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.
What?! You are drunk. The early Countach is a sad comparison to the later ones. It is an incomplete masterpiece waiting to find its da Vinci. As far as looks go, there are few cars prettier than an 89' Countach.
No, he's not drunk. One needs to look at values of early unadulterated Countaches verses the later "BOY RACER" versions to see what the actual BUYERS think is the better looking car. The early cars bring DOUBLE the money over the flared/winged cars.
The original Countach was an exceptional design. The later flared/winged cars were the stuff of fantasy for 12 year old boys.
No, he's not drunk. One needs to look at values of early unadulterated Countaches verses the later "BOY RACER" versions to see what the actual BUYERS think is the better looking car. The early cars bring DOUBLE the money over the flared/winged cars.
The original Countach was an exceptional design. The later flared/winged cars were the stuff of fantasy for 12 year old boys.
Wider is better... I just don't want the same B.S. about not getting wide tires, whatever the body.
I like wide up to about 70" and after than I prefer to stay at 70" with a little leeway.
When I started out, the sports car of that day were closer to 60" than 65".
It is a lot easier to keep a 60" ar in a 80" lane than a 75" car in a 80" lane.
Dollar value of the early Countach v the later proves nothing. The relative values were already known when the former statement was made. Of course the early ones would be higher in value, they’ve had 10 to 15 years more to grow in value. The later ones are iconic and will eventually pass other older ones.
Dollar value of the early Countach v the later proves nothing. The relative values were already known when the former statement was made. Of course the early ones would be higher in value, they’ve had 10 to 15 years more to grow in value. The later ones are iconic and will eventually pass other older ones.
I'll bet the flared/winged cars NEVER catch up in value to the original LP400's. The later cars may be iconic to YOU, but look at the price difference between a 1976 (no wings or flares) verses a 1979 (wings and flares). Same car, same body (sans wings and flares) and there is over $400K difference.
But really, I do wonder if a widebody will actually seem wide if they are all that way. Maybe it will just seem normal, and and even WIDER version will be needed.
-T
Last edited by Trackaholic; Oct 15, 2018 at 04:15 AM.
^^^
Hmm, you don't make wide bodies "to look good!" They are there to fit wider tires for more traction. Form Follows Function so some folks think that looks good as it reflects better performance.
There are other ways to fit wider tires, a tubbed chassis or foolish (IMO) looking spats! My ProStreet Rod uses a Tubbed chassis to fit the 420 section width (16.5 inch) wide tires in the original width fenders. Yep it can de done with a transaxle and IRS!
There is another really foolish look IMO, that is having the tires stick out from the fenders with improper wheel offset. See young folks doing that with their trucks and rice burners around here! Great for wheel bearings and handling- NOT!
I think Chevy can go widebody on a base or z51 w/o eliminating the GS. It would be a body with wider wheels but without all the GS options. Maybe bigger brakes... If you want to option up to a z51 or GS,in that scenario, GM would still charge for it and be happy to do so.
I would suspect Porsche is not making the move expecting to loose $ in the process.
Originally Posted by supermetroid
Hmmm, I doubt it as it would eliminate the GS model which is probably the most profitable?
While I can agree that wide tires look pretty cool, I have to say that they aren't necessary at all on the mid engine Corvette. In fact it would seem that every one of the competitors' mid engine offerings run the same sizes.
Lamborghini:
Huracan LP580/2: 245/35 R19 Front / 305/35 R19 Rear
Huracan LP610/4: 245/30 R20 Front / 305/30 R20 Rear
Huracan Performante: 245/30 R20 Front / 305/30 R20 Rear
McLaren:
570S: 225/35 R19 Front / 285/35 R20 Rear
600LT: 225/35 R19 Front / 285/35 R20 Rear
720S: 245/35 R19 Front / 305/30 R20 Rear
So, technically a 305 cross section rear tire is pretty much standard fare on much more expensive mid engine cars. The only examples of mid engine cars with larger rolling stock in the back are much more expensive, such as the McLaren Senna and P1, the Porsche 918, the LaFerrari, and the Aventador all have wider tires.
