C6 Platform Goals

[Rob]

As suggested in another post, what would your own personal C6 platform goals be in terms of:

1. Weight
2. Overall Size (in comparison to the current C5 or other models)
3. Production Options
4. Interior Options
5. Price
6. Colors
   [/list=1]
   
   Let's hear them!

 

[twiget]

This is gonna open a can of worms Rob.

IMO the perfect Corvette would be smaller than the current C5, hopefully loosing several hundred pounds, putting the curb weight below 3,000 lbs. While I'm not really willing to sacrifice interior room (I'm a big guy and barely fit in my GS), I'm more than willing to sacrifice storage space to make the car smaller.

With the large weight loss program should go a monster engine. The blown 427 in the tiger shark would be nice, but I think 700+ hp is a little much for a street car. 450+/- in a 3,000 lb car would make it fly! 6.6lbs per horsepower, that is fast!

Now to hadling, with todays technology I think it's very much with in the relm of possibility for a street car to pull well over 1.0G on the skid pad.

The interior is where I think some people might disagree with me. I think leather seats are a must, along with A/C. Whats the fun of driving a car if it's not comfortable? And personally I'm willing to sacrifice a little weight for a sound system. When I'm crusing around the tunes are a must! As for all the other extras like memory packages, the HUD, power mirrors... those can be left on the assymbly line, along with the automatic tranny. A true sports car should have a clutch and a stick to shift the gears with.

Jason

 

[Bullitt]

The first thing that I would like to do here is to list all the stuff that needs to see the trashbin or become an option so that everyone isn't stuck with the cost.

• Let's ditch the dual zone A/C. I can't believe something like this even exist in a small interior car.
• Get rid of those DRLs or make them an option. This was touted in the colder climates where in the winter, the daylight is shorter. Thus it would be safer. I don't know of one independant study that has actually proved this to be true. Just more R&D down the drain.
• Please, someone get rid of the foglamps. Since there is no criteria to set them at any angle concerning the car, why are they needed? They just seem to splash light 6 inches below the car line.
• This of course brings up the pop-up headlight issue. More weight can be saved and less electronic gremlins will be deleted with these. Fixed lights similar to the C5R design will really make the Corvette shine.
• Make HUD an option on the Z06, to get another price drop. Let those who want it, pay for it.
• Toss the "oil life" sensor. If you're too lazy to check the dipstick for old oil, drop the cupcakes and hoagies and give me 10 push-ups.
• Some may like it, but the Memory Packages are another thing I'd put on the chopping block. Just more options that end up increasing the production costs at the bottom line.
• Same deal with the "express down" power windows. Just another form of laziness.
• The multi-language display can go, too. Just more money senselessly spent.
• Radios are another issue that I'll bring up, but why do we have these "speed compensating volume controls?" I absolutely abhor this gadget. ad
• One more thing, why does GM charge $15 for a front license plate frame. I mean, c'mon! :eyerole

Ok, now to the good stuff. I know that the Corvette team spent alot of R&D making the valvetrain lighter and even hollowed out the valves for the Z06, so I think some of it can pass down to the Corvette line-up. The current valves at 2.01/ 1.55 have shown to be capable of handling 500 natural hp, so this is all good. We'll probably see some revised camshaft work in the evolution of the Z06, so again this current stuff should find it's way into the overall line-up. Where am I going with this valvetrain talk?Increased displacement! It's bound to happen sooner or later, so it might as well be sooner.

How much more do we need? Hmmm... I just want to see more, especially in the Z06. While the current 405hp is great, with the new Viper on the horizon, this is what I think we all want. There's no use in just bumping it up a few inches, to just play catch up to the 'ol Snake. It's going to be diificult on the exhaust side, with emissions testing, but if Dodge can do it, surely the General can. Let me start another list.

