Mid engine corvette C8.R

https://jalopnik.com...-yet-1828229738

I must say the overall shape is good. It looks good from the side and the rear. But i hope they keep pumping out stingrays as a separate model. This one will sell far less than a FR model. Sad day if they have abandoned the compact, pushrod/lightweight design.

Edited by MatsNorway, 10 August 2018 - 13:01.

Ah yes, GM are staggering, blinking and spluttering, into the 1960s.  Even Ford had a mid engined car by the mid 1960s.

Just another mid engined sports car. I worked on this one in the late eighties. Chevrolet Indy technology demonstrator.

http://image.superch...cept-silver.jpg

That is my sentiment too. The Stingray had caracter and was a little bit usable outside of the track. Kinda the same way a GTR is cool for being what it is.

Rumors are front engine will live on since initially the mid-engine will be expensive to produce.  They may also call the mid engine the "Duntov" model.  There are some rumors the underhead cam engine has reached its end, but I think we have heard that for a long time.  Pratt and Miller or GM Racing have said they are definitely out of places to go with the front engine Vette to keep themselves relevant in racing.  Almost all their competition is mid-engine.

Meh, looks like a road legal Corvette DP. I'm going to miss seeing the front engined Corvettes at Le Mans and IMSA.

Ah yes, GM are staggering, blinking and spluttering, into the 1960s.  Even Ford had a mid engined car by the mid 1960s.

Don't forget GM's Corvair, which was first produced in 1959.

I think the Corvair 'over achieved' mid engine! Any further back and the license plate would be mounted to the block.

no wonder it had such a bad name...

Oh well - Fiero then.

I'd forgotten about them. Reasonable car apart from the boat anchor of an engine.

Don't forget GM's Corvair, which was first produced in 1959.

That had the engine in the WRONG end. 

Personally I feel GM will lose buyers. The Vette has always been  a brash fairly simple car. And very effective. And putting the engine behind the driver is no longer simple.

I feel that they will still sell 'traditional' cars, and like some other lemons like Lotus engines etc will be back to what the buyer expects. front engines!

If ya want mid engine buy an exotic.

As for doing away with pushrods?  Show me an OHC engine in the price range with more useable power.

Look at the drag racers,, removing OHC lumps and fitting turbo LS so as to go fast!

I prefer Fords but NOT that expensive heavy bulky lump with less power. It does sound good though. And goes ok.

Exotics have had huge complex bulky lumps for decades, and seldom are faster than the simple old pushrod Chev. And cost a truckload more to maintain and buy.

Edited by Lee Nicolle, 17 August 2018 - 07:52.

Show me an OHC engine in the price range with more useable power.

Mustang Bullitt (5.0L DOHC V8): 480 hp, $47,600 base

Corvette (6.2L pushrod V8): 455 hp, $55,500 base

LS motors go into cars because they are small and cheap.  Not trying to degrade them either.  Lots of HP for little money and that is the reason.  I think the V8s are the last motors GM makes that are pushrod.

 

 

 

Mustang Bullitt (5.0L DOHC V8): 480 hp, $47,600 base

Corvette (6.2L pushrod V8): 455 hp, $55,500 base

 

And the very obvious,,, what has more USEABLE power. And what weighs a LOT less. 

As for Mustang Bullits, they are 2018 and 455hp Vettes are what 3 years ago? Or is that the base model compared with the top model? Compare the Mustang with top line Camaro,,, or Challenger, same market.

Whatever, unfair comparison. 

And which car is faster around a racetrack? The Vette or the heavier Mustang? 

LS motors go into cars because they are small and cheap.  Not trying to degrade them either.  Lots of HP for little money and that is the reason.  I think the V8s are the last motors GM makes that are pushrod.

Old story, if it aint broke dont fix it.

All the people waffling about OHC engines that have less power and dont package nearly as well.

And ofcourse how many Chevrolet based racing engines are there? And how many Modular Fords? About a 90-1 difference

How many Windsor based engines are there? The figures are still GMs way but far less so.

And the very obvious,,, what has more USEABLE power. And what weighs a LOT less. 

As for Mustang Bullits, they are 2018 and 455hp Vettes are what 3 years ago? Or is that the base model compared with the top model? Compare the Mustang with top line Camaro,,, or Challenger, same market.

Whatever, unfair comparison. 

And which car is faster around a racetrack? The Vette or the heavier Mustang? 

*shrug* You asked for one; you got one. 

