Chevrolet considering twin-turbo V6 for next Corvette

[SVT666]

Isn't mid-engine.  I want paying attention when I clicked "post".

[SVT666]

Fucking blackberry.

[sportyaccordy]

Not to mention the GT-R.

This was lol worthy.

But yea, a twin turbo V6 4 seater mid engined car sounds... French most realistically, European at best and in no way like an evolution of the Vizzette. I think it would be a cool engineering exercise by GM, but there's no way they could do it for the price of the current Corvette (or anywhere close).

I think if they tossed the leaf springs & x-frame body there could be some cool Vette based cars. A Cadillac branded 4 door Vette based hatch would be incredible. New CTS?

[68_427]

short lived halo car, a la the Ford GT.

The Ford GT ceased production due to new safety regs implemented in 2007.  I think Ford would have produced more if they could have.

[Vinsanity]

I have to admit, a big part of me would love to see something resembling a Corvette with a longitudally-mounted LS7 displayed through the glass fastback rear hatch

but yeah, no AWD, no V6, and no rear seats. All of that is just crazy talk.

[GoCougs]

This was lol worthy.

But yea, a twin turbo V6 4 seater mid engined car sounds... French most realistically, European at best and in no way like an evolution of the Vizzette. I think it would be a cool engineering exercise by GM, but there's no way they could do it for the price of the current Corvette (or anywhere close).

I think if they tossed the leaf springs & x-frame body there could be some cool Vette based cars. A Cadillac branded 4 door Vette based hatch would be incredible. New CTS?

Three is a LOT of unnecessary expense in those goofy leaf springs, the plastic body panels, the space frame and the rear tranny + torque tube. It's all pretty much worthless.

I think GM could build a car like that which 565 pines for about Corvette money; look at the Camaro SS and upcoming Z-28 for what GM can do for $30k - $48k.

For example I think a lightened version of the Zeta chassis with AWD and TTV6 could be done for $50-60k; won't be GT-R performance but I bet it could match C6 objective performance and be a much better car (just don't call it 'Corvette').

[sportyaccordy]

Three is a LOT of unnecessary expense in those goofy leaf springs, the plastic body panels, the space frame and the rear tranny + torque tube. It's all pretty much worthless.

I think GM could build a car like that which 565 pines for about Corvette money; look at the Camaro SS and upcoming Z-28 for what GM can do for $30k - $48k.

For example I think a lightened version of the Zeta chassis with AWD and TTV6 could be done for $50-60k; won't be GT-R performance but I bet it could match C6 objective performance and be a much better car (just don't call it 'Corvette').

Bear in mind though, the Camaro's platform, for what I understand, was already developed in Australia. IIRC, it's basically the GTO II, no? Plus GM itself is still subsidized. I don't think the Camaro is representative of what  565 is envisioning here development wise.

And "better car" is highly subjective? Cheaper than a base Corvette? No. Cheaper than a Z06? Still probably not. Plus the car would be so different in character than a Corvette, outside of the performance envelope I don't know that they'd be comparable. Is the GT-R a better car than the Corvette? It depends who you ask. It's definitely faster around a race track, but personally beyond that I hate it. Likewise I'm sure there are people who like/hate both, and love the GT-R but hate the Corvette. Objectively they're too dissimilar to make such a statement.

I am not sure what the Zeta chassis is, but if its the Camaro chassis there's no way they could lighten it + reconfigure it for MR, develop a new-to-GM TTV6, and develop a GT-R rivaling AWD system, and make a profit at even $70K, unless they threw an electric motor between the engine + tranny and called it a performance hybrid + got more federal funding for it.

[Tave]

The Zeta chassis is the platform underpinning the Camaro. As you guessed, it was borrowed from Holden of Australia, where it has been in production since 2006.

[SVT666]

GM should just build a new Fiero.  A tiny little two seat mid-engined V6 sports car.

[GoCougs]

Bear in mind though, the Camaro's platform, for what I understand, was already developed in Australia. IIRC, it's basically the GTO II, no? Plus GM itself is still subsidized. I don't think the Camaro is representative of what  565 is envisioning here development wise.

And "better car" is highly subjective? Cheaper than a base Corvette? No. Cheaper than a Z06? Still probably not. Plus the car would be so different in character than a Corvette, outside of the performance envelope I don't know that they'd be comparable. Is the GT-R a better car than the Corvette? It depends who you ask. It's definitely faster around a race track, but personally beyond that I hate it. Likewise I'm sure there are people who like/hate both, and love the GT-R but hate the Corvette. Objectively they're too dissimilar to make such a statement.

I am not sure what the Zeta chassis is, but if its the Camaro chassis there's no way they could lighten it + reconfigure it for MR, develop a new-to-GM TTV6, and develop a GT-R rivaling AWD system, and make a profit at even $70K, unless they threw an electric motor between the engine + tranny and called it a performance hybrid + got more federal funding for it.

