Rumor: Corvette C8 will trow their brand, history and DNA in the trash?

 

Having said all this, we're way past the point where this has become a political discussion as opposed to a technical one.

That may have been my fault, in which case I apologize.

The slightly more technical answer for increasing sales is to stop increasing the performance bracket of the car. But then it wouldn't measure up to the competition, and sales would suffer. So what should they do? The bean counters should should suck it up and let them produce great Corvettes.

Bsqured wrote

"In 1976 I was able to purchase a solid 1969 Corvette convertible as my first car for approximately $1,000 (at age 18) "

I must admit the short shelf life of secondhand cars  in the USA in the 70s makes this comparison tricky, but for 3000 dollars today a young un could buy a car that will trounce your Corvette in every objective measure up to and including power at the wheels. Admittedly a 10 year old Camry lacks that certain something subjectively. So, as the boring cars get better, or good enough, the top cars have to get betterer, so they'll cost more.

Incidentally I just drove an R8 dunnydoor with the 455 hp LS3, I must be getting very lazy it needed an auto box. The XR8 felt quicker, the R8 made better noises on the overrun, the XR8 ditto on full throttle.

 

Having said all this, we're way past the point where this has become a political discussion as opposed to a technical one.

I think it's fair game if it's a discussion based on intelligence, economics, design, etc. If it's just emotions than yeah it's political.

Like you say, mass transit doesn't work in a lot of American locales, we lack the density outside of the downtown of a metro area. A 15-30 minute walk(to your local rail station in Europe) won't get you very far in America. Same distance, but you probably haven't left your sub-division.

I like bikes. I just did a quick 50 minute lap of my local mountain bike trail. But it's recreation/exercise. There's no ****ing way I'm going on a main road. The local stuff is fine. And I'm in a rural area so the drivers here give you room. Usually room AND a wave. 

I can't think of any scenario where I'd want to bike to/from work. But I really liked trains/subways in Europe. I reckon it was quicker than cars most of the time and you could nap/read/whatever. 

My main experience with European cycling was in London. You have to be insane or a total tree hugger to want to bike there. It's *crowded*. And they have double decker buses, and proper sized trucks. No one seems to learn the lesson we all figure out on open test days. Weight has right of way. And those cycling-hire schemes? Yeah let's put tourists on heavy, poorly maintained bikes in congested traffic. 

Sloooooowly pulling us back to the topic. Ish. It's accepted wisdom The Young aren't into cars. But like, they still have to travel right? Or as an age group are they overwhelmingly found in cities? But outside of the old school cities you mentioned there aren't transit options to match. If everyone born after 1985 moved to California, they still need a set of keys right? Or are they just not going to care and get that Ellio* thing.

*At the risk of being the guys I hated from the DeltaWing discussions.... that doesn't look very stable

this amazingly unhelpful graph plots the cheapest falcon divided by 100, and the average wage, for Australia. Conclusion: cars have not changed much in price as a proportion of average wage. They have dropped a bit, but they may be because the average wage is inflated by the top end more than it was.

anyway, here's the datasource for car prices

http://www.redbook.c...=default&Page=2

and here's a direct link to the image

http://www.mediafire...verage_wage.jpg

Edited by Greg Locock, 16 October 2014 - 22:53.

They need a set of keys if they're going to live like us.  That's a key differentiator there and there's no reason to suggest they will.  They're the first generation to truly "get" mobile working, self employment and really utilizing the technology available to us today, to create an entirely different life.  And they have to.  Home prices, for the moment at least, are stratospheric relative to average income levels, there is little to no security in the work force and while the tide appears to be slowly changing, there's still the employment side-effects of out-sourcing manufacturing to the cheapest off-shore supplier. 

I rode my plastic bicycle ~5000 km last year, rain, sleet and a shitload of snow (and ice), as my primary transportation to and from work. I still like my cars.

Maybe we are drilling down too deep. I think the Corvette product planners would be content to shave 8-12 years off their owner base to align with Porsche. BMW, etc.  

