Guys...Mid-engine Vette inside.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 812
Likes: 3
From: Atascadero California
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 2,148
The electric turbo is a possible solution. Have any of you looked at the new f1 engines? The hybrid system they have is amazing. It has something like 1.4l turbo making 600hp (I could be a little off on that displacement amount) and it has a electric motor on the turbo that counters lag down low and when it gets going with the exhaust the motor acts as both a generator and to keep it from over spinning(acts as the wastegate). Now put this on a bigger displacement v6 or v8 and have twin turbos and boom. Amazing.
Total power this season is around 900-950 hp.
Next year the power will be increased resulting in a lap times 2-3 seconds faster.
If the car does arrive 2018-19, based on the 488/458 cost comparison, I doubt if a new Ferrari in 2018 will have a base price anywhere near $400,000.
At present you can buy a Mclaren 675 LT or Lamborghini Aventador for that money. Allot of famous brands with more panache, to choose from.
There are "real life" considerations. How many Corvette owners can afford $400,000? For those with the money, given how fast the Z 06 is on the street, is it worth spending it on another Corvette vs the alternatives?
Even at $250-300,000 this becomes an expensive proposition, and now you are putting the Corvette on the same stage as most supercars except those in the stratosphere, like the Bugatti, Koenigsegg, or Pagani, etc., and asking those who seriously consider such cars, to buy a "Corvette". Who knows, but it seems like a stretch to me. Best
At present you can buy a Mclaren 675 LT or Lamborghini Aventador for that money. Allot of famous brands with more panache, to choose from.
There are "real life" considerations. How many Corvette owners can afford $400,000? For those with the money, given how fast the Z 06 is on the street, is it worth spending it on another Corvette vs the alternatives?
Even at $250-300,000 this becomes an expensive proposition, and now you are putting the Corvette on the same stage as most supercars except those in the stratosphere, like the Bugatti, Koenigsegg, or Pagani, etc., and asking those who seriously consider such cars, to buy a "Corvette". Who knows, but it seems like a stretch to me. Best
At the moment, I don't see Corvette needing a DCT anyway.
The A8 shifts fast and no doubt will be shifting faster as it evolves in the years to come.
Plus, it is very pleasant in Auto Mode...something most DCTs aren't known for.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 998
Likes: 122
"Mid engine is a gimmick because of the blind fanboyism."
fanboys such a zora arkus duntov and tadge jeuchter?
from c&d via corvette blogger;
If it happens, we can thank the likes of chief engineer Tadge Juechter, who way back in 2003 as Chevy was beginning work on a replacement for the C6 did a PowerPoint showing, “very credibly,” according to Lutz, that the C6 ZR1 was at the limit of usable rear-wheel-drive performance.
“The problem was really the front-mid-engine layout—we couldn’t get the engine low enough and far back enough for proper weight transfer to the rear wheels under acceleration,” Lutz writes.
While Lutz was afraid that a mid-engine car would move the Corvette into a much higher price category, Juechter said back then that though the transmission would be more expensive, the final MSRP wouldn’t be more than $5,000 higher.
fanboys such a zora arkus duntov and tadge jeuchter?
from c&d via corvette blogger;
If it happens, we can thank the likes of chief engineer Tadge Juechter, who way back in 2003 as Chevy was beginning work on a replacement for the C6 did a PowerPoint showing, “very credibly,” according to Lutz, that the C6 ZR1 was at the limit of usable rear-wheel-drive performance.
“The problem was really the front-mid-engine layout—we couldn’t get the engine low enough and far back enough for proper weight transfer to the rear wheels under acceleration,” Lutz writes.
While Lutz was afraid that a mid-engine car would move the Corvette into a much higher price category, Juechter said back then that though the transmission would be more expensive, the final MSRP wouldn’t be more than $5,000 higher.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 998
Likes: 122
with approximately 51/49 weight distribution, vs approximately 40/60 for an engine located behind the driver.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 2,148
with approximately 51/49 weight distribution, vs approximately 40/60 for an engine located behind the driver.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
Of course, it has taken Porsche 50 some years of refining to get it to where it is today.
Last edited by sunsalem; Jul 2, 2016 at 03:36 PM.
