GM's V8 Production Down by Half - Should Next Gen Corvette Adopt a V6 to Keep Up with the Times?

[njlouc]

When you start hearing the rumblings of a V6 option for a vette - they are sending a message.

The message is clear. The govt/EPA doesn't want a "personal" sports/muscle car.
It's a bad image to the world. The liberals want you to feel guilty for success/freedom!
They want you to run electric.
The reason is that electricity is (to their mind) free and clean.

Rarely do I ever see anyone mention that a vette when driven like a Camry gets better MPG than a Camry.
When the (dolt) GM execs went to testify before congress, they never mentioned that they actually got some pretty good mileage across the board.
They should have gone to Washington with a caravan of Vettes getting 30 MPG!!! Instead of their fuel hog corp. jets.

I am amazed that the EPA doesn't declare V8's illegal altogether......... It's a different world out there.

My favorite, Mort Sahl said 45 years ago that if the govt built cars they would be 4dr grey Valiants.

I guess today it would have to be 4dr grey Volts.

 

[wolfuser]

keep the V8

a Corvette has never attempted to be a "reasonable", economy-minded car. Its character is very much focused around the small block V8, and I don´t think any attempt should be made to change this. There are enough cars with interchangeble personalities already.
By the way: remember Mustang II´s with their 2.8ltr V6?

 

[BigMike5]

V8 Corvette

My 04 coupe got 30 mpg right off the dealer's lot. It has 350 hp, more than enough for any situation I have ever encountered. GM should keep the V8 and back the HP down to 350 from the 405 or whatever the base model is at now if they want better mpg. Can't imagine why GM V8 production is off ....since they discontinued the Northstar several years ago, cancelled the XLR and generally have been forcing the DI6 into everything. What a revelation. Dumb. Don't do it. If I wanted an economy car I could get a Volt. I wanted a high performance sportscar so I got a Corvette. Keep the V8.

Oh yeah, and my wife's 09 CTS with the standard V6, and my 99 Chrysler 300M with a V6, both get less mpg by 3 or 4 than the Vette. So just being a V6 is not the answer to higher mpg.

 

[oscgolf]

Keep up with times...

There's been a lot of talk about how badly the Chevy Volt has been selling, let me voice in "Maybe because it's so damn expensive!!..."
But I think Corvette should consider an "All Electric" version and compete with the Tesla.

 

[Bill Boyle]

V8 Power all the way

Call me old fashioned or a traditionalist--I want and like V8 power. Keep the faith, baby. No need to change the number of cylinders or displacements on our American sports car.

 

[catbert]

Corvettes, especially the ZR1 have "super car" aspirations. Supercars have more than 8 cylinders, not fewer. I wouldn't mind a DOHC turbo six with a V8 or V12 option.

 

[LLC5]

I agree. I would hate to stop buying Corvettes. Put a V6 in one and I'll be done.

Gotta agree with that one. The sound and feel of a real V-8 (and I DO NOT mean any sound through the damn speakers, that is just a joke. Listening Germans?) is what makes a Corvette an icon, lose the sound and feel and it's over for me too . It would be similar to putting an inline 4 cylinder engine in a Harley. A V-6 would make it just like another rice burner (there is nothing wrong with those vehicles, but if I had wanted one I would have bought one).

 

[B747VET]

There's been a lot of talk about how badly the Chevy Volt has been selling, let me voice in "Maybe because it's so damn expensive!!..."
But I think Corvette should consider an "All Electric" version and compete with the Tesla.

Ah yes! There is nothing quite like the reverberating roar of 1,000 AAA batteries thundering up a twisty mountain road!

 

[Evolution1980]

As others have mentioned, there's lots of good arguments from both sides.

The question as stated isn't really as simple to answer as "yes or no" because it all depends on how much you want to read into it. I voted "Unsure" for that reason.