Cadillac sales are down significantly in 2014. 

To be honest I think Cadillac and Lincoln are in far more trouble than Corvette. At least I can understand what a Corvette is, as opposed to a blinged up mainstream product with a few new panels.

http://online.wsj.co...cars-1404763769

http://qz.com/60626/...nstead-of-cars/

http://onlinelibrary...se.738/abstract

So, rather than owning a car you will buy access to cars. If you want to tow something big and heavy you might contact the dealer and get access to a Chevy Suburban. On the weekend you may want to go for a blat around the local driver's roads you would get a Corvette. But for the daily commute you get a Volt.

Incidentally I just drove an R8 dunnydoor with the 455 hp LS3, I must be getting very lazy it needed an auto box.

Lazy - or slower like me.

Interesting discussion. I don't see the point in an MR 'vette either. Show me a mid-engined sportscar with equivalent functionality (luggage space for a dirty weekend, etc)  to an FR Corvette. Go on, I'll wait... I don't know about North America but down here I'm seeing the Toyota GT86 everywhere. It seems they properly nailed what people wanted. Lightweight sportscar, cheaper (attainable while still young!) and less impractical than an MX5/Miata. Fairly economical, and plenty of boot space for the shopping (or as Toyota like to say, a set of track-day wheels & tyres).

I think the first big company that gets this really sorted is going to have a huge advantage, but it's going to be tricky to actually get people to get their work done.

There's definitely companies making this happen already. My own employer has some folks working from home 9 of 10 days a fortnight. My 2-up manager picked up and moved to Indonesia, works from his new home there, and flies back to Sydney for 4 days a month to fit in any necessary face-to-face meetings. He says he's getting more work done than ever (I believe him, too) and is getting a tan along the way.

I haven't owned a roadgoing car in ~7 years now. No need. Cheaper, safer and less stressful to get the train. Also faster most of the time. Don't need to be sober, and it doesn't matter if I fall asleep in transit. Obviously not possible in every city. Canberra (where I grew up) is a poorly planned shithole with awful public transport, pretty much designed for cars. Hated it.

Bob, have you considered moving closer? Sixty miles is a pretty long trek. Lots of hours behind the wheel, and lots of wear & tear on whatever vehicle it is.

 

*At the risk of being the guys I hated from the DeltaWing discussions.... that doesn't look very stable

Praise the Lord, brothers and sisters, he has seen the light!  

Whatever happened to that funny old thing anyway?  The Future of Motor Sport, wasn't it?

I was thinking just that when I read your post.

Cadillac is finally going to build a full-size sedan again after years of homely pudgy cars that were neither truly luxury or any where near the class of what they made their name off of.

Lincoln whose name is full sized luxury now reflects the same trying to play both ends against the middle offering vehicles that are supposed to cover all bases while being mediocre at best, that Ford seems to be betting on.

While Ford may get away with that, Lincoln will probably join Mercury in the land of dead makes.

The fact Chevy, Dodge and Ford are offering and selling, successfully at this point, bloated pony cars, shows that while gear-head U.S. males are a declining number, they still count in Detroit board rooms.

What the hell do I know about street cars? I still kinda want a 240Z, a Honda 600 and a Smokey-and-the-Bandit Trans-Am.....maybe an early Rabbit GTI as well.

I still kinda want a 240Z

 

Now you, sir, have the most excellent taste, if i may say so.

Now you, sir, have the most excellent taste, if i may say so.

Then explain the Trans-Am.

My mom drove a Fiero. I was one happy first grader. 

I thought my dad's mustard Alfa was a piece of junk. I might have been accidentally right.

(He's got an Avanti with the Vette engine if anyone's interested. Working carphone included.)

Edited by Ross Stonefeld, 20 October 2014 - 17:55.

Then explain the Trans-Am.

That firebird on the hood fueled my imagination for years as a young boy. I agree with BRG: all of your choices show excellent taste. I was drooling over a 240Z that drove by the other day, too.

Then explain the Trans-Am.

We don't all want fine dining all the time.  Sometimes we just want a pizza.

