Thought about returning in a c5

The 'vette IS a mid-engine forward mounted design. Mid engine means between the rear AND the front wheels. The engine is behind the front wheels. AWD isn't going to shed any weight. Look what a Z06 does to a Lambo, and with 135 less horsepower.

Reply to
Bob I
Loading thread data ...

I saved this note because I think the last line says it all about tires and their importance.

----- Original Message ----- From: "The Corvette Doctor" Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 5:52 PM Subject: Motorcycle Tires

Reply to
Tom in Missouri

This is the exact impression I had when I test drove a '97 new back in the spring of '97.

It was like leaving the Hertz rental car office and climbing into any generic rental car - blah. It certainly didn't feel like a Corvette. Granted, all I did was drive it around a few blocks, and never had the opportunity to push it, but in just a regular drive, it felt just like any regular car. I've never seen any other Corvette do that.

Reply to
Tom in Missouri

While pure race track isn't what the Corvette is all about why would mid-engine rule out RWD? (I was thinking of AWD as an option to make the car more useful off the track.) And I wouldn't take R&T's assessment as the last word. Did R&T ever predict that the C5 would weigh as little as it does?

Unfortunately, pj has a point about storage for golf clubs. The vast majority of Corvettes are sold with automatic transmissions and see little sporting use. Mid-engined might work if GM did something like the RX8's "freestyle" doors for storage behind the seats. But the C7 is likely to be evolutionary, not revolutionary, and remain front- engine, RWD.

Reply to
ACAR

lol - i think you have evolutionary and revolutionary confused with each other - based on your sentence composition.

if the vette is to remain front-engine, rwd...then that'd be revolutionary; to be evolutionary...it'd need to be mid-engine

Reply to
Lawrence Lugar

No, a revolutionary design would require a radical change, like mid- engine. Evolution is more like the way the 911 has changed (or not changed) over time. I think you are mixing up mutation (abrupt change in form) with evolution (gradual, progressive change).

Whatever words are chosen, the Corvette is likely to retain its current configuration if only to keep cost down. I can't see GM investing in another sports car platform until they can regain some market share and profitability.

But a mid-engined Corvette would shake the industry if GM could pull it off at a low price point. Let the old farts put their golf clubs into a Camaro, I say.

Reply to
ACAR

i say the vette should remain front-engine, rwd. but if the brass is so insistant on entering the exotic market with this mid-engine vette...than make two, two versions.

one should be the vette as its configuration is now.

and one should be a limited production, 'exotic' version, mid-engine configuration, more horses, track-tuned suspension, chasis, and an improved interior - all at a premium price...for the american exotic-seekers

by the way, americans suck at trying to be exotic...just look at their last attempt, with the ford gt (lol)

Reply to
Lawrence Lugar

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 08:29:06 -0700, "Lawrence Lugar" puked:

Wouldn't the mid engine be RWD? And the engine placement is for overall balance of the car.

-- lab~rat >:-) Stupid humans...

Reply to
lab~rat >:-)

Did you notice how the SBC sound changed when they changed the firing order? Sounds more like a Fxxd, ugh.

SNIP

Reply to
Dad

I always loved the sound of the late '60s big block Mopars. It was like they intentionally made them sound that way just to irk Chevy guys. They were neat cars, but my first love was and still is Chevy. The mid '90s Z28 has a rumble that sounds like it means business. But few cars do anymore.

Reply to
Tom in Missouri

Reply to
Bob I

Reply to
Bob I

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.