What's "useable power"? Did you mean off-idle torque instead?

The Bullitt's not the range topper among Mustangs. But even the lowly base $35k Mustang GT makes 460 hp out of its DOHC V8...

*shrug* You asked for one; you got one. 

 

What's "useable power"? Did you mean off-idle torque instead?

 

The Bullitt's not the range topper among Mustangs. But even the lowly base $35k Mustang GT makes 460 hp out of its DOHC V8...

No, mid range to top end grunt. 

Plenty of OHC V8s. Benz, Ford, Nissan, Toyota but none do anything any better than a simple 2 valve pushrod. Often do it worse.

Look at V8 Supercars. We had Benz, Volvo and Nissan. And all were inferior to 60+ y/o design pushrod V8s. Nissan are still around and still struggling with the supposedly superior modern designed engine. And it uses  far more fuel as well, as did the other two.

If nothing else that clearly shows what you do not need.

And all those fancy cams all need chains or belts feet long to turn those cams, the more cams the more chain. And guess what chains stretch big time. Always have always will. Even those little short chains to drive a cam in block stretch. Or for a racing engine can be converted to gear drive that is simple and weighs less. Unlike gear driven OHC engines, complex and less than ideal for reliability.

And yes as a repairer I have done hundreds of 4 and 6cyl OHC chains.

And a LOT less cam in block chains, 4 6 or 8.

No, mid range to top end grunt. 

Plenty of OHC V8s. Benz, Ford, Nissan, Toyota but none do anything any better than a simple 2 valve pushrod. Often do it worse.

Look at V8 Supercars. We had Benz, Volvo and Nissan. And all were inferior to 60+ y/o design pushrod V8s. Nissan are still around and still struggling with the supposedly superior modern designed engine. And it uses  far more fuel as well, as did the other two.

If nothing else that clearly shows what you do not need.

And all those fancy cams all need chains or belts feet long to turn those cams, the more cams the more chain. And guess what chains stretch big time. Always have always will. Even those little short chains to drive a cam in block stretch. Or for a racing engine can be converted to gear drive that is simple and weighs less. Unlike gear driven OHC engines, complex and less than ideal for reliability.

And yes as a repairer I have done hundreds of 4 and 6cyl OHC chains.

And a LOT less cam in block chains, 4 6 or 8.

Okay, now we're talking about chains. Sure, chains can stretch. Short chains have additional challenges - fewer links mean each link's duty cycle is higher... 

Not all production DOHC V8s use chains that run over the top of the cam sprockets. Check out the Benz M156. A chain drives a spur gear below each head. The spur gears then drive mating gears on each camshaft. More freedom in sprocket diameters, tooth counts, chain link stress, plus tidier packaging and when R&Ring the cams, they just lift right out with no need to mess with the chain at all!

There is little arguing the simplicity and the compact size of a Pushrod V8. But clearly emissions dictate higher compression for high performance engines. And since rpm is a easy way to comply with both demands you get these screaming V-tech banshees. You can (kinda must) ofc. boost it too..

One way to maintain compact size (my stupid idea) and up the rpm is to have two cams on each side..and lift them higher up in the block, Shorter push rods = more rpm. You can still keep it tightly packaged and you get space on the cam for.. vtech or something. One cam more and two to four gears extra in weight minus shorter rods sounds good to me.

And you get space on the cam for.. V-tech or something.

Mercedes have some OHC engines still going strong. So you are not in need for DOHC it seems. quick search results:

https://en.wikipedia...enz_M113_engine

https://en.wikipedia...enz_M279_engine

Edited by MatsNorway, 21 August 2018 - 22:06.

There is little arguing the simplicity and the compact size of a Pushrod V8. But clearly emissions dictate higher compression for high performance engines. And since rpm is a easy way to comply with both demands you get these screaming V-tech banshees. You can (kinda must) ofc. boost it too..
 
One way to maintain compact size (my stupid idea) and up the rpm is to have two cams on each side..and lift them higher up in the block, Shorter push rods = more rpm. You can still keep it tightly packaged and you get space on the cam for.. vtech or something. One cam more and two to four gears extra in weight minus shorter rods sounds good to me.
And you get space on the cam for.. V-tech or something.

 
 
Mercedes have some OHC engines still going strong. So you are not in need for DOHC it seems. quick search results:
https://en.wikipedia...enz_M113_engine
https://en.wikipedia...enz_M279_engine

And the very obvious,,, what has more USEABLE power. And what weighs a LOT less. 

