[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Glen e

That’s not the important point. The Important point is GM has always felt that they needed a car to compete with the high-end stuff. To show that they can do it.Because everybody else has a halo car above them. Call it what you want, it’s still an inferiority complex. It started when Hank the deuce won LeMans. The new mid engine will def be at
Lemans, soon...if not 6/18 then 6/19....

None of my comments are meant to be a slam. People get so defensive here…LOL

If I was at GM during that time, I’d feel the same way.

Glen,

I didn't take it as a slam. I only added what I added because I was there and I know what the targets were. I spent a lot of time keeping Tadge and his team updated on their competitors product plans, so I knew who they cared about and who they didn't. You are correct in your assessment that there has long been a desire to move Corvette up market. That's what ZR1 was all about. That's what C7 was all about and it's what C8 is all about. Just pointing out that Ford GT wasn't a factor.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

What makes the mid engine design more expensive? People assume mid engine means expensive, but that’s only because most mid engine cars are expensive performance cars. The MR2 was mid engine and in the $30k range. I’m sure GM could build a mid engine car for a similar price as the front engine, if they wanted to.

Good point. MR2 was mid-engine. So was the Pontiac Fiero. I had a Fiero GT way back in the day. A lot of fun to drive, aside from its nasty propensity to push through corners.

[camaro5]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Good point. MR2 was mid-engine. So was the Pontiac Fiero. I had a Fiero GT way back in the day. A lot of fun to drive, aside from its nasty propensity to push through corners.

Tadge was quoted as saying $10k premium for mid-engine, that's not unreasonable and will sell well. IMO


Fieros did have another little problem though...

[ac-427]

First, a confession, I just turned 74 and I'm fighting age! Also, I expect to get flamed for my comments. I've had 7 Corvettes starting with a 1971 LT1 and ending with a C7 Stingray. I've also had 4 Camaros including a 1969 Big Block, a 45th Anniversary, a 2015 Z28 and my present ride, a 2018 Redline SS Vert. In my experience, Corvettes appeal to the older "gold chain" crowd while the Camaro attracts a younger demographic. In my opinion, Camaro easily whips Corvette in terms of performance per dollar and the appeal of identification with a younger group made my decision to get out of Corvettes and into Camaros pretty easy. I'm a Harley rider as well, and am hoping to be in full and safe control of both my rides for at least another ten years and longer if the Lord is willing. Signing off cause I've got to hit the gym!

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by camaro5

Tadge was quoted as saying $10k premium for mid-engine, that's not unreasonable and will sell well. IMO


Fieros did have another little problem though...

That they did. Actually, the issue was with the 2.5 Iron Duke engine. It was used in a number of GM products, but Fiero was unique, due to its engine being placed a lot closer to the fuel tank than other vehicles.

[Atomic Ed]

Originally Posted by camaro5

Tadge was quoted as saying $10k premium for mid-engine, that's not unreasonable and will sell well. IMO


Fieros did have another little problem though...

Ah yes; went through three engines on that little bastard. Worst car purchase decision I ever made.

[gpskinzhut]

Originally Posted by camaro5

Tadge was quoted as saying $10k premium for mid-engine, that's not unreasonable and will sell well. IMO


Fieros did have another little problem though...

I still want one.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by gpskinzhut

I still want one.

I would not hesitate to buy a Fiero GT. 2.8L V6 did not have the "thermal issues" that the 2.5L L4 had.

[Number 3]

The pre bankruptcy mid engine Corvette was going to be around a $10,000 premium.

Bowling Green won't last making a few thousand $100,000 plus exotics.

I don't expect the Camaro will ever replace the Corvette. It may creep up to the price point vacated by the C7, but it won't replace it.

Tha being said, a C7 is a wonderful GT. Luggage and even golf clubs are very doable. A mid engine Corvette will give hat up.

[doc7000]

Killing the front mid-ship Corvette for a rear mid-ship Corvette will be a mistake, one that I hope team Corvette understands and won't make. Last I rear in a Tadge interview was the price premium is $5,000 and it comes down to the transaxle (yes the Corvette has a transaxle but it is a regular transmission bolted to a diff.).



This is what a typical transaxle looks like, this is what a rear mid-ship Corvette is going to need and it will not be shared with any other vehicle at GM.



