[Alfisti]

The hood thing is true, I rented a stang and tried to hustle it on a back road and the front tyres seemed a million miles away.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by reallymarkedup

The whole reason I didn't have kids was so I could buy a two seater car and not feel guilty. Well that and I didn't want kids, but also because two seater sports cars.

You just need to have two cars for yourself. I have two kids, 16 and 19. I bought my Cayman about 2 years ago. My other car is a 2016 M235 that I've owned for nearly 9 years. Both cars have worked out exceptionally well for me and I can still get the wife and kids in the M235 for less than 1 hour jaunts and my daughter only wants me to take the Cayman when it's just her and me

[mjj]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

I just don't like them. They don't drive how I want a Corvette to drive, and don't offer a manual. That's two big strikes out. Add in the DSG issues and it's clearly the worst Corvette of all time.

You must be young enough not to remember the C4….

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by mjj

You must be young enough not to remember the C4….

Nope, I have a C4. It's tje most.underrated Corvette. Tons of analog feedback from the steering and chassis. 300hp LT1 and an incredibly smooth (honestly almost too smooth) ZF 6 speed manual. It's not the fastest thing out there by and means, but it's still good for 0-60 in the 5s, and sounds glorious doing it with muffler deletes. And the LT1 responds really well to heads and cam packages,.you can bolt up another 100+ HP for like $2k. I think that's kinda too much power for the chassis personally, but the ZR1 had 400hp with its DOHC motor stock. Those with heads and cams upgrades get nearly 600hp in a totally atreetable stock like package.

The early ones are even more not fast, but they handle great. They were actually so good that they got KICKED OUT of racing because all the other automakers couldn't compete, so they had to create the Corvette Challenge series. Pretty interesting. But no, the C4 is not the worst generation by a longshot.

[NickyC]

BMW M2s seem to hold their values very well.

[David70]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

If you can't grasp that it's far easier to develop a mid engine car when your powertrain is essentially the same but with a torque tube inserted between them, I don't know how to help you. Yes, obviously you had to redesign the space frame around that new location, you have to redesign the space frame IN GENERAL, it's a new car.

Also, that "far above anything they could do with the C7" is bullshit. Pure marketing bullshit. The #3 fastest lap time at the nurburgring for a production car is a front engine Mercedes. The two cars faster than it? One is a tuned GT2 RS (which being tuned shouldn't meet the requirements for production car) and the other is the Mercedes AMG One which is basically a tech demo mixed with an F1 car.

GM could have pushed the FR layout further, they just chose to go for the marketing route and went mid engine. Typical of Mary Barra's "leadership" pick the short term gain even if it leads to long term failure.

See, just put the engine behind the driver, you already have a torque tube between the engine and transmission. That's awesome, thanks.

Selling us on a car's engine layout based on a really long road course as if that's the only metric that matters. If you want to accelerate quicker from a stop you want to put the engine over the rear axle.

2019 Car and Driver ZR1 755 hp/715 lb.ft of torque 0-60 in 3.0 seconds
2020 Car and Driver Z51 495 hp/470 lb-ft of torque 0-60 in 3.0 seconds
2017 Car and Driver Grand Sport 460 hp/465 lb-ft 0-60 in 4.0 seconds (OUCH!)

If you like I can show you the Z06's acceleration times. Here's C&D's lightening lap for your road course fun, 2023 Chevrolet Corvette Z06, 2:38.6
2019 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1, 2:39.5. All with far less hp and torque, impressive isn't it.

What would you suggest they do to increase the ZR-1's acceleration time, maybe consider moving more weight from the front to the rear?

Your issue with the Corvette is you don't like how it looks and don't think it is as fun. Any objective tests it crushes the old layout.

[TXSTYLE]

And in other C8 News... ZR1 hits 207mph with a passenger in tow with no effort!

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by TXSTYLE

And in other C8 News... ZR1 hits 207mph with a passenger in tow with no effort!

