The Chevrolet Corvette is the exception that proves the rule. It’s the one GM car that has never, ever been boring. Sure, there’ve been times when the ‘Vette lost the plot– when comparing its dynamic capabilities to a similarly priced foreign sports car was like pitting Cheese Whiz against Normandie brie. But the ‘Vette was never po-faced about it. Besides, those days are gone. As I sampled a 2008 convertible automatic with a few new upgrades, I wondered: what could GM learn from the Chevrolet Corvette?
The latest Corvette’s "sheetmetal" remains exuberantly faithful to the model’s phallic traditions– despite Pokemon-eyes set within a vaguely feminine, Viper-esque nose. (Not to mention poorly integrated quad exhausts that seem to hoik the car’s derriere into the air in the great Gallic tradition.) Top down, the ‘Vette’s profile is breathtaking; the strakes and intakes are as flawlessly sculpted as the sinews in the arms of Michelangelo’s David.
The ‘Vette’s cabin is strictly as case of ‘nothing to see here folks; move along.” While the new Malibu gets sexy snickery and touch-friendly materials, the ‘Vette’s plastic controls would be right at home in an ‘80’s Subaru, and the materials are about as luxurious as a Day’s Inn suite. The new Custom Leather-Wrapped Interior Package only makes matters worse, drawing MORE attention to the Corvette’s piss-poor polymers. Oh, and the Chevy Cobalt called; it wants its steering wheel back.
Fuhgeddaboutit. Fire-up the Corvette’s LS3 small block V8, and you will. Even (or especially) at idle, you can sense those 430 horses kicking the starting gate. Give the fillies their head, and, well, the Vette ‘vert weighs-in at 3246 lbs. What do YOU think happens GMNext? Whatever your opinion, think fast; the Corvette chop top teleports its occupants from zero to sixty in 4.3 seconds. The only thing more dramatic than the Corvette’s ability to get its driver to scream a religious blessing on excrement: the NASCAR roar drowning out any and all expletives.
Once you’re out of quarter-mile challenge mode– which will take some time and may never occur– the LS3’s bottom end is surprisingly weak for a 6.2-liter engine. But the mid-range swell makes up for it. Oh yes it does. Got revs? Got power. Enough power to humiliate all but the most exotic of supercars in terms of hyperspace button in-gear oomph. God bless the V8 engine! Oh wait; He already has.
Unfortunately, our tester was equipped with an automatic gearbox– rather than the new short-throw self-shifter. The Corvette’s six speed slushbox is a bit dim-witted. Prod it hard and the mighty motor pauses slightly as the requisite greasy bits slip down a gear (or two) to find the requisite shove. On the positive side, under what some call “normal conditions,” the Corvette’s cog swapper swaps cogs so seamlessly you’ll find yourself going a lot faster than you thought (honest officer).
The steering is similarly effortless; which may or may not be a good thing depending on your testosterone levels. If you’ve got the balls, the Corvette’s balance, low center of gravity and wide gumballs (18’s up front, 19’s in the back, and no all-season mishegos) will see you through the most tortuous of twisties, at the most hair-raising of speeds. But you’ll need your wits as well; the drop top’s scuttle shake adds unwelcome lateral complexity.
Thankfully, the Corvette’s hugely powerful and tireless brakes (at least off-track) solve the most vexing Vette side effects. And you get an amazingly compliant ride for no extra charge. Less sporting drivers (a.k.a. most convertible owners) should leave the $1995 Magnetic Ride Control box unticked, wait for the straights to let slip the dogs of war and waft in peace. Although most Corvette convertibles are destined to wear a garage queen’s ermine robes (i.e. a soft car cover), this Corvette rivals Stuttgart’s finest in the “everyday” part of the everyday supercar olympics.
Speaking of which, perhaps the single most remarkable thing about Chevy’s uber-drop top is its $60k asking price. If you’re measuring sheer bang for the buck, you can’t beat it with a stick; although, again, the manual transmission is highly recommended. And it must be said that's one Hell of a lot of money for a Chevy.
So what have we learned from the Corvette Convertible? That constant, incremental evolution keeps a car competitive between significant re-thinks? We knew that. That sex sells? Duh. That a clear unique selling point (horsepower) is the key to sales success? Double duh. That GM should have upped the model’s price and fixed the interior, eliminating the last reason NOT to buy the Corvette Convertible. True dat.
The most important lesson that the ‘Vette can teach GM: whatever the Corvette product development and management team is doing is EXACTLY what ALL their product teams should be doing. Inside GM, common sense is not so common.