A lot of people have very personal ideas about what makes the Corvette a Corvette. And this love, while good, is different for everyone.
(The questions below can either be worded as "Did you..." or "Would you...")
Did you buy a vette for the "bang for the buck"? What determines "bang for the buck" and are there other cars that are close competitors given your personal criteria?
Did you buy a vette because it's American? Or more just because you won't buy "import"?
Did you buy it for the looks?
Did you buy it because you loved it as a kid and regardless of what it is now, you've had your heart set on getting one?
Did you buy it because overall it's less complex than other cars? (if you actually plan on turning your own wrench or expect to have it serviced)
Did you buy it as a status symbol?

Maybe just one or maybe many of these questions apply to potential buyers. And each question will be weighted differently.
For some, the V6 may be a good option. For others, not so much.

Here a few thoughts or questions in no particular order.

I've seen people talk about "that V8 sound". Is there a sound difference between engine types? Sure. And yes, you can typically hear the differences between the the layout and number of cylinders. But not even all Corvette V8's sound the same. I think the V8 sound of the Corvette has changed drastically over the decades. Does the C6 427 sound like a C3 427? Not even close at any RPM range. But that's a V8 sound, right, and that's all that matters! Right??? :eyerole There are so many factors that make a car's final note sound like it does, to be using such a generic line like "that V8 sound" carries little weight with me. It's different for everyone. What you like as a V8 sound is quite different than what I like or expect.

I've noted in other threads that over the years, people have complained about there not being enough options from the factory, but then any time the company starts offering more options, people start whining. I like "options" especially if it means selling more Corvettes.
We currently have 3 engine options. Base (350), Z06 (427), and ZR-1 (350 supercharged). So what's wrong with four options? Why didn't everyone buy the Z06 or ZR-1? Was it because you didn't need all that engine/car? Was it because it was too expensive? Whatever your reasons were for getting the base model, it fit your requirements, whatever they may be. And I bet you're happy as ever! So why try to take that away from someone that may only be able to afford a V6 model (assuming the purpose of the V6 is purely retail sticker pricing)? Would you look down on them? Do you think ZR-1 owners look down on base model owners? Maybe some do. But does that really change how you feel about owning your own Corvette?
For those that simply and vehemently state, "I wouldn't buy it!"....yeah, OK, so? You also didn't buy a ZR-1 but that didn't stop GM from making it. Nor did it stop GM from offering other RPO's that you didn't purchase. Generally speaking, you didn't buy any other car besides what you have. "Why?" It doesn't really matter what your answer is. You obviously aren't, or wouldn't be, the target market and thus they wouldn't be making it for you.

There's those that say, "The no replacement for displacement!" Really? 'Cause last time I checked, the ZR-1 was the better performing engine. (Yes, add more cubes to the LS9 and you'll have more power. But that's not the real argument in this particular case.)
For the sake of argument, let's just ignore the whole LS9 supercharged setup. If it's all about displacement, then why not just make a larger bore and stroked 6 cylinder?

As for the argument of being a leader versus being a follower...Sometimes we need to look at things from a slightly different perspective. Hell, let's learn from our history since we're probably going to repeat it.
Do you know why the Corvette brand is still around? Because we were following Ford. If it wasn't for the Thunderbird, the Corvette never would've made it out of the 1950's.
And why was engine size/displacement/power increased to a V8? Because we were *gasp!* following the Europeans! They were cleaning us up on the racetrack. So we had to figure out a way to compete. A bigger/better/faster engine was one of the ways to do that. Carrol Shelby took the idea one step further by creating a better chassis to handle the bigger engines.
So as far as "leading versus following", it doesn't really matter to me who develops the technology or 'standard' in the industry. If someone else does, fine. Let's either stick with our own designs and improve them, or take someone else's design and make it better ourselves; As long as we're competitive at a price point that the market can bear.

If it's all about the torque you get from more displacement or more specifically the low-end torque that eludes many in the anti-turbocharger camp, then we can go back to the larger bore 6-cylinder. Or, let's get really insulting and suggest a V6 diesel! hnoes "Whoa! You didn't just go there?!?!" Yes, I did.