We don't all want fine dining all the time.  Sometimes we just want a pizza.

I have driven two of those. Both RHD converted. One an average totally original car. Felt like a boat and accelarated like a snail. The other a rebuilt car with good shocks, steering and a mildly tuned rebuilt engine. That felt sharp [not really sporty] rode quite nice and went surprisingly well. The tired one was a down GM pig, the good one probably what GM should have built originally.

The styling and that bloody eagle I will still reserve judgement on. Though I have never hated them.

I saw a 24oz for sale at a swap on the weekend. A bit down but not rusty! still had the original carbs. Just $12500! Once I heard that I stopped looking. Though I am too old and fat to get in and out of it easily anyway. They always were a bit weird to drive sitting between the back wheels.  The 26oz 2+2 felt a bit better though were always a bit 'fat' Those I have owned a few of, none were great, just trade ins. All rusty, as most Datsuns always have been.

I had a Alfa GTV 4 cyl to drive for a few days many moons ago. Fun car to drive BUT I never wish to own one. It broke down [surprise electrical] and it bit my toe where the steeing went through the floor. A few months aftr I had it it caught fire and burnt to the ground.

Just reading an online auction list for a 2012 Camaro. Which shows the ID placard.  Weight 4727 lbs! 2144 kilo. What happened to the pony car? Bloody draught horse is closer! A real 69 Camaro is about 1250 kilo! And about 2/3 the size too.

 Though it shows the front rear split,1017k front and 1127 rear. With that distribution why move the engine? Yes I know it is fat, I hope a Vette is not quite as fat.

This car is being auctioned for motorsport use only, left hook with seemingly electric steering.. But even stripped [not gutted it is still going to weigh 400 kilo more than my existing toy, an 82 V8 falcon. With a bloody great Cleveland lump. Why are they so fat? A VE Commodore V8 is over 300 kilo lighter. And they are obese! My 71 Ford Galaxie is 154 kilo lighter, is far bigger with a 400ci lump and HUGE bumpers.

Imagine people being foolish enough to purchase a front engine sports car with 650hp, an aluminum chassis and composite bodywork for far less than $100K?

Just reading an online auction list for a 2012 Camaro. Which shows the ID placard.  Weight 4727 lbs! 2144 kilo. What happened to the pony car? Bloody draught horse is closer! A real 69 Camaro is about 1250 kilo! And about 2/3 the size too.

 Though it shows the front rear split,1017k front and 1127 rear. With that distribution why move the engine? Yes I know it is fat, I hope a Vette is not quite as fat.

This car is being auctioned for motorsport use only, left hook with seemingly electric steering.. But even stripped [not gutted it is still going to weigh 400 kilo more than my existing toy, an 82 V8 falcon. With a bloody great Cleveland lump. Why are they so fat? A VE Commodore V8 is over 300 kilo lighter. And they are obese! My 71 Ford Galaxie is 154 kilo lighter, is far bigger with a 400ci lump and HUGE bumpers.

The Base weight of a Camaro is approx. 3,700 lbs.

It makes not sense for one to weigh that much although the ZL-1 was over 4,100 lbs.

Imagine people being foolish enough to purchase a front engine sports car with 650hp, an aluminum chassis and composite bodywork for far less than $100K?

If i could get the car in Norway for that sum i would seriously consider it. Even without a house or garasje just yet.

The Base weight of a Camaro is approx. 3,700 lbs.

It makes not sense for one to weigh that much although the ZL-1 was over 4,100 lbs.

I was just quoting the GM placard. It does seem heavy to me too. Though I do know they are still a fat thing, like the Mustang and Challenger too. 

I do the American cruises here and there is a few of all the modern 'clones' around. Parked alongside the originals they look huge. Parked alongside my Galaxie they do not look like a compact.

Besides that like many GM sporties it is not made in the US.

Edited by Lee Nicolle, 25 October 2014 - 10:28.

The gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), or gross vehicle mass (GVM) is the maximum operating weight/mass of a vehicle as specified by the manufacturer^[1] including the vehicle's chassis, body, engine, engine fluids, fuel, accessories, driver, passengers and cargo.

SPIED!!!! 2016 Camaro!

and to add to grunt's informed post, GAWR is the gross axle weight, ie the maximum load on each axle.

These are usually limited by the tires, but then the car is tested for durability at these weights as well, so they effectively do define the strength of the car.

You can tell very little about the curb weight of a car from its GVW.

A 2014 Camaro ZL1 convertible weighs very close to 4400 lbs. Moo! 

The gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), or gross vehicle mass (GVM) is the maximum operating weight/mass of a vehicle as specified by the manufacturer^[1] including the vehicle's chassis, body, engine, engine fluids, fuel, accessories, driver, passengers and cargo.

I did not look hard enough at that plate. I am surprised [after looking at Aussie ones for decades] is that it has not got the seating capacity. Generally dictated by belts or child support anchors. I presume they are a 4 seater?  If not the 5th will be uncomfortable!

A 2014 Camaro ZL1 convertible weighs very close to 4400 lbs. Moo! 

That does weigh more than my Galaxie which is 1.990 tonne with the chairs and toolbox in the boot. And is a true 6 seater and does have [heavy] factory air and power steering.

A reasonably optioned (power steering, disc brakes, AC and a radio) big-block first gen Camaro runs an easy 3500 pounds. The claimed curb weight of a 2013 is 3850 pounds while having more power, more torque, better brakes, better safety and more room (~4" wider track, ~4" longer wheelbase and 3" longer overall).

Granted, a severe weightless program to get the car under 3000 is likely easier on the first gen. Hell, the radio option added 17 pounds alone.

Then compare a small block [never many truck engines] with air and steer. Flat out at max 1.5 tonne. A GpN race car [full trim plus rollcage etc] comes in around 1300 kilo. And all those power modifications probably make them heavier than the base car.

And US GM must have used fat radios,, I  just weighed a 69 Holden radio at just under 8 lbs, the whole package with ariel and speaker probably about 12 lb.

Some fathead wrote this: 

http://www.popularho...gh/viewall.html

All costs are relative as well as absolute. In 1971 my first home in the UK cost the same as the then fastest car, the Daytona. Today the fastest car , say the McLaren P1 is , in th UK at least five times the price of a starter home. However there are several cars at half the house price which are as fast as the Daytona was up to 120mph.

However as cars have gotten more expensive and better but moe complex most digital things have gotten cheaper so are more rational choice for a youngster. 20 year olds can afford almost any virtual internet world they want but they cant afford to insure any car ,let alone one they may want. So having a car is becoming less acheivable which is going to affect its desirablity.

As far as the Vette goes I saw my first 2014 one yesterday, it is sensational, front engined ot not. My wife rates it abovea  Ferrari in looks. Also the UK magazines have been steadily more complementary to the Vette with each iteration. So its no longer seen as "US junk" but is discussed as close to a Porsche 911 - not as good but quite close. BTW the average 911  driver age in UK is mid 50's - it's all about disposable income.

I'm writing this form Albuquerque New Mexico. Not a very rich US city by any means but thre are one hell of lot of new Camaro's, Challengers and Mustang's here , very few driven by 60 year old's as far as I see  so its still true - V-8 pony cars sell well.

Edited by mariner, 27 October 2014 - 04:02.

Since Ferraris became hideous, even Vettes are looking good!

I tell people the golden age of the American automobile is right now, we are living it. But they just laugh at me.

The big block option added 248 pounds to the base v8 weight. I would suppose less if you went for the L78 aluminium head 396. I no longer recall the weight difference between the original ZL1 and its more pedestrian brethren. Seems to me it was a base car with no options except the engine and related brakes / suspension, but I could be wrong. Drag racing wasn't so much focused on stopping at that point.

Now, a rag-top ZL1? That's just....wrong.

Reputedly the ZL1 69 weighed about the same as a base 350 manual car. 

