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 had already amended my post to acknowlege my wheels being huge, which you said nothing about. And only a bind fool wouldn't notice a car's suspension dipping for a hard turn.
Yes, Chaz. I think that time has come. The vast majority appreciate your efforts. Please try to ignore the 2 main detractors, which most aren't paying any attention to at this point.
After pushing my wheels up, they are not so huge after all. (I did do a 3% reduction).
It is unfortunate you need to be spoon-fed the truth. Maybe it's time I stop feeding you at all.
In all seriousness.. just add these pedantic losers to your ignore list in your forum "user control panel" or whatever it's called. It will hide their posts
It's a VERY USEFUL feature. Mine has at least 5 people on it lol
Last edited by mammoth713; 01-21-2019 at 09:10 PM.
In all seriousness.. just add these pedantic losers to your ignore list in your forum "user control panel" or whatever it's called. It will hide their posts
It's a VERY USEFUL feature. Mine has at least 5 people on it lol
I'm only here to help. Most of you can't draw a straight line with a pencil, including our artist friend. It's not your fault, it's the tricks God played on your parents. Chaz imports the distortion of a photo into his program and can't understand why his renderders turn out so wrong. Since he can't comprehend perspective (not is fault) and can't understand airflow dynamics (not his fault) he can't correct his errors because he cant comprehend them. (not his fault)
Cars reveal the talent of a artist like no other object. Making them look pretty does not fix the problem. You know in the air force, you can bust the fighter pilot track even with 20/10 vision. Other parts of your brain process spacial orientation and situation awareness. If you don't have it, you will fly tankers or transporters. If you don't have it, you won't even know what I'm talking about. These programs are very difficult to learn and use. You can't get things exactly where you want them.
Now Chaz can get the student version of Solid Works for $40 if he becomes a member of the EAA. He can start each design with a box. He won't have to concern himself with perspective again.. Now if you wan't to print or mill a solid model, you will have to purchase the the professional version of Solid Works or Edge. Oh yeah, the smoothing facility gets surfaces perfectly.
I import my free hand sketch into the program and end up with a complete car. Watch for the real thing later this year. I start with a free hand sketch. Convert it to a hard file then print it. The full size foam buck is been milled as we speak.
Those front fenders look like a huge wing that will only serve to lift the front end.
Well, it's designed for old farts who appreciate the history and legacy of Corvette. It is easy to get into and out and the chassis is designed for comfortable cruising. The chassis is complete with a LS3 engine, by the way.
It is a high drag and lift creating body, but the old fart won't care, because it is sexy. The hood outlets produce downforce, so if the old fart decides to do 160, the car will cope.
Please focus on the purpose of this post. Chaz is wasting his time and everybody else's. I've given him valuable information to correct his ways because that's the kind of guy I am.
Those front fenders look like a huge wing that will only serve to lift the front end.
agree... not my cup of tea, and I LOVE late model C2's, which this appears to be generated from... this just looks like two different cars (top half to bottom half), and a completely unbalanced design, visually.
agree... not my cup of tea, and I LOVE late model C2's, which this appears to be generated from... this just looks like two different cars (top half to bottom half), and a completely unbalanced design, visually.
As an "old fart" owner of a "real' C2, I would not be caught driving Shaka's grotesque caricature. It's a design joke. Something out of a 10 year old's mind.
Chaz, thank for the update with the before and after. Having that really shows the difference in image modeling and the changes that lighting, softening and gloss make which I'm sure is an oversimplification.
For the sake of argument, can you show a render with the eye level set to the height of the nose? Clearly I'm not familiar with these programs you use but that would give a clear visual of how it lines up with the top of the tire. I believe that point will cross at the 2/3 to 3/4 point on the tire, just a though and not trying to make any additional work.
Anyway, happy molding and thx for all the time and work!
Hey Shaka, that line you drew to define the height of the front in relation to the tire pretty clearly hedges toward your argument, tricky man. lol. On the other hand I think the line from Chaz may hedge a bit toward his side of the argument, plus the small wheel and tire change. I have a sneaky suspicion that line actually falls somewhere in between, so in reality you are both sorta right! Lol. Half glass full guys.
Chaz started this thread and is donating extraordinary amounts of his time and considerable talent trying to decipher what's under the camo, based upon the limited number of pictures and apparent CAD drawings that have been acquired and published. Many of of those are low quality. What he's done thus far is nothing short of exemplary.
