New Corvette C7

Its a stigma that comes from a grain of truth. America has produced some shockers, they can't deny that. But as with all things, it will take a while for them to shake it off. A bit like Skoda.
 
Brookert said:
I think its said more in jest than anything else, much like British people being labled posh and what not.

I take it the engine will be a large v8 with a supercharger? Not sure these cars would have the same character with turbochargers.
Click to expand...

No.

Only the top end £100,000 ZR1 had a supercharger, the rest were all naturally aspirated, even the Z06. That just had a N/A 7.0 V8 instead of the standard corvette's N/A 5.7 (amongst lots of other modifications of course)
 
MrLOL said:
No.

Only the top end £100,000 ZR1 had a supercharger, the rest were all naturally aspirated, even the Z06. That just had a N/A 7.0 V8 instead of the standard corvette's N/A 5.7 (amongst lots of other modifications of course)
Click to expand...

After driving a turbo'd car, I can now understand the appeal of a powerful engine but with no forced induction. Forced induction just makes a car that bit less predictable, likes it's cheating its way to higher power figures. Particularly turbo cars, rather than supercharged ones, the way you get that little delay when you hit the pedal, just takes away from the driving experience a bit.

On the flipside, foced induction gave birth to the F40, so I won't carry on tarnishing it :D
 
hohum said:
So what's the idea behind them using leaf springs anyway? Can't be purely cost cutting I assume.
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with cost cutting - in fact the leaf springs used by Corvettes cost far more than conventional coils.

The leaf springs (in Corvettes at least) are also far more advanced than coil springs.

Here's a useful cut and paste to save me some typing :D

The Corvette's leaf springs:

Advantages

- Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.

- Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace. Volvo reported that the single composite leaf spring used in the rear suspension of the 960 Wagon had the same mass as just one of the two springs it replaced.

- Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of mass of the car.

- Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1983 have been. As of 1980, the composite spring was an option on the C3.

- As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.

- Also as used on the C4 front suspension, C5, and C6 Corvettes, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs. As implemented on the C3 and C4 rear suspensions with a rigid central mount, the anti-roll effect does not occur.

- Packaging. As used on the C5 and later Corvettes the use of OEM coil over damper springs would have forced the chassis engineers to either vertically raise the shock towers or move them inward. In the rear this would have reduced trunk space. In the front this would have interfered with engine packaging. The use of the leaf spring allowed the spring to be placed out of the way under the chassis and while keeping the diameter of the shock absorber assembly to that of just the damper rather than damper and spring.

Disadvantages

- Packaging can be problematic; the leaf must span from one side of the car to the other. This can limit applications where the drivetrain, or another part, is in the way.

- Materials expense. Steel coils are commodity items; a single composite leaf spring costs more than two of them.

- Design complexity. Composite monoleafs allow for considerable variety in shape, thickness, and materials. They are inherently more expensive to design, particularly in performance applications.

- Cost of modification. As a result of specialized design and packaging, changing spring rates often requires a custom unit. Coil springs in various sizes and rates are available inexpensively.

- Susceptibility to damage. Engine fluids and exhaust modifications like cat-back removal might weaken or destroy composite springs over time. The leaf spring is more susceptible to heat related damage than conventional steel springs.

- Perception. Due to its association with spring-located solid axles, the leaf spring has a stigma unrelated to the spring itself.
Click to expand...

LEAF SPRINGS 4 LYFE

ontrack.jpg


After all, what's so smart about a bit of metal bar stock heated up and wrapped around something?
 
Last edited:
I like, very much!

The interior is supposedly very cool too, you can personalize your dashboard.

Had 3 standard modes, normal mode with general info mostly displayed.
Sport with en extra large rev counter and things like oil temp...
And racing, a Bar type rev counter ( you know the ones that change color when to shift).

EDIT:

1358354172s.jpg


1358354225s.jpg


1358354173.png
 
Last edited:
hurfdurf said:
6.5K redline :(
Click to expand...

It's still a push rod engine. Which means it won't be revving to 8000rpm like a BMW V8, but also means it will happily do 200,000 miles with only a few oil changes.

It's actually got some properly cool technology in it such as the ability to run on 4 cylinders under light load around town and will reportedly manage 26 US mpg which is 31 mpg in our money. Pretty cool for a 6.2 V8 engine pushing 450bhp
 
MrLOL said:
It's still a push rod engine. Which means it won't be revving to 8000rpm like a BMW V8, but also means it will happily do 200,000 miles with only a few oil changes.
Click to expand...

May well be preaching to the converted here so apologies in advance - but for the reference of others.

Pushrod engines can happily do upwards of 10,000RPM in race trim - even higher in some cases. Not uncommon to see relatively stock examples, or mildly built engines, turning over 7,500-8,500RPM at drag strips all over the place - or at race tracks.

That and they generally don't need to spin that fast to make power, unlike the BMW alternative.

For the most part it's the manufacturers being sensible - the engine doesn't make any more power after that, so there's no point spinning it any faster. Then there's (for them) concerns about warranty, long-term durability, etc... :)




Just some random examples.

Tl;dr: GM could make the Corvette's engine rev really high if they wanted it (or it needed) to.

They've run tests before and people preferred the delivery of the lower-revving (not necessarily pushrod) motors.
 
Focus on interior looks stunning.

http://www.chevrolet.com/new-2014-corvette/

TRUTH IN MATERIAL

MATERIALS

An honest interior starts with authentic materials. This is no exception. If it looks like aluminum, it is aluminum. If it looks like carbon-fiber, it is carbon-fiber.

When it’s leather, it’s Grade A leather — hand-selected, stitched and crafted
to adorn a new generation.
Click to expand...

Want!

I don't like the steering wheel though, the centre airbag part is just too big!
 
Lashout_UK said:
Pushrod engines can happily do upwards of 10,000RPM in race trim - even higher in some cases.
Click to expand...

I knew about the american preference for engines generating peak lower at lower revs, and about the durability benefits of push rod engines, but this bit above i didn't know :)
 
It's not uncommon to find people spinning 7-litre (well, 426ci) Hemi motors at 11,000RPM. They start sounding "a bit funny" at that point.

We're not talking 11,000RPM for a brief moment in neutral either :D

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom