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.
That looks horrible.... the rear of the car looks like its making a left turn
You were right, the perspective of the rear end was off a bit. I fixed it. Thanks I don't know if you think it looks any better now, but at least the art is correct.
Mike
Last edited by Vettrocious; Jul 2, 2019 at 11:25 AM.
Whether referring to it as a bird beak or a wedge or a flying buttress, no portion of the side intake will likely be a component of the actual door unless no part of it extends beyond the widest section of the door which could contact an adjacent vehicle.
Similarly, when opening the door abruptly, that design criteria would also prevent the “wedge” from injuring a pedestrian, let alone damaging an adjacent vehicle. The alternative is a relatively high level of insurance property damage and personal injury claims of an unprecedented nature.
I could well be wrong, but I believe that the “wedge” is simply a component of the camouflage. We will know soon.
Pretty bland and soft.... not based on the reality of what we've seen to date. I'll take the real one.
.
OMG, great words of encouragement... NOT !!
Toolie, instead of criticizing the time and effort that was put into this really nice artistic render, you should instead focus on YOUR bland and soft physique . You should spend less time behind the keyboard and more time at the gym.
Son, despite your self denials, you need to lose about 30-40 pounds. Losing the weight would even help your lap times since you would be lighter on the track. You are only lying to and fooling yourself with the “Broad shoulders” excuse. Man up, but the bullet and face reality.
And it wouldn’t hurt to enroll in positive outlook seminar. — or enroll in charm school.
Whether referring to it as a bird beak or a wedge or a flying buttress, no portion of the side intake will likely be a component of the actual door unless no part of it extends beyond the widest section of the door which could contact an adjacent vehicle.
Similarly, when opening the door abruptly, that design criteria would also prevent the “wedge” from injuring a pedestrian, let alone damaging an adjacent vehicle. The alternative is a relatively high level of insurance property damage and personal injury claims of an unprecedented nature.
I could well be wrong, but I believe that the “wedge” is simply a component of the camouflage. We will know soon.
I agree, if you go back to my posts on this a few weeks ago in another thread (Chaz’s, I think) I said pretty much the same thing. I tried to make mine small enough that it’s point is inboard of the accent line below it. The scoop drawn in post 36 is a more likely choice, and frankly, better looking one. Thanks.
Last edited by Vettrocious; Jul 3, 2019 at 07:30 AM.
After all the iterations of C8 renders I've drawn, I decided to give it one final shot before the real car is unveiled. Absolutely no claims that this is remotely correct, but after looking at a few other guy's work (ie: Chaz and the FVS), I felt it needed a few updates. We'll all know soon, but in the meantime, I hope you all like it
Mike
None of us know yet, but I think the door and rear quarter panel scoop will be very close to this, much more muted than the camo’d cars running around.
If you consider how low this car will sit it is no doubt that this render would make a beautiful car. But I believe that the actual car’s styling will be more radical, something to appeal more to a 25 year old.
They’re certainly going to be shooting for a younger buyer, but not 25, realistically, this price point involved rules out most people younger than 40. My styling is deliberately conservative, radical styling is going to be less generally acceptable, this is not a low-volume car. Maybe somewhere in between. In a few days we’ll know their intent.
They’re certainly going to be shooting for a younger buyer, but not 25, realistically, this price point involved rules out most people younger than 40. My styling is deliberately conservative, radical styling is going to be less generally acceptable, this is not a low-volume car. Maybe somewhere in between. In a few days we’ll know their intent.
Vette, you bring up an excellent observation regarding volume. Here I am getting lost in deigns like the AM Valkyrie's when in reality the Corvette needs to appeal a much larger audience. With that said, designing for the masses is even harder than designing for small batches.
Vette, you bring up an excellent observation regarding volume. Here I am getting lost in deigns like the AM Valkyrie's when in reality the Corvette needs to appeal a much larger audience. With that said, designing for the masses is even harder than designing for small batches.
That is why, IMO, radical styling is a much bigger risk. You saw the C7 taillight bitch-fest, and that was on a great design. Wait ‘til the whole car varies significantly from the norm to something way out there. If you get the right combination of design features, great, but if you don’t hit a home run, things can go south in a hurry (read, Chevette, Reatta, Alante, Aztec). That’s a big chance with this kind of outlay.
Then again, who knows, their latest boss may be a gambler
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Slideshow: A Jaguar designer's personal project imagines what a modern front-engined Corvette might look like if Chevrolet revisited the golden age of the Stingray.
I don't know if you think it looks any better now, but at least the art is correct. 