Safety Car
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,369
Likes: 179
From: Road Atlanta You do the MATH!
"Mid engine is a gimmick because of the blind fanboyism."
fanboys such a zora arkus duntov and tadge jeuchter?
from c&d via corvette blogger;
If it happens, we can thank the likes of chief engineer Tadge Juechter, who way back in 2003 as Chevy was beginning work on a replacement for the C6 did a PowerPoint showing, “very credibly,” according to Lutz, that the C6 ZR1 was at the limit of usable rear-wheel-drive performance.
“The problem was really the front-mid-engine layout—we couldn’t get the engine low enough and far back enough for proper weight transfer to the rear wheels under acceleration,” Lutz writes.
While Lutz was afraid that a mid-engine car would move the Corvette into a much higher price category, Juechter said back then that though the transmission would be more expensive, the final MSRP wouldn’t be more than $5,000 higher.
fanboys such a zora arkus duntov and tadge jeuchter?
from c&d via corvette blogger;
If it happens, we can thank the likes of chief engineer Tadge Juechter, who way back in 2003 as Chevy was beginning work on a replacement for the C6 did a PowerPoint showing, “very credibly,” according to Lutz, that the C6 ZR1 was at the limit of usable rear-wheel-drive performance.
“The problem was really the front-mid-engine layout—we couldn’t get the engine low enough and far back enough for proper weight transfer to the rear wheels under acceleration,” Lutz writes.
While Lutz was afraid that a mid-engine car would move the Corvette into a much higher price category, Juechter said back then that though the transmission would be more expensive, the final MSRP wouldn’t be more than $5,000 higher.
All the stuff you posted amounts to 100ths and10ths of a second. They don't need to build a new platform to get that. My point is that if they are building a new platform, it's for money. Not because they can't make the front mid faster. It's already faster than all of the so called superior mid engine cars anywhere near it's price.
At 600-700 hp you are modulating throttle in either platform. The rear mid platform has a reputation for being unpredictable at the limit, so they usually add a bit of imbalance rearward.
You seriously think this car will cost almost the same as a C6ZR1?
lol
Safety Car
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,737
Likes: 551
From: North California
with approximately 51/49 weight distribution, vs approximately 40/60 for an engine located behind the driver.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
A few more points.
With the engine, trans, and traction at the rear, the front is so light that oftentimes you can get away without powersteering, saving further weight.
With the engine at the back the exhaust is shorter and lighter.
With the engine at the back the front is so light you can save considerable weight up front requiring smaller and lighter wheels. This improves curb weight, but also drivability on the road and general steering feel.
With the engine at the back the front of the car can be more aerodynamic enabling front downforce that can only be seen on race cars.
Why are tube frame cars built with the Chevy small block almost always mid engine?
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 812
Likes: 42
From: Dallas, TX
Mid engine is a gimmick because of the blind fanboyism. The Corvette's and Vipers, rules not withstanding, have been whooping up on rear mid engine cars for decades now, on the street and on the track, with much less money invested. Imagine a CF chassis and exotic materials on today's Vette/Viper weighing in at 3200 lbs....... Game over.
Look around and see who's beating these two........ Audi? nope, Ferrari? nope Lambo? Nope. Porsche barely with a million dollar electric AWD car or McLaren with the P1 at 10x the amount.
The only thing you are buying with mid engine is more cost to buy, and more cost to maintain. I will bet you this means the Z06 will not get DCT for a while. They will need the differentiation to sell this new car. They will need every edge they can get.
Look around and see who's beating these two........ Audi? nope, Ferrari? nope Lambo? Nope. Porsche barely with a million dollar electric AWD car or McLaren with the P1 at 10x the amount.
The only thing you are buying with mid engine is more cost to buy, and more cost to maintain. I will bet you this means the Z06 will not get DCT for a while. They will need the differentiation to sell this new car. They will need every edge they can get.
I hope that GM has the guts and funds to develop a mid-engine sports car and that it also commits to have adequate cooling and brake to make the car excel on track. I expect the price point to be over $200K, so hopefully the budget permits adequate development, instead of the "let's throw horsepower at it so our demographic can have bragging rights and we can do a hero lap for the bench racers before it overheats and price it well under $100K" that was clearly the objective of the C7 Z06.
