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.
Honestly, in all these hundreds of posts, whoever caught on with the key fob design in relation to the side vent on the door was a really cool observation.
In my observation, the first owner buys it to look at, rub on, and quote/know the specs. The second, third, etc. owners are the ones that wring these out. Heck, my plan is to let one of you keep the car perfect for 3 years and eat the depreciation. Then I'll scoop it up and run the **** out of it on the track.
...For those that get irritated at IronV, or anyone else who disagrees with the "oh my god this car is amazing take my money now crowd", do you think maybe your expressing your irritation with his opinion is not equally annoying? If I understand correctly, you can voice how much you love the car over and over in every single thread but those that don't can only express their dislike one time & then it's " we got it, you don't like it, now shut up" Very simple: don't read it if you don't like hearing opinions that differ from yours.
Back on topic, I think Chazcron's work is pretty awesome, however, the car is still butt ugly.
Chazcron's work is indeed awesome. As are the other imaging contributors such as FVS. I admire and enjoy their contributions. But the most awesome renders will be the ones that predict what the car actually looks like as opposed to what we want it to look like.
WTF are you talking about? Do you even realize how accurately these talented artists are interpreting the photos of the camo cars to create these renders? Are you saying they should instead use their crystal ***** and predict what the car will look like instead of trying to be accurate to the only sources that are currently available? Are you saying they are making the car look better than it actually will?
WTF are you talking about? Do you even realize how accurately these talented artists are interpreting the photos of the camo cars to create these renders? Are you saying they should instead use their crystal ***** and predict what the car will look like instead of trying to be accurate to the only sources that are currently available? Are you saying they are making the car look better than it actually will?
None of the above. I didn't make any comment on their renders other than to say I appreciate and admire them.
Let me repeat what I'm "saying" for you (in bold type as a courtesy):
"...But the most awesome renders will be the ones that predict what the car actually looks like as opposed to what we want it to look like..."
I think some of the renders are unsupportably optimistic. While others are getting closer to the truth.
I don't think any of the renders has accurately represented the proportions and basic shape evident in the wrap camo cars.
Iron, I respect your opinions and frustrations because I believe you love Corvette and really want the c8 ME to be sensational. What I don't understand is your insistence that the basic proportions shown in the renders are different from the actual camo cars. I made this gif to show you that the render is identical to the camo cars. If as you say, the rendering are optimistic versions of the car and "better" looking than the camo cars suggest, this should ease your mind.
The actual car will IMO be much better looking with beautiful lines and detailed features and more refined but I don't think this is a "bad" looking car so far as a 2d rendering can depict.
I don't think you can say this rendering is what I want the car to look like... it is what the camo car suggests it looks like.
Last edited by firstvettesoon; 11-29-2018 at 08:44 PM.
Iron, I respect your opinions and frustrations because I believe you love Corvette and really want the c8 ME to be sensational. What I don't understand is your insistence that the basic proportions shown in the renders are different from the actual camo cars. I made this gif to show you that the render is identical to the camo cars. If as you say, the rendering are optimistic versions of the car and "better" looking than the camo cars suggest, this should ease your mind.
The actual car will IMO be much better looking with beautiful lines and detailed features and more refined but I don't think this is a "bad" looking car so far as a 2d rendering can depict.
I don't think you can say this rendering is what I want the car to look like... it is what the camo car suggests it looks like.
Ditch that rear spoiler and I'm in! Well done, thanks!
Iron, I respect your opinions and frustrations because I believe you love Corvette and really want the c8 ME to be sensational. What I don't understand is your insistence that the basic proportions shown in the renders are different from the actual camo cars. I made this gif to show you that the render is identical to the camo cars. If as you say, the rendering are optimistic versions of the car and "better" looking than the camo cars suggest, this should ease your mind.
The actual car will IMO be much better looking with beautiful lines and detailed features and more refined but I don't think this is a "bad" looking car so far as a 2d rendering can depict.
I don't think you can say this rendering is what I want the car to look like... it is what the camo car suggests it looks like.
Mostly...
Here's the problem from my humble point of view. The most accurate renders are displaying a car that is not an attractive automobile. That red thing transformed from the camo thing is a bloated, crazy-***, mess of angles and directions.
Keep in mind: I freely admit my assessment is a matter of taste. Yeah. I have some professional expertise in these matters, but forget all that.