Lastly, why isn't anyone clamoring for a V10 option? Is that overkill? I'm sure it has a phenomenal sound! And you can get some serious displacement from a V10! Whatever arguments you can make for V8/V10 you can take the other way with V8/V6.
It stands to reason in my mind that whatever you can do with a V8 you can do with a V6. And whatever you can do with a V6, you can do with a V10.

So should a Corvette have a 6-cylinder (note, I didn't state V, I, or even W configuration) option?
I'm unsure. It would all depend on GM's rationale for having it and where they focused their research. Their track record for researching the buying public's psyche is hit or miss.

 

[MarkusUT]

I don't think it makes sense to build a V6 Corvette because I doubt there would be enough demand for it. While a V6 could certainly be built that would have enough power, it's the sound that's the problem. My Buick T-Type was fast but sounded wimpy. A Corvette that sounded like that is just plain wrong.

 

[B747VET]

Chevrolet tried to turn the Corvette into a "chick car" years ago and almost destroyed the brand. Why do we think there is discussion of a V6 at GM? Is there a shortage of aluminum? Is there a shortage of steel? No, we have a situation in which some MBAs are brainstorming ways to make the Corvette more green and more acceptable to people who think the Fiero is a cute sports car.

Nobody at Aston Martin, Ferrari, or Lambo is trying to conduct such idiotic debates.

My 1st dream is a quad cam V12 Corvette. Next, a quad cam V8. Next, a V10 Corvette. Nowhere in those dreams is a V6 of any kind nor is a battery powered Corvette a proper fantasy. On the other hand, I recognize the amazing technology inherent in the current crop of LS engines and would be perfectly to happy live in that Corvette realm since I don't forsee any venture by GM into quads, 12's or 10's. But 6's?

The plain and simple truth is that you cannot cost effectively make a V6 perform exactly like a 400-500 HP LS V8. Anyone who thinks so simply hasn't done their research. High performance V6 engineering is fraught with many more problems that require bigger bucks to resolve. So, if it costs more to build and maintain a high performance V6 compared to a high performance V8 of the same power, why even pretend interest to go there unless the real goal is to try and make a more user friendly lower and safer powered and more green Corvette, which means no high power V6 will ever evolve.

Again, if it is a totally different named, framed, bodied, and engined smaller car similar to the Porsche Caymans, that might be OK as a venture into a different market. There might or might not be a market for such a car. I personally don't think there is profitable market for such a lower grade Corvette sub brand in the U.S.

However, putting a V6 of any kind ... short of a V6 racing engine (more expensive than a ZR-1 or ZO6 engine) ... in a Corvette serves no purpose other than to give the competition a leg up and lay the ground work for the eventual demise of the Corvette line as a serious world class car.

A V6 Corvette will be immediately nicknamed the Corvette Fiero. And, I can guarantee there are any number of exec MBAs at GM who would like nothing better. Let's not play into their hands and empower their desire to minimize all the R&D outlays required to maintain the Corvette as a world beater.

 

[Kid_Again]

Chevrolet tried to turn the Corvette into a "chick car" years ago and almost destroyed the brand. Why do we think there is discussion of a V6 at GM? Is there a shortage of aluminum? Is there a shortage of steel? No, we have a situation in which some MBA idiots are brainstorming ways to make the Corvette more green and more acceptable to people who think the Fiero is a cute sports car.

Nobody at Aston Martin, Ferrari, or Lambo is trying to conduct such idiotic debates.

My 1st dream is a quad cam V12 Corvette. Next, a quad cam V8. Next, a V10 Corvette. Nowhere in those dreams is a V6 of any kind nor is a battery powered Corvette a proper fantasy.

The plain and simple truth is that you cannot cost effectively make a V6 perform like a V8. Anyone who thinks so simply hasn't done their research. High performance V6 engineering is fraught with many more problems that require bigger bucks to resolve. So, if it costs more to build and maintain a high performance V6 compared to a high performance V8, why even pretend interest to go there unless the real goal is to try and make a more user friendly lower and safer powered and more green Corvette, which means no high power V6 will ever evolve.