79 Comments on “2008 Chevrolet Corvette Convertible Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
$60K sounds a great deal until you think that you won’t have to pay a lot more to get a new Nissan GTR. I know which I would go for…
Jay Leno said nothing beats the vette for value.
$60K sounds a great deal until you think that you won’t have to pay a lot more to get a new Nissan GTR. I know which I would go for…
ahem….MARKUP!!!!
It’ll be a long time before you can get a Nissan GT-R for anything close to MSRP.
Sure, there’ve been times when the ‘Vette lost the plot– when comparing its dynamic capabilities to a similarly priced foreign sports car was like pitting Cheese Whiz against Normandie brie.
What were these cars?
Even if you have a preference for the RX-7, 300ZX, or Supra during the Corvette’s fourth generation, I would hardly call their comparative dynamic performance “Brie to Cheese Whiz”.
Good review. I wish GM would put a little more cash into the Corvette’s interior. The M6 is definitely the way to go in a Corvette however, with a little work (cash) the A4 can be a good performer though not nearly as much fun.
It’ll be a long time before you can get a Nissan GT-R. period. Ahh Faith in the unknown.
I’ve got to object to this statement: “It’s the one GM car that has never, ever been boring.”
Methinks the author has not yet driven some late 70s, early 80s corvettes. I drove one, and I do not remember the year. That is not a testament to my sloth, it is a testament to the ability to forget that Corvette.
It was all show and no go…and it didn’t show that well. It could barely turn, stop, or accelerate. Slamming the loud pedal only resulted in about 5 seconds of gear-hunting (yes, it was an auto) before the pace slowly increased….slow as in a 1995 Honda Civic. Loaded with 500 pounds of concrete. With fouled spark plugs.
Why are the manufacturers providing more and more journos with slushboxes on their high performance models? Is it because the “I’ll shift it for ya”s have gotten so good? Or because the makers are tired of glazed clutches after 1000 miles?
Joe
Joe O :
It could barely turn, stop, or accelerate. Slamming the loud pedal only resulted in about 5 seconds of gear-hunting (yes, it was an auto) before the pace slowly increased….slow as in a 1995 Honda Civic. Loaded with 500 pounds of concrete. With fouled spark plugs.
That doesn’t sound boring to me! Seriously, even when ‘Vette’s were tail-happy sleds, they still LOOKED exciting.
NB: the Vette tested was not provided by GM. TTAC always acknowledges any and all manufacturer contributions to our editorial.
3200 lbs? Wow. That 25MPG highway could well be 30+ using the 3.6 DFI V6, and the car wouldn’t be a terrible slouch, either.
Aerodynamics and light weight; what a concept.
Around here, the people who own late-model automatic ‘Vette convertibles are middle-aged guys who own their own fencing companies.
Ah Corvette. A guy I hated had one in high school. So that colored my perceptions for a long time I guess. They have been very ugly for a very long time. I agree that the current generation ragtop is beautiful though – and GM, in its quest for making cars that no one wants, can afford, or lately pay gas into, has perfected a car that can’t be driven in the manner it was intended anywhere but a track. Perhaps this is endemic to this class of vehicle, but I frankly don’t see the point. And please do not lecture me about 26 mpg on the sticker. If you are actually getting 26 mpg on this car, you should have bought a Hyundai. Or four.
I realize that they are different cars for different audiences, but GM also gets it kind of right with the little pontiac/saturn ragtop twins – except that they have no trunk space whatsoever. The vette has trunk space, I think. Even in the ragtop.
However, I quibble. Most of the men (usually men) I have known who have these cars, like those who pilot fat wheeled 911’s and other like cars are not interested in top end. These cars will see a track about as much as most SUV’s see a dirt road. They are for see and be seen, as indicated by the testers automatic shifter. And who would want to be seen in a car that Leno says “is a good value”? That sounds like an ad for generic toilet paper.
I suppose if you couldn’t afford a real show stopper, you could buy one of these. I suppose.
3200 lbs? Wow. That 25MPG highway could well be 30+ using the 3.6 DFI V6, and the car wouldn’t be a terrible slouch, either.
Aerodynamics and light weight; what a concept.
That would be a surefire deathwatch editorial on the folly of putting six cylinders in a ‘vette (C1 nonwithstanding) if I’ve ever seen one.
quasimondo :
tell u what, at 30+ mpg, I would be interested.
And ONLY you, and surely not any die-hard Corvette fan.