All in all, I think the 305s look perfect on this car. As for being traction limited with 420s in the rear...you have no weight over them, of course you can light them up! Throw some sandbags in the back and see if that helps
^^^ Many mid engine cars have 305's as did the C8 in Germany, however the current Ford GT with it's 3.6 Liter V6 has 315s and both the old Enzo and la Ferrari have 345s!
RE my ProStreet Rod; it has 53% of it's 3000 pounds on the rear wheels! First the engine is set back (see pic below of firewall and floor cut during construction.) That TCI ridged Chassis has a heavy Currie 9" Ford rear as is the very ridged 4 bar link adjustable rear suspension and chassis. Adjustable coil overs are set for even tire load under launch. Lots of heavy "stuff" in the rear interior as no room for a rear seat!
Perhaps the biggest reason for being traction limited is the ~600 ft-lbs of torque from that 502 cid BB with long tube Sanderson headers, 850 Holley double pumper and straight thought Borlas in 3 inch pipes help. The race prepped TH400 with high stall converter and rear gears give optimum launch. Yep slicks would get more traction but the 420 equivalent Mickey Thompson Sportsman tires using tubes and low pressure are good enough for me!
Bet the Z06 or ZR1 version of the C8 will have wider tires!
^^^ Many mid engine cars have 305's as did the C8 in Germany, however the current Ford GT with it's 3.6 Liter V6 has 315s and both the old Enzo and la Ferrari have 345s!
RE my ProStreet Rod; it has 53% of it's 3000 pounds on the rear wheels! First the engine is set back (see pic below of firewall and floor cut during construction.) That TCI ridged Chassis has a heavy Currie 9" Ford rear as is the very ridged 4 bar link adjustable rear suspension and chassis. Adjustable coil overs are set for even tire load under launch. Lots of heavy "stuff" in the rear interior as no room for a rear seat!
Perhaps the biggest reason for being traction limited is the ~600 ft-lbs of torque from that 502 cid BB with long tube Sanderson headers, 850 Holley double pumper and straight thought Borlas in 3 inch pipes help. The race prepped TH400 with high stall converter and rear gears give optimum launch. Yep slicks would get more traction but the 420 equivalent Mickey Thompson Sportsman tires using tubes and low pressure are good enough for me!
Bet the Z06 or ZR1 version of the C8 will have wider tires!
What's that diagonal link on top? Be careful with your design of a Panhard or Track Rod. Must be behind the axle mounted lateral and horizontal and designed with a spike load of twice the load at the rear tires. This is my design for a 4 link 500hp 60 Vette. Watch end float of drive shaft into gearbox. At least 1/2" Design for pinion and output shaft to be the same angle. Drive shaft no more than 3' standing and 6' max. Move that axle all over the place while checking everything before installing coil/overs. Your life depends on your design.
If a wide body is so important how many have a truck with dual rear wheels ( referred to as hips ) ? Track masters will get their shot . The remaining 98% will be happy with normal width and stance.
What's that diagonal link on top? Be careful with your design of a Panhard or sway bar. Must be behind the axle mounted lateral and horizontal and designed with a spike load of twice the load at the rear tires. This is my design for a 4 link 500hp 60 Vette. Watch end float of drive shaft into gearbox. At least 1/2" Design for pinion and output shaft to be the same angle. Drive shaft no more than 3' standing and 6' max. Move that axle all over the place while checking everything before installing coil/overs. Your life depends on your design.
A lot of the 1000+ hours I have in the ProStreet Rod are my designs BUT that Chassis design is TCI's in Ontario CA! Visited them before I bought it! They have built many thousands of tubbed street rods! That is their arrangement for a Panhard rod as with a tubbed chassis not much room. It does have a sway bar front and rear. The front is conventional with spherical ball heim joints. The rear bar goes through referenced welded tubes in the boxed frame with plastic bushings. The ends of the bar are splined and fit matching splined aluminum rods and spherical heim joints attached to the rear. Has handled fine for 18 years. That is in a straight line, which it is designed it to do best! It's not a canyon carver! All drive shaft/pinion angels are fine, lots of adjustment to get them right. Note the chassis member that doubles as a driveshaft loop just in case! It is the weak link!
The handling issues are at launch. It has posi but if one of those tires loses traction due to the pavement it makes a hard turn! You get about 1/2 second to back off and steer! A lot more exciting than a launch in the Grand Sport (and quicker!)