Again, if it is a totally different named, framed, bodied, and engined smaller car similar to the Porsche Caymans, that might be OK as a venture into a different market. There might or might not be a market for such a car.

However, putting a V6 of any kind ... short of a V6 racing engine (more expensive than a ZR-1 engine) ... in a Corvette serves no purpose other than to give the competition a leg up and lay the ground work for the eventual demise of the Corvette line as a serious world class car.

A V6 Corvette will be immediately nicknamed the Corvette Fiero. And, I can guarantee there are any number of exec MBAs at GM who would like nothing better. Let's not play into their hands and empower their desire to minimize all the R&D required to maintain the Corvette as a world beater.

God, it's been years since I posted here and I now I know why. Nothing has changed, especially with regard to facing reality. While the rest of the world goes into direct injection, variable geometry turbo vanes and volutes, this crowd wants to keep the current V8-powered porker...and while we're at it, ADD two more cylinders, maybe three more cams. You can't be serious. You just can't be.

Look at the fact that V8 engine production at GM/UAW Motors is down. Look at the idle time at Bowling Green Assembly Plant. Look at the aging demographics of Corvette buyers, as well as the trajectory which ain't getting any younger. THE VETTE IS passé. It'll be gone in the next few years, just as certainly as all new cars seem to now come from the same design studio.

EVERYTHING from the cell phone in your hand to the car you drive is getting smaller and more efficient. While I completely miss your logic about making a V6 perform like a V8 (you have so many qualifiers in the sentence that it can never be proven or disproven), I DO KNOW that the '13 GT-R biturbo compares favorably (although less so) in horsepower to an LS9. You appear to equivocate on the cost comparison between a V6 and V8 but I would EXPECT to pay more for a completely Japanese built engine than one assembled in Wixom. Ergo, in my mind, the ricer V6 compares favorably in every way, including economics, to the domestic brand. While you're at it, could you please find and print the final weight of a current GT-R engine compared to that of an LS9? Some data might be refreshing.

One can rant and rave all one wants but if the Vette were a better product than the competition, there would be less of them sold and more Vettes sold. So the Vette will have to change and stop fondling the AARP crowd. And don't give me the baloney that the LS9 is a real advance in engine technology. It's just a blower sitting on top of something off the shelf and it was developed at the time the company was being driven off the cliff. WHAT a waste of money; thanks Rick!

Drop 700 pounds, put in a drivetrain to suit (I didn't say drop the V8 but shedding blubber will free up some engineering talent to look at things differently) and find someplace else to make the beast.

I think Bob Lutz was right, Holden should be the performance division. Not Chevrolet. The Vette has lost its way. Kill it's current design and ask Holden what to do. And yes, I know that Holden used the LS series engines to make their mark. Imagine what they could do if they had a free hand.

 

[Kid_Again]

Chevrolet tried to turn the Corvette into a "chick car" years ago and almost destroyed the brand. Why do we think there is discussion of a V6 at GM? Is there a shortage of aluminum? Is there a shortage of steel? No, we have a situation in which some MBAs are brainstorming ways to make the Corvette more green and more acceptable to people who think the Fiero is a cute sports car.

Nobody at Aston Martin, Ferrari, or Lambo is trying to conduct such idiotic debates.

My 1st dream is a quad cam V12 Corvette. Next, a quad cam V8. Next, a V10 Corvette. Nowhere in those dreams is a V6 of any kind nor is a battery powered Corvette a proper fantasy. On the other hand, I recognize the amazing technology inherent in the current crop of LS engines and would be perfectly to happy live in that Corvette realm since I don't forsee any venture by GM into quads, 12's or 10's. But 6's?

The plain and simple truth is that you cannot cost effectively make a V6 perform exactly like a 400-500 HP LS V8. Anyone who thinks so simply hasn't done their research. High performance V6 engineering is fraught with many more problems that require bigger bucks to resolve. So, if it costs more to build and maintain a high performance V6 compared to a high performance V8 of the same power, why even pretend interest to go there unless the real goal is to try and make a more user friendly lower and safer powered and more green Corvette, which means no high power V6 will ever evolve.