As a former Corvette owner, I’d be interested in a “baby ‘Vette” with the handling of the regular model and slightly lower performance that turned 30+ mpg. As long as the 0-60 time is still in the 5-6 second range, who needs a 175 mph+ top speed?
(Incidentally, 30+ MPG wouldn’t be that hard to attain on the highway with just a few tweaks. The 2003 I had would turn 29-30 MPG cruising at 70 in 6th gear all day long.)
Just give me a big motor , a fast 0-60 time and all is forgiven? Not so fast. The Corvette is a Barbie car, a fast Barbie car , but still a Barbie car. They are not eye catching, in particular that little Barbie-esqe hood scoop on the faster models looks very petite , very Barbie. The whole shape looks tired,specially the front and sides.The Corvettes of the 1960’s was the high water mark, Current Corvettes are just as impractical as ever , but now look about as sexy as the Smart ForTwo. A good safe bet for the want-ta-be playboys, but it no longer says “step aside, there’s a new sheriff in town”. Does it come in pink , or just seem like should? Bill C.
In my mind, such an idea dictates that this vehicle be named anything but Corvette. There are some vehicles that have such a following and are such automotive icons that it would be an outright betrayal of the vehicle to do someting like what you guys suggest. Think about it. Can you imagine a Porsche 911 with anything other than a flat-six engine hanging off the back of it, or a piston-powered RX? (I know about the LS1 swaps; those things are rolling heresies)
There’s something to be said about not screwing up a winning formula to appeal to a minority of potential buyers who may not even buy the car. The automotive landscape is littered with such automotive betrayals.
Actually, Nissan is supposed to be fighting price gouging on the GT-R, including a direct conduit through the regional VP offices, dealer certification, etc.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/12/nissan-will-att.html
We’ll see if it works, but the $70K GT-R at MSRP could certainly hurt the Vette in the bang/buck department.
The fact that you can’t even get a GT-R (let alone at MSRP)is irrelevant to a car that you can get at or below MSRP. Corvettes have a large following that justify 6 generations of the car. The car has it’s good & bad attributes but to say that it needs better MPG or that it’s a car for the middle aged is a cop-out. It’s a performance car that many desire (at least for 6 generations).
Wow, jerseydevil, you must have really hated that guy in high school. The C5 and C6 Corvettes are great cars that can be driven every day. Easy to get in and out of, large cargo area, tremendous to drive slow or fast, trouble-free even decent gas mileage. I used to be a Porsche guy (I’ve had 4 including a 93 911 that I still have and a 2007 Cayman S that I just traded in on a Z06). The Corvette is a better car than any of these, hands down, regardless of price. And, your high school nemesis not withstanding, Corvette people are nicer, they wave to each other, unlike Porsche guys who are too cool!
” I’d be interested in a “baby ‘Vette” with the handling of the regular model and slightly lower performance that turned 30+ mpg.”
Wouldn’t that be the Solstice (and Sky)? Looks like GM has it’s bases covered. I only hope that the Solstice is given the chance to evolve as the Corvette has over the years.
I fear that GM’s cash position makes that difficult.
BlisterInTheSun:
Around here, the people who own late-model automatic ‘Vette convertibles are middle-aged guys who own their own fencing companies.
The Corvette drivers in my neighborhood are typically 45-55 year old recently divorced law firm partners with longer-than-average peppered hair.
timoted—the C6 Corvette is equipped with a 6 speed auto.
I don’t understand how anyone can hate the Corvette. Stellar performance creds combined with class leading fuel economy and utility = a no brainer.
True, my 1998 convertible has an interior that definitely needs improvement, but I would say that that is the ONLY fault of the car. I bought it used at a very reasonable price last year, and I simply love it. (A 13.4 quarter bone stock gets me emotionally erect, too).
And essen is right, Corvette owners ALWAYS wave at each other.
Oh and I’m 32 and married w/kids.
essen :
interesting comments – thanks.
U traded in a cayman for a vette? why? i am considering a cayman.
jersey devil:
I traded in a 2005 C6 Corvette Coupe (Stick, as are all my cars) on the Cayman. The Cayman is a beautiful car, great handling, and I had the Porsche bug. I missed the horsepower of the Vette, plain and simple. I didn’t like having to wait to get into the the fast lane on the Turnpike or Parkway (I’m an NJ guy too). I traded the Cayman in on the Z06.
For magazines, the GTR is manna. For the average car buyer it is and will remain vaporware. There’s no way Nissan will avoid price gouging. If demand exceeds supply there will be huge price gouging. That’s human nature.
