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.
Just as the title asks, is there anyone in the design studio of GM working on the C8 that was working on the C7? Just saw my first c7 ZR1 and it is disgusting!!!! If GM really plans on making cars that look like that, then I think Mitsu's EVO plant or Subi's WRX plant can probably work in some production days for GM...............
Absolutely horrid what GM did to the Stringray. Mid engine design has so many possibilities, but I am now thinking GM can completely screw it up.
Flame suit is on for those C7 ricers that will post negatives towards my comment.
The C7 design team is the ME design team, with the exception of the GM Chief of Global Design Ed Welburn who resigned last June, and who was replaced by Michael Simcoe.
The person who initially sketched the C7, Hwasup Lee, who developed the sketch that became the C7, is working on the ME, as is Kirk Bennion (Chief Designed, Tom Peters (Director of Exterior Design for High Performance Vehicles), and many more.
Hwasup Lee’s sketch below was chosen out of every GM designer (all ten worldwide GM design centers). He has remained involved with the Corvette, most recently Tadge noted his design work on the ZR1. Kirk and Tom has also remained working on the C7 and are now, have been working for years, on the ME’s design.
Essentially, the C7 team is with that one exception, the ME design team.
I know where OP is coming from. Not a huge fan of the C7 look myself, and the ZR1 in the wild, as opposed to studio shots is going way too far in the batmobile direction for my taste.
So I really hope they can do much better than this.
Last edited by Bikerjulio; 05-06-2018 at 05:59 PM.
Many of us have the opposite feeling about the C7 design team being essentially the ME team. We are excited about that!
While you disagree Bikerjulio, thank you for expressing your views tactfully.
We definitely can and do have different opinions on lot of “things Corvette,” and healthy and positively-expressed, differing opinions are always a good thing.
Just as the title asks, is there anyone in the design studio of GM working on the C8 that was working on the C7? Just saw my first c7 ZR1 and it is disgusting!!!! If GM really plans on making cars that look like that, then I think Mitsu's EVO plant or Subi's WRX plant can probably work in some production days for GM...............
Absolutely horrid what GM did to the Stringray. Mid engine design has so many possibilities, but I am now thinking GM can completely screw it up.
Flame suit is on for those C7 ricers that will post negatives towards my comment.
I don't think you understand what the term "ricer" means.
I don't think you understand what the term "ricer" means.
I think he thinks it means, anyone who likes what he doesn't like.
The term ricer is highly lost on this forum...guys with lambo doors call 4cylinder guys with 700hp ricers. Some guys call functional aero like the ZR1 and ACR ricer, yet have stick on chrome thingies on their taillights....this is a crazy place.
^^^^^
Tom Peters.
The same Tom Peters that designed the C6.
And for clarity (Elegant) Ed Welburn retired.
FWIW, the Aztec was supposed to be built on the rear drive, Pickup/SUV chassis. The original design was actually pretty cool looking, then some GM product genius decided to put it on the front drive minivan platform and so they scrunched up everything to make the Peters' design work on that chassis and we got the ugly duckling that is the punchline to a joke. Sadly (for Peters), he gets the blame but reality is the product planners have more to do with the ungainly Aztec than Tom Peters.
If you doubt how screwed up GM was in those days, they trotted out the Aztec (in final form) to multiple "focus groups" and EVERY one of them slaughtered the Aztec's looks. So, what does GM do? They build the thing anyway!
I think he thinks it means, anyone who likes what he doesn't like.
The term ricer is highly lost on this forum...guys with lambo doors call 4cylinder guys with 700hp ricers. Some guys call functional aero like the ZR1 and ACR ricer, yet have stick on chrome thingies on their taillights....this is a crazy place.
haha totally agree. I've seen so many of the Vette guys on the forums with "ricer" mods like you mention, it's hilarious. I have a 500hp Evo 8 and C7 GS. I definitely don't fit the typical Vette owner profile that's for sure.
^^^^^
Tom Peters.
The same Tom Peters that designed the C6.