Again, if it is a totally different named, framed, bodied, and engined smaller car similar to the Porsche Caymans, that might be OK as a venture into a different market. There might or might not be a market for such a car. I personally don't think there is profitable market for such a lower grade Corvette sub brand in the U.S.

However, putting a V6 of any kind ... short of a V6 racing engine (more expensive than a ZR-1 or ZO6 engine) ... in a Corvette serves no purpose other than to give the competition a leg up and lay the ground work for the eventual demise of the Corvette line as a serious world class car.

A V6 Corvette will be immediately nicknamed the Corvette Fiero. And, I can guarantee there are any number of exec MBAs at GM who would like nothing better. Let's not play into their hands and empower their desire to minimize all the R&D outlays required to maintain the Corvette as a world beater.

Oh, and I have one more counterpoint to one of your assertions. Something about Ferrari and the other brands not having idiotic debates about greener cars. The facts show actually the opposite is true. The crowd that races if F1 and the other international homologation racing schemes are VERY actively involved in developing greener cars. That's because the racing societies are locking down specifications, bringing down max rpms, lengthening engine endurance AND restricting fuel consumption to the point where new tools like KERS (kinetic energy recovery systems) are being implemented. SMALLER is much better.

If you have data that differ, I would certainly like to see it.

 

[B747VET]

God, it's been years since I posted here and I now I know why. Nothing has changed, especially with regard to facing reality. While the rest of the world goes into direct injection, variable geometry turbo vanes and volutes, this crowd wants to keep the current V8-powered porker...and while we're at it, ADD two more cylinders, maybe three more cams. You can't be serious. You just can't be.

Look at the fact that V8 engine production at GM/UAW Motors is down. Look at the idle time at Bowling Green Assembly Plant. Look at the aging demographics of Corvette buyers, as well as the trajectory which ain't getting any younger. THE VETTE IS passé. It'll be gone in the next few years, just as certainly as all new cars seem to now come from the same design studio.

EVERYTHING from the cell phone in your hand to the car you drive is getting smaller and more efficient. While I completely miss your logic about making a V6 perform like a V8 (you have so many qualifiers in the sentence that it can never be proven or disproven), I DO KNOW that the '13 GT-R biturbo compares favorably (although less so) in horsepower to an LS9. You appear to equivocate on the cost comparison between a V6 and V8 but I would EXPECT to pay more for a completely Japanese built engine than one assembled in Wixom. Ergo, in my mind, the ricer V6 compares favorably in every way, including economics, to the domestic brand. While you're at it, could you please find and print the final weight of a current GT-R engine compared to that of an LS9? Some data might be refreshing.

One can rant and rave all one wants but if the Vette were a better product than the competition, there would be less of them sold and more Vettes sold. So the Vette will have to change and stop fondling the AARP crowd. And don't give me the baloney that the LS9 is a real advance in engine technology. It's just a blower sitting on top of something off the shelf and it was developed at the time the company was being driven off the cliff. WHAT a waste of money; thanks Rick!

Drop 700 pounds, put in a drivetrain to suit (I didn't say drop the V8 but shedding blubber will free up some engineering talent to look at things differently) and find someplace else to make the beast.

I think Bob Lutz was right, Holden should be the performance division. Not Chevrolet. The Vette has lost its way. Kill it's current design and ask Holden what to do. And yes, I know that Holden used the LS series engines to make their mark. Imagine what they could do if they had a free hand.

First, maybe consider losing all the arrogant, anti-Corvette technology hostility. Second, better get some of your facts straight. The whole purpose of high performance sports cars is high performance ... nothing more nothing less. That seems to be lost in even your fundamental premise.

As far as the weight figures, your arguments have no basis in logic or reality.