• More displacement. 383? 400? 409? Let's see some more! 427!
• Lighter weight. While the Z06 turns in at 3131, getting down to 3000 for every Corvette is a great cornerstone that should be achieved. Getting rid of the aforementioned junk will really help and should not cost too much.
• Another rear gear option. Let's try a 3.60 or something like that. This is a throw back to the 'ol days. If they can't get it to fly on the showroom, intergrate into an over-the-counter system that will not void the warranty.
• Stainless steel headers. I think every BMW has them, even the small ones, so why doesn't America's Sportscar? More hp, lighter weight! Where can you go wrong?
• Right now the Corvette has a power-to-weight ratio of 271.13bhp per ton. Let's jump it up to 300.
• Tighten up the overall length. 179 is kinda big, so let's chop a few inches.
• A radio delete option should be available. The factory can keep the same harness, but the customer should decide on the tunes. Like I mentioned, aftermarket stereos are usually better in this department.
• I want to see a dash that is something to similar to a TVR 500 Griffith. I know it's not for everyone, but aluminum panels do make a ride look good. This was done in early Trans Ams, but it can't be done as an afterthought. It has to be solid. I'll try to find a pic, so you guys can understand what I'm talking about.
• The exterior needs a hood similar to the Tiger Shark or the C5R. With it and some engineering, I think the Corvette can make better use of the intake tract.
• Overall, the car needs stronger lines. Sleek down that rear and sharpen up the profile. Though I have seen Lingenfelter's body kits, I think they're a bit too much boy racer. However, it does hint a better design that should be achieved.

Whew! My hands hurt. I'll stop for now and add some other thoughts as they come. I'll also get around to a price figure. In short, I want to see "Billy Bob" come back with Z06 enhanced power and more dispalcement. It's time the Corvette jumped to the forefront and kicked some serious a**!!! --Bullitt

 

[Bullitt]

Yeah, that's the goal, Keith. Make the stuff optional. Like the saying goes, "Speed cost money. How fast do you want to go?" As far as most of us are concerned, I think, the electronic gadetry is just fluff that not everyone should have to incur just to get the performance option, as it is now. --Bullitt

 

[Bullitt]

I agree with the packaging concerns, that's why I want to see a over-the-counter program in which the parts will not void the warranty. Some say that the present is better than the glory days of the past, and to some extent they're right with the leaps in technology and parts networking in the aftermarket. One large factor being left out is how in the past, you could order a stripped down version of a car with a hot rod motor. Then you could go to your dealership and buy whatever additional parts you want to upgrade your ride. I think if GM can match aftermarket prices, it could really see a sweet return on it's investment. --Bullitt

 

[twiget]

Originally posted by Racer78
I set in a really sweet 99, 6 speed coupe with 10k miles today, my dealer friends says: "if you drive it, you will own one".

I fear he is right, I did not drive it

I dont know that that is true Keith. I took a '98 hardtop for a test drive about a year and a half ago, shortly before I found my GS. It was definatly a kick in the pants compaired to my old '78, but as my signature can atest to, I dont own a red '98 FRC.

So take heart, for as awesome the C5's are, they can be resisted... not easliy (I really was ready to buy that car) but they can be.

Bullit,

For the most part I agree with your statements of what should and should not be in the C6. With a few exceptioins. First I like the express down feature on the windows. The less time I have to keep my fingers on the down switch the less time I have my hand off the steering wheel.

The daytime running lights I like. For two reasons, one my insurance gives a discount for having them. And two, while there dont seem to have been any studies to prove it, I have noticed that I see a car with DLR's before I see a car with out. Now it's not out of any safety concern that I like having the DLR's, I just like having people notice my car.

Jason

 

[Bullitt]

Jason, one of the problems that I have noticed with DLRs are that sometimes the drivers are fooled by them. When they driving at twilight, some people are known not to bother switching their lights on at all. Well, they can see better out front because of the light up there, but they forget about the rear of the car. Perhaps this is an occurence that happens with new owners who have never or little experience with this system, but I do see it often. That's not to say of course, that there are morons who will drive in the "dark," regardless of their headlight system. What I hope would be accomplished with the deletion or option creation of this feature is to bring cost down overall. --Bullitt

 

[singledad_9]

For the C6, I think it's time for a mid engine. As long as it can come as a convertible. I also want the ability to switch from a soft ride (when I have a lady in the car) and firm ride when I'm having fun. A bigger engine would be great, but supercharger would be a reasonable compromise. I also would want a car that can out handle anything else on the road (before aftermarket).

 

[kfehling]

I got two words for the next Vette: paddle shifter.

OK, and maybe 450bhp (in all models) and <3000 pounds. As for DRLs, yeah you can see the car from a farther distance but you don't crash into them when they are far away. If you can't see the car when it is right in front of you, then you shouldn't be driving and DRLs aren't much help--ditch 'em!

 

[Tom73]

For the C6, I think it's time for a mid engine.

Why mid-engine? Look at Ferrari, they have gone back to front engine cars because they can get better packaging with that configuration.

tom...