He had less to do with the C6's design than he had with the C7's design.
His styling group also was one of three bidding on the C5's styling. Thankfully, he was not chosen to work on the C5, and the C6 was a follow up on the C5's design.
Peters loves the tacky add on black cladding that the original Aztek proudly exhibited(and was later body colored in an effort to sell the Aztek to the general public that didn't like that weird styling), and he carried that styling into the C7 with all the excessively exposed black grilles/vents, etc.
Hopefully, the C8 will revert back to a more sophisticated styling.
I now know where my distaste for the C7 comes from
Peters’ love of cars goes back even further than that, when he would sketch out gassers and hot rods on paper as a kid and sell the drawings for a nickel. That boyhood enthusiasm still drives him — for example, he said the 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, which he oversaw from start to finish, was designed with nine- and 10-year old kids in mind.
He had less to do with the C6's design than he had with the C7's design.
His styling group also was one of three bidding on the C5's styling. Thankfully, he was not chosen to work on the C5, and the C6 was a follow up on the C5's design.
Peters loves the tacky add on black cladding that the original Aztek proudly exhibited(and was later body colored in an effort to sell the Aztek to the general public that didn't like that weird styling), and he carried that styling into the C7 with all the excessively exposed black grilles/vents, etc.
Hopefully, the C8 will revert back to a more sophisticated styling.
The C5's styling is also problematic because of the 11th hour change made by someone (can't remember who it was) that decided the C5, even though it would be equipped with runflats would have a spare tire well. This meant that the mufflers had to be turned parallel to the rear bumper to make room and the C5 got that horrible HUGE butt that ruins the lines.
Blame Peters all you want for the Aztec, but there is more to it as I pointed out above. As far as Peters' "love" for "tacky" black cladding, I don't know that to be a fact. You hate the C7's styling, but you are in a minority on that one.
Park a Stingray beside a C6 and the C6 becomes invisible.
You should read the Motor Trend link to get your facts straight.
I can confirm the plans for the Aztek were screwed up by the execs. I am very good friends with someone who was on the early concept team. There is no way the vehicle should have been built on the van platform. The proportions were all wrong. As visualized from the beginning, the vehicle would have filled the crossover slot with a lot of innovative features. As it turned out, it was just an ugly minivan and vehicle to mock GM for. It could have been a home run hit for GM if they had not tried to pinch pennies.
Originally Posted by jimmyb
^^^^^
Tom Peters.
The same Tom Peters that designed the C6.
And for clarity (Elegant) Ed Welburn retired.
FWIW, the Aztec was supposed to be built on the rear drive, Pickup/SUV chassis. The original design was actually pretty cool looking, then some GM product genius decided to put it on the front drive minivan platform and so they scrunched up everything to make the Peters' design work on that chassis and we got the ugly duckling that is the punchline to a joke. Sadly (for Peters), he gets the blame but reality is the product planners have more to do with the ungainly Aztec than Tom Peters.
If you doubt how screwed up GM was in those days, they trotted out the Aztec (in final form) to multiple "focus groups" and EVERY one of them slaughtered the Aztec's looks. So, what does GM do? They build the thing anyway!
I can confirm the plans for the Aztek were screwed up by the execs. I am very good friends with someone who was on the early concept team. There is no way the vehicle should have been built on the van platform. The perportions were all wrong. As visualized from the beginning, the vehicle would have filled the crossover slot with a lot of innovative features. As it turned out, it was just an ugly minivan and vehicle to mock GM for. It could have been a home run hit for GM if they had not tried to pinch pennies.
It amazes me in this day and time, with all the information available at one's fingertips, that folks still parrot (and make up) the same old stuff about the Aztec. Was it ugly? Totally. Was it Tom Peters' fault? Not in the least. But it's the internet, where making stuff up is easier than taking 5 minutes to actually find out FACTS.
Joe says Peters had little to do with the C6, and yet, EVERY single piece done at the time of it's release (History Channel "Icon" special, etc) has TOM PETERS front and center. But Joe LOVES the C6 and hates the C7, so consider the source.