As for Mustang Bullits, they are 2018 and 455hp Vettes are what 3 years ago? Or is that the base model compared with the top model? Compare the Mustang with top line Camaro,,, or Challenger, same market.

Whatever, unfair comparison. 

And which car is faster around a racetrack? The Vette or the heavier Mustang? 

All you asked for was an engine, and then you launch into more minute detail as a follow up to his correct answer.

Looks fantastic. Like a sports car built for something other than a drag race away from traffic lights.

You don't mean........surely not.....you mean...built for going round corners? 

And all this engine debate overlooks the simple truth that a flathead side-valve V8 is best.

haha. BRG speaks the truth regading V8 configuration.

As for the stingrays cornering performance.. it was superior to the V6 turbo 4WD fancy pancy diffs with the Gearbox in the rear GT-R in the figure 8 so please. Give it some respect if you want to be credible and not be seen as a typical internet couch expert/hater

https://www.motortre...smo-comparison/

Edited by MatsNorway, 23 August 2018 - 18:48.

haha. BRG speaks the truth regading V8 configuration.

 

As for the stingrays cornering performance.. it was superior to the V6 turbo 4WD fancy pancy diffs with the Gearbox in the rear GT-R in the figure 8 so please. Give it some respect if you want to be credible and not be seen as a typical internet couch expert/hater

https://www.motortre...smo-comparison/

"We brought the cars to historic Willow Springs to let their monstrous power and grip loose on the Big Track, colloquially known as the "Fastest Road in the West." At 2.42 miles, its nine turns run the gamut from tight and technical to high-speed sweepers, and its long straights let high-horsepower cars really stretch their legs. For this, we brought in our favorite pro driver, Randy Pobst, who turned an impressive 1:25.70 lap time in the NISMO but only a 1:27.10 in the Z06."

"We brought the cars to historic Willow Springs to let their monstrous power and grip loose on the Big Track, colloquially known as the "Fastest Road in the West." At 2.42 miles, its nine turns run the gamut from tight and technical to high-speed sweepers, and its long straights let high-horsepower cars really stretch their legs. For this, we brought in our favorite pro driver, Randy Pobst, who turned an impressive 1:25.70 lap time in the NISMO but only a 1:27.10 in the Z06."

 

Check the g-force readings in the chart near the end of the article.

And the price.

Check the g-force readings in the chart near the end of the article.

And the price.

Some straw clutching going on here, I feel. 

Some straw clutching going on here, I feel. 

It's just a factual observation that the Z06 pulls more G in the corners, which the NISMO seems to (more than) make up on the straights - quite the opposite of the old stereotype of American muscle cars.  I don't have a dog in any fight over which is "better".

Some straw clutching going on here, I feel. 

Eh. I knew that before i posted. Your the one pulling this out and refusing to admit that the corvette is a fast and capable car. Espesially if you consider price, you go try to find a car with same price performance. Either way, my point was that it is not a slow car.

Especially so for the new ZR1, Perhaps more relevant for your comment being this years model. beating the Viper ACR on Laguna Seca. Both are faster than 918 Spyder, 488 GTB and Mclaren F1 to mention a few. If you talk **** without really adding info, nuances or substance your just filling the forum with garbage.

http://fastestlaps.c...-seca-post-1988

http://www.corvetteb...9-corvette-zr1/

You don't mean........surely not.....you mean...built for going round corners? 

Do you still stand by this regarding the 2018/2019 ZR1? really?

Edited by MatsNorway, 26 August 2018 - 15:44.

Eh. I knew that before i posted. Your the one pulling this out and refusing to admit that the corvette is a fast and capable car. Espesially if you consider price, you go try to find a car with same price performance. Either way, my point was that it is not a slow car.

You should really calm down and stop throwing insults around.  I have never said that the Corvette is slow.  But it doesn't go round corners as well as some other cars.  The very article that you quoted states unequivocally that the Corvette was slower round Willow Springs than a GTR. 

As for price, a new GTR is about 7.7m yen in its home market of Japan.   That's about £54,000 in real money.  The Corvette is about $120,000, which is about £93,400.  So the GTR is massively cheaper and is faster. 

So you are wrong.

You do bring a good point in how prices vary by region. Allthough you did not bring a source..  I believe you.

When you state X sucks at something. It is a trash post when you do not back it up with a source, evidence or a good argument with nuances. I try to keep my insults to a minimum but it happens. Sorry.

