"Blue Devil" Corvette - Front or Mid-Engine?

[Rob]

More and more rumors seem to be floating around about a super-high performance Corvette that will excel above and beyond the 2006 Z06 soon to debut. Out of curiosity, do you think this "Blue Devil" should be mid-engine or front-engine? Why or why not?

 

[Tom Bryant]

Ok. I'll jump in first.

I don't see where mid engine makes much sense anymore in a GT type car. With the materials and packaging used in the Corvette today achieving a perfect 50/50 weight distribution is easy. Plus you get a roomy, comfortable and quiet passenger compartment. You also get decent luggage space for a sports car.

Back in the 60s and 70s when the rage was mid engine a serious high performance American car had a iron big block out front causing a nose heavy car that liked to plow into the corners. By putting the engine behind the driver in the middle of the chassis you could balance the handling and improve traction and lateral g force.

The big drawbacks with the mid engine design were you still needed to cool the car so the radiator and the forward possitioned driver compartment used up the space vacated by the engine and there was very little space left to stick a few pieces of soft luggage. The engine was sitting a mere few inches behind your head making a lot of noise and heat. Sure these cars were fun but owners of C5 and C6 Corvettes that are used to speed, handling and comfort would not put up with this type of car for too long. Modern insulation and other materials used today would make building a mid engine car much more practical than 30 years ago but the basic layout just isn't going to make for a lot of happy campers. The current crop of mid engine cars from around the world are low production niche cars intended to appeal to a very limited segment of the market or just to be image leaders (Ford GT)

If mid engine was still a viable alternative to the front engine performance car why then were there no mid engine cars beating up on the C5R over the last several years? Lord knows Ferrari could have built whatever layout they wanted to race against the Corvette but they chose front engine too.

Tom

 

[Hib Halverson]

If there is going to be a "Blue Devil" type of product branded a Corvette...which is very unlikely, at least in the forseeable future....it'll be front engine.

 

[lov-n-life]

If there is going to be a "Blue Devil" type of product branded a Corvette...which is very unlikely, at least in the forseeable future....it'll be front engine.

After racing a mid-engine car and "playing" with my C5, I agree that the current handling package is exceptional for a 50/50 weight distribution. That being said, I think if GM makes an "exotic" sports car such as the Blue Devil, it should be a mid-engine car. Although the handling characteristics between my mid-engine Boxster and the Corvette are very similiar, the Boxster's shorter polar moment made for much crisper response when at the razor's edge of handling. Putting the tail out or sucking it in was a matter of thinking about what you wanted the car to do. In contrast, the longer polar moment of the Corvette does not feel as predictable (to me anyways) when at the limits. The benefit of the Corvettes longer polar moment is that when the car begins to drift, the rotation is very slow (in comparison to a mid-engine) and so it does not require as much experience to control or recover from a spin. Whereas a mid-engine is going to turn around and bite you in the arse before you even realize you've exceeded the car's limits. That challenge is what draws me to mid-engine cars though. The need to be so attuned to the car that you feel an impending spin or drift and use it to your advantage. In the Corvette I don't require the same connection, so I am less attuned to the car. If it starts to come undone I feel like I can time the spin with calendar. Still being accustomed to the mid-engine car, I've already countered the car's rotation before it ever gets out of line. I suppose this is safer, but not quite as much fun (challenging). Just my 2 cents.

 

[warren s]

Price will always be an ultimate consideration in the construction of any GM car that becomes available for public sale. As the Z-06 already has almost perfect balance it would be much easier to build off the current platform than to create a totally new one to support a mid engine configuration.



Mid engine would be “exotic and cool” but it would remove one of the Corvettes claims to fame, that of being the cost Vs. performance leader. For that reason I would vote for front engine.

 

[Eric]

I'm with Warren. Front engine just makes fiscal sense since the bulk of the design is already there and has proven successful in recent models with all of the advances in technology. Mid-engine just for the sake of being able to say "ooh mid-engine equals exotic" is no reason to go mid.