Honestly, I'm surprised it only hit 207 with 1000hp. Guessing it wasn't a manufacturer level top speed test. Didn't watch the video cuz those guys annoy the crap out of me.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Honestly, I'm surprised it only hit 207 with 1000hp. Guessing it wasn't a manufacturer level top speed test. Didn't watch the video cuz those guys annoy the crap out of me.

When you optimize for handling and lap times, that means downforce, Downforce means drag. Even the GT3 RS top speed isn't that high, slower than the GT3...because they made that next-level downforce, where the Z06 is closer to the non-RS GT3. So going 207 with all the downforce/track optimization is damn impressive.

[David70]

Originally Posted by RM7

When you optimize for handling and lap times, that means downforce, Downforce means drag. Even the GT3 RS top speed isn't that high, slower than the GT3...because they made that next-level downforce, where the Z06 is closer to the non-RS GT3. So going 207 with all the downforce/track optimization is damn impressive.

Agree. Also add top speed is likely the most irrelevant performance stat of them all. You need a long straight at a track to hit it & if it's a circuit your time will drop with more downforce (to a point). Base C8 goes 194 (with less than half the hp of the ZR1), spend more money on the Z51 package with it's added downforce & it drops. If you only care about straight line acceleration or top speed you shouldn't buy downforce packages (also to a point).

Chevrolet has confirmed that the 2020 Corvette Stingray with the track-capable Z51 Performance package will reach a top speed of 184 mph, down from the 194 mph officially recorded by the base C8.
The Z51 package adds a front splitter and rear deck spoiler that Chevrolet claims add a total of 400 pounds of aerodynamic downforce compared with the base Stingray.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by RM7

When you optimize for handling and lap times, that means downforce, Downforce means drag. Even the GT3 RS top speed isn't that high, slower than the GT3...because they made that next-level downforce, where the Z06 is closer to the non-RS GT3. So going 207 with all the downforce/track optimization is damn impressive.

I get it, but I'm still surprised. The C7 ZR1 with ZTK did 202 with a crapload of aero and like 400hp less. Without ZTK it did 212. This has a whole LS3 more power than that, lol. This has Bugatti 250mph Veyron power levels. That's nuts in a couple ways, but I'm surprised that's as fast as they could manage. Granted the Veyron wasn't exactly a track car, but you still need a lot of aero to not go airborne at those speeds.

[Efthreeoh]

I'd hate to be in a street car and ball it up at 207 MPH. I'm not sure you'd get out of that situation alive.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

I get it, but I'm still surprised

No. I highly doubt you do.

Also, the "1000hp" of the ZR1 is going to be at the crank, SAE, essentially the engine power. For a long time, euro mfrs have advertised their "power at the wheels" numbers, which gives them a giant advantage when it come to testing. The cars aren't really equivalent, but the testers don't know better at the time.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by RM7

No. I highly doubt you do.

Also, the "1000hp" of the ZR1 is going to be at the crank, SAE, essentially the engine power. For a long time, euro mfrs have advertised their "power at the wheels" numbers, which gives them a giant advantage when it come to testing. The cars aren't really equivalent, but the testers don't know better at the time.

That's hearsay. While some German cars are advertised using their whp, that's far from consistent or the standard. German manufacturers were also guilty of sending non production tune ringers to get an advantage during testing. And none of the other countries did this, it was almost exclusively BMW and Audi/VW. Nobody has ever heard of an underrated power Jaguar or Volvo, lol.

GM also has a history of underrating motors, especially LS ones.y belief is that's more to account for manufacturing variation than anything, they rate them for the lowest potential output (which is what the Germans claim is the case, that they rate their motors at "worst case, high altitude, high temperature, and shit DA basically). Granted, GM underrating was 10-15 HP Max, whereas my X5 M50 is rated for like 80 crank HP less than it actually makes.

