C8 may kill Corvette
#21
Burning Brakes
Imagine a day when there are no new threads posted in this section of the forum... what a great day that would be
#22
#23
"Why would GM produce a mid engine sports car when the C7 is already mid engine?"
The above quote is a really dumb response that demonstrates absolutely no knowledge of physics as applied to performance automobiles! But, I have to cringe at the number of similar responses that I have received over the years when trying to promote a mid engine Corvette. It is fine to prefer a front engine car over a mid engine car. Front engine cars make arguably better Grand Touring cars, especially since FE layouts typically demonstrate more benign handling at the limit than a mid engine car (understeer vs oversteer). This is especially true since Grand Touring typically involves travelling at high speeds on unfamiliar roads. For example, try getting surprised by a decreasing radius turn in a mid engine car vs a front engine car.
If you love mechanics and high performance sports cars, you know why you want a mid engine car!
The above quote is a really dumb response that demonstrates absolutely no knowledge of physics as applied to performance automobiles! But, I have to cringe at the number of similar responses that I have received over the years when trying to promote a mid engine Corvette. It is fine to prefer a front engine car over a mid engine car. Front engine cars make arguably better Grand Touring cars, especially since FE layouts typically demonstrate more benign handling at the limit than a mid engine car (understeer vs oversteer). This is especially true since Grand Touring typically involves travelling at high speeds on unfamiliar roads. For example, try getting surprised by a decreasing radius turn in a mid engine car vs a front engine car.
If you love mechanics and high performance sports cars, you know why you want a mid engine car!
Last edited by PurpleLion; 01-18-2019 at 02:39 AM.
The following users liked this post:
jamesc1123 (01-18-2019)
#24
Safety Car
Originally Posted by marknagy13
Did the c4 Corvette kill it? Nope, and those things are UGGGGGLLLLYYYYY
C6 production 215,000
Yup nobody liked them.
Last edited by Dt86; 01-17-2019 at 09:53 PM.
The following 8 users liked this post by Dt86:
bdsvavars (01-18-2019),
dcarr (03-27-2020),
ErrrrCar205 (01-18-2019),
Jason Staley (01-20-2019),
NytmereZ (01-21-2019),
and 3 others liked this post.
#25
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 10,066
Received 3,805 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
"Ask Tadge" Producer
Technically speaking, the Corvette hasn't been a true sports car for a very, very long time. It's a GT. It's been a GT for ages. And that's actually a big deal and the reason that it's sold as successfully as it has: it has, as Tadge is fond of putting it, the bandwidth to do it all. Run errands, commute to/from work, get groceries, take long trips, carve up canyons, and terrorize race tracks. Depending on how they build this rear-ME, the utility of the vehicle will take a hit.
That's concerning from a sales perspective. There aren't 35000 sports car buyers annually. There are 35000 GT buyers.
That's concerning from a sales perspective. There aren't 35000 sports car buyers annually. There are 35000 GT buyers.
The following 2 users liked this post by jvp:
ren80 (11-16-2020),
Steel_Venom (02-01-2019)
#26
Drifting
No, I think it will only enhance the Corvette formula and image. Those stuck in the past with the FE layout are probably the same old bunch that said the iPhone would be a failure because the smaller flip phones were so much simpler and easier to use. They probably still use a VCR as well. If you can’t deal with this technology change (to an ME) then you should probably grab a C7 as fast as you can. But it’ll look pretty outdated once the new ME is released!
The following users liked this post:
Maxie2U (01-18-2019)
#27
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 10,066
Received 3,805 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
"Ask Tadge" Producer
Why would GM produce a mid engine sports car when the C7 is already mid engine?
But, again, technically Corvettes have been ME for a while. The engine has just been in front of the driver instead of behind it.
Last edited by jvp; 01-17-2019 at 10:10 PM.
