be more revolutionary......guess I'm keeping my c6 zo6 then....I guess they are still catering to older corvette owners....I guess only older people can afford +60k for a car......

 

They will eventually. If it is not this model it will be the next. Too many cars are being redesigned and look great. Even lower end cars look fantastic. GM will quickly see the sales drop if they don't adapt to the ages.

 

I actually like the C7 design (if this is it) more than the C6.

 

Not sure why but the more I look at the renderings the more I think 80s C3s. Maybe it is the front to seat distance..anyhow it is a good thing IMHO!