Review: 2009 Chevrolet Corvette Z51

by Jonny Lieberman

Published: January 16th, 2009

Jamming along with the cruise control set at 100 mph and the instant fuel economy reading 23 mpg, you start wondering: how General Motors can be in any sort of trouble? The bright yellow Corvette Z51 is beyond calm, cool and collected at this three digit speed. The tachometer’s barely indicating 2,400 rpm. And get a load of these beautiful gauges. I’ve seen chintzier dials on Tag Heuers. You know what? Forget the instrument cluster. It’s all about the heads up display. Which not only indicates speed, but rpm, temp, pressure and… Wait a second– why does one speedometer read 100 mph and the other 99 mph? And why are there three different rattles buzzing in my right ear? And what is that smell?

Before we return to the inside of the 2009 Corvette, let’s spend a moment with the outside. It’s tough to have fruitful debate about such an iconic shape, but I dig C6 ‘Vettes. Especially when compared to the C5. Nice job Chevy on shaping such a taut, muscular form that doesn’t automatically scream, “I Heart New Jersey.” Moving on…

Here’s what I’ve come to realize. Corvettes are designed by people that have never sat inside a Porsche for people that never will sit inside a Porsche. That’s the only possible explanation for such inattention to detail. The seats are crummy, the shifters covered in crummy leather and there are some extremely low-rent plastics in frighteningly obvious places. Like the fake-aluminum steering wheel inserts. This particular car actually sets a new record for tackiness: fake carbon fiber on top of fake leather. Seriously guys, that sucks. Especially when Holden (who you own) is so fully capable of building world class accommodations. One nice thing? The pedals are in the right place

Of course no one buys a Corvette for the interior (Chevy just throws that in for free). It’s all about the engine. Let me introduce you to latest in a long line of bitchin’ Chevy small blocks, the mighty LS3. 6.2-liters. 436 hp. 428 lb-ft torque. Blood pumping numbers for certain, especially if you like to dabble in the aftermarket. Because the LS3 is essentially the LS9/LSA minus some fancy pieces and a blower. But what if you leave the engine as is?

Thanks to all that muscle and a low weight of just 3,273 pounds, the Z51 assaults 60 mph in 4.1 seconds and attacks the quarter-mile in 12.4 seconds (at 117 mph) on its way to a top speed of (probably) 190 mph. Nuts. And unlike certain turbocharged cars I can think of, the Z51’s power is everywhere. Floor it in first (with the nanny off) and the back tires turn to smoke. Floor it in sixth gear and it pulls, hard. It is my firm belief that if this engine were in more vehicles, GM would be in better shape. Naïve? Sure, but the LS3 is fully, 100 percent excellent. An homage to America’s love affair with power.

The Z51 package does two things (besides raising the price by $1,700). The first is an all-new suspension set up with stiffer springs, firmer dampers and fatter sway bars. You also get better brakes and tires, as well as additional cooling. This setup changes the Corvette’s day to day behavior from “nearly intolerable” to “pretty damn good.” Long gone are tooth-damaging thuds and chronic bump-steer over less than ideal macadam. This is the first C6 I’ve experienced with a livable ride.

All these new goodies help with the left-right stuff too, as I got the g-meter to read 0.99g around one memorable right-hander. Sure, there’s still plenty of USDA prime numbness when it comes to steering feedback, but the car’s grip inspires so much confidence that the former doesn’t matter.

The other thing the Z51 package does is make the Z06 obsolete. I just don’t see $20,000+ more value in the (now) middle tier Corvette. Besides, you can spend a little of the money you save on a blower and easily achieve (if not surpass) LS7 power levels. Hell, that’s what Chevy did with the ZR1. Unless you’re actually racing, you won’t notice the performance gap between the Z51 and Z06. But maybe you should skip Corvettes altogether and buy– oh I don’t know– a Porsche 911?

I spent over 1,000 miles inside the Z51 trying to answer that question. Just when I found an attribute that thrilled me — speed! — I found another that horrified — radio! How can a car hold the road with the best of its competition, yet squeak and rattle like something from behind the Iron Curtain? Sort of like how the country that produces the best doctors in the world doesn’t allow 20 percent of its citizenry access to them. The Corvette is America, both in glory and failure.

Jonny Lieberman

Cleanup driver for Team Black Metal V8olvo.

More by Jonny Lieberman

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 107 comments

Sheik480 on Dec 07, 2009

How long do you spend appreciating the inside of your car? For me, it was about five seconds when I sat in it at the dealer. All I paid attention to was the fact that the seat fit, the shifter and steering wheel were well placed, and the pedals were spaced right. True, I'm probably biased (my last car was an 86 Subaru, but I'll keep it around when it snows), but my point is that interior quality makes very little difference unless you focus on silly details like whether or not the carbon fiber trim is real or fake. If you do, get a different f*ck'n' car. As for the targa top, vasoline also works (it doesn't smell like WD-40).

Like Reply
Sheik480 on Apr 07, 2010

I think the reason why you wouldn't just skip the corvette and get a 911 might have something to do with the 911 being $30,000 more expensive. I myself can hardly stand Porsche styling, but I'd sure love a Corvette.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
Redapple2 Love the wheels
Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.