For the swappers: How do you deal with the drivetrain ladder thing (what Mazda calls a powerplant frame)? I don't see an easy way to make a traditional trans crossmember and diff mount.
For the swappers: How do you deal with the drivetrain ladder thing (what Mazda calls a powerplant frame)? I don't see an easy way to make a traditional trans crossmember and diff mount.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:For the swappers: How do you deal with the drivetrain ladder thing (what Mazda calls a powerplant frame)? I don't see an easy way to make a traditional trans crossmember and diff mount.
Are you talking drivetrain swaps into the Corvette, or putting the Corvette suspension under a different body?
In reply to MadScientistMatt :
Drivetrain swaps into Corvettes.
The part that kind of blew my mind about the ZF setup is the shifter boot is also the top of the shifter box. And, it is moulded into the body, cannot be removed.
pointofdeparture said:Tk8398 said:barefootcyborg5000 said:Emissions is a concern in most places, as in you won't pass and the parts you'll need are extinct.
That's one of the main reasons I would want to know more before buying one, I live in CA so that's definitely an issue.
This is anecdotal but it seems like the only C4s I ever see driven in NorCal, even at gearhead events like rallies and shows, are LT1/LT4 cars and the ZR1s.
The old, failure-prone electronics on the L83/L98 cars (particularly the earliest ones) would certainly give me pause.
You'd be sorely mistaken to think GM LT1/LT4 or ZR-1 90s electronics are a huge improvement. Don't ask how I know......
I got a ride in one and didn't like it. Interior, very 1980s GM, the car felt big, with okay power (though woefully weak compared to todays cars). I recall a comment in a car review regarding this era of 'Vette that went something like: "It wasn't so much an assembly, but rather a bunch of parts flying in close formation." A lot of rattles and shakes. If I were to buy a used Vette today, I'd go with as recent a generation as I could afford.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Haha, I'll admit that I have no first-hand experience (hence the anecdotal disclaimer) but there's probably something to the fact that it seems like only the later cars make it past the Smog Gestapo out here.
Broadly speaking though I would generally trust PCB solder joints on a 1994 board more than a 1984 board at this point.
I drove mine to work today. It is surprising rattle free for one of these. The shifter is terrible and having the separate overdrive is quite a throwback. Visibility is excellent. Gas mileage is awful. It's still rad.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
They were definitely an improvement.
They're in a dead zone. For people who want something older, possibly even pre-emissions for the most part, there are still plenty of affordable C3's. For people who want to go really fast and maybe do some track days or build a time attack or even drift car, there are plenty of affordable C5 and C6. C4 just gets no love.
In reply to A 401 CJ :
The C4 is kind of an odd duck because it doesn't look nearly as cool as a C3 and its suspension is way too stiff to be an enjoyable weekend car in comparison to alternatives. On the performance side, its suspension is stiff because they had horrible geometry and making the suspension stiff kept it from moving and thus doing the wrong thing. Again, there are better alternatives nowadays...
Pete. (l33t FS) said:In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
They were definitely an improvement.
I owned a 91 ZR-1. It was a great engine surrounded by C4 Corvette. My C3 was less irritating and as much fun to drive and got far more attention. If I ever own another Vette it will be a bumper C3 or C6 or C7. I have no interest in another C4 and any C5 worth owning is loose change away from a nice C6.
You'll need to log in to post.