The Zeta point I was trying to make was that GM can leverage an appropriate traditional chassis from elsewhere.

As to other practical barriers are legion but I was just thinking in theory; the economies of scale and scope primarily are there.

The Corvette is not a good car when it comes to ride, fit/finish, and refinement. All of this would be addressed in spades by using a more traditional chassis layout.

[Vinsanity]

The Corvette is not a good car when it comes to ride, fit/finish, and refinement. All of this would be addressed in spades by using a more traditional chassis layout.

But its traits as a sports car would be compromised. Those objectives would be important if say, Cadillac wanted another go at the XLR, but they're secondary on the Corvette.

[GoCougs]

But its traits as a sports car would be compromised. Those objectives would be important if say, Cadillac wanted another go at the XLR, but they're secondary on the Corvette.

Which traits? Virtually no other sports cars are space frame + plastic body panels + leaf springs.

[Vinsanity]

Aren't the space frame chassis and fiberglass body used to keep the car's weight low? That would be pretty important in a sports car. And IIRC, the Corvette's leaf spring design is unique to the car, and given its specs and geometry, actually results in superior handling compared to coil springs.

[SVT666]

Aren't the space frame chassis and fiberglass body used to keep the car's weight low? That would be pretty important in a sports car. And IIRC, the Corvette's leaf spring design is unique to the car, and given its specs and geometry, actually results in superior handling compared to coil springs.

No way.  The leaf springs are what is blamed for the squirrelly handling when at the limit.

[sportyaccordy]

Yea I can't see a metal beam having the same linearity in response as a spring over the same displacements. Like Cougs once said I think that's a big part of why they developed the magnetic shocks for the C6. I hear the C4 rode like a dump truck. I would bet conventional springs would handle + ride better. Some traditions aren't worth keeping.

[Vinsanity]

I skimmed wiki's Corvette article, and caught mention that the leaf springs were introduced on the C4 for improved handling, but at the expense of a jarring ride quality.

[sportyaccordy]

I don't see how leaf springs/torsion bars could improve either TBH

[GoCougs]

The 911 has less power and weighs more yet is just as quick/fast; superior traction, better power band, better tranny/shifting, chief among the reasons.

Go look at the average C6 - you can spot inconsistent body panel gaps at 10 paces, and like all Corvettes there's all sorts of shimmy and shake.

Those leaf springs absolutely blow chunks and exist solely because they are a legacy throwback dating all the way back to the first C2 of 1963.

[sportyaccordy]

The 911 has less power and weighs more yet is just as quick/fast; superior traction, better power band, better tranny/shifting, chief among the reasons.

I don't know about a better power band, but pretty much everything else you listed as an advantage is due to the added $$$$$ put into the 911's parts, or the fact that the engine hangs off the back and aids in braking and accelerating. A base Carrera is a good $25K more, 300lbs less and only 60 HP down on a C6, with superior launch traction and better engineered parts. With all that it wouldn't make sense for it not to perform about as well.

[Vinsanity]

I don't see how leaf springs/torsion bars could improve either TBH

it appears I was mistaken regarding the handling benefits; it looks like most of the advantages are related to lower weight:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corvette_leaf_spring#Advantages

[GoCougs]

I don't know about a better power band, but pretty much everything else you listed as an advantage is due to the added $$$$$ put into the 911's parts, or the fact that the engine hangs off the back and aids in braking and accelerating. A base Carrera is a good $25K more, 300lbs less and only 60 HP down on a C6, with superior launch traction and better engineered parts. With all that it wouldn't make sense for it not to perform about as well.

My point being that the 911 achieves relatively low weight - only ~100lbs more than the C6 while being both larger and a 4-seater - without the more expensive space frame, plastic body panels and leaf springs.

[sportyaccordy]

My point being that the 911 achieves relatively low weight - only ~100lbs more than the C6 while being both larger and a 4-seater - without the more expensive space frame, plastic body panels and leaf springs.

The 911 is about as much of a 4 seater as the C6. The only reason they were able to fit that parcel shelf between the front seats and the rear shock towers is because the engine hangs behind the rear axle. In the C6, from what I understand, the front seats are basically resting on the rear shock towers (making rear seats an impossibility)

Not to mention, the base 911 costs about 70% more than the base C6. I agree that there's stuff the C7 should do away with, but it shouldn't look to the 911 for ideas. They won't work.

[Tave]

My point being that the 911 achieves relatively low weight - only ~100lbs more than the C6 while being both larger and a 4-seater - without the more expensive space frame, plastic body panels and leaf springs.

The 911 and the Corvette are almost exactly the same size.

It also has a smaller engine, a much more compact drivetrain, and (probably the most important part) commands a 63% premium over the Corvette.



The more you guys insist on comparing the Corvette to cars that cost WAY more than it, the more I think you're beyond bonkers if you believe GM can build this hypothetical Uber-Vette for a reasonable price tag.

[565]

Uh yes, of course. We're talking about dollar/performance and affordability for middle class buyers.

YOU contended that GM can build an affordable, AWD, twin-turbo charged, mid-engined Vette, and then you offered the GT-R as an example of such a car.

The PAINFULLY obvious flaw in your argument is the fact that the GT-R is nowhere near affordable to most anyone. In other words, your hypothetical Vette is, BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION, likely to cost at least TWICE what the current car costs.

Considering that the VAST majority of Corvettes purchased are...wait for it...NOT Z06s or ZR-1s, and are in fact the $50K run-of-the-mill Vette's, your suggestion is the automotive equivalent of seppuku. You would be alienating almost every buyer and eviscerating the very concept that the brand was built on: that of the Everyman's sports car. The Corvette would not last 10 years after such a change. At most, you'd be talking about a limited run of a very cool, but nonetheless short lived halo car, a la the Ford GT.

The GT-R compares with the Z06, a supposed performance bargain.  The Z06 has all the favorable things going for it to be a performance bargain as well, being based off a cheaper model.  And yet still the GT-R manages to perform better for similar prices.

I already gave a good car to compare to the base vette, the BMW M3, which starts at a similar price, performs similarly.  

You need to reconsider why the Corvette sells.  It's not some sort of brand loyalty.  We know how much good brand loyalty did for American cars like cadillacs and Tauruses.  It's not just because it's affordable, because many many cars are very affordable like the Cavalier, and we know how well that sold.  The thing that drives Corvette sales is VALUE.  The ONLY real reason why it sold in recent years is because it performed like cars costing twice as much.  There used to be a time that NOTHING could touch the Corvette's performance bang for the buck.  That is simply no longer true today.  Look at all the competition that has sprung up around the Corvette.  We are at a point when Corvette needs a major overhaul to stay competitive.

[565]

No way.  The leaf springs are what is blamed for the squirrelly handling when at the limit.

No the leaf springs are fine.  The squirrely limit is really mostly seen on the Z06's because of not enough shock tuning and the basic fact that the C5/C6 chassis is now about 15 years old and has a torsional rigidity of about 25hz, while modern sports coupes and sedans are more than twice as stiff (50+hz). 

[SVT666]

The GT-R compares with the Z06, a supposed performance bargain.  The Z06 has all the favorable things going for it to be a performance bargain as well, being based off a cheaper model.  And yet still the GT-R manages to perform better for similar prices.

I already gave a good car to compare to the base vette, the BMW M3, which starts at a similar price, performs similarly.  

You need to reconsider why the Corvette sells.  It's not some sort of brand loyalty.  We know how much good brand loyalty did for American cars like cadillacs and Tauruses.  It's not just because it's affordable, because many many cars are very affordable like the Cavalier, and we know how well that sold.  The thing that drives Corvette sales is VALUE.  The ONLY real reason why it sold in recent years is because it performed like cars costing twice as much.  There used to be a time that NOTHING could touch the Corvette's performance bang for the buck.  That is simply no longer true today.  Look at all the competition that has sprung up around the Corvette.  We are at a point when Corvette needs a major overhaul to stay competitive.

You're right.  It does need a complete overhaul, but it doesn't need be a completely different class of car.  It's not a Corvette anymore if you do that.  It needs to stay V8 F/R 2 seat stylish sports car.  It's just that for the last 26 years, the Vette's shadow hasn't changed and it's got a shitty interior, shitty seats, and is generally considered a toy in a time when people aren't buying toys.  The last one being a big reason to the recent sales slump.

[Tave]

You need to reconsider why the Corvette sells.  It's not some sort of brand loyalty.  We know how much good brand loyalty did for American cars like cadillacs and Tauruses.  It's not just because it's affordable, because many many cars are very affordable like the Cavalier, and we know how well that sold.  The thing that drives Corvette sales is VALUE.  The ONLY real reason why it sold in recent years is because it performed like cars costing twice as much.

And your solution is to offer a car which costs twice as much as the current car and performs like cars that cost twice as much as the current car?

[Raza]

Comparison of the GT-R to the base vette?  When the GT-R falls somewhere between the 75K Z06 and the 115K ZR1 in performance while having the added bonus of 2 seats, more safety features, more tech toys, and all weather ability?

Worse looks, automatic transmission, fixed roof, and inferior drivetrain setup thrown in for free!

[Raza]

The 911 and the Corvette are almost exactly the same size.

It also has a smaller engine, a much more compact drivetrain, and (probably the most important part) commands a 63% premium over the Corvette.

Actually, if we're counting, I do believe the 997 is longer than the Corvette. 

[Tave]

Actually, if we're counting, I do believe the 997 is longer than the Corvette. 

Yes, exactly 1" longer, 1.4" narrower, and 2.5" taller.