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 2,148
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 812
Likes: 42
From: Dallas, TX
I can assure you there is a demographic, albeit small, that buys cars based on merit and without regard to badge. I can and have owned or own MP4-12C, GT3, Gallardo, Scuderia, even F40 and a throughly engineered mid engine Corvette is definitely on my radar at the $200K -ish price point.
I am also not alone.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 812
Likes: 42
From: Dallas, TX
And a mid engine car allows Chevrolet to take advantage of homologation rules to campaign the configuration in racing, and make the next step to run with the 488, and Ford GT. I do think the C7R could run with these cars, but it was hamstrung by the BOP rules and politics. A more "exotic"mid engine version might very well get more favorable BOP allowances.
I personally expect a mid engined car to be way upmarket from the Z06, not aimed at the guy stretching to buy a Z and trading it in for the mid engine car, but for the guy with a stable that might include not only a Z, but high dollar vintage cars like L88, mid year big block, and/or high end resotomod. That guy is looking for another addition and an extra $200K is not that big a deal or he might let his mid year go to buy the ultimate corvette ever.
I personally expect a mid engined car to be way upmarket from the Z06, not aimed at the guy stretching to buy a Z and trading it in for the mid engine car, but for the guy with a stable that might include not only a Z, but high dollar vintage cars like L88, mid year big block, and/or high end resotomod. That guy is looking for another addition and an extra $200K is not that big a deal or he might let his mid year go to buy the ultimate corvette ever.
Last edited by kverges; Jul 4, 2016 at 08:14 PM.
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 2,148
I have talked about this before, but can't find the thread...otherwise I would just post a link.
Anyway, there are a couple of reasons for the increase in value of the 2005-6 rendition.
Its limited production is one, with every serious collector wanting to add one to his collection.
And I'm sure the price of the upcoming car is based on amount of demand that has driven up the value of these G1 cars.
However, the most important factor is the history of the Ford GT40 of the late 1960s.
There is no greater race car story told than the grudge match between Henry Ford II and Enzo Ferrari.
HF2 thought he had a deal with Enzo to buy his company.
Apparently, at the last second EF backed out of the deal and Ford took it personally.
To make matters worse, reportedly ol' Enzo said some unkind things about the character of Americans.
It was, in the mind of many, America vs. the World all over again.
Ford opened the vault at Ford Motors and issued one command to his engineers: BEAT FERRARI.
Of course, that's exactly what did happen...the GT40 crushed them foreigners with their funny accents.
Moral of the Story: don't pi$$ off America.
It's a story loved by every patriotic gearhead in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT40
BTW, Happy 4th of July.
I can assure you there is a demographic, albeit small, that buys cars based on merit and without regard to badge.
I am also not alone.
I am also not alone.
But like you said, the number is small.
Is there a story about a mid-engined or any GM car that can compete with the Ford GT40?
And a mid engine car allows Chevrolet to take advantage of homologation rules to campaign the configuration in racing, and make the next step to run with the 488, and Ford GT. I do think the C7R could run with these cars, but it was hamstrung by the BOP rules and politics. A more "exotic"mid engine version might very well get more favorable BOP allowances.
I personally expect a mid engined car to be way upmarket from the Z06, not aimed at the guy stretching to buy a Z and trading it in for the mid engine car, but for the guy with a stable that might include not only a Z, but high dollar vintage cars like L88, mid year big block, and/or high end resotomod. That guy is looking for another addition and an extra $200K is not that big a deal or he might let his mid year go to buy the ultimate corvette ever.
Last edited by sunsalem; Jul 4, 2016 at 11:15 PM.
Safety Car
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,737
Likes: 551
From: North California
Glad you brought up the GT.
I have talked about this before, but can't find the thread...otherwise I would just post a link.
Anyway, there are a couple of reasons for the increase in value of the 2005-6 rendition.
Its limited production is one, with every serious collector wanting to add one to his collection.
And I'm sure the price of the upcoming car is based on amount of demand that has driven up the value of these G1 cars.
However, the most important factor is the history of the Ford GT40 of the late 1960s.
There is no greater race car story told than the grudge match between Henry Ford II and Enzo Ferrari.