GT-R weighs 3,800 lbs it’s VR38DETT engine weighs 608 lbs with everything installed. No V6 weight advantage whatsoever here.
ZR-1 weighs 3352 and the highly modified LS3 based LS9 engine weighs 529 lbs
ZO6 weighs 3180 lbs and the LS7 engine weighs about 458 lbs (Note a pushrod engine with 7,000 RPM redline, proven safe at 8,000 RPM)
BMW M5 engine weighs in at 529 lbs
Ferrari F50 weighs in at V12 436 lbs

You should understand that much of the superior nature of the GT-R's performance numbers have to do with it's all wheel drive, certainly not with any inherent weight advantage from its V6 racing evolved engine.

Getting back to performance, which again, is what world class high performance cars are all about ...


2011 R&T Best Driver’s Car Competition @ Laguna Seca
Test Driver Randy Pobst

1:34:4 Corvette ZO6
1:36:2 Ferrari 458
1:36:4 Nissan GT-R
1:36:4 Audi R8 GT
1:36:4 Lexus LF8
1:36:8 Porsche GT3 RS
1:41:8 Porsche Cayman R

The Corvette technology is outmoded and almost dead?? Apparently not in 2011 or 2012. Again, while the GT-R was the fastest in straight line acceleration, that is mainly due to the all wheel drive and the computer controlled technology of the car. It is a soulless vehicle that has no soul stirring mechanical sounds or feel. Bad choice for trumpeting superiority over the ZO6 or ZR1 or any quad V-12 or quad V8.

You claim Corvette technology is dead and that smaller is better. Where are your numbers? Is the GT-R a great machine? You bet. Does it have a soul like a Corvette, a Ferrari, a Lambo, a Porsche? Many, many people say no. You say yes? That's cool. I'm glad it works for you.

Does the Corvette have a problem penetrating the younger driver markets? Yes. I agree, that problem has to be addressed or it will not bode well for the Corvette in 10 to 15 years. Which car still has the ultimate appeal and soul wrenching performance and sounds for most people? Sorry, but it's the kind of technology found in V-12 Ferrari's. The ZR-1 & ZO6 type of technologies run a close second. Ricers? A whole different world that appeals to a lot of the young largely because of the price points, the low speed fun of drifting, and a lot of movies glamorizing that technology.

Call me when a stock Porsche or a stock GT-R beats a stock ZO6 on a real race course. Call me again, when either of those technologies beats the ZO6 with all cars having all handling computers turned off. Good luck on that one.

 

[B747VET]

Oh, and I have one more counterpoint to one of your assertions. Something about Ferrari and the other brands not having idiotic debates about greener cars. The facts show actually the opposite is true. The crowd that races if F1 and the other international homologation racing schemes are VERY actively involved in developing greener cars. That's because the racing societies are locking down specifications, bringing down max rpms, lengthening engine endurance AND restricting fuel consumption to the point where new tools like KERS (kinetic energy recovery systems) are being implemented. SMALLER is much better.

If you have data that differ, I would certainly like to see it.

Yes, almost all racing venues are going to smaller engines and even restricting air intakes on existing engine technologies. Why? It generally has little to do with technological breakthroughs in V6 engines. It primarily has to do with making racing safer by restricting top end speed. The only alternative is completely redesigning all the traditional race courses that were designed in the times of much slower cars with much slower cornering abilities. And yes, there are admittedly some inherent advantages in racing smaller packaged powerplants that cost $100,000 and run at 14,000 RPM and last for one or two races before self destructing. But what in the world does that have to do with the subject at hand?

Next will you try to argue that Bonneville Land Speed Record cars will be dropping their V-8's, V-12's, and V-16 Allisons for Super dooper V6 super turbos because they are better and faster technology?

You can also call me when Ferrari or Lambo toss a V6 in one of their high end autos for public consumption.

 

[KANE]

God, it's been years since I posted here...

Glad to see you here again!

Look at the aging demographics of Corvette buyers, as well as the trajectory which ain't getting any younger.

You may be onto something- many boomers are now becoming Medicare and Social Security recipients! hnoes

Oh, and I have one more counterpoint to one of your assertions...

First, maybe consider losing all the arrogant, anti-Corvette technology hostility. Second, better get some of your facts straight. The whole purpose of high performance sports cars is high performance ... nothing more nothing less. That seems to be lost in even your fundamental premise...

