Wow... 27 pages, and I was in on one...

I think I will go start a new thread to discuss the one thing that hasn't been discussed yet... how much will the C7 cost....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

....to change out the rear end for one with round tail lights... bwahahahaha

 

The C5 made the C4 obsolete. The C6 (which was really only a C5.5) made the C5 obsolete. A complete from scratch redesign should do exactly that, and there should be no apologies about it. The remaining C6's will eventually be discounted and liquidated, life will go on. In a few years the C6 guys hating on the C7 will eventually get one and sell theirs to the C5 guys still hating on the C6. Tadge's comments are a fart in the wind, don't matter, and are only followed by the fanboys who wear their special corvette embroidered driving gloves to the weekly waxing party.

 

No hate on the C6 from this C5 owner, I just simply don't think there was a big enough difference between the two to justify spending the money on a C6, however the differences between the C5 and C7 is enough for me to cough up the dough to buy one.

 

I thought Juechter explained it pretty well in the vid, which is what? a year old. True many of the technologies making it to this Corvette are not neccessarily new anymore, although it is also true that they did not exsist when the C6 was initially designed. Furthermore, for the most part, did not exist until more recently until the C7 R&D was in full swing. I feel that the reason we didn't see them on the C6 was that they felt it was a little late in the game, in seeing that the sixth generation had already outlasted it's intended time frame. So, now we are seeing them on the C7. I think it will be interesting to see this platform develop over time.

 

This is not necesarily true, AFM was on Corvette in 2007, right before LS3 came about, if embarrassment at LeMans did not take place, it would be on 2008 update. AFM showed up on GM trucks shortly after, this is no coincidence. You should check some GM forums to understand the extent of problems this revolutional NEW technology has been causing to truck owners. DI was used right around the same car on cars like Pontiac Solstice.

IMO at least, using DI, AFM and E85 on one vehicle, one that is a high performance car is asking for big trouble. This is just my apparently negative opinion though.

 

Please elaborate/clarify.

 

Why don't you? Should give you something constructive to do

 

Tried, but can't find any reference to a Corvette offered with AFM. Did find this article however.

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/fea...ne_technology/

From the article...

I also didn't run across alot of complaints or issues on AFM equipped engines. But I would hazard a guess that a good number of these issues might have a similar cause to VVT issues. The major factor being that customers wait too long between oil changes. Both of these systems depend on oil pressure sensitivity to function properly, and both of these systems can cause oil consumption, which can be exponential if the change intervals are extended. I know on my STS with VVT the oil life monitor will read 65% left at 5000 mi. Many customers will let it go to 10%, and going 10,000 miles between changes. My brother says he'll drain the oil on these things in the dealership and he'll get a quart out of the pan. That's not bad design, that's bad ownership.

As I understand it, one of the major issues with AFM in the Corvette was the rear transmission and the consequence of the NVH on the drive train. While it seems to be working well on other vehicles, and GM seems confident they have solved this on the Corvette, I guess we'll have to wait for the TSB's to start rolling in to know for sure. But I'm pretty sure the good ol' days of the Caddy 8-6-4 are behind us.

As to DI and e85, well if they start including a firesuit with the purchase, I guess we should be worried.

 

AFM was not offered on C6, it was installed on C6R and promptly removed after 2007 LeMans failure. IT WOULD BE on corvette already if this little problem did not happen.

Did you wiki?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette_C6.R

 

As I already mentioned, check out the Toyota D-4s direct injection design, the secondary set of injectors is there not just for good looks.

 

Looks like I don't need to after all!

I have one simple question for you Peter. can you show a single thread or even post you have made with a positive comment about the C7?

 

Typical PeterMJ comment - non productive, non- sequiter that serves no purpose whatsoever...................

Heading to my user control point now to put him on "ignore" I recommend everyone else do the same, and then he'll just be talking to himself.........

 

Hence the statement about driveline issues with the rear transmission, and why it didn't go into the CTS-v or the GTO as well.

Right, Toyota and Lexus systems alternate between tradition fuel injection and Direct injection. Yes, one of the major issues with DI is carbon build up on the intake valves. GM is not the only manufacturer using DI to have had these issues. The LT1 is incorporating a PCV system that seperates oil from gasses before those gasses are returned to the intake. How well will this work? We'll have to see. But, again, good ownership would include a regular interval of a top end clean, not hard even for a novice to do, and it should not be an issue.

 

Many do this but come back to respond to his thread anyway.

 

Is the red car the new Camaro?

 

That is still the most beautiful car ever made. And it's 50 years old!

 

Any product manager who comes up with a new generation product that doesn't obsolete the prior generation should be fired for not doing his job. That's how you stay in business. If you don't make old products obsolete, your competition will. Way to go Tadge!:will.

 

Now this is a whitty, intelligent, forward thinking post! Unique, fresh, truly paradigm shifting. Keep up the good work

 

Yup, can't you tell? wait... C.O.R.V.E.T.T.E. That's a funny way to spell Camaro...

 

I am critical about the car and skeptical about GM being able to master the technologies they brag about to make new Corvette both huge leap in performance and bulletproof at the same time. Who is the negative one? You attacking me or I who merely is concerned with this too good to be true scenario? I would like to know my money is wisely spent, suiting my needs. Sorry but things do not add up. Nevertheless, continue to complain about my comments that are critical toward the car.