 

[Bullitt]

True F1 derived paddle shift, as incorporated on the Ferrari 360, is not a cheap option. Many different components go into it's application, such as the clutch mechanism and the "automatic" mode. While it can be shifted manually, you can also drive without it, in the 360. The Porsche and Lexus versions are closer to the "his/her automatic shifter" of the '60s, which were very popular in Pontiacs. I think, and I could be wrong, but sequential transmissions maybe cheaper to incorporate. While not cheap when compared to a regular manual, they may be more feasible.

I would like to see mid-engine placement, but one of the biggest complaints is engine access. As Tom73 points out, the Ferrari 550 Maranello, has front engine placement. It's also considered one of the best road Ferraris in quite sometime. Not by some average magazine journalist, but by American Formula 1 Champion, Phil Hill, whom has a long and solid history with the Italian marque. Expect mid-engine placement some day, but I don't think it will happen with the C6.

Of course, all of these ideas are wants and desires, and more than welcomed. A healthy discussion such as this will hopefully further the cause of furthered performance and advancement of the C6. Don't hold back guys, keep those ideas coming. --Bullitt

 

[Rob]

Regarding Daytime Running Lights

From the CarConnection.com:

In an unprecedented action, General Motors is petitioning regulators to order the new safety hardware for vehicles sold in the U.S. Since 1997, all U.S. GM light-duty vehicles have been equipped with Daytime Running Lights, or DRLs, which stay on whenever the vehicle is running. "We think it's time to afford that safety benefit to all roadway users," said GM safety official Bob Lange, noting a study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration shows a seven-percent decline in accidents where DRLs could play a role. And NHTSA found a 29-percent drop in pedestrian fatalities involving DRL-equipped vehicles. Regulators appear receptive to the idea. The devices typically add $20 to $40 in cost, but they're already mandated in a number of countries, including Canada, which would make it easy to add DRLs on models also sold in the U.S., Lange noted. DaimlerChrysler is reportedly already working on its own DRL rollout plans.

 

[Bullitt]

GM safety official Bob Lange, noting a study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration shows a seven-percent decline in accidents where DRLs could play a role.

"Could" is the operative term here. Rob, is there a detailed analysis of the NHTSA study that I could view online? On the same note, by saving that $20-$40, maybe GM could throw in that license plate frame, instead. --Bullitt

 

[danl72]

I think the C6 should have more power. As far as the gissmos, I don;t care if they keep them or don't. It does not bother me because the bottom lone is that the C6 will be a more improved car due to advances in technology and development.

 

[Tom73]

What is a Mid-engine car? It is one where the engine is mounted somewhere between the axles. A rear engine car has the motor behind the rear axle. Front engine has the engine ahead of the axle. (Note: if any of the engine is ahead of the axle it is front engined.) The corvette has been mid engine car for years, since '63.

tom...

 

[sariana]

Drop the weight, boost the power, and give me all wheel drive! and I agree with comments on what should be "standard" and what should be option choices...make it unique in the industry...

and maybe pair the C6 with a slightly smaller (displacement and weight) sibling so we can kick the stuffing out of the Porsches and BMWs in the GT class too...

 

[Bullitt]

Welcome Sariana to the CACC, it's nice to see another new member joining in the debate.

Ok guys, now it's time to start talking money. Take your different options and configurations and put it into a ballpark figure. Will the current C5 price extend to the C6? Will it be lower or higher? Will there be a Super Corvette, etc., etc. ? Keep the ideas coming, but let's hammer down some figures, for fun. --Bullitt

 

[StillDreaming]

Weight 2500lbs
Same size car in general, just sits even lower, basically lowered from factory.

Same colors, maybe add a stripe option like the 1996 GS for all colors, or at least black, red, blue, and white.

0-60 in under 4.4 sec
stops 60-0 in under 100 ft.
1.0 lateral g
6-speed standard
top speed 200 mph
6.0 engine, 485+ hp
Front engine, rear wheel drive.
Perfect 50/50 weight distribution.
19 inch wheels on all four corners, 335/30-19 rears
Error or defect free....
Improved C5 body, make it look even better.... less than .29 cd
all for under $40,000
Keep it AMERICAN!!!!!!!!

 

[rjsmith]

I got two words for the next Vette: paddle shifter. /QUOTE]

Here here! If Ferrari can offer the F1 transmission so can Corvette.

The computer prevents over-revving the engine on downshifts and changes gears in 150 milliseconds. It is a $10,000 option on the 360 F1 Modena, should be about the same on a Z06.

Never take your hands off the steering wheel to shift ever again.

Ray