[NYG]

I love Corvettes. My C7Z was one of the craziest cars that I ever had. I put a deposit on the C8Z pretty early and backed out of it a long time ago.

The performance is all there, FOR SURE but as time goes on the car becomes more and more hideous to me. It had the reverse G8x effect. It looked amazing when they first announced it but then you start seeing them in person and the proportions are strange, the rear end looks awful and as much of an improvement that the interior is, it's still cheap as shit when you compare it to the build quality of German cars. I'm ok with all of that but not at that price.

I agree with the poster above who says it looks like a Ferrari with downs.

[DrVenture]

My observations over many years is that there are two kinds of cars guys - those who appreciate all cars regardless of deficiencies, and those who are overly critical of anything they specifically do not (or have not) owned.

I'd also suggest that extends beyond the hobby for most people, and can be succinctly summarized as "my shit doesn't stink".

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by NYG

I love Corvettes. My C7Z was one of the craziest cars that I ever had. I put a deposit on the C8Z pretty early and backed out of it a long time ago.

The performance is all there, FOR SURE but as time goes on the car becomes more and more hideous to me. It had the reverse G8x effect. It looked amazing when they first announced it but then you start seeing them in person and the proportions are strange, the rear end looks awful and as much of an improvement that the interior is, it's still cheap as shit when you compare it to the build quality of German cars. I'm ok with all of that but not at that price.

I agree with the poster above who says it looks like a Ferrari with downs.

.

It is never necessary to use disadvantaged people as a source of contempt. It is indicative of a person's character.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

Depends on the Mustang. A properly spec'd Dark Horse or GT350 is said to be very responsive. A rental GT, not so much.

It was a PP2 so reasonably well sorted, and yes responsive but the loooooooooooooooong hood feels odd after driving smaller cars.

[NYG]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

.

It is never necessary to use disadvantaged people as a source of contempt. It is indicative of a person's character.

Spoilers: Virtue signaling on the internet does not make you a good person.

"contempt"

How wildly egregious - it's not that serious.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

Depends on the Mustang. A properly spec'd Dark Horse or GT350 is said to be very responsive. A rental GT, not so much.

The GT350 is one of those cars that I both wish I owned and am absolutely terrified of. Ironically for the same reason, the engine. It's a freaking sweetheart motor, so fun, so revvy, and in a great chassis too. It's also a horribly unreliable motor, and they've long run out of replacements for the voodoo. I don't know what you do now if your motor grenades. And it will.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by NYG

Spoilers: Virtue signaling on the internet does not make you a good person.

"contempt"

How wildly egregious - it's not that serious.

Did I mention that I had a seriously disabled close family member? Want to discuss "virtue signaling" more?

Another indication of poor character is the inability to say "my bad" when confronted with poor behavior. Instead relying on deflection and personal attacks.

Now had you said, "It looks like a Ferrari designed by someone with a "New York State of mind" that would be okay, because New Yorkers are fair game.

Want to keep going? It won't end the way you think.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

That's hearsay. While some German cars are advertised using their whp, that's far from consistent or the standard. German manufacturers were also guilty of sending non production tune ringers to get an advantage during testing. And none of the other countries did this, it was almost exclusively BMW and Audi/VW. Nobody has ever heard of an underrated power Jaguar or Volvo, lol.

GM also has a history of underrating motors, especially LS ones.y belief is that's more to account for manufacturing variation than anything, they rate them for the lowest potential output (which is what the Germans claim is the case, that they rate their motors at "worst case, high altitude, high temperature, and shit DA basically). Granted, GM underrating was 10-15 HP Max, whereas my X5 M50 is rated for like 80 crank HP less than it actually makes.

All you need to do is look at the OEM dynos. If they arent specifying SAE at the crank, whatever other HP number you are comparing to is apples to oranges. Not the same thing. GM does claim SAE, but many others, especially euro, do not.

My LT1 is SAE rated for 455hp. It dynos about 401 at the wheels. There is nothing underrated about that.