They were full poverty pack with that 427 alloy motor and alloy Muncie box. Did have disc brakes, 12" or so for 69. Rear discs too I believe. A few were auto too, for drag racing I guess.

I read up on them after experiencing the Bob Jane ZL1. And he had two, the championship winning manual orange car and the blue auto car that was dragged.

Where is Thunder 427. He restored the orange car!

If you ask me, the viper is perhaps the most underrated car out there. No one ever speaks about it. It certainly is underrated in terms of design. Its nothing wrong with it. It is just a mean machine with a strange engine choice.

http://www.topgear.c...sema-2014-10-27

Edited by MatsNorway, 27 October 2014 - 17:29.

Corvette is looking to go mid motor in the future according to this article. i don't know about you but to me thats like Porsche announcing the 911 to ditch the Boxer engine. The rear engine layout. The front lights being round.. And i guess the overrall round shape... all at once.

 

I think you can say that it would be as much of a shock as if Porsche announced the 911 to become mid-engined (in other words: shelve it and let the Cayman take over)

Porsche dropping the boxer engine for something else: In the corvette world that would be if the boat anchor up front is replaced by a modern lightweight design engine, no matter if is is a foruvalve Quadcam V6 or a V8

Prove it.. if it really is a ship anchor give us numbers to look at.

Here is the corvette..

http://www.topspeed....e-ar136830.html

Actually let me help you.. Here is some numbers a state of the art engine with alu everything (thanks to Ford tech.. heh..) and DOHC.. 

http://en.wikipedia....issan_VR_engine

Im not going to double check the numbers. Thats up to you. It might be dry weight for the Corvette and wet or something for the GTR motor.

Edited by MatsNorway, 27 October 2014 - 19:39.

Prove it.. if it really is a ship anchor give us numbers to look at.

 

You have to remember too many of the Euro type auto enthusiasts never got past reading up on the old thick wall V-8s concerning U.S. power plants.

I agree that Dodge using a V-10 was odd to stupid in my book.

Lee the ZL-1 Camaro was a COPO car with no special mechanical items other than an aluminum V-8.

Edited by Bob Riebe, 27 October 2014 - 21:55.

You have to remember too many of the Euro type auto enthusiasts never got past reading up on the old thick wall V-8s concerning U.S. power plants.

 

I agree that Dodge using a V-10 was odd to stupid in my book.

 

Lee the ZL-1 Camaro was a COPO car with no special mechanical items other than an aluminum V-8.

Currently in V8 Stupidcar here in Oz we have all the wannabes [Nissan, Mercedes and Volvo] with their hitech engines that struggle to keep up with the Windsors and HMS engine [short deck Chev] And use a good deal more fuel doing so. And I believe too that some of the all alloy engines weigh more than the 2 valve pushrod. 

The old story, if it is not broke dont fix it.

The ZL1 was alloy 427, heavy duty [rockcrusher?]  Muncie manual or turbohydramatic with a 4.10 posi, cowl induction bonnet and front disc brakes. I have read that some or all had rear discs. Otherwise full pov pack. The weight was 3300lb

 I just googled it to get the above answers.

The 427 weighed about the same [500 lbs]  as the small block.

GM built 69 of them.

Read the Bob Jane cars thread on TNF which has many mentions of the two Jane ZL1s. The restored road race car has the engine from the blue drag race car. The original 427 from that car went to Frank Gardiner's UK 69  SCA Camaro.

Though the Jane car went as quick with the 350, just had to be turned a lot tighter!

Edited by Lee Nicolle, 28 October 2014 - 03:48.

What is odd or stupid about using a V10 in a car that could only be called a game-changer. At a time when north American "muscle" cars were anything but. F1 was still running V10s at that point.

Yeah, but not what was basically a truck engine!

Vipers like many Chrysler products are different. They go extremely hard. Not many hitech exotics are faster in a straight line, yet alone up a hill. And the Dodge cost a whole lot less. 

Just like a Vette always has, simple basic cars [comparitivly] that are damned quick and cheap to maintain. At least as a road car!