;squint:






Like Evo said...

As others have mentioned, there's lots of good arguments...

Let's keep it that way.

 

[Kid_Again]

First, maybe consider losing all the arrogant, anti-Corvette technology hostility. Second, better get some of your facts straight. The whole purpose of high performance sports cars is high performance ... nothing more nothing less. That seems to be lost in even your fundamental premise.

As far as the weight figures, your arguments have no basis in logic or reality.

GT-R weighs 3,800 lbs it’s VR38DETT engine weighs 608 lbs with everything installed. No V6 weight advantage whatsoever here.
ZR-1 weighs 3352 and the highly modified LS3 based LS9 engine weighs 529 lbs
ZO6 weighs 3180 lbs and the LS7 engine weighs about 458 lbs (Note a pushrod engine with 7,000 RPM redline, proven safe at 8,000 RPM)
BMW M5 engine weighs in at 529 lbs
Ferrari F50 weighs in at V12 436 lbs

You should understand that much of the superior nature of the GT-R's performance numbers have to do with it's all wheel drive, certainly not with any inherent weight advantage from its V6 racing evolved engine.

Getting back to performance, which again, is what world class high performance cars are all about ...


2011 R&T Best Driver’s Car Competition @ Laguna Seca
Test Driver Randy Pobst

1:34:4 Corvette ZO6
1:36:2 Ferrari 458
1:36:4 Nissan GT-R
1:36:4 Audi R8 GT
1:36:4 Lexus LF8
1:36:8 Porsche GT3 RS
1:41:8 Porsche Cayman R

The Corvette technology is outmoded and almost dead?? Apparently not in 2011 or 2012. Again, while the GT-R was the fastest in straight line acceleration, that is mainly due to the all wheel drive and the computer controlled technology of the car. It is a soulless vehicle that has no soul stirring mechanical sounds or feel. Bad choice for trumpeting superiority over the ZO6 or ZR1 or any quad V-12 or quad V8.

You claim Corvette technology is dead and that smaller is better. Where are your numbers? Is the GT-R a great machine? You bet. Does it have a soul like a Corvette, a Ferrari, a Lambo, a Porsche? Many, many people say no. You say yes? That's cool. I'm glad it works for you.

Does the Corvette have a problem penetrating the younger driver markets? Yes. I agree, that problem has to be addressed or it will not bode well for the Corvette in 10 to 15 years. Which car still has the ultimate appeal and soul wrenching performance and sounds for most people? Sorry, but it's the kind of technology found in V-12 Ferrari's. The ZR-1 & ZO6 type of technologies run a close second. Ricers? A whole different world that appeals to a lot of the young largely because of the price points, the low speed fun of drifting, and a lot of movies glamorizing that technology.

Call me when a stock Porsche or a stock GT-R beats a stock ZO6 on a real race course. Call me again, when either of those technologies beats the ZO6 with all cars having all handling computers turned off. Good luck on that one.

Arrogance? Moi?


Hardly...once again, I point to the reality of the original premise of this thread. V8 engine production is in decline, as it should be.

If you take the time to look at your own arguments, you'll see that the ricer GT-R performance you attribute to four wheel drive, among other improvements. Gee, a 4WD Vette? Nah, that technology is for trucks, according to GM/UAW Motors. I take your point about the times around Laguna Seca but when was the last time you drove at Laguna Seca? If you drive it a lot, I'd say you MAY want to consider the point that it skews your views a LITTLE bit in a somewhat rarefied direction. I also know other highly irrelevant facts such as the ZR1 holding the 'Ring record. I don't know what that means since I drive the NJTP. They have rest stops with dirty toilets on the 'Ring?

I can't fathom your argument about "soul". Perhaps the soul of the UAW lives in the Corvette but Zora's ideal of a lively, nimble concours racer equal to anything that came from Europe doesn't exist. Read each of my words carefully before you throw out a raft of record times from some race track. The current car is not Zora's car. Corvette is a perfect reflection of GM management philosophy and implementation. Is that the perfection you want? Then it's time for you to lead the effort to bring Rick back.

