2020 Corvette Stingray C8: What We Know and Our First Impressions

Dave M said:

In reply to z31maniac :

The markups are crazy, but the manufacturers can counter them by building supply. That's why a Vette markup will be short lived, while Civic Type Rs, GT350s and their ilk have long lasting markups, and/or rapidly increasing MSRPs.

GM of late has combined overpricing with over estimating demand for their products at the MSRP. So you end up with a fire sale once inventory has built up to unreasonable levels. Hence, silly things happen, like a Vette Grand Sport costing less than a Camaro ZL1.

 

Many have, and it's killed many cars the Focus RS, there were lots of dealers asking $55k for them.

When you could buy a C7 for the price.

And it's killed many cars, you can still find a new Focus RS even though how long did production stop?? It's ruining cars

I would have bought a Focus RS 20 months ago but I couldn't drive one or buy one that didn't cost as much as a base Vette

If you don't think that matters I'm not sure what to stay.

dean1484 said:

So I guess I should go see what a c7 is selling for tomorrow. They will either be trying to give them away or there will be a run on them by those wanting the last of the old style corvette. 

Respectfully, Dean

It's not hard to find a C7 for under $50K right now. Especially if you want a manual, since those are apparently sitting on the lots. 

I just watched Jay Leno's short video about the C8. I like it. More than I did when I first saw the pictures. Especially the rather understated blue car Leno looked at. 

This is my best and only chance to own a current mid engine true sportscar. When they depreciate enough, I may ignore the alarm bells of "old-fart-buys-aVette LOLOL" and at least see what the fuss is about.

To me the C8 looks better from the back than the front, probably because it reminds me of the tail of the current Camaro.  Although, I do wish they had brought back the signature round-ish Corvette tail lights. At least they fixed the worst aesthetic of the C7 by detaching the tail lights from the rear panel vents. I can't look at the back of a C7 without seeing Kiss.

I’m a bit conflicted as I really liked how it came out after hating literally every spy shot...

The nose of the car vaguely reminds me of the 1992 concept car.

I want love it but no manual is a deal breaker for me.  I still prefer to be involve in driving experience not just a passenger.  

Gingerbeardman said:

JG Pasterjak said:

• Overall, I like the looks. From the back of the doors to the front of the car, the looks and proportions are really, really good. From the back edge of those doors to the tail of the car, things get a little, well, less good.

The proportions of the rear are long and heavy compared to the front. Shorten the distance between the rear edge of the doors and the rear wheel wells, somehow, and you have an epic package. Right now, it’s good, but not perfect.

One of the most common criticisms I’ve heard regarding the styling is that it’s a little “generic supercar.” Uh, okay. I mean, I guess you could be more cynical and jaded, but you might need a special permit or something. A generic supercar is still a supercar. I’m ultimately going to choose to judge it by lap times and not a few styling missteps.

 

You can't shorten the gap between rear of the door and the rear wheel wells...there is an engine between there. That length is necessary on a longitudinal setup. The only way that distance could be shortened is going to a transverse setup.

EVERY MID ENGINE CAR WITH A LONGITUDINAL SETUP HAS THIS "GAP".

DeTomaso Pantera, Lotus Esprit, Ferrari 348, F355, F360, F430, F458, F488, Pista, Tributo, Lamborghini Gallardo, Huracan, Audi R8, etc.

The only mid engine cars with a shorter "gap" are all transverse setups: Fiat X1/9, Lancia Beta Montecarlo, MR2 (all three gens), Fiero, etc.

Be glad that GM FINALLY kept their word and actually made the damned thing. And don't criticize what YOU can't improve. I'll be waiting for your styling designs...

Valid point, which leads me to the crackpot idea I just thought of. Someone (not me) should make a "ripoff" C8 by taking a wrecked C7 and wedging a transverse V8 in the back. Like, the LS4 from a 2000s Monte Carlo SS. YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I'm excited about the advanced PDR! Can't wait for someone to figure out how to upgrade my existing one in my ZL1 1LE!

I read an article on the internet by one of the developers.

The main reason they went to mid engine was the lack of traction on the front engine cars.  They couldn't keep adding power.

 Early development cars used a PDK transaxle.     Developing the new transaxle was the hardest part.

I have never been the biggest fan of corvettes except for the FRC Z06 so I am yawning a bit at the hype. But I am looking forward to the Italian rebodies of the C8 that will inevitably happen. Your name wouldn’t need to be Glickenhaus to afford a one off Italian beauty.  

GTwannaB said:

I have never been the biggest fan of corvettes except for the FRC Z06 so I am yawning a bit at the hype. But I am looking forward to the Italian rebodies of the C8 that will inevitably happen. Your name wouldn’t need to be Glickenhaus to afford a one off Italian beauty.  