Respectful and polite critiques and questions about certain shapes and proportions are certainly appropriate in this thread, and there has been much of that. Using it as a platform to say "GM designs suck," over and over again is tiresome, and it is irrelevant to the purpose of this thread. Likewise, arrogant pronouncements telling Chaz that he doesn't know what he's doing are also just plain rude.
The bottom line is that Chaz is volunteering his time and considerable talent to create a high-fidelity model of what's under the camo. GM may or may not come up with a design that is widely acclaimed as beautiful, but that's not what Chaz's work is all about. It would be nice if folks could discuss this work in a respectful and dignified manner.
After pushing my wheels up, they are not so huge after all. (I did do a 3% reduction).
It is unfortunate you need to be spoon-fed the truth. Maybe it's time I stop feeding you at all.
First off I would like to say thank you to Chazcron for these renders. They are fantastic and are the best possible renders based on the available information. That said, does anyone else feel that the car we are getting just doesn't seem to make sense? The front bumper has a point, great, but is otherwise distinctly unCorvette in the height of the nose. And the overall proportions of the car are very boxy. Both of these elements have been talked about at considerable length. Most cars have a flow, a design aesthetic, that carries through from tip to tail. Ex: most cars that are icons. Some of the more unlucky ones, have one design aesthetic in the front but another in the rear. Ex: the Bently Continental, its front bumper and headlights are stylish and even a bit agressive, whereas its rear taillights are plain, boring, and possibly ugly. The C8 falls into neither of these. If anything the design seems to suffer from a lack of styling. The front kind of feels like an aero package added on to a Camaro. The rear feels like a bolder version of the C7 rear. The curve in the side hearkens back to neither the C7 or any prior generation. The rear window (possibly a false window) is distinctly small with Ferrari-like venting elements but also strange sharp angles. A car should be somewhat predictable. When you look at the front bumper you should be able to almost draw the entire rest of the car without seeing more than that bumper. Same for the rear. The C8 ends up feeling like that other gem that Tadge gave us, the Aztek, an incoherent mess that is remembered more as Walter White's failed life mobile than anything else.
So...ignoring whether the car looks Corvette enough, does anyone else feel that the design just doesn't seem to make sense?
So...ignoring whether the car looks Corvette enough, does anyone else feel that the design just doesn't seem to make sense?
I do see plenty of Corvette cues. But, let's face it, even Chazcron admits that he's guessing on most of the pertinent details. And, I agree his guesses in some areas do not look good at all to me. I hate the rear window, I am not thrilled with the tail, I am not liking the front a whole lot, and from some angles the side scoop is jarring. So what. It is a starting point for fun conjecture and I am amazed at his drafting talent. I also am 100% convinced that the real thing will be a bit chunky but will look very Vette-like and compelling. I mean some people like Camaros, BMW 2-series, and Challengers -- talk about chunky!!!!
In summary, I think the overall design, once we see it, WILL make sense for what it is and the market GM is going after. I believe the camoflage team has done their job superbly!
I wish that Shaka guy had relevant skills to match his massive ego -- I think he does have some sense of style and he is not intellectually stupid. It would be nice if he and Chaz could collaborate, but Shaka does not seem like the type of guy who works well with others. Shame...
I mean some people like Camaros, BMW 2-series, and Challengers -- talk about chunky!!!!
In summary, I think the overall design, once we see it, WILL make sense for what it is and the market GM is going after. I believe the camoflage team has done their job superbly!
The BMW 2 series was always going to be a compromise car. It was kind of a game of hey we want to get our cars to a wider audience so we need to make it smaller an cheaper. It kind of ended up looking like a cartoon. Throw a big engine in it though, and it got kinda peppy and fun. The Camaro...not much to say on that one. The Camaro has lost its way. The 2010 was pretty but almost every change made since that time has been for the worse. The Challenger on the other hand, I think that Dodge is doing a great job there. It still carries a solid retro design aesthetic and looks angry. It has carried the retro torch well.
I hope that GM is fooling us with the camo, it would be a welcome relief to see a cohesive design emerge. The C8R has some appeal, it should be fun to see how much camo is built into that design as well.
Last edited by Atari_Prime; 01-22-2019 at 01:27 PM.
01-21-2019, 06:57 PM
