When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I'm a little amazed anyone would only see a performance car as a one dimensional vehicle, but whatever.
I buy individual vehicles for each specific purpose. I'm not poor, so I don't need a multi-dimentional vehicle.
I've never needed to haul anything bigger than my laptop bag in either my performance cars or my daily, so I couldn't care less about golf clubs fitting. If anything, I'd hope they don't fit in future models.
The C3 was even longer in the tooth than the C4 and it's sales were 40,606 in 1981(14th year of production). Dropped to 25,407 in 1982 as everyone knew there was an all new a 1983 model on the way.
The C4 was dead just after 4 years of production and only produced 21,536 in its 13th year of production vs 40,614 of the C3's 1980 model(also 13th year of production).
That kind of knocks a hole in your arguement that a long production run automatically means bad sales and then great sales for the following generation. BTW, the C5 had great sales after being in production for 8 years with 34,064 built, compared with 20,639 for the 8th year of the C4. Being long in the tooth wasn't the reason for the lackluster sales of the C4 during it's last 9 years of production and then responsible for the huge sales success of the C5. The C5 was 10 times the better car vs the C4(and that included the C5's huge 25 cu ft of cargo space).
The cold hard facts it that the C3 gained sales most every year as it got older with it's long on the tooth 15 year run(with the exception of it's last year which was still greater than the C4's 5th year of production. LOL).
A little revisionist history there, Joe. The C3 had very little competition. By 1990, the C4 had the 300ZX/944/RX-7 (which had moved upmarket) Stealth/3000GT/Supra/and some I'm probably forgetting. So...comparing 1981 available sports cars to 1990 sports cars is just incorrect. The C3's sales success was an anomaly, which you well know. The BEST years of the car in terms of performance were it's earliest years. By 1981, it was not much of anything beyond a "personal luxury car", obviously because of emission/mileage standards..... still, it was a pig of a car by that point. How are 1976 - 1982 C3's doing on the auction market? Or further....I'll sell you a 1966 or 1976 Corvette equipped similarly with similar mileage for the SAME price. Which one would you choose? Right.
Any new car sales are based on MANY market variables. Based on your premise, the C3 is the BEST Corvette ever, I would hope you don't believe that. It was a different time and not applicable to any other time other than it's TIME.
I know you love to argue and love being right, but on this one, you should just walk away....
A little revisionist history there, Joe. The C3 had very little competition. By 1990, the C4 had the 300ZX/944/RX-7 (which had moved upmarket) Stealth/3000GT/Supra/and some I'm probably forgetting. So...comparing 1981 available sports cars to 1990 sports cars is just incorrect. The C3's sales success was an anomaly, which you well know. The BEST years of the car in terms of performance were it's earliest years. By 1981, it was not much of anything beyond a "personal luxury car", obviously because of emission/mileage standards..... still, it was a pig of a car by that point. How are 1976 - 1982 C3's doing on the auction market? Or further....I'll sell you a 1966 or 1976 Corvette equipped similarly with similar mileage for the SAME price. Which one would you choose? Right.
Any new car sales are based on MANY market variables. Based on your premise, the C3 is the BEST Corvette ever, I would hope you don't believe that. It was a different time and not applicable to any other time other than it's TIME.
I know you love to argue and love being right, but on this one, you should just walk away....
So, your argument is that the C3 was NOT the best SELLING generation?
I NEVER said the C3 was the BEST Corvette. I said it was the best selling, especially in it's latter years, even though it was very long in the tooth.
My argument was that even with the C3 being extremely long in the tooth, it in fact sold like hotcakes. Unlike you, who claimed the reason the C5 sales soared was because the C4 was long in the tooth.
I proved you wrong. Being long in the tooth is not necessarily a bad thing, as proven by the sales success of the C3 at the end of it's long run.
Oh, and you don't think the 240Z, the 260Z and the 280Z were not in sales completion against the C3 in the 1970's and the early 1980's.
The 240Z, 260Z and the 280Z sold 818,272(1970-1983). Approximately 54,000 sold each year(average).
For very C3 I personally saw back then(I had a 1969 C3 during the C3 era) I saw a Datsun Z also on the road. BIG competition as the Z outsold the C3.
