Yardjass

Lol! I'm sure I could find Kate Upton's resonant frequency but it would take a whole, whole bunch of experimenting and trial/error to do it.

FLiPrayZin240sx

What do you do for a living again Rich? When I grow up, I wanna be just like you.

Did GM say anything yet about pricing? I've been reading that the projection is about $80K but I dont see how that could be with all the goodies they have for it. Hell, GM's C7.R is pretty much a Z06 chassis with a giant wing and smaller displaced engine to meet the standard.

As far as color, something about the C6 Cybergray appeals to me. If they have something along those lines, maybe slightly darker with more flakes, car would look sick.

PhillyLS1

Am I alone in my opinion that this is the ugliest car GM has made since the Aztec? The pictures don't convey all the build quality issues with the car.

I don't know if it's a really good propaganda campaign by GM, but the interior is worse than the C6. Everywhere I see people raving about this thing. Performance aside, I just can't see myself buying one.

ej1995

I don't like it either, but then again I haven't liked any Corvette since they stopped making C3s.

Everybody loves the LS/LT engines, and I do to a point. It's funny how Ford has got a 5.8L thats BEEN putting out 662 for two years now though.

I don't know where everybody is getting this $80,000 thing from either. It may be correct, but for a reference point, the 2013 Corvette ZR1 started at $112,600.

A 2013 GT-500 started at $54,200 with 662hp... Or... Buy a SuperSnake for $94,195 and it's got 850hp.

Not trying to sound like a Ford fan boy, because honestly I wouldn't buy a GT-500 new either. I'm just trying to figure out why GM thinks their Corvette is worth so much more.

92_SR20

I like the car minus the tail lights. I don't like them on the Camaro and I definitely don't like them on the Corvette.

GT500s are definitely fun cars and you can land one on the cheap if you look around! But HP isn't the only thing going for the Corvette.

RandomTask

Previous ZR1 will have no impact on the pricing of this car for several reasons, in fact, ZR1's are expected to plummet in price.

1. The C6 was only about $2k cheaper than the C7, which is way more car.
2. This is post financial crisis GM, they want to make money. The ZR1 production numbers were extremely low; GM wants to sell more of these.Anything above $100k has a stigma to it that would hurt sales.
3. The ZR1 used lots of expensive bits. The LS9 shared next to nothing with other LS motors.
4. Autoweek has GM employees stating the C7Z will be under 100k with every option checked.

Its in the technology and other options:

1. Magnetic Ride Suspension
2. Removable roof
3. Carbon ceramic brakes (some journalists baked the supersnakes brakes after a couple quarter mile runs)
4. PDR - High def video with data logging
5. Electronic limited slip differential
6. Way better interior (including a heads up display)
7. Independent rear suspension
8. Better fuel economy
9. Choice of transmissions
10. Better tires
11. Rev matching
12. Changeable liquid crystal gauge display
13. Better aero including trans and differential cooling

etc. . .

Comparing the Supersnake to this car is a bad comparison as HP numbers aren't everything. They're two entirely different animals. The mustang is better compared against the Camaro.I get the mustang, its a really cool car and tons of HP for the money. If end HP is all you're concerned about, sure the mustang is awesome (and quick); but the supernakes only concern is sheer power.

/fanboi

Yardjass

Oh, for fuck's sake not another HP/liter post.

ej1995

All those features totally set it apart, and honestly I was looking at it from my purchasing perspective as opposed to a Corvette buyers perspective. I dont give a shit about most of that stuff on my personal car so thats my mind subliminally overlooking it, whereas somebody in the market for a Corvette would find all of that appealing.

Wasnt trying to get off on the whole hp per liter thing either, just trying to figure out why GM wouldnt just go ahead and top Fords 662hp since it would be easily done and you wouldnt have to sacrifice anything to do it. Im sure there is way more behind it than that, but Im sure most of you understand what I am saying...lol.

Yardjass

Yeah, I mean the rest of your post is level headed. That HP/liter shit just rubs me the wrong way. I don't think I'd ever spend that kind of money on that particular car but I can definitely see the appeal of the Shelby. It is badass to say the least. The best explaination I can offer up for them not matching is because the C6 Z06 is already faster. I wouldn't be surprised if the base stingray was too. That was probably good enough for them.

Fabrik8

The Corvette team doesn't care about beating a straight line Mustang with a big engine and a solid axle. They have different benchmarks. They have more endurance racing championships to win, not worry about how fast a mustang can trip the lights on the strip. I'm a little biased though.
HP per liter is great, but that's a narrow way to define a car.