mid engine corvette qtr panels leaked photo

Mustang has been selling (relatively) big in Europe. I think GM would like to move 5,000-10,000 units there - that’s achievable.

 

You brought up "history" when you dragged out the late, unloved Porsche 928.
No matter what the C8 ends up being, it will be a CORVETTE. Which means it will OVERDELIVER as a sports car, and Ferraris will still have nicer interiors (all be it with soft touch buttons that will fail).
Show me an American car in 1978 that outperformed the 1978 Corvette...everyone was dealing with the same laws and technology.
As far as your revisionist history on the 2005/2006 Ford GT, they made 4,000 of them. And contrary to your thoughts, they were NOT widely loved by the Euro-centric market. There have been NUMEROUS threads on this very forum expressing SHOCK about the 2005-2006 Ford GT's remarkable strength on the used market. The current GT? Explain to me how it's a "game changer"? The McLaren 720S is a game changer...the Ford GT didn't make ANYONE change how they were doing things. The current Ford GT is touted by literally everyone as a "race car for the street", yet it is not as fast on what should be it's natural habitat (the track) as numerous cars that are not only attainable but cheaper.

 

China? Yes. Europe -- I don't see it. Some but not that many.

If GM sold 5000 Vettes in China they would be ecstatic. I've seen some Mustangs.

 

If they sold 5000 anywhere outside North America, they will be thrilled and the program would be a success. Based on some early leaks, it seems (operative word) 40,000 units / year is the target.

We’ll see!

 

But I think GM is aware that a mid engine car WOULD be more likely be acceptable in foreign markets than a front engine car. So it would not surprise me that they have already adopted it for foreign sales, unlike they did with the C7. For example, the C7 did not have Euro mandated headlight washers so they had these awful looking stuck on bits that spoiled the looks. My thinking is Chevy thinks this one could actually be sold overseas as something other than "just a novelty"

 

But just look at it! The 720s looks like something I extrude after my morning coffee.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You just don't get it do you? Just like Trump asking the Russians to find the emails I asked Porsche to bring back their front engine manually shifted car. I think they are the only ones with the balls to do it. As for your 78 Corvette the 6.6liter Pontiac 400 4sp TA would beat it. Where did I ever mention production numbers for either GT model? I said Ford had the balls to build it and they were indeed special. C8 is not special and never will be. All the C8 pundits say its going to be a game changer and YOU my friend have been one too. I question change what? Do you think the others are going to build a response to it? Keep dreaming. Like I said its a change only unto itself. Sounds like I got your nose out of joint. Relax, have a beer and know that we will never agree. NEVER (in caps too).

 

And I hope they do. I hope anything made here is desired worldwide. It helps us all. But I am not holding my breath since the C7 being as great as it is has not done well oversees. And it isn't because of headlight washers. That's like running a front plate to me. You do because you have to and therefore you get a pass on the looks. Other issue is how crazy EU is on gas prices, emissions and trying to outlaw or out price everything so you can't have it. So how many with the pockets will switch and get the C8 over a 458 or 488 or Hurcan? I say not many.

 

Don't lecture....you don't know enough about this subject to preach (assuming you are NOT part of the C8 development team).
You're talking about a car that has not been shown to the public yet. No specs released. But YOU have decided it's not special. That "my friend" is the DEFINITION of AGENDA. Get over yourself.

By the way. 1978 Trans Am 6.6L (W72): 220HP, 7.2 sec. 0-60 (Road and Track)
1978 Corvette L82: 220HP, 6.5 sec. 0-60 (Car and Driver)

Next time, do some homework. It took me 10 seconds to gather the above.

 

I guess you and I have different views of what a "game changer" is.
So, Ford basically copies it's own 40 year old design in 2005 and then refreshes it 10 years later (for TRIPLE the price) and you guys think it's "game changing" because "they had the balls to do it"? So, again I ask you and Eric...WHO changed ANYTHING they were doing because of EITHER Ford GT? Did Ferrari? Did Lamborghini? Did McLaren? Because "game changer" by pure word definition is something that causes a SHIFT in the game (you know, like Steph Curry is a "game changer")

And for clarity. I said that the mid-engine Corvette is game changing for CORVETTE....not the entire automotive world.