If you claimed that it is unable to put the power down on corner exit i would never have said anything.

More on the current gen.

ZR1 beats Ford GT

https://www.motortre...tional-raceway/

Are the laptimes the ultimate proof of how good a car is? I am not having a dig, just thinking out loudly.. as it tends to be very track specific these days..

Are the laptimes the ultimate proof of how good a car is? I am not having a dig, just thinking out loudly.. as it tends to be very track specific these days..

If you talking about racing, then yes of course.  But if you are talking about track day cars or road cars, then definitely not.  You can have far more fun in a MX5 or an Elise on either a track or the road than you would have in a Corvette (or a GTR).  And there are plenty of other factors that make a good car.   You don't say 'Look how fast I can lap Willow Springs' if they have to carry you off to the chiropractor after doing the lap. 

And it is interesting that car marketing these days seems to centre on connectivity rather than cornering.

the should have made it a new model...if it was good then a name will stick...no need to use a name such as corvette, it just complicates things

There is little arguing the simplicity and the compact size of a Pushrod V8. But clearly emissions dictate higher compression for high performance engines. And since rpm is a easy way to comply with both demands you get these screaming V-tech banshees. You can (kinda must) ofc. boost it too..

 

One way to maintain compact size (my stupid idea) and up the rpm is to have two cams on each side..and lift them higher up in the block, Shorter push rods = more rpm. You can still keep it tightly packaged and you get space on the cam for.. vtech or something. One cam more and two to four gears extra in weight minus shorter rods sounds good to me.

And you get space on the cam for.. V-tech or something.

 

 

Mercedes have some OHC engines still going strong. So you are not in need for DOHC it seems. quick search results:

https://en.wikipedia...enz_M113_engine

https://en.wikipedia...enz_M279_engine

a single overhead cam sitting between the valves with cantilever rockers can easily be as compact as pushrod...and if compact and performance were taken real seriously, a d.o.h.c. head can be as low profile as a pushrod by mounting the cams right next to the valves via cantilever rockers

Perhaps, i have not seen that myself. I guess i forgot to fully flesh out why i think a pushrod V8 is so great. it is compact but also light. 3 more cams and support material adds weight. For comparison the R35 engine is heavier than the LS7

Some state the NSX engine to be up to 400 pounds. that is a 3L engine.. vs 450-500 pound  6L+ engine. 

Edited by MatsNorway, 18 September 2018 - 16:42.

The Datsuns are VERY fat. Heavy, thirsty and very expensive to maintain.

I have driven one around local streets and it did not excite me.

Saying that however often cars feel far better at speed. I have had old Z cars that felt better at 80mph than 40.

Though people are fixing L26s with LS engines as well. And are faster around a racetrack than with the 6.

a single overhead cam sitting between the valves with cantilever rockers can easily be as compact as pushrod...and if compact and performance were taken real seriously, a d.o.h.c. head can be as low profile as a pushrod by mounting the cams right next to the valves via cantilever rockers

If it were that simple they would be doing it and the Ford Mod. engines would not be as large in size as a Boss 429.

At that there are/were OHC cylinder heads available for U.S. small blocks after-market but then again they did not sell like hot cakes.

― Henry Ford

The quote is on the internet, so it must be true and it must mean whatever I want it to mean in my usage of it here because, like it, I am also on the internet thus I too am true.

While I like the LS engine and think it's a remarkable product, and am totally in lust with the new generation of 'Vettes, a number of commenters remind me of old Harley riders. "Nobody will buy this new ****" is the paraphrase, and they might be correct in their assessment of their own willingness to buy new ideas but one need only look at the current crop of offerings from Harley vs just a decade ago. These are not grandpa's rides anymore and that's probably a damn good thing 'cause grandpa can't always get it off the kickstand anymore and he's certainly not buying a new one every couple of years.

The demographic of the Corvette has always been on the grayer end of the scale, but that doesn't mean today's grandpa wants yesteryear's grandpa's car. God, imagine if all we had on offer was the doorstop model with skip-shift transmission and all 210 hp... I like the looks of the ME prototype myself, and if that's what it takes to lure the next generation of buyers into the showroom instead of the competition, then so be it. As long as it's bite matches it's bark, it can't be too bad. It might be cliche too, but then how cliche is a front-engine, rear drive, push-rod V-8 American car?

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

― Henry Ford

The quote is on the internet, so it must be true and it must mean whatever I want it to mean in my usage of it here because, like it, I am also on the internet thus I too am true.

 

how cliche is a front-engine, rear drive, push-rod V-8 American car?

 

About the same as those who fantasize over the Acronyms: FWD,  DOHC, IRS, or descriptions Paddle-shift, Turbo as being so much superior to anything else without a clue as to  why.

My cousin bought a 1993 Corvette because it was the first modern, all electric more or less Corvette, for 10,000 dollars five years ago.

Well now he has near that in the car, has driven it less than two thousand mile, been in the shop often, drive-train and body problems.

It needed a new distributor cap, I told him you get what you spend for but he put on a generic thing that did not fit unless part of it was ground off, by a mechanic at the shop he took it to. Well that was last year and his new cheaper by a couple hundred dollars cap went pffft.

Now he does not even drive the car out of town because he is paranoid it will break down, not that he has ever had a break down.

He is cheap and I do not hesitate to tell him you get what you pay for, BUT now he want to buy some used FWD crap-wagon as a drive around town car.

I told him , why, do you want to inherit all the problems the original owner sold it to get away from.

Of the past two ohc fwd crap-wagon sedans he has owned , he still has the Equinox he bought new, one he had to put a rebuilt engine into and the Equinox he had to put new pistons in, by the grace of God, that happened 3,000 miles before the warranty ran out.

Don,t tell me how the new electronic OHC, FWD crap wagons, are better than what people drove  before.

Addendum:

He had a Canadian Chrysler Intrepid which a front-end loader hit the front wheel with the bucket, just the wheel not the fender.

They had to, and I mean had to , total the car.

They fixed it, but after the work was done the car was determined to be unfit for the road. It would not drive straight.

Gotta love FWD crap-wagons.  

So how often do people's cars break down now? I've not had a breakdown in my lease car in 28 years. I did blow up a rental Renault in France (red light wouldn't go out, don't know what was wrong) and my wife's Astra munched its ignition pack a couple of years back. That's it though.

Oh yes, modern cars break down. Ask any repairer who are kept busy fixing them. Not all grind to a halt but oh so many have lights come on, and run in limp mode, trannys that go into limp mode with one gear, ABS systems that have lights come on.. but still work. Or dont work and in one case I know had no boost either so a tilt tray

A friend had a VW van which was in the shop more than being driven. Tilt tray on speed dial!

And ofcourse even the dealers cannot fix some of this stuff, intermitent faults that are fine in the workshop but act up regularly. I know of a Fiesta? that does it all the time. 

As for front drivers, look around at all the older cars, over 10 y/o No most have gone to scrap. So quoting a Govt minister 'a car is the second most expensive item a person will buy' 

And many are scrapped because a minor repair exceeds the cost of replacement. Now 15 y/o Mondeo. Astra etc Bottom radiator hose has multiple branches and to replace is 3-4 hours. You have to remove several items to get at it, then mangage to get all the branches off the various fittings, which are always corroded on. Even with proper maintenance and coolants. And then replace them all again. Planned obselescence? You bet. The Modndeo engine is a decent unit but NOT in its packaging in an ugly car. The Astra is just a junker at best, though to me at least a bit better looking

So "repairers" mostly see cars that have problems - who'd have thought? OTOH those who buy one of the reliable brands will probably never have a problem that actually causes the car to stop . . and that go on for 500,000 km these days.

Lee - I am probably about your age and I remember the days when if you neglected to replace the points on schedule your car wouldn't start one morning, a Holden red motor needed a re-bore every 100,000 miles, a V8 Holden had the performance and a Mini had the fuel economy of today's Commodore 6.

Bear in mind that modern cars are designed to last, without significant repairs, but with routine maintenance, for X km, where X is a somewhat variable number, but say 30000-100000 as a start (that varies by both manufacturer and model). That gets the car out of the warranty, and in most cases into the hands of the second or third owner. The third owner of a car is NOT the customer that the car is designed for, if it is a troublesome POS by then, well you are basically operating in unknown territory so far as the car's development process went. The only customer who  gets really considered is the one who buys the car in the first place, and since he is affected by residuals, that means the second owner also gets a look-in.  TCO is tracked by all fleet operators, so you'll find that maintenance for the expected life of a fleet vehicle is cheap. But once you are out of that zone, TCO is a low priority, except so far as it affects residuals for fleet operators.

Total Cost of Ownership?

Yup.