In reply to Javelin :
Of course we’re both speculating, but if the vette is really hitting 60 in under 3 seconds, I don’t see how it could *not* run a sub 12-second 1/4. Add the same 100 treadwear tires found on the Scatpack and things would get even more interesting.
I like it! First "different" new car I've really liked since the Elise came to the USA. I'd like to see them change the rear panel bodywork for 2021.
Wow, GM really knocked this one out of the park. I expected horrifyingly ugly and at least $20k more expensive. Dare I say this might be the greatest performance bargain EVER?
I see two major flaws, though:
1) No manual (?)
2) Children won't fit in the frunk nearly as well as they did under the hatch 
Here's a nit to pick: Why 495 hp? Could they really not squeeze out another 5 before calling it a day?
Furious_E said:Wow, GM really knocked this one out of the park. I expected horrifyingly ugly and at least $20k more expensive. Dare I say this might be the greatest performance bargain EVER?
I see two major flaws, though:
1) No manual (?)
2) Children won't fit in the frunk nearly as well as they did under the hatch
I'm floored by the starting price as well. Figure so much on this car is new and unique to this model.
Is it any more unique than other Corvettes once you get past the shock of OMG MID ENGINE? I don't think it is. The Corvette has had a unique trans for a while. This engine is just the first application of the LT2, it'll get smeared over the rest of the fleet soon enough. The platform has always been a one-off. The only thing that's really any different is where they put the engine when they started the design work.
Regarding the price: Is there any reason it SHOULD be more expensive?
Obviously, there is the concept of what they can get for them, but is anything truly expensive to build here (compared to the old Corvette at least)? The engine appears to be somewhat common, the suspension is not going to be that different to produce, the body.. is a body, not sure why that would be more. The only thing that seems like it would drive up the price would be the transaxle or any electronic do-dads they add (I think the current Corvette has plenty though)
Since the C5, I'd say that we've been refining the same basic idea/platform. This is our first clean sheet design in decades.
This is infinitely more appealing than the Zupra.
Keith Tanner said:This thing definitely opens up a lot of options for mid-engined builds down the road. I predict a reverse rotation final drive so it can also be used in rear engined applications like sand rails.
The engine is tall, unfortunately. We'll have to see if the LT2 gets into the Camero to see if it'll fit under low hoods in other front engined applications.
It's dry sump in the Vette. How tall can an OHV V8 with no sump really be?
I'm a little surprised by the move from torque converter auto to dual clutch auto. Due to cost/complexity and tech advances, BMW and others are doing the opposite.
Hellcat Redeye is $73,000 and does the 1/4 in 11.8. Widebody is now about the same price and will do it in 10.9. The Demon did it in 9.6 (but really its just a factory drag car.)
I'd have a hardtime believing that buyers cross shopping American muscle will choose a hopped up Challenger who's base price (in V6 form) almost dips under $20,000k over a mid-engine Corvette that looks like an American Ferrari - especially when they will be so close in performance.
If Ford was smart, they'd figure out how to put V8, 6spd Mustangs into the hands of more people. $40k for a GT V8 Performance package? I might as well just splurge and pay a few extra bucks per month for the Corvette. Nah, Ford needs a $25k V8 GT.
I have a feeling the new Ferravette is going to reset a lot of peoples budgeting for a sports car.
David S. Wallens said:Since the C5, I'd say that we've been refining the same basic idea/platform. This is our first clean sheet design in decades.
But ideas don't cost money. The platform is completely new for each generation, it just carries over concepts. It seems more different, but if you're actually counting the number of unique and new parts I suspect it's not really any more of a departure than other generational leaps.
STM317 said:Keith Tanner said:This thing definitely opens up a lot of options for mid-engined builds down the road. I predict a reverse rotation final drive so it can also be used in rear engined applications like sand rails.
The engine is tall, unfortunately. We'll have to see if the LT2 gets into the Camero to see if it'll fit under low hoods in other front engined applications.
It's dry sump in the Vette. How tall can an OHV V8 with no sump really be?
Intake manifolds can be a lot taller. Also, the dry sump means that the minimum distance to a steering rack isn't really changed if you're doing a front engine install, so the engine isn't really any lower than it would be with a wet sump and the right. pan. I'm thinking of a very specific application here, of course :) Here's a quote from the Car and Driver article:
"With the engine behind the driver, engineers were less concerned with forward sightlines and free to make the LT2 taller than the LT1. A new intake manifold with equal-length runners is mounted so that the engine now breathes from the back of the car, further shortening the distance between the throttle body and intake valves, which improves flow."