So – the Vette will remain the best fast car value for some time to come.
Wouldn’t that be the Solstice (and Sky)?
Solstice on the skidpad: 0.90g
Corvette on the skidpad: > 1g
Just saying.
Was it a Cayman or CaymanS?
In terms of power there is a big difference.
The solstice/sky ergonomics are SO bad that the car is unusable. :(
As for the GT-R, Nissan might very well keep the Dealers in line (they have an incentive to do so), so you get one if you put your deposit down now, but without a huge markup (unlike the $10K on a $20K solstice we’ve seen.)
In all honesty, the “American Revolution” ended with the 1960s Corvette. The 50s and 60s Corvette was truly revolutionary, employing state of the art technology that you could not get in any other car, not to mention the price. I think that the Corvette is a prisoner of its own heritage. The recipe for the corvette is unalterable, V8 power, rear wheel drive, engine in the front. Remember the uproar when corvette enthusiasts found out that GM was doing away with the flip up head-lights, automotive blasphemy!
The problem is the Corvette needs to be able to become more than it is. The recipe for improving the corvette can’t simply continue to be more displacement/more power, in this kind of competitive world. A Corvette should employ state of the art technology and showcase to the world that America can build the best car in the world at a price that no one can touch. What about a mid-engine configuration, dual variable valve timing with lift, gasoline direct injection… just to name a few.
Let’s get real, even the Z06 7.0L V8 which puts out 505HP has A WORST HP/Liter ratio than the current Ford Taurus.
Corvette Z06 505/7= 72.1 Horse power per liter.
Ford Taurus 263/3.5 = 75.1 Horse power per liter.
This isn’t an American Revolution, this is just laziness. The next generation Corvette needs to step its game up if it’s going to compete with the new cars coming out: Case and point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM5wxTmCZYQ&feature=related
RGS920:
If you’re saying that Vette development is lazy, that must mean Porsche is REALLY lazy.
It seems that the evolution of a car, or more correctly, an automotive icon, is an art. Both Porsche (911) and Chevrolet (Vette) are 2 examples of what happens when you make evolutionary changes but leave the successful basic concept in tact.
Here’s proof: When was the last time you have seen incentives on either car? The consumer is the final arbiter of what is good. Gotta love capitalism.
60k is for the convertible. The coupe is in the mid 40k range. The GT-R is not a convertible, so it is competing with the Z06 on performance vs. price. Plus, the GT-R itself, its performance, and especially its pricing are vaporware. I don’t see how it can be that much faster than the R8, down about 55 hp, but also 400-500 lbs lighter and also has awd.
RGS920:
While I agree that new technologies should be implemented on the Corvette, the LS-7 is far from laziness. HP/liter is a decent way to judge performance, but it isn’t a true benchmark for an engine’s technology.
If you want to use the Taurus for a comparison again (for whatever reason), how come the 7.0L V8 Z06 is rated at 15/24 MPG while the FWD Taurus does 17/24 MPG? Granted the Z06 has a tall cruise gear and when driven properly should get much lower mileage, but the engine isn’t designed to achieve the maximum HP/liter. It’s the combination of lightweight, powerful, efficient (relatively) and affordable that makes the LS-7 successful.
jkross22 :
January 7th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
RGS920:
If you’re saying that Vette development is lazy, that must mean Porsche is REALLY lazy.
It seems that the evolution of a car, or more correctly, an automotive icon, is an art. Both Porsche (911) and Chevrolet (Vette) are 2 examples of what happens when you make evolutionary changes but leave the successful basic concept in tact.
Here’s proof: When was the last time you have seen incentives on either car? The consumer is the final arbiter of what is good. Gotta love capitalism.
Wait 20 years my friend. Corvette continues down the path it’s made I guarantee you that the market will bury it. From the people in my generation, the people I went to college with, law school and the people my age that I work with. None of them have the word corvette on their tongues when they are talking about cars.
Evolutionary changes? My Dad’s 1967 corvette stingray has about the same curb-weight as the new corvette which “evolved” by cutting off a few inches from the last model. Oh yeah, and added more displacement/HP.
GM continues with the same recipe 20 years from now you’ll see the incentives at the GM lot and the average age of vette owners continue to rise.
In order to save this American Icon GM is going to need to have an American Revolution because the current evolution of the Corvette isn’t going to cut it. Capitalism is not stagnant.
