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.
For the C7, GM changed that, and deliberately made styling changes to move the C7 away from the traditional Corvette styling, thinking that that would improve sales in Europe and to a younger market.
Seems to me that C7 is very much an evolution of C6 in appearance. The only big change is the move away from round taillights, but even that isn't huge. Otherwise C7 just picked up the styling trend of a combination of hard lines and curves that we see in lots of vehicles.
Seems to me that C7 is very much an evolution of C6 in appearance. The only big change is the move away from round taillights, but even that isn't huge. Otherwise C7 just picked up the styling trend of a combination of hard lines and curves that we see in lots of vehicles.
The C7 is a C6 derivative--intentionally. One glance and you know it's a Corvette. If you read about the history of Corvette, such as Dave McClellan's (ex Chief Design Engineer) "Corvette from the Inside" you will find that every generation of Corvette intentionally pulls from the previous generations. The changes are incremental. They're not trying to "get away" from the Corvette; they are incorporating it. That's why the rendering above can't possibly be a Corvette. There is nothing about it that looks like a Corvette. It could be anything. It's not a bad looking car, mind you, but it is not a Corvette.
Dude, where is the engine in those cars??? This post made me laugh hard.
The laughs on you Dudette. My response was to the poster that said...."It could also be that the wedge shape is aerodynamically superior to all others". I gave concrete examples of where the "wedge" is not "superior to all others".
You can't dispute that, Dudette, as much as you would like to.
Coefficient of drag is coefficient of drag, no matter where the engine is placed. The cars I showed could have the engine located in the rear seat area and they would have still had the same coefficient of drag if there were no changes made to how the airflow moved around the car, etc.
You could put a tiny 1L 2 cylinder boxer engine in front of the passenger compartment of the Ferrari 458 and it's wouldn't change the Cd if no changes were made to the body shape, etc and it retained it's 'wedge' shape. It would still have a .33 Cd and the Mercedes B class could have a 427 cu in big block Chevy engine behind the front seats and it would still have a .26 Cd.
What do you think the coefficient of drag is for the 2017 Ford GT mid engine sports car with it's "wedge" shape? Would you believe me if I said .35 Cd, That's correct...I said .35 Cd. Way higher than the Mercedes B class with it's "boxy" shape and it's .26 Cd. But, in the real world, I doubt that very many people would get in line to buy a Ford GT if it looked like a Mercedes b class with it's superior Cd over the Ford GT.
Seems to me that C7 is very much an evolution of C6 in appearance. The only big change is the move away from round taillights, but even that isn't huge. Otherwise C7 just picked up the styling trend of a combination of hard lines and curves that we see in lots of vehicles.
That reminds me of a road trip we made in the summer of 2015 and we stopped at a convenience store in southeast Colorado(well off the beaten path) where very few Corvettes are seen. An older gentleman(60's) came out and was looking at our cars, and asked if the only C7 in our group was a new Viper. He recognized the C5's and C6's in our group as Corvettes, but not the C7.
We talked for awhile and he said that he had a 1965 Vette "back in the day" and always loved the Corvette.
The C7 was a "space ship design" in 2013. I admit... at first I was a little skeptical, but warmed up quickly. I'm certainly looking forward to the C8, and I'm sure that it will not disappoint.
Joe, you are conflating Cd of sedans and family cars (fuel efficiency) with cd for performance cars. A family car isn't going to require downforce at speed. Downforce at speed, (or negating lift) ALWAYS increases drag.
And last I heard the cd of a F1 car is like 0.7 to 1.0...
And OBTW, I like the rendering, I'll never be able to afford one.
Designs like the OP shows, as well as many super cars already in production, look a lot alike for a reason. Same reason most fish look alike. They are designed to achieve maximum efficiency. These cars all have low hoods, swept back windshields, large openings in the front for cooling, big brakes, big tires, splitters, wings or spoilers, etc. They all have to deal with the same physics, air drag, weight distribution for acceleration and cornering, cooling, inertia, and occupant comfort. Many times a car design gives up a low drag co-efficient for more downforce, using the same tried and true features like wings, spoilers, and splitters. Now days the aero is getting upgraded to an active performance feature.
The challenge for designers is to take full advantage of those common features needed for a performance car and package them in a form that has continuity with the past models.
We've all seen concept cars in the past that had very futuristic designs, cars that looked so space aged that we didn't think they'd ever be brought to production. And most weren't. But they brought on such cars as the C7, Corvette's most advanced design yet. Whether mid engine or front engine, the Corvette will lead America's sports car tradition.
So, don't expect new designs to break much from what we're seeing now. Oh, there'll be changes in rounded or sharp edges, lights, electronic enhancements and such. Cosmetic changes that don't degrade the performance characteristics for the most part. Probably engine changes too, but they don't much affect the outside body design, except for the mid engine placement. The new designs yet to be revealed must address the physics involved with being a high performance car, same as all previous cars of this type.
Joe, you are conflating Cd of sedans and family cars (fuel efficiency) with cd for performance cars. A family car isn't going to require downforce at speed. Downforce at speed, (or negating lift) ALWAYS increases drag.
And last I heard the cd of a F1 car is like 0.7 to 1.0...
And OBTW, I like the rendering, I'll never be able to afford one.
No it doesn't. The base Nissan GTR has a .26 Cd. Then Nissan designed the Nismo version and while increasing it's downforce, they were able to maintain the .26 Cd, through good engineering.
Take the Mercedes AMG GT for instance. "A special engineering feat is the completely new active aerodynamics profile, which is concealed almost invisibly in the underbody in front of the engine. At a speed of 80 km/h in RACE mode, this carbon component automatically moves downward by about 40 millimetres and changes the airflow considerably. This process results in what is known as the Venturi effect, which additionally “sucks” the car onto the road and reduces front-axle lift by around 40 kilograms at 250 km/h."
"All of the aerodynamic measures combined increase the surface contact at top speed by 155 kilograms compared with the AMG GT. The new AMG GT R therefore offers maximum grip, perfect drivability and a powerfully proportioned design that integrates the aerodynamic functions harmoniously. And there’s more: despite its higher engine output, extra width, chunkier tyres, larger rear aerofoil, raised cooling-air demand and increased downforce, the AMG GT R has a lower drag coefficient (Cd) than the AMG GT.
The driver can feel this in the steering: the AMG GT R is even more precise to steer when cornering at high speed and exhibits even better directional stability. In addition, the drag coefficient is improved."
Besides, I was commenting on the shape of the car and it's affect on the car's aerodynamics. What I posted is true. A car can be aerodynamic and not have a "wedge" shape, and can have it's downforce increased while lowering it's Cd. I just gave you proof of this, unless you want to argue with Mercedes's engineers. and Nissan's engineers. I don't consider the AMG GT R as being 'wedge" shaped, yet it has both "downforce' and low aero drag.
A car can be designed to have a particular amount of "downforce" yet have different amounts of aero drag. Both the AMG GT R and the Nissan GT R Nismo have managed to get around the Ring with very low times, by increasing the downforce, but not adding aero drag to the car. In the case of the AMG GT R, the downforce was increased by 342 pounds but yet has a lower coefficient of drag vs the AMG GT.
I also like the rendering, but as it's designed , it will never go into production.
09-10-2017, 01:45 PM