HF2 thought he had a deal with Enzo to buy his company.
Apparently, at the last second EF backed out of the deal and Ford took it personally.
To make matters worse, reportedly ol' Enzo said some unkind things about the character of Americans.
It was, in the mind of many, America vs. the World all over again.
Ford opened the vault at Ford Motors and issued one command to his engineers: BEAT FERRARI.
Of course, that's exactly what did happen...the GT40 crushed them foreigners with their funny accents.
Moral of the Story: don't pi$$ off America.
It's a story loved by every patriotic gearhead in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT40
BTW, Happy 4th of July.
I wouldn't deny that at all.
But like you said, the number is small.
Is there a story about a mid-engined or any GM car that can compete with the Ford GT40?
I don't think the mid-engine layout of the other cars is the reason why the C7.R has not won since the first 2 race...it's the BOP adjustments you pointed out.
The question would be how many of those guys are out there?
I have talked about this before, but can't find the thread...otherwise I would just post a link.
Anyway, there are a couple of reasons for the increase in value of the 2005-6 rendition.
Its limited production is one, with every serious collector wanting to add one to his collection.
And I'm sure the price of the upcoming car is based on amount of demand that has driven up the value of these G1 cars.
However, the most important factor is the history of the Ford GT40 of the late 1960s.
There is no greater race car story told than the grudge match between Henry Ford II and Enzo Ferrari.
HF2 thought he had a deal with Enzo to buy his company.
Apparently, at the last second EF backed out of the deal and Ford took it personally.
To make matters worse, reportedly ol' Enzo said some unkind things about the character of Americans.
It was, in the mind of many, America vs. the World all over again.
Ford opened the vault at Ford Motors and issued one command to his engineers: BEAT FERRARI.
Of course, that's exactly what did happen...the GT40 crushed them foreigners with their funny accents.
Moral of the Story: don't pi$$ off America.
It's a story loved by every patriotic gearhead in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT40
BTW, Happy 4th of July.
I wouldn't deny that at all.
But like you said, the number is small.
Is there a story about a mid-engined or any GM car that can compete with the Ford GT40?
I don't think the mid-engine layout of the other cars is the reason why the C7.R has not won since the first 2 race...it's the BOP adjustments you pointed out.
The question would be how many of those guys are out there?
Today's C7 is built with imported talent.
C7 is a global platform from a multinational company with a multiethnic labor force.
We live in a globalized world, it was murky when the Ford GT was built whether it was American and the C7 is certainly even murkier.
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 2,148
GM may be further along than we know on the mid-engine and simply tapering off the C7 hoopla! Doesn't it seem like it?
BUT, WOW: http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/chevr...2017-corvette/
The ocean is getting ready to part!
BUT, WOW: http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/chevr...2017-corvette/
The ocean is getting ready to part!
The Ford GT was built with imported talent.
Today's C7 is built with imported talent.
C7 is a global platform from a multinational company with a multiethnic labor force.
We live in a globalized world, it was murky when the Ford GT was built whether it was American and the C7 is certainly even murkier.
Today's C7 is built with imported talent.
C7 is a global platform from a multinational company with a multiethnic labor force.
We live in a globalized world, it was murky when the Ford GT was built whether it was American and the C7 is certainly even murkier.
Safety Car
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,737
Likes: 551
From: North California
But in all honesty the first two Ford GT40s were all British with Ford V8s. Even the Ford engineer that was sent to the UK to work on the project was born, raised, and trained in the UK.
One of the early Lola race cars had a Chevy engine, which basically has no Ford bones in it at all.
Instructor
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 192
Likes: 14
Anyone that has driven a mid engine car will agree, it is a superior design.
Kinda funny that some people will defend the front mid of the current Corvette has being the best and untouchable. Reminds me of people saying carburators are best.
I'm happy GM is going to fight with a technically superior design. Now I expect a lot of power from big engine and lots of downforce. And many really sad italians getting their *** kicked.
Kinda funny that some people will defend the front mid of the current Corvette has being the best and untouchable. Reminds me of people saying carburators are best.
I'm happy GM is going to fight with a technically superior design. Now I expect a lot of power from big engine and lots of downforce. And many really sad italians getting their *** kicked.
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 2,148
Maybe I have been paying too much attention to our current political season.
True, but how many recall that?
Love my Z06, but it is nothing like the kinetic experience I got from a 458.
I'm happy GM is going to fight with a technically superior design. Now I expect a lot of power from big engine and lots of downforce.
Downforce is the key going forward (aka, where the rubber meets the road).
One of the early Lola race cars had a Chevy engine, which basically has no Ford bones in it at all.
Kinda funny that some people will defend the front mid of the current Corvette has being the best and untouchable. Reminds me of people saying carburators are best.
I'm happy GM is going to fight with a technically superior design. Now I expect a lot of power from big engine and lots of downforce.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 5,027
Likes: 320
From: N. CA
Le Mans Master
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,475
Likes: 332
From: Port Arthur, Texas 77642
with approximately 51/49 weight distribution, vs approximately 40/60 for an engine located behind the driver.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
Benefits
Mounting the engine in the middle instead of the front of the vehicle puts more weight over the rear tires, so they have more traction and provide more assistance to the front tires in braking the vehicle, with less chance of rear-wheel lockup and less chance of a skid or spin out. If the mid-engine vehicle is also rear-drive the added weight on the rear tires can also improve acceleration on slippery surfaces, providing much of the benefit of all wheel drive without the added weight and expense of all wheel drive components. The mid-engine layout makes ABS brakes and traction control systems work better, by providing them more traction to control. The mid-engine layout may make a vehicle safer, since an accident can occur if a vehicle cannot stay in its own lane around a curve or is unable to stop quickly enough. Mid-engine design is also a way to provide additional empty crush space in the front of the automobile between the bumper and the windshield, which can then be used in a frontal collision to absorb more of the impact force to minimize penetration into the passenger compartment of the vehicle.
In most automobiles, and in sports cars especially, ideal car handling requires balanced traction between the front and rear wheels when cornering, in order to maximize the possible speed around curves without sliding out. This balance is harder to achieve when the heavy weight of the engine is located far to the front or far to the rear of the vehicle. Some automobile designs strive to balance the fore and aft weight distribution by other means, such as putting the engine in the front and the transmission and battery in the rear of the vehicle.
Another benefit comes when the heavy mass of the engine is located close to the back of the seats. It makes it easier for the suspension to absorb the force of bumps so the riders feel a smoother ride. But in sports cars the engine position is once again used to increase performance and the potentially smoother ride is usually more than offset by stiffer shock absorbers.
This layout also allows the transmission and motor to be directly bolted to each other—with independent suspension on the driven wheels; this removes the need for the chassis to transfer engine torque reaction.
....At the top level of racing, such as Can Am, F1, and Indy Car, the introduction of mid engine cars rendered the front engine cars dinosaurs almost overnight. Knee-jerk comments about 50/50 weight distribution could not be more incorrect. The optimum is more like 40F and 60R, as all cars brake better than they accelerate, especially RWD cars, and you want more weight over rear tires on corner exit and the natural shift of weight under hard braking makes you want static distribution to be rear-biased. A more modern failure of front engine was the Panoz LM car. Hell, even Top Fuel went mid-rear with driver in front of engine years ago. There can be no doubt that mid engine is the optimum arrangement for almost any application, and to assert otherwise is akin to asserting that the world is flat or the Earth Is center of the Solar System......
And a mid engine car allows Chevrolet to take advantage of homologation rules to campaign the configuration in racing, and make the next step to run with the 488, and Ford GT. I do think the C7R could run with these cars, but it was hamstrung by the BOP rules and politics. A more "exotic"mid engine version might very well get more favorable BOP allowances.....
Corvette has a strong following and it will be interesting to see how GM deals with the increased unit cost and unit sales lost with base model price of $80k+.
Check out link below for information regarding the Aston Martin AM-RB 001 designed & engineered with help from Adrian Newey. Without race regulations to deal with, Aston Martin CEO Andy Palmer claims Newey is attempting to design a track-only version that can lap Silverstone as quick or even quicker than an F1 racer. This version will be sold alongside road-going versions that are projected to offer performance comparable to an LMP1 prototype.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1...mage=100557791