 

Yes the C8 is maybe just a game chaging corvette, or maybe its just a vette this time with the engine in the middle but fundementaly the same, imo it could be more much more. However that remains to be seen, and if its heavy as rumored or twisty then its just another vette with big tires and lots of hp.
The first gen NSX was game changer in that it was a no BS mid engined car, after that car ferrari had to up its game on reliability and ease of use(whether thats good or bad is another debate). The second gen NSX changed the NSX game but thats it. The ferrari 458 was game changer in that it was truley a beautiful car, and yet one designed in the legislative era, unfortunatly we have yet to see another truley beutiful car form ferrari or anyone else.
The 05 ford Gt was game changer in that it was the first truly american supercar, since maybe the shelby cobra of the 60's. A supercar in looks performance and handlign/feedback. The new ford Gt moves the game on in being yet another american supercar, and the first oem supercar that has suspesion which really lowers itself on track, giving the car a completly different feel to drive on track, feelling like a true race car as opposed to a really fast road car, yet it works on road too. The two ford Gts have also moved the vette game on, in that their performance(if not experience to drive) has to be beaten by a new vette.

The 288 Gto was game cahnger, not because of its paltry sales but because it brought back raw hyper performance. The Maclaren F1 with under 100 sold was also a game changer in that it showed how great a car built with attention to detail and light weight could be. In the end it begat the current Mclaren lineup.

Lots of cars with small sales change the game in that they move things on. I wonder what the Me corvette will do in terms of moving things on. If they get it really right and have a light Na version thats democratzing Gt3 type performance, thats moving the game on.

The Miata and lotus elise move the game on in that they show its possible to design a truely evocative ad great driving sportscar for a price.

In the end though, the new vette may only move the bang for the buck game on, as vettes despite their flaws have for decades, no bad thing but it is what it is. Were hoping for more than that, like styling, weight/feedback so far thats a big big question mark..

 

Mr b, the 2017 GT is a refresh of the '05/'06? Bam, just like that your credibility is gone. LOL!

 

Some would argue the ME is 12 years too late to be considered "a game changer". The party has been going on since the 80's.

 

This car is going to be fantastic.

Big block American rumble in an American mid engine car.

What on earth is not to like?

 

Exterior design. I should have been more specific.

 

Thank you. You brought up cars that, IMO, were truly game changing (excepting the Ford GT's). What surprises me is the hard on some have for a car that is A. not released, B. no one knows the specs, and C. no one has driven. I just don't get it and to argue from a position of zero knowledge reeks of agenda....the C8 may suck...the C8 may be brilliant....., I surely don't know. But I do know that no one else knows either. Half full/half empty. The problem/challenge is to make a car that is wanted by a broad range of people. YOU want a light weight, NA track weapon and if Chevrolet delivers THAT, YOU will proclaim the car a success. But, that's not all they have to deliver, as the vast market could car less about that, so, like everything in this world, there will be compromises to the car and the buyers will make the call.

Of all the cars you mentioned, I think the pure definition of "game changer" was the 1st gen NSX. That car DID make Ferrari and Lamborghini change their game. I can imagine Honda engineers driving the Ferraris/Lamborghinis of the mid 1980's and thinking: "This is the state of the art? We can make better cars than these in our sleep."

And what car company is GM benchmarking, based on cars seen running around with C8's? Porsche. Not a Ferrari or Ford GT or Lamborghini or McLaren in sight. But 911 Turbo S? Yes indeed.

 

Your a real piece of work. I never attacked you personally but that seems to be the best you can come back with. Therefore it appears to me that your the one trying to lecture and think more highly of themselves than they should. No agenda, I don't like the direction of the C8 from what I have seen and you do. What's your problem? No I did not go google something just to shove it at you. And magazine results are nothing more than bench racing. Like I said a couple back. Enough on the past and back to the C8. IF you want to start a new historical corvette thead where you and I fight it out I am all game if you start one. Otherwise I will leave this one as is and let the everyone get back to C8 talk.

 

Agreed on the NSX,but then look how honda totaly blew it on the new one, from styling to the whole concept. Granted the origional nsx did not meet its sales expectations so they went in a new direction, but wow what a miss.

On the C8, no one know for sure, but Gm has allegedly been developing this platform since before the recession, and they have been leakign infoi now in some detail for at least 1 year, while also delaying due to developmental issues. The leaks create expectation, maybe in some cases unrealitic, and they also provide real for for the mill.

Agreed the vette has to sell to a wide audience, and its also true that in may years there are more vettes sold than any other sportscar, so its a sucessful formula
and the goal is to make money, not necessaily and excellent car/game-changer.

Its inetresting that you say they benchmarked the 911 turbo, that is an example of information we have read not mere speculation. There is much other info about this car that rises above mere speculation, although not cofirmed. We know with soem reliability there will be no stick, that an evolved SBC will be the base mtoor and that there is a TTV8 ans well as a hybrid TTV8. We dont know what it will weigh but all indications are more than a C7. It also appears that from Gm relases this car has mega electronics, not just new epctronic architecture but lots of power load. That all woudl indiacte yest youre rigth about the 911turbo, which is in may ways the elast desireable 911 these days.

