2nd Request: Define "a lot"? What percentage would you say despise C4s?
You're not under any obligations? Well I seem to recall you said:
Which was, to be blunt, completely riddled with errors, mis-information and conclusions utterly lacking in logic and facts. Please feel free to back it up or, if under "no obligation" you can always step off.
Important? You skipped the computer designed chassis? The lack of a center bar? The direction tire suspension? The 1+G skip pad? But you fixate on the direction of light rotation as your important centerpiece premise of your argument. Can you explain why?
Subjective? Have you considered the R&D budget GM expended on the C4 development program in the early 1980s? Do you believe that the man hours expended on developing the 'radical' 180 degree rotating headlights compares to the man hours and expenses GM expended on the C4 chassis? The difference is not 'subjective' but rather is an order of magnitude.
Your original post did not key on the "visual distinctions" but seemed caught up in importance of the axis of rotation for the headlights. I believe I've already previously summarized the relevance of the C4's exterior features in my previous post. While certainly debatable a basic consideration of automotive design history as it relates to each of the Corvettes generations seems missing from your argument.
But your original point was that the C4 had the "most" upgrades and that it was the most 'radical' generation. You posted that to a public forum. Once confronted with minimal factual information about all the other generations that you've essentially overlooked or written off - you seem to be somewhat defensive. Did you start this thread just for a bunch of 'attaboys' or what?
I didn't intend to present a "diatribe" but rather a very brief fact based summary of points about the previous and subsequent generations of Corvettes which seemed to be overlooked in your original and subsequent argument.
You're not under any obligations? Well I seem to recall you said:
Which was, to be blunt, completely riddled with errors, mis-information and conclusions utterly lacking in logic and facts. Please feel free to back it up or, if under "no obligation" you can always step off.
Important? You skipped the computer designed chassis? The lack of a center bar? The direction tire suspension? The 1+G skip pad? But you fixate on the direction of light rotation as your important centerpiece premise of your argument. Can you explain why?
Subjective? Have you considered the R&D budget GM expended on the C4 development program in the early 1980s? Do you believe that the man hours expended on developing the 'radical' 180 degree rotating headlights compares to the man hours and expenses GM expended on the C4 chassis? The difference is not 'subjective' but rather is an order of magnitude.
Your original post did not key on the "visual distinctions" but seemed caught up in importance of the axis of rotation for the headlights. I believe I've already previously summarized the relevance of the C4's exterior features in my previous post. While certainly debatable a basic consideration of automotive design history as it relates to each of the Corvettes generations seems missing from your argument.
But your original point was that the C4 had the "most" upgrades and that it was the most 'radical' generation. You posted that to a public forum. Once confronted with minimal factual information about all the other generations that you've essentially overlooked or written off - you seem to be somewhat defensive. Did you start this thread just for a bunch of 'attaboys' or what?
I didn't intend to present a "diatribe" but rather a very brief fact based summary of points about the previous and subsequent generations of Corvettes which seemed to be overlooked in your original and subsequent argument.
