The "CURSE"...it ain't just FR-S, 86 or BRZ

[dem00n]

Originally Posted by cruzinbill

Exactly, the vette is one of the worst designed cars since the corvair. The driver prolly tried to take a 45mph corner at 20mph and lost total control. Dont get me started on its cheap half assed interior that has no place on a 90k$ car.

Have you ever driven a Corvair?

[Shit Luck]

new vette = white trash ferrari

horrible interior and looks, well it looks like a white trash version of a ferrari. like a cheap kit car clone.

[cruzinbill]

Originally Posted by dem00n

Have you ever driven a Corvair?

Driven no, rode in yes. I may be a lil off on the comparison but cmon ofcourse they have improved the corvette some since the corvair went away like 40 years ago.

[dem00n]

Originally Posted by cruzinbill

Driven no, rode in yes. I may be a lil off on the comparison but cmon ofcourse they have improved the corvette some since the corvair went away like 40 years ago.

1st Gen or 2nd Gen?

The problem with the Corvair was the suspension geometry, since rear independent suspension at a time was a very new thing, Chevy simply didn't know how it would react in oversteer situations.


Simply you had a problem where the car would display snap oversteer when pushed to the limit, sort of like a certain model of the Toyata MR2 displayed (whole other reason on that car though)

So in the end, tons of 1 st Gen Corvairs were wrapped around trees, all over the country.

But they gladly fixed it with the 2nd Gen model with a whole new suspension geometry (new front sway bar and some other things if i'm correct), and the car is fairly important because it broke the mold for many future sport cars. (Independent suspension, back engine which influenced some mid engine sport car designs, Porsche stole a few things as well, well rumored too)

Read Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile

Oh and there was also the fact that the tires would have different PSI ratings then most cars did, i believe the front tires had higher PSI then the back tires, so when gas stations attendants checked your tire pressure (Good ol' days!), they always put it to a certain PSI (35 to every car?) so it really fucked up the geometry since the PSI's were both the same when they weren't post to be.

That sounds about right.

[cruzinbill]

Originally Posted by dem00n

1st Gen or 2nd Gen?

The problem with the Corvair was the suspension geometry, since rear independent suspension at a time was a very new thing, Chevy simply didn't know how it would react in oversteer situations.


Simply you had a problem where the car would display snap oversteer when pushed to the limit, sort of like a certain model of the Toyata MR2 displayed (whole other reason on that car though)

So in the end, tons of 1 st Gen Corvairs were wrapped around trees, all over the country.

But they gladly fixed it with the 2nd Gen model with a whole new suspension geometry (new front sway bar and some other things if i'm correct), and the car is fairly important because it broke the mold for many future sport cars. (Independent suspension, back engine which influenced some mid engine sport car designs, Porsche stole a few things as well, well rumored too)

Read Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile

Oh and there was also the fact that the tires would have different PSI ratings then most cars did, i believe the front tires had higher PSI then the back tires, so when gas stations attendants checked your tire pressure (Good ol' days!), they always put it to a certain PSI (35 to every car?) so it really fucked up the geometry since the PSI's were both the same when they weren't post to be.

That sounds about right.

While your points may be valid idk... What I can say is that if Ralph Nader were to drive the above Vette, he would be able to write a new book titled "More Unsafe at Any Speed: The Costcutting Dangers of the Discusting Modern American Automobile" The book would go on to sell trillions of copies. I could even see it raising such a stir that the government would put a ban on the creation of another Corvette.

I mean these things are such death traps that studies have shown more fatalities per year from them than from that of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms combined.

[dem00n]

Originally Posted by cruzinbill

While your points may be valid idk... What I can say is that if Ralph Nader were to drive the above Vette, he would be able to write a new book titled "More Unsafe at Any Speed: The Costcutting Dangers of the Discusting Modern American Automobile" The book would go on to sell trillions of copies. I could even see it raising such a stir that the government would put a ban on the creation of another Corvette.

I mean these things are such death traps that studies have shown more fatalities per year from them than from that of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms combined.

Because so much power is accessible at a cheap price.

If we sold Lambos at 50K, then tons of people would own Lambos and tons of people would be dead.

It reminds me when some dude won a Lambo and crashed it the next day, theres tons of stories like these.

[n2oinferno]

Methinks some people are trolling. Or they don't realize that the C4 '84-'88 Vette that was considered "dangerous" was because they were fast, and drivers are idiots.

Here's what the Chevrolet spokesperson said:

During evaluation, the driver caught the inside tire caught the edge of the pavement during a tight corner, leading to the accident. Thankfully, no one was hurt, the car received only minor damage, and no citations were issued.

[eddieEndo]

Originally Posted by mikalem

Saw it in person up in Detroit - car is great looking, til you get to the rear end. Then it gets way too busy.... Additional pics to show what I mean (Towards the middle of the album):

https://plus.google.com/photos/10476...36972159204913

awesome album dude!!!

[cruzinbill]

Originally Posted by n2oinferno

Methinks some people are trolling. Or they don't realize that the C4 '84-'88 Vette that was considered "dangerous" was because they were fast, and drivers are idiots.

Here's what the Chevrolet spokesperson said:

Well this is the OT lol, but I do actually think they have terrible interiors and are overpriced for what you get.


Also an 84 had a 0-60 of like 6.6 ours is like 6.2.... so it wasnt that fast of a car.

[n2oinferno]

Originally Posted by cruzinbill

Well this is the OT lol, but I do actually think they have terrible interiors and are overpriced for what you get.


Also an 84 had a 0-60 of like 6.6 ours is like 6.2.... so it wasnt that fast of a car.

We'll agree to disagree. While the C5 Z06 that belongs to my wife's grandfather doesn't have the nicest interior ever, I don't think it's terrible. I love the new interior too. Very driver-focused. It reminds me of a modern version of the Supra.



I'm curious, what makes you believe the Vette is overpriced? Is it only the interior? Realistically here what other new, stock car will outperform it for under 50 grand?

Lastly, in '84 a six second 0-60 was fast. That was Ferrari 328 GTS territory back then.

[Guff]

You know, there's a C7 Corvette thread. Also, I agree with this ^^^

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by cruzinbill

Exactly, the vette is one of the worst designed cars since the corvair. The driver prolly tried to take a 45mph corner at 20mph and lost total control. Dont get me started on its cheap half assed interior that has no place on a 90k$ car.

You're crazy dude. Most of the reasons these cars end up in wrecks are because for average Joe's it's too much car for such a low price. It's essentially a blue collar supercar, which means tons of people realistically have access to one. As far as handling characteristics a vette will take a corner hard enough to pull your face off.
Don't forget it was the first stock American vehicle to pull over 1g on a skid, been doing it since 84. It's pretty bang for your buck when you consider the car competes with vehicles priced 50-200k higher than it on equal footing. The only thing lacking in a few opinions is the interior and to me all that says is "you get what you pay for"; luxury + performance = $$$$