A lot of the 1000+ hours I have in the ProStreet Rod are my designs BUT that Chassis design is TCI's in Ontario CA! Visited them before I bought it! They have built many thousands of tubbed street rods! That is their arrangement for a Panhard rod as with a tubbed chassis not much room. It does have a sway bar front and rear. The front is conventional with spherical ball heim joints. The rear bar goes through referenced welded tubes in the boxed frame with plastic bushings. The ends of the bar are splined and fit matching splined aluminum rods and spherical heim joints attached to the rear. Has handled fine for 18 years. That is in a straight line, which it is designed it to do best! It's not a canyon carver! All drive shaft/pinion angels are fine, lots of adjustment to get them right. Note the chassis member that doubles as a driveshaft loop just in case! It is the weak link!
The handling issues are at launch. It has posi but if one of those tires loses traction due to the pavement it makes a hard turn! You get about 1/2 second to back off and steer! A lot more exciting than a launch in the Grand Sport (and quicker!)
Sorry, I meant Track rod and not sway bar. I use the term ARB for sway bar and Panhard bar for track rod. The Panhard rod in the TCIs design above can't possibly work and is very very dangerous as it is mounted. Please change it. The dude with the 60 Vette bought an after market kit. I can't mention the name, but thousands have been sold.The company should not be in business. Most of the after market producers ensure job security for lawyers. Post a picture of the back of the axle and frame with gas tank removed. I'll show you what MUST be done.
^^^
Appreciate your passion but TCI is one of the best street rod chassis builders in the country. Not the cheapest. Before I purchased their product I visited their facility, now 32,000 square feet, and talked with the GM as I toured!
There are a number of ways to build a quality rear suspension (by the way my front suspension is double wishbone adjustable coilovers with sway bar and have disk brakes in all 4 corners.
Yep would be perfect to have a Watt's linkage to keep the rear perfectly centered (better than any arrangement of a single Panhard rod BUT not much room in a tubbed chassis!
Have a number of text books on chassis design and use Chris Alston's book on setting up an adjustable 4 bar link rear. Bit of math with instant center calculations, identifying the CG etc. But then I like math!
Below is from the TCI (Total Cost Involved.) website. They have built thousands of street rod chassis and mine has run just fine for 18 years! In fact they were a help in supplying hi res pics for the book I wrote for CarTech Pro series in 2015 (on advanced welding.) Great folks, great products.
"In 1974, Total Cost Involved Engineering began to set the standard for quality when we built one of the first Model ‘A’ reproduction frame. It took the Classic Car restoration market by storm. Today, we own 32,000 square foot manufacturing facility, where we deliver a broad mix of products serving Street Rodders, Hot Rodders, Pickups and Muscle Car enthusiasts nationwide. We’ve earned numerous design awards, including the coveted ‘Manufacturer of the Year’ Award from SEMA-SRMA. Through a well-trained team of experienced engineers and machinists, we’re still setting the highest standard for reliability and performance, as we’ve done now since 1974. We promise to achieve this standard in all the products we deliver to you. We take quality very seriously which is why we offer a 6 Year/60,000 Mile warranty on wear & tear items and a lifetime warranty on any part we manufacture in house. Quality doesn’t cost, it pays."
PS: Know all about "lawyers for injured people!" I consult as an expert witness (for insurance companies etc!) The last case paid for my Grand Sport and a current "wrongful death case" will pay for my C8!
These are 3 of the many pics from my CarTech Book. The painted one is from my chassis that was all TIG welded. The two of an unpainted chassis are pics TCI supplied for my 2015 CarTech book on advanced welding processes. They now also use Pulsed MIG welding. You can see the excellent quality of their work. Note, lots of holes for mounting the 4 bar link rear suspension arms so the instant center controlling chassis dynamics at launch can be placed wherever you like!
There are only two basic automobile body shapes:
1. Supermarket shrink-wrapped ground meat.
2. Contemporary electric shaver.
I'll categorize the C8 when I see an OEM at a Chevy dealer showroom.
Many mid engine cars have 305's as did the C8 in Germany, however the current Ford GT with it's 3.6 Liter V6 has 315s and both the old Enzo and la Ferrari have 345s!