Smaller's not better? You still carrying a one pound cell phone in your pocket? And we didn't even touch on the potential for diesel engines. Not sure about you but I have a fair amount of experience driving the small turbo diesels available in England and they are a blast to drive. Mention diesel on this forum and the knives will come out. Something about no "soul", perhaps?

It's also telling that you believe the ultimate appeal is the kind of technology found in Ferrari V-12s. Gee, how does that explain the continued explosive demand for Porsche? Did they launch a Ferrari V-12 when I wasn't looking? And then there's Audi. Maybe MB/AMG. The list goes on, as I'm sure you know. BTW, which engine does the Ferrari California have? Answering that question will show the future of the V8.

Just conduct a "windshield survey" of Vette owners and you will see the built-in demise of the brand. You are mostly old as me, overwhelmingly monolithic demographically and enjoying the fruits of your labors. Now look at the demos for the BMWs, 911s, Audis and whatever you consider the "soul" of the younger generations. Pissing money away on one BMW after another and wouldn't be caught dead in a Vette. This is the ONE time you can accuse me of over-generalization but I think I'm pretty close to being accurate. Where are the future Vette sales coming from?

These data are obvious and compelling and they are reproduced daily, not a one shot deal at Laguna Seca. The Corvette brand has been dead for a while but like every dinosaur, the head needs some time to realize the body has expired. The VERY existence of the LS9 is proof of that reality. The "Blue Devil" was the BEST that GM Management could come out with? Hell, I put a Vortech centrifugal blower on my small block in my garage but I can't install a computer controlled AWD drive system there. Maybe I WILL rename my garage Wixom. And yes, I DO expect kudos for my technical competence in producing a superbly entertaining vehicle in my garage.


Nah, it's not anti-Corvette hostility. I'm just a plain-talking guy looking to lure in a few fish for some entertainment. IMHO, I note what's called reality and it's MUCH closer than 10 years away from being proven correct. Remember the big hand of the Gummint and the UAW in GM? I don't think these guys are going to suffer a low-volume halo brand as a source of investment. Nor should they, given the direction of the rest of the world.

Drive em' while you got 'em.

Finally, one word about GM Innovation.

Volt.

 

[nd4spd]

As long as we still have a V8 option, sure, why not.

 

[Evolution1980]

Kid_Again, B747VET, and anyone else...keep in mind while you're writing that you don't want your replies to become personal in nature. Try to keep in mind the actual question/topic at hand. Don't let yourself get pulled into a pissing contest or who can be the bigger Internet Tough Guy. Before you click "Submit" on your post, go back and re-read it. Is it really on topic or is it more a personal attack/rebuttal?
If you feel that you must address something of a personal nature, use the "Private Message" function to direct your reply privately to that person. (Note: This doesn't give anyone permission to harass another person. Know your limits and know the limits of what the site administration allows. )

 

[Tom Bryant]

Going to a V6 is not keeping up with the times, it is going back in time to the late '80s and '90s. That's when they thought that the V6 was the future. So much so that NASCAR even went to the V6 in the Grand National Series (now the Nationwide Series). I'm not sure if NASCAR dropped the V6 because of cost, a realization that they were not going to be the performance engine of the future or if they just couldn't stand the sound of 43 buzz boxes going in circles. Street rods were seeing them installed in droves also. Can't hardly find one left these days that hasn't been changed to a V8. I'm old enough to know that the only 6 that ever sounded good was built by Chevy in the '50s and had a split manifold with dual glass packs.

If they want a V6 sports car just fire up the Soltice line again. But a global Chevy grille on that thing and a Camaro V6. Then call it whatever name will sell but leave the Corvette alone. The Corvette competes with the best sports cars in the world at a fraction of the cost and beats them. I don't see Ferrari running their V12s through a band saw to make V6s. If your goal is to compete with the best you aren't going to do it by downgrading the driveline. You must have torque for a bigger sports car or you end up with a meaningless boulevard cruiser.

Tom