That was very stiff competition to the C3 Corvette. That's not history revised, but the facts, unlike what you stated in your post. The Datsun 240Z, 260Z and 280Z were not some little fluke sports car that was selling only a couple thousand cars each year. It was out selling the C3 Corvette that outsold the C4 by a huge margin.
The 300Z went into production in 1984, so it was in completion with the C4, NOT the C3.
And another thing, I was talking about NEW Corvette sales, not used sales of the various generations. That has nothing to do with my discussion of the FACTS.
Were you even old enough to drive when the C3 was in production? I doubt that your memory of what was popular during the C3 era is very accurate.
I buy individual vehicles for each specific purpose. I'm not poor, so I don't need a multi-dimentional vehicle.
I've never needed to haul anything bigger than my laptop bag in either my performance cars or my daily, so I couldn't care less about golf clubs fitting. If anything, I'd hope they don't fit in future models.
So do I(buy different vehicles for different purposes).
I drive my 1956 Corvette when I want to relive the 50's and drive around town on a Sunday afternoon. I drive my 1964 Corvette when I want to relive the 1960's and I drive it on short cruises(250 miles) locally on the wekends.
I drive my 2009 C6 Z06 high performance car when I want to go fast(like driving 160+ mph around Talladega). But since it's a two dimensional car(more than just being able to go fast), I also drive it on long cruises(15 days, 6,400 miles) all over the country(in 40 states so far) as it rides great, gets great gas mileage and hauls a ton of stuff in the back, on those long trips.
And then I have a Mercedes(supercharged) 4 door sedan for mundane everyday driving, when I might want to throw a bale of straw in the trunk, or carry four passengers with me to dinner.
I would hate to have a high performance Corvette that was not able to serve more than one function, thus stayed in the garage all the time because I can't drive 160+ MPH through a school zone on the way to the grocery store to pick up a single banana because I don't have space to carry two.
There will be no mid-engine C8. Most likely what we saw was some Cadillac prototype. It makes absolutely no sense for Chevy to take the average man's supercar at "reasonable" pricing and turn it into some mid-engine supercar that will surely be deep into 6-figs pricing.
The front engine rear wheel drive platform has TONS of room for improvement. I foresee that the regular base model and Z06 will be fun GT cars with a track edge, like they've always been, and the ZR1/Grand Sports will be track-focused variants.
So, your argument is that the C3 was NOT the best SELLING generation?
I NEVER said the C3 was the BEST Corvette. I said it was the best selling, especially in it's latter years, even though it was very long in the tooth.
My argument was that even with the C3 being extremely long in the tooth, it in fact sold like hotcakes. Unlike you, who claimed the reason the C5 sales soared was because the C4 was long in the tooth.
I proved you wrong. Being long in the tooth is not necessarily a bad thing, as proven by the sales success of the C3 at the end of it's long run.
Oh, and you don't think the 240Z, the 260Z and the 280Z were not in sales completion against the C3 in the 1970's and the early 1980's.
The 240Z, 260Z and the 280Z sold 818,272(1970-1983). Approximately 54,000 sold each year(average).
For very C3 I personally saw back then(I had a 1969 C3 during the C3 era) I saw a Datsun Z also on the road. BIG competition as the Z outsold the C3.
That was very stiff competition to the C3 Corvette. That's not history revised, but the facts, unlike what you stated in your post. The Datsun 240Z, 260Z and 280Z were not some little fluke sports car that was selling only a couple thousand cars each year. It was out selling the C3 Corvette that outsold the C4 by a huge margin.
The 300Z went into production in 1984, so it was in completion with the C4, NOT the C3.
And another thing, I was talking about NEW Corvette sales, not used sales of the various generations. That has nothing to do with my discussion of the FACTS.
Were you even old enough to drive when the C3 was in production? I doubt that your memory of what was popular during the C3 era is very accurate.
I'm 60 Joe, so yes, I was old enough to drive during the C3. And why do you ALWAYS get personal? Is YOUR opinion the only one? And where did I argue about the C3's unquestioned sales success? I said it was an anomaly (IMO). Believe what you want about the C4's declining fortunes, the C5 was the first truly new Corvette 14 years. Also, there's no such thing as a "300Z", it is called a "300ZX" so we can get our "facts" straight.