This is the Corvette transaxle which is essentially a regular transmission bolted onto a differential, this allows the Corvette to share transmission with other vehicles at GM.

What the Corvette will lose in this transition, the car will lose passenger space with the engine up front you can push the seats pretty far back even over the rear axle. However with the engine out back you can't push the seats too far forward unless you want bus like steering wheel which is set vertically.

Cooling for rear mid-ship cars is a challenge, if the C7 Z06 has cooling issues just wait until such an engine is placed in a rear mid-ship car. You either put the radiator up front and run long hoses all the way to the engine out back (adding weight/cost). Or use small radiators placed out back with side openings feeding them air, with that said we will likely see C7 Z06 over heating issues 2.0 (remember this is the same Tadge that signed off on that car).

Rear heavy cars have a natural tendency to understeer, this is caused by less mechanical grip up front. Aerodynamic grip will resolve this however you have to be traveling to get that grip, which reminds me of a study that Ferrari did which put ideal weight split at 45/55 (rear mid-ship Corvette will be 40/60) for traction under acceleration and braking.

With all of that said they could have gone a different route but didn't, I get it that some people have always wanted a mid engine Corvette and because of that nothing else matters. However there have been performance cars that were front mid-ship while having a 45/55 or even close to 40/60 while having an even lower moment of polar inertia then all rear mid-ship cars which in my view looks better too.

[camaro5]

It's not that any car can truly replace the Corvette.

It's that the Camaro is taking over the sales niche occupied by Corvette for years, as Corvette moves up in the world.

I believe this situation solidify's Camaros continued existence, and will continue to offer top-notch performance in a affordable (in today's terms) performance car.

Originally Posted by doc7000

Killing the front mid-ship Corvette for a rear mid-ship Corvette will be a mistake, one that I hope team Corvette understands and won't make. Last I rear in a Tadge interview was the price premium is $5,000 and it comes down to the transaxle (yes the Corvette has a transaxle but it is a regular transmission bolted to a diff.).

What the Corvette will lose in this transition, the car will lose passenger space with the engine up front you can push the seats pretty far back even over the rear axle. However with the engine out back you can't push the seats too far forward unless you want bus like steering wheel which is set vertically.

Cooling for rear mid-ship cars is a challenge, if the C7 Z06 has cooling issues just wait until such an engine is placed in a rear mid-ship car. You either put the radiator up front and run long hoses all the way to the engine out back (adding weight/cost). Or use small radiators placed out back with side openings feeding them air, with that said we will likely see C7 Z06 over heating issues 2.0 (remember this is the same Tadge that signed off on that car).

Rear heavy cars have a natural tendency to understeer, this is caused by less mechanical grip up front. Aerodynamic grip will resolve this however you have to be traveling to get that grip, which reminds me of a study that Ferrari did which put ideal weight split at 45/55 (rear mid-ship Corvette will be 40/60) for traction under acceleration and braking.

With all of that said they could have gone a different route but didn't, I get it that some people have always wanted a mid engine Corvette and because of that nothing else matters. However there have been performance cars that were front mid-ship while having a 45/55 or even close to 40/60 while having an even lower moment of polar inertia then all rear mid-ship cars which in my view looks better too.

IDK - I think the C8 will be even more of a supercar, at a bargain price.

It's definitely a done mid-engine deal. They have mules on the road.

Announcement at Detroit show Jan. 2019.

The radiator intake ducts are on the side.

I hope they're doing some golf club bag fit testing in the storage compartments!

[redcoats1976]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I would not hesitate to buy a Fiero GT. 2.8L V6 did not have the "thermal issues" that the 2.5L L4 had.

theres one around here that has a blown 350 chevy shoehorned into it...thats a hot car.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by camaro5

It's not that any car can truly replace the Corvette.

It's that the Camaro is taking over the sales niche occupied by Corvette for years, as Corvette moves up in the world.

I believe this situation solidify's Camaros continued existence, and will continue to offer top-notch performance in a affordable (in today's terms) performance car.

Which to me would be a failure on both parts. If the Camaro also moves up scale, that to me makes the Camaro lose some of it's appeal.

[ModernCamaroZ28Fan]

They are working on the Camaro Empire. The camaro shall rule da warld!