RSG920: “The 50s and 60s Corvette was truly revolutionary, employing state of the art technology that you could not get in any other car”
Not exactly. Up through 1962, it was a primitive car that sat on a modified 1952 Chevy sedan frame, and all the other components were standard Chevy items that were used/available on the sedans. The ‘63 had IRS, which had been used in Europe for eons, and in ‘65 the ‘Vette got discs, which had also been around for a long time.
The ‘Vette was sexy, and had lots of power, but was never “state of the art”.
By 1975, power dropped to 165hp, resulting in 17sec quarter miles. The 911 never lost power during the seventies; Porsche used fuel injection and “advanced technology” to keep performance up while the Corvette became a poseur only until well into the mid eighties.
idontknow1
It was the Cayman S, 295 HP
hp/L is possibly the most irrelevant statistic ever. If you want to compare things that actually matter, you can talk about hp/Engine Weight (the LS3 is a relatively light motor, name one 430hp+ convertible that weighs 3200lbs with a 50/50 weight distribution?), hp/MPG (the Vette gets excellent highway mpg although its city mpg leaves much to be desired), hp/lb-ft etc. but hp/L says absolutely nothing.
danms6 :
January 7th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
RGS920:
While I agree that new technologies should be implemented on the Corvette, the LS-7 is far from laziness. HP/liter is a decent way to judge performance, but it isn’t a true benchmark for an engine’s technology.
If you want to use the Taurus for a comparison again (for whatever reason), how come the 7.0L V8 Z06 is rated at 15/24 MPG while the FWD Taurus does 17/24 MPG? Granted the Z06 has a tall cruise gear and when driven properly should get much lower mileage, but the engine isn’t designed to achieve the maximum HP/liter. It’s the combination of lightweight, powerful, efficient (relatively) and affordable that makes the LS-7 successful.
You have the mpg rating for the FWD Taurus mixed up with the AWD Taurus. Also remember that the Taurus uses 87 octane gasoline while the corvette Z06 requires 93 octane. Regardless, I wasn’t comparing fuel economy. My point was that the efficiency of this engine was no where near what it could potentially be. For example, the Direct Injection technology used in the CTS raises the performance of the 3.6L from 263HP to 303HP with no effect on MPG. Why isn’t that technology showcased in the vette? DI technology has been around for quiet sometime as well. Or VVT, what about dual VVT that effects both intake and exhuast? It is not enough that you build a good engine. The Z06 should be a world beater of an engine. And displacement should never be a justification for lazyness. GM put an engine with the same efficiency in terms of power as the Ford Taurus… to me that is lazyness on the part of GM.
I thought I’d never see the day when people yawn at an engine making 430 hp without the use of nitrous or forced induction.
If Mattel decided to make a “adult” toys I get the impression that they would look just like the Corvette. Or better yet the Corvette really does look like a full scale Hot Wheels car in person.
OK, lets get the stats out of the way first. This way I think we all can be a little bit more objective about this car. The Corvette is amazing on paper and on the track (with just a little work). In todays sportcar market the Corvette is the MEAN (performance wise) that all others are measured.
Needless to say if I were in the market a dedicated track racecar (and had the cash) the Corvette would top the list. I can not think of a better platform to start with.
Now that I have given the Vette it much deserved praise please allow me to point out what I think is wrong. The Vette has a very limited appeal as an object of desire for too many potential costumers with the necesary $$$. After 50 years in existance as one of GM consistant top products the Corvette still has a undenible cheapness factor that does NOT fit its $45,000 to $100,000+ image. No matter what color you paint a Vette it still look like it is made out of ummm, plastic! Parked next to a plain-jane Boxster the Vette has that toy look to it while the Porsche looks like a serious piece of automotive engineering (almost).
There is no neutrality to the Corvette in terms of style. It is a polarizing design that too many people feel they will look rather rediculous driving around in. “Hey look at me and my CORVETTE”! Like it or not the driver is screaming this whether they want the attention or not. On the other hand all but the most outrageous porsches allow the owner to simply chill out and enjoy the car without much unnecessary fanfare.
Really who wants to look like an cockold old man or a pimply faced punk (the two main sterotypes for this car)?
Very nice review.
whatdoiknow1 :
While I have to agree with some of what you say, but saying it looks like a toy in comparison with a Boxster of all cars, is pretty out of line. The Boxster is a great car (in fact, the Boxster S/Cayman S were the only other cars I felt were worthy of consideration when I bought my 2006 Coupe) I can think of few more toylike cars than the entry level Porsche
I also have to disagree a little with the stereotypes. The old man stereotype is definitely there, but I haven’t seen too many pimply faced punks that have the cash to buy a new Vette. And while some people look down on it for being a “Just a Chevy,” the car has enormous appeal amongst people of all ages. I can’t count how many random people have stopped me in the streets, at gas stations, on the sidewalk, etc. to comment on my car. I turned 24 a few months ago and I have yet to meet a person my age that didn’t have at least some respect for the car.