The following users liked this post:
DoctorV8 (01-31-2019)
The following 5 users liked this post by MikeG37:
drwet (01-31-2019),
isellpower (01-28-2019),
jamesc1123 (01-18-2019),
Maxie2U (01-18-2019),
RapidC84B (01-18-2019)
#29
Melting Slicks
Technically speaking, the Corvette hasn't been a true sports car for a very, very long time. It's a GT. It's been a GT for ages. And that's actually a big deal and the reason that it's sold as successfully as it has: it has, as Tadge is fond of putting it, the bandwidth to do it all. Run errands, commute to/from work, get groceries, take long trips, carve up canyons, and terrorize race tracks. Depending on how they build this rear-ME, the utility of the vehicle will take a hit.
That's concerning from a sales perspective. There aren't 35000 sports car buyers annually. There are 35000 GT buyers.
That's concerning from a sales perspective. There aren't 35000 sports car buyers annually. There are 35000 GT buyers.
The Corvette is a REAL sports car, just like the 911, or the Viper...which is exactly the same as the Corvette when it comes to layout and capability yet no one makes the GT caveat when talking about a Viper. Its a silly thing to even suggest as Corvettes and 911's are among the fastest road going track capable cars and therefore classifies it as a sports car. Hell I consider the ZL1 1LE as a proper sports car as well, but for some reason the "pony car" caveat precludes this possibility in peoples eyes, even though it will humiliate plenty of "real" sports cars in their natural environment.
The question is whether or not the Corvette is a supercar, generally I think the consensus discounts the price and the lack of $50k worth of leather in the interior as determining factors against this classification...which is stupid, but I digress.
The mid engine platform has literally one thing going against it vs the outgoing front engine Vettes and that is storage capacity. Although if there is a nice storage area under that rear hatch we may end up with even more storage than previous Corvettes. So who knows?
Some people will bitch and moan about some benign design thing that they just can't live with and pass up the C8 over it. Some will continue their boycott of tail lights that aren't round and wax poetic about flip up head lights. Some will not buy because there is no manual. In the end we May lose a few buyers changing to a mid engine platform, but we will likely gain quite a few more that want in on a sports car layout that has been exclusively the domain of supercars for decades (with the exception of a few underwhelming examples like the MR2 Spyder).
Personally I've only been a fan of Corvettes since the reveal of the C7, it was the first time I saw a Corvette and knew I had to have one, I am also young-ish at a ripe old age of 38, so my taste is a bit different than many legacy Corvette enthusiasts. The best thing GM can do is throw out as much "tradition" as they can, while still maintaining the things that make a Corvette, a Corvette. Considering the fact that I can buy a $35k Hyundai with a nicer interior than many cars leads me to believe the capability of GM to make a nice interior affordable is there. We already know GM can make a killer chassis and power train, so all we need now is a banging job on the exterior design and presto...another great Corvette.
The following 4 users liked this post by Supermassive:
#30
Burning Brakes
Corvette will be just fine.....to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't mind seeing fewer of them on the road provided GM is making enough off of them to continue the lineage and its a quality product. They will always have to cater to a value proposition as it will never have the prestige of an Italian exotic, but increasing the rarity will add to the "special-ness" of seeing them in the wild....much like the Viper.
Last edited by 427muscle; 01-17-2019 at 11:09 PM.
The following users liked this post:
DaveFerrari458 (01-17-2019)
#31
Drifting
Here's another thought...
GM does not NEED to sell 30,000 Corvettes to be successful and profitable. Look at Lamborghini, Ferrari, McLaren, etc. Who knows, they may choose to go down the route of a higher priced (higher margin) and lower volume Corvette. That wouldn't kill the Corvette, it would simply change their business model around the car. I'm not suggesting that is what they will do, I'm just saying that everyone seems to think they need to sell a bazillion cars to survive and that's simply not the case. Completely depends on their strategy and what they want to do with the Corvette as a halo car/brand.
Maybe the car becomes a $120,000 car with 10,000 units a year and that is what GM wants from a strategic perspective for whatever the reason. It doesn't kill the Corvette, it just changes it.
GM does not NEED to sell 30,000 Corvettes to be successful and profitable. Look at Lamborghini, Ferrari, McLaren, etc. Who knows, they may choose to go down the route of a higher priced (higher margin) and lower volume Corvette. That wouldn't kill the Corvette, it would simply change their business model around the car. I'm not suggesting that is what they will do, I'm just saying that everyone seems to think they need to sell a bazillion cars to survive and that's simply not the case. Completely depends on their strategy and what they want to do with the Corvette as a halo car/brand.