That thing is a far cry from a swoop, sexy, streamlined dream we hoped it would be. In terms of design direction, it truly has far more in common with the Pontiac Aztek than it does the Mako Shark.
Not trying to offend with that. It's just design reality.
FVS: Your render looks great. I think that scoop detail is accurate to what’s under the camo and imo it’s a fine design detail.
I'm wondering if you could post a pic of just the render, without the GIF transition? And if you have the time, I’d really like to see the front fascia insert in black (or removed completely).
Iron: it sure as hell is no Miura, but if that’s the final form and it can be had for under 65k, it’ll be a huge hit.
It’s not classically beautiful, but neither is the C7. Its edgy, current and borderline exotic; exactly what the Corvette needs to be at its current price point.
Name me one modern vehicle from GM that’s a classic beauty? Why would you think the new Corvette would be any different?
Mostly...
Here's the problem from my humble point of view. The most accurate renders are displaying a car that is not an attractive automobile. That red thing transformed from the camo thing is a bloated, crazy-***, mess of angles and directions.
Keep in mind: I freely admit my assessment is a matter of taste. Yeah. I have some professional expertise in these matters, but forget all that.
That thing is a far cry from a swoop, sexy, streamlined dream we hoped it would be. In terms of design direction, it truly has far more in common with the Pontiac Aztek than it does the Mako Shark.
Not trying to offend with that. It's just design reality.
Iron, I respect your opinions and frustrations because I believe you love Corvette and really want the c8 ME to be sensational. What I don't understand is your insistence that the basic proportions shown in the renders are different from the actual camo cars. I made this gif to show you that the render is identical to the camo cars. If as you say, the rendering are optimistic versions of the car and "better" looking than the camo cars suggest, this should ease your mind.
The actual car will IMO be much better looking with beautiful lines and detailed features and more refined but I don't think this is a "bad" looking car so far as a 2d rendering can depict.
I don't think you can say this rendering is what I want the car to look like... it is what the camo car suggests it looks like.
Mostly...
Here's the problem from my humble point of view. The most accurate renders are displaying a car that is not an attractive automobile. That red thing transformed from the camo thing is a bloated, crazy-***, mess of angles and directions.
Keep in mind: I freely admit my assessment is a matter of taste. Yeah. I have some professional expertise in these matters, but forget all that.
That thing is a far cry from a swoop, sexy, streamlined dream we hoped it would be. In terms of design direction, it truly has far more in common with the Pontiac Aztek than it does the Mako Shark.
Not trying to offend with that. It's just design reality.
Thanks for your reply.
First, we need to remember that the renderings are based off the little we can actually see and "may know" from the CAD and eyewitness reports. They are likely not 100% accurate and has been noted, small differences in line and contour can make a dramatic difference in the final appearance. I accentuate the details and keep them a bit "hard" so the lines can be seen better. I believe this design will look MUCH better when in 3d and with correct lighting. It will look less dramatic and more sexy IMO.
The "bloated " comment I just don't see. It is no more bloated than the Ferrari and Mclaren... but maybe you don't like those either.
As you admit, these are your personal views on design...which may not be a mainstream view. Swoop and sexy streamlined mean different things to different people. IMO, MANY supercars are not exactly beautiful...but they are "sexy" and spark the imagination because of their outrageous performance/engineering driven design.
Some love the Porsche rounded, soft flowing surfaces... some hate it.
Some love the hard, sharp angular surfaces of the Lamborghini... some hate it.
Some love the flowing streamlined body lines of Ferrari...some love it more... ; )
Some love the older Corvette c2-c3 c5 designs more than the more modern c7... that's ok. There is something for everyone. Love is blind and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
IMO, the c8 design brief is to first engineer a more reliable mid-engine car for everyday driving. B, design a car recognisable as a Corvette. An evolved updated and "modern" ised. version of the c7 taking some design concepts from major competitors. 3, develop solutions to some annoying but "lovable" features and quirks of the most popular competitors.
So far, I think the design we can see delivers some of this mandate already. I believe the car will be beautiful and exciting for many but those wanting to see a revival of the c3 or a GM version of a Miura etc may be disappointed.
Everyone has their own idea of beauty. Members here are MORE critical because they care more... that's why they hang around here. WE will be the harshest critics...no doubt. At the reveal... when the cover is pulled off, either we will gasp in awe... or we will cringe with horror... but IMO it will be the former for most.
11-29-2018, 03:38 AM
