[roastbeef]

this is simply a tool to allow for different horsepower package tiers with the same exact engine.
the audi r8 v10 "plus" does this. $30k package for a tune or something like that.

[See5]

Originally Posted by supra93

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...edly-untunable

They say this before every Corvette introduction.

Will it be more difficult to crack? Yes.

Will the aftermarket figure it out? Yes.

It took them about a year to crack and tune the ZR1 ECM. Now guys are making 800+whp with boltons.

[N54Yankee]

Makers have said the same thing about quite a few cars coming out. I recall they said it about BMW N54/N55 powered cars when they came out. Maybe GM figured out how to make a crack proof safe but I doubt it.

[EDWYER]

Originally Posted by supra93

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g2...pe-spy-photos/

[WestRace]

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...et-corvette-c8

The mid-engine Corvette will not have a 50/50 weight distribution; Mero says it could be more like 35/65, which is typical for a rear-engine car (Editor's note: The 2020 Porsche 911 Carrera S has a 39/61 front/rear weight balance)...

Hm... hopefully that's not true. That's even more rear weight bias than the 911.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by WestRace

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...et-corvette-c8

Hm... hopefully that's not true. That's even more rear weight bias than the 911.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Clearly there's a limit, but provided the motor isn't hanging over the rear axle a rear bias helps braking, putting power down and allows for lighter front components.

These guys know a thing or two about weight bias and certainly don't listen to BMW's tired schtick about 50/50:
[IMG]https://images.latintimes.com/sites/...ck-marshal.jpg[/IMG]

[The HACK]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

You say that like it's a bad thing. Clearly there's a limit, but provided the motor isn't hanging over the rear axle a rear bias helps braking, putting power down and allows for lighter front components.

Porsche also had 60+ years worth of experience trying to figure out how to make it work.

It IS a bad thing if you're trying to ditch 50+ years of incremental improvements and all of a sudden change the entire architecture of your halo sports car.

It'll be like Porsche trying to slap a giant V8 and put it in the front end of their 911.

Oh wait. They did. It's called a Panamera. And it handled fabulously.

Never mind.

But oh wait again. This is GM, not Porsche...The same company that brought you the f**king Malibu.

Yeah. I'll just leave it at that.

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

You say that like it's a bad thing. Clearly there's a limit, but provided the motor isn't hanging over the rear axle a rear bias helps braking, putting power down and allows for lighter front components.

What you said is fairly obvious in theory but that doesn't say much.

Originally Posted by Red Bread

These guys know a thing or two about weight bias and certainly don't listen to BMW's tired schtick about 50/50:
[IMG]https://images.latintimes.com/sites/...ck-marshal.jpg[/IMG]

The currrent C7 has 50:50. They also has the transmission in the back to get 50:50 so what you said doesn't make sense. Sure they understand 50:50.

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by The HACK

Porsche also had 60+ years worth of experience trying to figure out how to make it work.

It IS a bad thing if you're trying to ditch 50+ years of incremental improvements and all of a sudden change the entire architecture of your halo sports car.

It'll be like Porsche trying to slap a giant V8 and put it in the front end of their 911.

Oh wait. They did. It's called a Panamera. And it handled fabulously.

Never mind.

But oh wait again. This is GM, not Porsche...The same company that brought you the f**king Malibu.

Yeah. I'll just leave it at that.

Well there is no need to make things more difficult on yourself.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by The HACK

But oh wait again. This is GM, not Porsche...The same company that brought you the f**king Malibu.

Well, Porsche's parent company brought us this:

[The HACK]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Well, Porsche's parent company brought us this:

That is ALSO true. However, having had 2 GM (Chevrolet specifically) vehicles in the garage after nearly 20 years of ubiquitous BMW ownership (sprinkled in with a couple of Subarus but whatever), my hopes of GM trying to go out of their comfort zone to try and do something THAT different isn't high.

It isn't that GM's engineers are incompetent. Quite the opposite. It's GM's penny pinching nature where sh*t that the entire automotive industry has gotten right for more than 100 years seems to break because they use cheap GLUE that's got me worried.