The FRC/Z06 C5 are the only other corvette that I genuinely love (prior to C7, which i do think look good in upper level trims), but I can't get enough on the C8. Super excited to see one in the flesh. I've seen many, many camo-ed cars and was unsure, but I fell in love with the revealed body and colors!

iceracer said:

 Early development cars used a PDK transaxle.     Developing the new transaxle was the hardest part.

 

PDK as in a Porsche-developed dual clutch gearbox? How did they make it work? I want to know for... reasons.

KurtK01 said:

My observation is that the rear end is too busy. May be the first thing GM re-designs.

Depending on how the C8 sells, you may see more price drops for the C6s and C7s.

it's busy, but remember, being mid-engined, it needs the vents to exhaust the air that keeps the engine compartment cool. While you can say that the Mr2 and Fiero didn't have that much venting, they also did not come as a slippery fastback either. I think they will fine tune it, but it's still going to remain perforated with venting no matter what they do

In reply to Ozzy :

Go testdrive one. If this gearbox is even in the same ballpark as a PDK in a GT3 is, trust me.... You Will Be Involved.

Looks like a Ferrari with a Corvette front end slapped on..

Ozzy said:

I want love it but no manual is a deal breaker for me.  I still prefer to be involve in driving experience not just a passenger.  

Electric power steering that kills feel, drive by wire that controls the engine as an interpretation of what it thinks you think you want, divided by what it is programmed to allow you to have, braking that is closer to brake by wire at this point and has integral handling control... and shifting with a paddle on the steering column instead of an H gate is your hangup?

Horse is waaaay out of the barn, man.

Ever since the C5 Z06 I've thought "yea, I could own a Corvette", but now I'm finding myself really wanting one and even as a long time manual fanatic, I don't even really care that it doesn't have one.

iceracer said:

I read an article on the internet by one of the developers.

The main reason they went to mid engine was the lack of traction on the front engine cars.  They couldn't keep adding power.

 Early development cars used a PDK transaxle.     Developing the new transaxle was the hardest part.

 

I could swear that I read that in an article about the C6 Z06, in Car and Driver.  

Ozzy said:

I want love it but no manual is a deal breaker for me.  I still prefer to be involve in driving experience not just a passenger.  

So what you're saying is, "I've never driven a modern dual-clutch gearbox and why are those clouds there!"

In reply to z31maniac :

Are you really going to claim that it's not possible to prefer the driving experience of a manual transmission over a dual clutch? 

Don't get me wrong dual clutch transmissions are great and can be engaging when you're really starting to push whatever car is equipped with it. But if you're just cruising around doing a little spirited driving a manual transmission is still much more engaging, in my experience.

Different strokes and all that. A dual clutch transmission isn't a deal breaker for me, but I understand if it is for some.

MTechnically said:

In reply to z31maniac :

Are you really going to claim that it's not possible to prefer the driving experience of a manual transmission over a dual clutch? 

Don't get me wrong dual clutch transmissions are great and can be engaging when you're really starting to push whatever car is equipped with it. But if you're just cruising around doing a little spirited driving a manual transmission is still much more engaging, in my experience.

Different strokes and all that. A dual clutch transmission isn't a deal breaker for me, but I understand if it is for some.

Are you really going to claim to take things seriously on the internet?

It's a joke, it's just playing around,s I understand all "I prefer manuals" talk. For me, it just depends on the car.

A Miata, BRZ, Mustang GT, sure, I do want a manual (I've owned all 3). A mid-engined supercar meant to be the fastest/baddest on the block? I want the DCT (like I had in my 135i).

In reply to MTechnically :

I don't really see any driving experience difference in any of the transmissions.  Unless your engine has a WRC-like flat horsepower curve, you're always in the wrong gear anyway.  Twin clutch transmissions at least allow you to shift near-instantaneously into a less wrong gear, like a good hydraulic automatic, with the minimal driveline losses of a manual.

Some people like to shave with straight razors, too, even though modern zillion-blade razors work better.  It's the connection with the past that people like, not necessarily the end result.  See also- retro designed everything.

In reply to Knurled. :

You don't see how the experience of perfectly executing a rev matched heel and toe downshift gives you a different sense of satisfaction over just pulling a lever?

Your point about instantaneous shifting and not finding yourself in the wrong gear is related to what I like about manuals. There is stronger negative feedback for "bad" driving. I like the extra challenge that a manual provides.

In reply to MTechnically :

My point about the wrong gear is, unless you have a CVT, you are always in the wrong gear.  (Or even if you have a poorly calibrated CVT)

And no, I get no satisfaction from that, just dissatisfaction if it isn't 100% perfect.  I tolerate manuals because nobody makes a torque converter that will reliably tolerate 10,000 rpm.  Manual transmissions are just so slow.  You have to lift off the throttle every time you upshift or downshift, and unless you melt the clutch, they're slow in traffic too. (And then you need to either upshift to 2nd while that truck is bearing down on you as you make a left turn into traffic, or you scream the engine up to redline in 1st like an shiny happy person and risk getting a street racing ticket)