Maybe the car becomes a $120,000 car with 10,000 units a year and that is what GM wants from a strategic perspective for whatever the reason. It doesn't kill the Corvette, it just changes it.
Price will be inline with the current model and production numbers will still be 30-40 units a year
#32
Do any of you guys drive your cars?
The following 5 users liked this post by NORTY:
bdsvavars (01-18-2019),
Jason Staley (01-20-2019),
RapidC84B (01-18-2019),
renchjeep (01-20-2019),
silverja (03-29-2020)
#34
Race Director
#35
The following 3 users liked this post by Atari_Prime:
#36
Team Owner
I think you are missing something important. The advantages of a mid engine are lost on the majority of Corvette owners. The typical owner is not the performance freak. It's the older guy who likes to be seen in it and likes the utility of the cargo space, and the day-to-day functionality.
#37
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,657
Received 4,116 Likes
on
1,470 Posts
2020 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Too expensive kills the Corvette as we know it.
The following users liked this post:
Art17 (01-18-2019)
#38
I think we should be a bit careful before calling someone's response "really dumb" when the rest of your post wasn't too intelligent to begin with. Let's examine the quoted text:
Technically, that's a correct statement. The phrase "mid-engine" doesn't mean what you're implying it means. It simply means: "Engine is between the axles". And, the Corvettes since C4 (and perhaps further back) have been that. It's part of why they're so well balanced in the handling department for the most part. What you're implying by your statement is a rear-mid. So if you want to pull someone's statement apart, make sure you do it carefully. Certainly, rear-mids provide a lower polar moment of inertia (which is good and bad!) and they generally give more mass where it's needed: over the driving wheels. Further, they usually put less stress on the front brakes, which can help with slowing at the track.
But, again, technically Corvettes have been ME for a while. The engine has just been in front of the driver instead of behind it.
Technically, that's a correct statement. The phrase "mid-engine" doesn't mean what you're implying it means. It simply means: "Engine is between the axles". And, the Corvettes since C4 (and perhaps further back) have been that. It's part of why they're so well balanced in the handling department for the most part. What you're implying by your statement is a rear-mid. So if you want to pull someone's statement apart, make sure you do it carefully. Certainly, rear-mids provide a lower polar moment of inertia (which is good and bad!) and they generally give more mass where it's needed: over the driving wheels. Further, they usually put less stress on the front brakes, which can help with slowing at the track.
But, again, technically Corvettes have been ME for a while. The engine has just been in front of the driver instead of behind it.
The term front-mid is BS. It is used by marketing departments to sprinkle mid engine goodness on your typical sports car or GT. If the term were only applied to front engine cars with less than 50% of their weight on the front wheels, it might be a relevant term, but it is not.
Last edited by PurpleLion; 01-18-2019 at 03:09 AM.
#39
Le Mans Master
Technically speaking, the Corvette hasn't been a true sports car for a very, very long time. It's a GT. It's been a GT for ages. And that's actually a big deal and the reason that it's sold as successfully as it has: it has, as Tadge is fond of putting it, the bandwidth to do it all. Run errands, commute to/from work, get groceries, take long trips, carve up canyons, and terrorize race tracks. Depending on how they build this rear-ME, the utility of the vehicle will take a hit.
That's concerning from a sales perspective. There aren't 35000 sports car buyers annually. There are 35000 GT buyers.
That's concerning from a sales perspective. There aren't 35000 sports car buyers annually. There are 35000 GT buyers.
What we really don't know is how many people are out there that are waiting/looking/dreaming to get a used ME (engine behind the driver) because a new Ferrari or even Porsche is just out of reach. Here comes the new ME Corvette and problem solved. But are there enough of those folks to make up for those that will go elsewhere to find the GT style car they desire.
Whatever the case, this would be a huge gamble for GM.
#40
Burning Brakes
It’s funny how a lot of people think they know more or how to do something better than scientists, engineers, marketing analysts, the President, etc.