Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Chevrolet C6 Corvette



  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    I think GM is obviously listening to people. The upgraded interior and somewhat better styling (still a problem for me) were shrewd moves I think. I hope the C7 takes the mechanicals and puts it into an entirely new skin in the future however. HP is high enough, I think that should level off. And KILL that skip-shift once and for all, please! That is such an embarrassment to the engineering department, even if you can by-pass it easily. C&D had to take yet another shot at skip-shift, so it's a sore point.


  • avolvofanavolvofan Posts: 358
    Shifty, I doubt if you would get anyone to argue that the skip shift improves the driving experience of a manual transmission. The reason it is there (and will probably remain there for as long as a manual transmission is available for the Corvette) is fuel mileage. The skip shift is responsible for about a 2 mpg increase in the EPA City cycle. As far as GM is concerned it has a win-win-win (a win for GM for corporate average fuel economy, a win to be able to offer a manual transmission in the Corvette, and a win for those who want to disable the skip shift, since it is relatively easy to do).
  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 7,103
    It's no secret that the "skip shift" is a by-product of the gas guzzler tax and despised by just about everyone. I wonder if GM has tried to submit one to the testing agencies without the skip shift? The MPG numbers are already fairly impressive given this is a hi-po V8.

    The more I read about the C6, the more I think this may be my next car a few years down the road. I'll let the early adopters take the MSRP hit and then I'll take a look.

    Still, it would be a totally different drive than my current RX8. I don't know if I could give up the "fun" that the RX8 offers. The allure of all that HP and torque is undeniable, though.

    From what I'm reading, the C6 is about $1K LESS than the C5. I'd have to guess that perhaps the '06 or '07 model years might yield some rebates? I qualify for GMO/GMS and would think the C6 price may be a little more pallatble using those GM discounts.

    I need some C6 seat and road test time.
  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142
    On the skip shift, I've driven it for 3 years and it just isn't an issue IMO, not even worth the effort to disable. On the track, I can assure you it never gets in the way! ;) Ok, many do disable it, but there will always be something to complain about, ever lost the rearend in a Porsche? The Corvette Quarterly review of the C6 now on sale, not on the Net, makes one point that I like, the C6 is the only 400 hp car not facing the gas guzzler tax. Sure if I can afford the car I could pay that too, but why not avoid it through, keep it simple engineering, if that's possible?
       I take it you like the M3, Shifty, but having a few rides in the neighbor's, it's just a coupe with a back seat. That's why they got it, need room for a child seat, and for anything beyond the kid that back seat is not very comfortable. It doesn't really have much more head room, well I could go on, but needless to say, I'll take what I've got to the track and every so often get to pass an M3. :)
       Took the 3 day class at Bragg-Smith last year and it's now Spring Mountain Motorsports Park with new 2004 Z06's and the web site says they are going to add C6, Z51's, I think that might be the ticket for some seat time in a C6. Should be a good comparison to get back to back with the last C5 Z06 before they raise the bar again.
       One last comment on the C6 pricing. The list is just below the C5 but the options are higher on most stuff so I expect the out the door pricing to be just a little higher when all is said and done. I too am waiting for some discounts.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    nah, I don't like the M3 at all actually. I like cars that look like what they do. I'm not very keen on BMWs in general. Porsche is my German car of choice, Mazda my Japanese.


  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142
    Courtesy Chevy in San Jose, San Tomas Expy just north of I280 has one. Even set aside some area for current Vettes to park since it seems many have been by to see the car already.
  • low12slow12s Posts: 9
    Does anyone know of a C6 in So. California that is available for viewing?
  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142
    Thanks to Edmunds, just did a side by side 2004 to a 2005 and list is lower which helps if you want a base unit with no options, especially if you get the six speed. Looking at past sales, only 10% get the car that way. Hence new pricing is no surprise but don't expect to pay less.
       List on the new coupe is $43.4k down $400 from $43.8k. For those who got manual it is now standard so that saves another $900. But that doesn't get you heads up display (HUD), memory and power sport seats and auto dimming mirrors, telescope on steering wheel and new for '05 side air bags. The '04 package was $1.2k while the preferred package (1SB) for '05 is $4.4k. Then the new Z51 performance package includes new coolers, better gearing and brakes but it goes for $1.5k vs. $400 for the '04. So, that's $1300 off and add $3.2 + $1.1k ending up with about a $3000 increase with some nice new stuff. Still trying to sort out the old addon 12 disc changer vs. the new 6 disc in dash sound system.
       Personally getting the car without HUD or the telescope wheel is really missing out, but at 6' 3" I find the wheel without telescope to twist my leg so it's not comfortable to drive, it's a must have, IMO. Also the sport seats have a cut through that works well with harnesses which is a significant shortfall on the Z06 seats if you ask many who track the cars. Going to be very interesting to see what this all does to option take rates compared to history, things are going to change, how much, only time will tell.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    What do you think about the wisdom of lightening the LS2 engine by using a smaller water pump and an oil sump with one less quart capacity? Do you all shrug that off as insignif or does it give you any concern at all?