If im in the market for a mid engine supercar....storage is very low on priority. I would rather not sacrifice performance for the sake of hauling a few bags of groceries.
Most people in the market for a car of this layout and the likely price point that it will be in, usually have additional means of transportation.
And that really frames what expectations for the mid-engine car are all about.
People buy the current car, and for that matter C4's, C5's & C6's - not old enough to comment on C1-C3 - for lots of reasons from daily drivers, to touring cars to track machines, and the C7 is good at all of those, but could be better at any one of them with a more focused design.
Its being good at many things is what sells 30,000 C7's per year.
If GM goes the route of an NSX, 488, GT, R8, etc, there is no doubt the performance will go up, but they would be hard pressed to sell 10,000 per year even at the current GS/Z06 prices; which means the price will need to go up quite a lot ($25-50k), which will probably settle demand in at the 3,000-5,000 units per year range.
I am very happy with the current car, but I don't track it - mine goes to my golf club every other Saturday, an some touring of wine country on eastern Long Island - all of which require storage space. I really don't have any want or desire for a mid-engine car: if I did, I would probably buy either the NSX or 488GTB.
It's hard to beat the practicability of the front engine layout.
Plenty of room for luggage Ready to hit the road. Removable hard top fits over the luggage.
Perhaps an unpopular sentiment, but, for me, one of the things I've loved the most about all of my 'vettes has been the relative practicality of the hatch design = enabling me to carry 2 sets of golf clubs in the back, or 1 set + a walking cart, groceries, boxes, etc. - making the 'vette a relatively practical sports car, much more so than its competitors.
I fear that a mid-engine design will lose this relative practicality, and also put the 'vette into a very different market niche. Just my 2 cents!
It's going to have a spectacular towing package for you to hook-up your C7 (with its golf clubs) any time you want to use it to go to the golf course.
Whether you like to golf or not - GM knows a BIG number of potential new C8 buyers do!
So having room for a set of clubs is an important part of the design process.
And if you have to worry about door dings - you're playing at the wrong course!
Whether you like to golf or not - GM knows a BIG number of potential new C8 buyers do!
So having room for a set of clubs is an important part of the design process.
And if you have to worry about door dings - you're playing at the wrong course!
GM will have the traditional front engine Corvette with room for golf clubs. The mid-engine model is all new and I really doubt they are planning to make room for a set of golf clubs if it will compromise the styling and performance. Perhaps a roof rack will be created for that purpose (JK).
I, for one, don't give a rat's *** about the mid-engine model having room for a set of clubs. I'll put them in my ATS-V.
Ok - so lets be completely honest for a moment...
Anyone who is truly SERIOUS about buying a mid engine C8 - obviously has the money & good sense to ALREADY OWN own a 2nd everyday vehicle - likey an SUV that will fit golf clubs...!
But I don't want to have to drive my BORING SUV to the golf course!
So if the clubs won't fit - I must acquit!
I'll keep to my Mercedes SL63 - where they fit just fine!
Perhaps an unpopular sentiment, but, for me, one of the things I've loved the most about all of my 'vettes has been the relative practicality of the hatch design = enabling me to carry 2 sets of golf clubs in the back, or 1 set + a walking cart, groceries, boxes, etc. - making the 'vette a relatively practical sports car, much more so than its competitors.
I fear that a mid-engine design will lose this relative practicality, and also put the 'vette into a very different market niche. Just my 2 cents!
Buy a golfer car, not a sports car. Problem solved.
Corvette didn't get famous winning golf matches, they got famous at race tracks.
With the expected high cost of C8's - the average age of buyers will likely be 70 years!
So there really is no problem - whether a golf bag will fit or not.
These buyers will have enough trouble getting in & out of the car - let alone swing a golf club!
Hahaha.
The price of the C8 will be more, but it will be the normal Generational increase....not the crazy numbers the fear-mongers have thrown about.
There is going to be a lot crow for dinner around here when the numbers are announced.
07-10-2017, 09:53 PM
