CAMARO6 - View Single Post - Will the Camaro take over for the Corvette?

doc7000 · 11-23-2017, 04:42 PM

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.

11-23-2017, 04:42 PM	#38
doc7000 Drives: 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Lomita,CA Posts: 806	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.