The C5's styling is also problematic because of the 11th hour change made by someone (can't remember who it was) that decided the C5, even though it would be equipped with runflats would have a spare tire well. This meant that the mufflers had to be turned parallel to the rear bumper to make room and the C5 got that horrible HUGE butt that ruins the lines.
Blame Peters all you want for the Aztec, but there is more to it as I pointed out above. As far as Peters' "love" for "tacky" black cladding, I don't know that to be a fact. You hate the C7's styling, but you are in a minority on that one.
Park a Stingray beside a C6 and the C6 becomes invisible.
You should read the Motor Trend link to get your facts straight.
As usual. you have your "facts" backwards. Jim Perkins(head of Chevrolet) did not like run flats and ALL ALONG, the C5 was designed to have non run flats as standard and run flats as an option(like the 1996 C4). The center cubbyhole was designed to hold a mini-spare from day one. That was why Goodyear had both a non run flat and a run flat tire for the C5 on day one that it was released as they had to develop both to get the C5 contract. Oh, and that huge rear butt on the C5, you should actually compare it to the butt on the C7 as to which is larger.
Jim retired in December, 1996, and the C5 was fully designed/developed at that time. The new head of Chevrolet made the decision to have the run flat as standard equipment, which was no big deal, as the car as designed from day one to have a run flat as an option, so making it standard did not affect any '***' end designs of the C5.
As for the Aztek design, the body panels had mothing to do with what platform the vehicle was using. At the exact same time, the Buick Rendezvous was designed as a sister SUV using the EXACT SAME PLATFORM as the Aztek. Using the same exact platform , the Buick was designed to appeal to a more mature audience than what the Aztek was designed for. Peters carried over the Aztek's styling to the C7 to appeal to a less mature audience than what the C6 was deigned to appeal to.
The Buick version didn't have all the crappy looking black cladding, etc as did it's sister, the Aztek. As soon as the Aztek became the laughing stock of the automotive world, Pontiac, eliminated all the tacky black cladding, replacing it with body colored cladding, etc, but while it helped, the ugly Aztek's basic styling was still there. Long after the Aztek was sent to the garbage dump, the Rendezvous remained in production as it was selling as it's styling wasn't a huge turnoff to the American car buying public.
In a poll in the off topic section, as to what is your least favorite generation Corvette, the respondents say the C7 is 3 times less liked than the C6. In fact, the C7 is the least liked of all 7 generations(except maybe the C4 which isn't in the poll). I'm hoping GM is paying attention to what people think.
I just hope, for the survival of the Corvette, that the next generation gets away from the "boy racer" styling and into a more sophisticated design.
The cladding design was a hallmark of Pontiac at that time. I don't think you should lay the blame for it on Peters. The platform the team was forced to use wasn't proportionally good for a clad design. Combine the Pontiac desire for cladding with the mini van base and you get ugly.
Personally, I like the C7. It is the first Corvette since the early C3S which has appealed to me.
Anyone associated with Aztek design working on C8?
Actually, according to Lutz, it was GM's most successful project... like saying that the operation was a success but the patient died. Usually, there is some public interaction in assessing a new vehicle, sort of like getting a sample opinion from the target demographic, this was NOT done on the Asstech, nor was it done on the C7, and probalby not on the C8, after all GM design knows more than the people who would be willing to sink $$$$ down on purchasing one
Actually, according to Lutz, it was GM's most successful project... like saying that the operation was a success but the patient died. Usually, there is some public interaction in assessing a new vehicle, sort of like getting a sample opinion from the target demographic, this was NOT done on the Asstech, nor was it done on the C7, and probalby not on the C8, after all GM design knows more than the people who would be willing to sink $$$$ down on purchasing one
Bob Lutz...who is that guy???????
Oh yeah, now I remember. He was the kingpin in GM spending billions on the Volt, that hasn't done **** in the market place(where the final evaluation of a vehicle is made).
05-06-2018, 12:53 PM
Anyone associated with C7 design working on C8?