  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142
    To me that's way to technical to try to sort out before there is some feed back from the track. The engineer's are paid well to get that stuff right, but as the ring problem, locking column and rocking seat in the C5 showed, some times they miss a few details. Any input that isn't based on technical study or hard facts from track failures is just guessing.
  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 7,103
    I think I'd want to know what the flow rate of the new smaller water pump is compared to the larger one. If it's the same or better, I wouldn't be too concerened. I'd also like to know if GM has any other heat dissipation tricks they're counting on with the new engine design (increased airflow around the block, etc) to go to a smaller water pump.

    Since Corvettes require the use of synthetic oil, I'm not nearly as concerned about the oil sump changes. Just a guess, but I'd say the use of synthetic oil probably negates any affects using a quart less.

    That said, only time and miles will tell the tale.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    Yeah, of course we really don't know. I was just a little surprised on the decision to decrease oil capacity on a wet sump system. On a dry sump it wouldn't be such a big deal. I mean, how much weight does one quart of oil and a little smaller oil pan save here?

    I'm sure the engineers know what they are doing (obviously, given the product) but sometimes you get bit in the butt from the most unusual sets of circumstances.


  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 7,103
    While I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, the C6 sounds very intriguing.

    Before I bought my current ride, I considered the C5 pretty seriously (particularly since I qualify for GMS pricing).

    My biggest complaint with the C5 was the "low quality" interior (typical GM fare) and the "buckboard" ride. In my estimation, in today's world, you can have both a decent ride as well as great handling.

    Plus, I wasn't real keen on the C5 body style. The C6 fits more with the type of styling I like.

    If I'm reading the initial trade rag reviews correctly, all of these issues have been addressed in the C6.

    I'm anxious to hear of owners experiences when they get the first ones.
  • skeezixskeezix Posts: 45
    OK Charts2, maybe misinformation is the wrong word. I was not de-valuing your opinion at all.

    The C1 Corvette had several problems as a sports car, but “good performance” was not one of them. The C1 was a decent performer, compared to other sports cars of the day. I have read that information in countless reviews during the last 40 years. Since then, many Corvettes could easily be called “good performers” and some could be called great performers. Saying it took 51 years to get a “good performer” is quite a stretch.

    The September 2002 Car and Driver had an article entitled “10,000-HP Shootout” where a bunch of Tuner Cars were tested, then all the tests were summarized in a time line and a winner was chosen. After the tuners were tested, three stock cars were tested the same way. The three stockers were the 911 Turbo, the Z06, and the Viper. The Z06 came in third place in this stocker test. What else did I learn from this test? The Z06 tied with the 911 on the road course, both beating the Viper. There was a 150 to 0 MPH braking test where the 911 stopped in 684 feet, the Z06 in 702 feet, and the Viper in 775 feet, something like that. The point is that the Z06 could compete with these other two cars which both cost a lot more money. I would not describe this third place car as having to play catch up with anyone, especially when one considers its price.

    Now, take the C6. With whom is the C6 going to play catch up when it goes on sale real soon? If you exclude any car that costs more than, say, $55000, I wonder what you’d say.
  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142

    The only reason I can think that there wasn't whining when they switched seats is that she drove first and he didn't have to relinquish the controls. After seeing my first one, I can note that I didn't notice where the cup holders were.

    And added info from the Corvette Museum newsletter today:

    Corvette Assembly Plant Ships the First Batch of 6th Generation Corvettes

    Today, the Corvette Assembly Plant will ship the first batch of C6 Corvette Coupes to many dealerships throughout the United States. The first “batch” is reported to have approximately 70 Corvettes ready with others to follow soon. "This is an exciting day for the Corvette community and for the Bowling Green Assembly Plant," said Wil Cooksey, plant manager. "Our plant is committed to building the highest quality, most precise and powerful sports cars for our customers." The plant will continue to accelerate to its production build schedule this fall. "This is a memorable day in Corvette history. ...
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    You can see immediately where those Detroit News people are coming from. What they want the new Corvette to be in the future is a (my quotes, not theirs) "GT car", with "civilized amenities" and a "modern" automatic transmission.

    I thought the Lexus SC430 was for that type of buyer?

    Like it or hate it, the Porsche 911 is still a bit "rough and ready", with that electric wire feel all true sports car should have. I trust the C6-C7-C8s will go that way as well.


  • sphinx99sphinx99 Posts: 776
    Keep in mind that Detroit News employees work in Detroit. All a "rough and ready" car gets you in Michigan is a cracked rim a year.
  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142
    driving it like they stole it. I'm thinking the engineer's are into performance and that will go a long way to keeping it at the edge. Another article from yesterday that I just found. _top-feature.html
  • starrow68starrow68 Posts: 1,142
    The details that is. References to the 5 sp auto, and spinning the wheels and spinouts without ever mentioning the electronics that keep all that from happening in the current world seem to be based on some pretty old assumptions, as well as poor research. .html

This discussion has been closed.