Plus, if the car has to use a completely different drivetrain configuration not to mention frame mods to permit a mid-engine, then could it really be called a Corvette? IMHO that answer is no.

 

[motorman]

More and more rumors seem to be floating around about a super-high performance Corvette that will excel above and beyond the 2006 Z06 soon to debut. Out of curiosity, do you think this "Blue Devil" should be mid-engine or front-engine? Why or why not?

i doubt this will happen because the word around motor city is ford is loosing their ass on the GT-40 because of cost over runs.

 

[MCMLVII]

I vote for mid-engine.

Walk around a Ford-GT and you start to tighten your racing gloves.

This is about marketing strategy.

I am a big Corvette fan. But have me pick a C-6, a Viper or a Ford GT for my garage, it would be the GT hands down.

NowI will go hide.


MCMLVII

 

[wallyknoch]

I heard last night the new "R" Vette will be 500 HP+, and no mention of a possible mid engine car.

 

[abowtieguy]

I think the "Blue Devil" and "zo6-R" might be the same car from all the rumors going around. It wouldn't surprise me that GM is working on a mid engine car to go against the Ford GT but I don't think it will wear the "Corvette" name and probably cost as much as the Ford GT. To keep with tradition and affordability I would keep the Vette front engine, it's a proven winner. That's just my opinion.

Doug

 

[The Drakester]

And that would be $60K, $80K and $130+K respectively. As much as I love the Styling of the Ford GT - I loved it in 64 too!-- I'd opt for the New ZO6 if I was spending my money. If I'm spending yours, OK, I'll take the Ford.

 

[MCMLVII]

Corvette -Front of Mid Engine

And that would be $60K, $80K and $130+K respectively. As much as I love the Styling of the Ford GT - I loved it in 64 too!-- I'd opt for the New ZO6 if I was spending my money. If I'm spending yours, OK, I'll take the Ford.

I do not think this is a money issue. It is a matter of market placement and preception.

You and I are impressed with the Ford GT. I think the Blue Devil is something other than the New Z06. Why not stretch the envelope. If that is true, mid-engine seems the way to go. Zora and Larry Shandoa could never make the sell on mid engine. But they both wanted them and they had a good eye for market desires.

The GT got me into a Ford dealership just to find out how I could get one. Fat chance, even if I could come up with the money and slide it by my wife.


MCMLVII

 

[Tom73]

Out of curiosity, do you think this "Blue Devil" should be mid-engine or front-engine? Why or why not?

Just to stir the pot a bit, but all new Vettes are "mid-engined". A mid-engined car is one where the engine is between the axles.

I assume that by "mid engined" you are refering to a rear mid-engine rather than the current front mid-engine.

tom...

 

[Hib Halverson]

I vote for mid-engine.

Walk around a Ford-GT and you start to tighten your racing gloves.

This is about marketing strategy.

I am a big Corvette fan. But have me pick a C-6, a Viper or a Ford GT for my garage, it would be the GT hands down.

NowI will go hide.


MCMLVII

Oh, please...spare me.

The Ford GT is an image car that weighs way too much for the price and has an engine that is so poorly designed it needs a supercharger to make 550hp because it can't rpm.

Tighten your racing gloves...
LOL
...I'll pass yer candy-butt on the inside driving a Z06 barehanded.

On second thought, I'll probably never get the chance becuase once the idiots who pay the price of the Ford GT find out they're getting their butts waxed by a car half the price and weighing 300 lbs less they'll just leave those pretty-looking GTs in the garage.

 

[froggy47]

And that would be $60K, $80K and $130+K respectively. As much as I love the Styling of the Ford GT - I loved it in 64 too!-- I'd opt for the New ZO6 if I was spending my money. If I'm spending yours, OK, I'll take the Ford.

You'd be lucky to get a GT for sticker, they're on ebay @ $200k

 

[MCMLVII]

Oh, please...spare me.

