The missing generation:

General Motors, moving with glacial speed and in massive indecision, has finally decided to transform the Corvette from one of the best, front-mounted, mid-engined cars, into a traditional rear-mounted, mid-engine car, to compete head-to-head with some of Europe’s best designs, automobiles whose design companies firm grasp of such technology is rooted in deep racing experience and vast amounts of public exposure by way of large (relatively) retail sales of such car designs.

It is as if Ferrari decided that they should not produce more than one sports car at a time. Thank goodness that Ferrari has better sense than GM.

Where is the final evolution of the C7? Where is the chassis design which finally controls and cures that tail-wagging propensity that pins (aided and abetted by driver incompetence) the nose of the car against the nearest obstacle on the side of the road? GM was but one step away from producing the definitive C7, just one design element short of making the Corvette into the best and most affordable of such front-engined sports cars.

What step did they leave untrod? The change from rear-wheel drive alone to something like the Lusso’s 4WD with four-wheel steering. That would have finally, like the F12tdf, GTR and the Superfast, (some of the best examples of front-mounted, mid-engined cars) which would finally have tamed the tail-wagging-prone beast into a traction monster, saving the beautiful nose of the car from ill-conceived forays onto the side of the road, looking for something to hit.

Ferrari licensed GM’s Magnetorheological damper technology from Delphi, before GM so unwisely sold the technology to China; why would GM hesitate to license Ferrari’s 4RM-S technology, or derive something like it, for the Corvette? There’s but 11 inches difference in the Lusso’s and the C7 wheelbases, a design stretch (or something like it) that literally would have placed the otherwise wonderful chassis of the C7 into design heaven.

I oft reminded people that the modern versions of the Corvette are no longer nose-heavy slugs, with their perfect 50/50 balance ratio, but I failed to realize that GM needed to move that fulcrum forward a bit; it seems that something more like a 53-47 or 54-46 R/F ratio is more appropriate to give this design type good traction from its motor placement up-front.

After years of shying away from the rear-engine design, GM decided to throw its best chassis design out without that last tweak that would have transformed a great design into a magnificent one. It is simply inconceivable that GM cannot design, manufacture and sell two sports carts at the same time. If nothing else, this would have allowed GM to hedge its design bet while the mid-engine C8 found its way.

To argue that selling two sports cars at the same time is too risky, all the while discarding the best-but-penultimate chassis design in favor of an unproven one, simply beggar’s belief. Choice is nice; choice is better than gambling. Mary is betting the (sportscar) farm on successfully competing with a plentitude of similar European designs that have already proven their worth.

 

The C8 is not even out yet and the complaining about it begins. Why not wait until the car is made available for various test drives by the major automotive outlets and see how it turns out. Or even better yet, let's hear from Corvette buyers when the car is actually on sale to the public.

Yes, the C7 is a fine car and perhaps a few more years would have made it even better, but the mid-engine design is something that GM has had on its plate for decades. Right or wrong, GM has decided now is the time to move forward with it. Those of us that want to see the next generation Corvette succeed are hoping that the C8 is a very successful launch. While I do not plan to jump into buying a C8 right now, I take solace in the fact that I do have a C7 in my garage and that I am enjoying the heck out of it.

 

 

Times change and marketing prognosticators make the final decision. Get over it... it's DONE--good, bad, or ugly, it doesn't matter.

 

At least he didn't mention the tail lights....

 

I wrote not one word of complaint about the C8, not one; my entire comment had little-to-nothing to do about the C8.
This is just a simple lament that GM unnecessarily abandoned a design before it was mature. It doesn't have to be a choice between the two; I mentioned that, too. Read, don't project, that's the adult choice.

 

What more maturation was there to be accomplished? C5,6,7 and 20 years brought the C7 ZR1 to the final conclusion of FE capability.

 

It took me awhile to get used to the open headlights on the C6, and the tail lights of the C7. And, I'm quite sure it will take a little time to get used to the complete redesign of the C8. But, I sure I'll come around. Like Jack I won't jump on one early, but I'm sure there will be one in my garage one day.

 

Did you picture yourself in front of a podium with millions of people listening to your speech? Man get over yourself.

 

Not sure why everyone's so hard on the op. He just posted his opinion, and I think it's pretty accurate. Not understanding why one can't lament the nixing of the C7 without getting hammered. I'd love to pilot a four wheel drive C7. He's expecting too much from GM though. They don't make the bulk of their $$ selling sports cars, as do many of the other sports car manufacturers. I hope the C8 is awesome, but only time will tell. At least GM is still making a sports car, right?

 

four wheel drive, maybe with a little four-wheel steer thrown in to compensate for understeer induced by a slightly stretched wheelbase, stuff just like I wrote above, which very few people (thank you, those who have actually read the post) are taking the time to actually read before making remarks that have nothing to do with what I offered. those kinds of improvements, which make other front-mounted, mid-engine cars, like the C7, much more capable from a "traction" point-of-view

that kind of stuff.

the C7 is remarkably close to traction-perfection, but it's not there yet. could have been, though.

 

Thanks, I appreciate that. I reckon you're right about GM, but it's disappointing, nonetheless.

I was just hoping that a forum dedicated to just talking about our favorite sports car would not be as venomously stupid as a YouTube comments section, but perhaps I was wrong there.

 

I'd guess you could post that welcoming remark about anyone who wrote an original post here. Hopefully, you don't.

Thanks for the warm reception, though, for just expressing an opinion concerning the Corvette; it's nice to know there is a place to just talk with other people who like the same car. That's what I thought, anyway.

As Wesley said, in the clever little movie called the "Princess Bride", I'll just have to "get used to disappointment".

 

One wonders if the OP understands the meaning of the word penultimate....

 

I find this whole complaining thing quite sad, really. Resisting change is too cliché. Try to embrace it.

GM trying a mid engine car is no different than when they tried the fuel injection on the C1's 283. Guess what every car run today.

I would actually love to see an affordable mid engine V8 powered supercar killer.

I already blow the doors off plenty of fancy and expensive Porsches and AMG on the track with my little cheapo C5z. I can't wait to see what GM will come up with this time.

If I had to complain on anything about the vette, its the prices of the C7. They have gotten too expensive for the middle class.

 

You could probably look at any previous generation & say they could have kept it going & improved upon it. But at some point, GM has to decide when to move on to the next generation. And likely for financial reasons, apparently they feel this is the right time to move on.
While I agree it would have been nice to keep the C7 going along with the C8, (actually I thought they would, for a few years anyway) for whatever reasons GM decided to nix that idea.
Guess we'll just have to see how things pan out with the C8. If nothing else, it will be an interesting watch in the next few years.

 

Possibly the only thing left they could have done to advance the FE capability is by doing a C7 FRC ZR1. Even though the chassis is a stiff as it is, there is still a bit of chassis flex due to the removable roof panel, even when installed.

Thats the only thing I can think of, other than removing all the heavy airbag and other safety crap to make a true track car.

 

The C8 will outperform the C7. The second sports car you opined about is called the Camaro.

 

It appears so.

In his post the current chassis is the penultimate; his posited hypothetical ultimate evolution of the C7, the final.

 

Thank you.