That’s not to say the Vette is perfect. The city gas milage is terrible (I’m averaging 11mpg, and that’s with a manual transmission), it sucks having to try to talk a Chevy dealer into giving you a loaner, the steering feel isn’t great, and the exhaust sounds pathetic (at least they have a dual mode exhaust on the new 08s), but for the price the only car that can even come close to offering as much as the Vette are the Boxster/Cayman S twins, and the Vette is more on par performance-wise with 911s.
I have a 2006 and the bang for the buck is great! I really like the car.
The Corvette is a relative bargain. Why did he test an auto model?? I would have waited until a manual was offered and taken it to VIR (Virginia International Raceway).
Look forward to a review of the new ZR1!!!!! 4 out of 5 stars yes agree!
there are a number of people with corvettes in local autocross circles. they’re friendly, some of them are women, and they turn in some very fast times. no spring chickens though. they’ve made me respect the car, though I still don’t want one.
One of the nicest aspects of the vettes is their long range capabilities.
You can literally just keep on going, and going, and going in a late model Vette without feeling any significant fatigue. The engine will comfortably cruise at a steady 80+ mph without straining a bit regardless of the incline. Although the interior is (cough! cough!) nothing special, I’ve always found the seats to be very comfortable and far less punishing than some of the more taut seats found in many German models.
The engines on most of the Vettes, from the LT1’s on up, tend to last a very long time as well. I believe Porsche and GM can lay claim to the durability crown in the sports car segment as far as engines are concerned.
If I bought one though, I would have to perform some major modifications on the interior. The dashboard and steering wheel in particular are far below what would be gently called ‘decent’. My first choice wold be a Porsche hands down. But if I had to choose between the two as a daily driver, the Vette would likely represent a better real world choice.
That still wouldn’t stop me from choosing the Porsche.
@thetopdog
What I like about all the Porsches is the refinement. I collect Porsche valves because they are so beautiful. (Neither BMW or Corvette valves hold are nearly as nice.) In fact, I made a menorah out of Porsche valves, which you can see on my website, motorlegends.com. Toy? I don’t think so.
I haven’t yet driven the Vette, but from everything I’ve read about the car, I’m inclined to respect it. But beyond a certain point, sheer power doesn’t satisfy me nearly as much as handling and refinement. But for those who thrill to acceleration, I can see the Vette’s appeal.
When I referred to the Boxster as ‘toylike’ I was strictly talking about the looks. It looks a lot like a toy to me, part of it probably has something to do with the fact that the front and back ends are shaped almost exactly the same. It’s still a good looking car though, and the Cayman is even better
I have a lot of respect for the Boxster/Cayman, i wouldn’t say they’re better than the Vette, but I wouldn’t say they’re any worse either. This time around I wanted power, next time I’m looking for a car I might go for a Cayman if I want something more tossable
jkross22
I got about $10k off of the red/red 96 LT4 I used to drive back when the C5 was coming out. There is a local dealer here that offers about $6-8k off new coupes and around $10-12k off the ‘verts towards the end of every model year. Check out Corvette Fourm if anyone here is interested.
After the Vette and 98 Trans Am and 00 Camaro SS 6 speeds the GM RWD muscle just didn’t do it for me any more. The 2nd gen Talon TSi I used for a beater for a few years before starting to modify it was and still is the more interesting car to me even when I had the Super Sport with SLP exhaust and t-tops. Especially with the AWD I added and the extra 240bhp from the stock 2.0 liter. :) So mabye the argument that the Corvette needs to go more high tech and perhaps mid-engine or hybrid/AWD/curb feelers etc is a good one to pursue for the next generation of high end sports car buyers. I have read there has been and still is a big debate within GM on taking Corvette mid engine someday.
So anyway yes this car in the article is still a great value for the money. Sure the 08 is $60k but heck 11 years ago my LT4 Coupe stickered for around $42k and the convertibles were over $52,000 IIRC. That means GM has been holding the price on the vehicle over the years if you take inflation into account. Good for them.
David Holzman:
Corvettes handle very well, actually. The power gets brought up a lot because Corvettes overpower Porsches in that price range by a good margin. That doesn’t mean that Corvettes aren’t refined – they perform extremely well on the track and have a long history in professional racing.