[NoGuru]

I have been seeing the new Corvette all over Oakland Co, MI. Has the crazy anti picture wrap on it but still.

[WestRace]

Most mid-engine cars have weight distribution around 42% front. I was a bit surprised the C8 rumored to have 36% front. The 911 with each iteration has moved its engine forward closer to the rear axle to get better weight distribution. I think the reason behind 911 rear engine is to have extra room upfront to add two extra seats. I don't think Porsche put the engine there because they think that's the ideal location for the engine. If you put the engine in the middle, you probably can have only two seats.

[JDsX3]

Since the current Stingray (C7) has pretty close to a 50-50 weight distribution, it's reasonable to expect the C8 midengine will be something like a 40-60. But it is possible that it could be closer to 50-50, since Porsche managed that with the Boxster series.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by JDsX3

Since the current Stingray (C7) has pretty close to a 50-50 weight distribution, it's reasonable to expect the C8 midengine will be something like a 40-60. But it is possible that it could be closer to 50-50, since Porsche managed that with the Boxster series.

Also transverse vs longitudinal engines. The C8 should be longitudinal, making it harder to push the balance to the front.

Again, 50/50 isn't an ideal. Rearward bias helps quite a bit. FD RX7's and a few other front engine cars have managed to be closer to 45/55.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by WestRace

Most mid-engine cars have weight distribution around 42% front. I was a bit surprised the C8 rumored to have 36% front. The 911 with each iteration has moved its engine forward closer to the rear axle to get better weight distribution. I think the reason behind 911 rear engine is to have extra room upfront to add two extra seats. I don't think Porsche put the engine there because they think that's the ideal location for the engine. If you put the engine in the middle, you probably can have only two seats.

Generally yes, there are the purists that proclaim if Porsche wraps the Cayman in a 911-esque body and calls it the 911 then it's the end of times, but really, that would be the better car/chassis. Porsche has to go to exotic lengths to overcome the rear engine layout, like 4-wheel steering, active suspension (sways), etc. It's not that you can't make a very high performing car, even one that is faster than everything else, but it takes more resources and exotic engineering and it's easier for the next guy to come along and make a faster car for much cheaper. There are good cases to be made that 50/50 is not necessarily the optimal distribution and how many drive wheels the car has also matters. Really, you only need enough weight up front for steering, and enough in the rear to put the power down. That is a simplified version, but it also doesn't mean "50/50". One of the other big issues is the polar moments created by having a bunch of weight at the end of the car, either end. Again, exotic engineering can help to minimize the effects, but you can have 50/50 but if all that weight is at the end past the axle, when it rotates it's not going to be easy to bring it back, it's going to want to swap ends easier. This is why my WRX had massive understeer followed by snap-oversteer.

[TSM330i]

I don't think 50:50 weight distribution is the end-all be-all in any way shape or form.
Right now, three of the fastest cars around a track (C&D Lightning Lap) all have a different drivetrain layout.
Quickest is rear engine: GT2RS
Second is front engine: ZR1
Third is mid-engine: 720S

I believe chevy saw the light in racing. The Ford GT, Ferrari 488GTLM and the 911RSR are all essentially mid-engine cars.

The above noted 720S is the "standard" car, not the LT version, which will more than likely be quicker than the GT2RS when it comes out.

We have to remember, once you turn, put the brakes on or accelerate the car is no longer 50:50 weight distribution. It's shifting and how the chassis deals with the shift in balance will determine how well it performs.

[Shiza]

https://jalopnik.com/2020-c8-mid-eng...w-r-1836174302

Looks like someone leaked the tail end

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by Shiza

https://jalopnik.com/2020-c8-mid-eng...w-r-1836174302

Looks like someone leaked the tail end

Camaro with some Aventador mixed in?

[Red Bread]

Guess there will be a strong market for aftermarket exhaust. That's awful.

[Ickdeep]

New engine alive on the roads

https://www.thedrive.com/news/28077/...on-the-highway

[turboawd]

Originally Posted by Ickdeep

New engine alive on the roads

https://www.thedrive.com/news/28077/...on-the-highway

this corvette should be a big hit, provided they dont price it in ferrari/lambo territory.