Going with the 911 anlogy, porche has 911 bandwith from the Gt3 to a turbo, light to heavy, evocative motor track ready to a sledgehammer and everything in between. I hope vette in time can do the same. One thing we have seen with vette sales is they sell well for 3 years then percipetrpously decline ven with special models. The C7 special models got more powerful and heavier, there was no nadwidth in the other direction. Sometimes you need to go lihgt an real track ready even if you only sell a few thousand because thats the halo effect that allows the buriser to sell to people who dont really sue performance other than to walter mitty.

p[orche also saw how the 996 with fried egg headlights and crapo interior was cost cutting too far, and rolled out the vastly improved version of the platform in the 997. Vette did the same with C6 to C7 but it was heavier and bui;ld was stil well vette.

in fact I'm trying to think of any Gmn car with a truly great interior. True some caddies have good materials in parts, but really questionable ones in others, and interior concept is questionable. So will the C8 up the game on build and interior materials executtion. i think we all have reason to question this. The riposte is that a vette is built toa price, bt as I always day if hyundai can doa great interior so can Gm, and even a 70K base vette is not cheap.

The C8 imo may look applealing, a laferrari front ned and various other bits. the C7 had cohesive design, hopefully this car will too, or it may be c5 which was car where the front end looked to be done bya different team to the rear. It may be heavy platform therefore irredeemable for those of us who look towards the Gt3 911 rather than the tutrbo, or it could have baked in goodness so thata Gt3 and turbo are bot possible. the interior may well be improved, but could still be well vette.

Given its a Gm product and Gm inetrefres with ts product teams and lacks singularity of vision, its quite possible that while the car is somewhat dramatic looking like the NXS it does not sustain styling wise, its possible that as we saw with the C7 its heavier and seeks to decieve perfomamce wise with bigger tires, more power, in otehr words a pre recession supercar.

It may well be a car designed to still suit its aging demographic while being Me to try lure youger euro buyers. Its hard to be all things to all people, the 911 range comes pretty close. Given Gms past bumblings across their whole product range(esp cadillac and camaro), its fair to be concerned and more than an even bet this car is a miss for those of us who have decamped to "finer" machineary which in theory this vette is trying to appeal to, esp with the 30-45 yo demographic who buys euro cars.

 

^^^^^
Agreed. The new NSX will go down in history as a "how you don't do it" example, from showing it WAY too early (Superbowl 2012 with the great Seinfeld/Leno commercial) to making it ridiculously complex. There is a $20,000 (!) rebate on the NSX now....I'm sure Honda NEVER thought they would have to incentive the NSX to sell even a paltry number of them.

As far as the C8's weight, there are lots of reports about material usage (new magnesium alloys, etc) in the car. We will have to see. I hope the car is lighter than a C7, we'll know soon enough. And there's no question the days of Corvette generations lasting 9 years (or more in the case of the C3/C4) is gone.

 

Did you see the guesses of the weights on the Vette forum. Most aren't guessing much under 3400. I think its going to be 3500+

If its slower 0-60 than the C7 is a major fail so you know it won't be.

 

Don't lecture....you don't know enough about this subject to preach (assuming you are NOT part of the 2016 GT development team).

 

You’re saying the exterior design of the new GT is just a refresh of the ‘05-‘06 GT?

 

Guesses of weight are just that guesses.
It will be quicker 0-60 and in the 1/4 for sure. The SBC will be up to 500hp, but more importantly a 7 gear paddle is going to make any car quicker just because thats what a paddle and lots of gears does.

Back to the weight and whole concept issue. The performance game these days is very much about weight loss, and stiff tub, we see that most notably at Mclaren and ferrari, for now Lambo is getting away with relative weight, but they did cut a some weight from the hurrucan evo.
That being said the porker 911 actualy put on weight this time for the new car.

Its interesting also because a Me car is hardley ever a Gt car, yet the C8 has to essentialy be a Gt for the majority of its audience. Lots of decsions and not more than a few compromises. Still maybe they have built in platform flexibility.

 

If you're going to quote me, at least put it in context. Another poster decided to lecture me about Corvettes, culminating with a statement about how the 1978 Trans Am W72 was faster than the 1978 Corvette L82. Which is, of course, wrong.
What I KNOW about the New GT is that, styling wise, it is OBVIOUSLY a Ford GT, I could see the car in silhouette and know it was a Ford GT. If "refresh" is too strong a word, how about "strong family resemblance" or "modern interpretation"? No doubt the mechanicals are totally different which is why I posted again, specifying the styling.

 

Half of Corvette Forum believed the $169,900 price quote, so I don't think I'd give that much credence.