Check out the pictures of the engine and how much the intake towers over the valve covers. The integrated oil tank for the dry sump system is a nice piece of packaging, though - it's basically sitting where a hydraulic PS pump would be in the old days.
Here's the LS3.
pheller said:
I have a feeling the new Ferravette is going to reset a lot of peoples budgeting for a sports car.
So, C8 or Cayman?
The no manual kills it for me. I like it though hopefully later versions will rectify the manual issue.
David S. Wallens said:pheller said:
I have a feeling the new Ferravette is going to reset a lot of peoples budgeting for a sports car.
So, C8 or Cayman?
C8. And no, not the Spyker.
And I guess add the 4C to that question as it's also in the same price range. Definiately cool to have some choices.
pimpm3 said:The no manual kills it for me. I like it though hopefully later versions will rectify the manual issue.
I’ll withhold judgement until I drive one in anger. The flappy paddles (err...commodore 64 buttons) in my 10-year old V, SUCK.
That said, I walked (limped) away from a C63 AMG saying “If every auto shifted like this, why the hell would you ever buy a manual!?”
Also, I’m not an automotive engineer/designer, but I’d ASSume the price of both autos and manuals would go up if they decided to offer both, just to appease what I’m also ASSuming is a very small segment of buyers.
poopshovel again said:pimpm3 said:The no manual kills it for me. I like it though hopefully later versions will rectify the manual issue.
I’ll withhold judgement until I drive one in anger. The flappy paddles (err...commodore 64 buttons) in my 10-year old V, SUCK.
That said, I walked (limped) away from a C63 AMG saying “If every auto shifted like this, why the hell would you ever buy a manual!?”
Yup. The AMG boxes are pretty darn sweet.
Javelin said:In reply to poopshovel again :
Pretty sure Tesla's are the only things to 0-60 like that anyway. Performance is a broad term. The Scat Pack would destroy the C8 at the drag strip, the Boxster (hell the ND too) would out lap it at any technical track or autocross, and the Quattro's would win on wet surfaces.
We're getting into some serious Internet racing speculation now. We haven't even had anyone drive a C8 and it's already getting destroyed by the Boxster and ND on track days and autocrosses.
David S. Wallens said:pheller said:
I have a feeling the new Ferravette is going to reset a lot of peoples budgeting for a sports car.
So, C8 or Cayman?
C8 no contest. As much as I'd love to own a Cayman the hydraulic lift thing on the Vette and the potential for a much higher performance ceiling for less money does it.
This really made me rethink the kind of sports car I'd want to own (and Corvettes in general.)
Harvey said:Javelin said:In reply to poopshovel again :
Pretty sure Tesla's are the only things to 0-60 like that anyway. Performance is a broad term. The Scat Pack would destroy the C8 at the drag strip, the Boxster (hell the ND too) would out lap it at any technical track or autocross, and the Quattro's would win on wet surfaces.
We're getting into some serious Internet racing speculation now. We haven't even had anyone drive a C8 and it's already getting destroyed by the Boxster and ND on track days and autocrosses.
Welcome to the internet. 
Another unpopular opinion from me: the lack of a manual doesn't bother me.
*runs*
Jordan Rimpela said:Another unpopular opinion from me: the lack of a manual doesn't bother me.
*runs*
I like my manual transmission cars but I have to say that I'm not sure if miss it on something I drive everyday. Especially now that I have to drive into Philly to see clients occasionally.
The tech has come really far in a short time.
Harvey said:Javelin said:In reply to poopshovel again :
Pretty sure Tesla's are the only things to 0-60 like that anyway. Performance is a broad term. The Scat Pack would destroy the C8 at the drag strip, the Boxster (hell the ND too) would out lap it at any technical track or autocross, and the Quattro's would win on wet surfaces.
We're getting into some serious Internet racing speculation now. We haven't even had anyone drive a C8 and it's already getting destroyed by the Boxster and ND on track days and autocrosses.
And the RAIN! Don’t forget about the RAIN! They shoulda made it an AWD turbo four..wait...FIVE cylinder!!!!! WTF were they thinking!?!? For $60k it should do ALL THE THINGS!!!!!! AND it should look like a bad copy of a 50 year old pony car for at least the next 15 years!!! WTF GM!?
You'll need to log in to post.