The Ford GT is an image car that weighs way too much for the price and has an engine that is so poorly designed it needs a supercharger to make 550hp because it can't rpm.

Tighten your racing gloves...
LOL
...I'll pass yer candy-butt on the inside driving a Z06 barehanded.

On sedond thought, I'll probably never get the chance becuase once the idiots who pay the price of the Ford GT find out they're getting their butts waxed by a car half the price and weighing 300 lbs less they'll just leave those pretty-looking GTs in the garage.

That is the point, it is an IMAGE CAR. I know my driving skills are limited. I don't try to race everything on the road. But this is how the GT makes me feel. Hands down it looks, IMHO, a whole lot neater than the C-6.

As for them being kept in the garage, I see them on the road quite often around here and each time something "sparks". That is not happening for me with the C-6. If GM is building a "BLUE DEVIL", it will be an image car, why not have it stir up some real excitement.

I am still a big Corvette fan, but ....


MCMLVII

 

[Tom73]

That is the point, it is an IMAGE CAR. I know my driving skills are limited. I don't try to race everything on the road. But this is how the GT makes me feel. Hands down it looks, IMHO, a whole lot neater than the C-6.

That is the problem with Ford right now, everything that they are doing is retro. The new GT, Mustang, Thunderbird, 500, etc, etc, all are retro. You can live in the past for only so long before the rest of the world runs over you.

The C6 carries "design clues" from the past but it does not try to look like a 40 year old car.

tom...

 

[Tom Bryant]

I would see GTs running in a group of 3 at about the same time every day on I69 in Michigan almost all summer. Of course these weren't sold units yet but they made your head snap around. I think that is the purpose of the car. I'm sure some will be driven to some extent but most are destined to be garage art. Just like the Ferraris you see in dealer showrooms that are 3-4 years old with only a couple hundred miles on them. Some are actually enjoyed, most are just looked at.

If I could afford a GT I'd put it on a 2 year 15,000 mile annual lease and turn it back in at the end with every one of those 30,000 miles used up. I wonder how it would do in the snow?

Tom

 

[Ol Blue]

Interesting thread!! As a long, (spell that L O N GGGGGtime) Corvette owner, I too have watched Zora try to sell his mid-engine concept, only to come up short, for political, cost and the very real comfort reasons mentioned above.

Still, IF there is any substance to the Blue Devil rumor as a high-dollar Corvette, I think it has to stretch the imagination and not be a based on a stock-bodied C6. That brings me to wonder what kind of connection, if any, is there between GM and the Daytona Prototype series. A good way to work out the details on the viability of a mid-engine sports car....mechanically anyway. http://www.fastdetails.com/grand_am/94872/04Day_05.jpg


Hib, any thoughts or inside scoop on the Daytona Prototypes series?
Ol Blue

 

[tomtom72]

Hi All, I voted for mid-engined because I think if GM builds it they want to aim it directly at the Ford GT and it's ilk. Kind of like a 'one ups manship' type of thing. I know that from a business sense it is a waste of resourses to build a product with that narrow a market and so many choices already in that segment. I just remember what Ford did back in the 60's with the GT40 deal. That was corporate ups manship at it's egotistical best! What better way, if you have the spare change, to stick it to the competition just for bragging rights? That makes no sense but the GT40 deal made no sense either, they would have sold Mustangs anyway so what was the market strategy? We all know that it was Mr. Ford's ego after the Ferrari deal went south. The only thing I have trouble with is that GM is not structured like that...nothing is personal like at Ford back then...and to what aim does the excercise serve? Is GM that serious about prototype racing? I thought the C5R program was enough of a R & D platform for GM's corporate taste's and the developement of the C6? Another reason I doubt it is that the auto industry's $ outlook isn't exactly peachy keen right now. I can only think of reasons that don't make good corporate business sense to spend $ on a project like that. JMHO Tom
If I could afford a GT40MkIV I'd buy it in a skinny minute, I just have to hit lotto first! The new Ford GT is probably better but it don't got the same soul.