Counting the polygons: a peek at the C7s rear

[bkuper]

Originally Posted by rickv

The above done properly would've been awesome.

WHERE DID YOU FIND THESE???
THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL!

(All caps on purpose)
This is the first conversion I've seen that I really like.



Edit:
Love this one. These guys really seem to know what they're doing.

[Andonis]

This thing is AMAZING!!!!

I collected two little galleries of this wonderful beast

Convertible

Coupe

Thanks Longtimer!!!!

[Longtimer]

Glad you like it Adonis. To those of us who have been looking at older vettes for decades, even the good (Karl's is excellent IMO) adaptations on C5 & C6 chassis take a bit of getting used to. The windshield rake and some of the panel proportions make your mind scream "Foul!!"

But there are some worthy attempts out there and as I said, I think this is one of the very best.

There are, of course, even more with their own unique alternative (not retro) designs, but IMO there are far more "Fails" in that group than "Worthy" designs.

Brian, I don't recall where I first ran across the Karl's Stingray, but I've admired it for a while now. I agree about the proportions. That, to me is what sets this one apart. I suspect it is much longer than the chassis upon which it is based. Look at how far it extends from the hatch terminus and the hood terminus - although the front is closer than the back. A real C2 probably looks like a toy next to it. But it looks hot!

[Andonis]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

Glad you like it Adonis. To those of us who have been looking at older vettes for decades, even the good (Karl's is excellent IMO) adaptations on C5 & C6 chassis take a bit of getting used to. The windshield rake and some of the panel proportions make your mind scream "Foul!!"

But there are some worthy attempts out there and as I said, I think this is one of the very best.

There are, of course, even more with their own unique alternative (not retro) designs, but IMO there are far more "Fails" in that group than "Worthy" designs.

Brian, I don't recall where I first ran across the Karl's Stingray, but I've admired it for a while now. I agree about the proportions. That, to me is what sets this one apart. I suspect it is much longer than the chassis upon which it is based. Look at how far it extends from the hatch terminus and the hood terminus - although the front is closer than the back. A real C2 probably looks like a toy next to it. But it looks hot!

Like it? LOVE it. This is unbelievable! I am not saying this should be the C7 but OMG, this is very Corvette. I envy you for looking older Vettes for decades. Sometimes I think how could it feel like living in the 70s or 60s. Or 80s as an adult. Those Vettes have heart. I still can't define why don't I like the c5, but when I read that GM made a global contest between the design centers to design the next Vette I was thinking about something like this. I mean with real Corvette cues.
Don't get me wrong, I like the new one too, but after looking at this Karl's... I like it as it is. I wouldn't change a thing on this.

I can really see what you mean by "after looking at older vettes for decades... " at least I think I see.
No wonder you have high expectations. And taste.

[dobrenyr]

I've seen a C3 (1971 or 1972) that is really a C6 Z06 underneath and it is awsome... In many respects a better overall car than the original. Original is still "original" but we all have to admit that the newer tech, drives much better and is much easier to live with.

[Longtimer]

Originally Posted by Andonis

Like it? LOVE it. This is unbelievable! I am not saying this should be the C7 but OMG, this is very Corvette. I envy you for looking older Vettes for decades. Sometimes I think how could it feel like living in the 70s or 60s. Or 80s as an adult. Those Vettes have heart. I still can't define why don't I like the c5, but when I read that GM made a global contest between the design centers to design the next Vette I was thinking about something like this. I mean with real Corvette cues.
Don't get me wrong, I like the new one too, but after looking at this Karl's... I like it as it is. I wouldn't change a thing on this.

I can really see what you mean by "after looking at older vettes for decades... " at least I think I see.
No wonder you have high expectations. And taste.

Adonis, if you ever get the chance, read "All Corvettes are Red." The author was allowed to sit in meetings and document the Corvette C5 program for years. It covers the on-again-off-again authorized development plus all the off-the-GM-books covert work that GM employees - at risk to their careers - did to crate the C5. You don't need to like the design to appreciate learning about the inside working relationships between engineering and design and all the obsticles that could have killed corvette. Also, the last section of the book shows the orgainization of Corvette responsibilities as they still are today. Although the names have changed, it provides good insight into who was responsible for what, even on the C7.


JMHO

[dobrenyr]

Good taste stands the test of time!

For those old enough to recall, remember Charley the Tuna in the Starkist Tuna adds, Charely wanted to show Starkist that he had good taste... but they wanted tuna's to TASTE GOOD !
Seems to me these days, everyone is just loooking for tuna's with good taste and have forgotten the reality that they should taste good... like the emperor with no clothes, we are sometimes "told" that it's good and we should by it becasue it will mean we have good taste... a marketing ploy... Us older gentlemen, tend not to be swayed buy such marketing because we've been around long enough to know what is truly beautiful and why...

The "kids" will find out in about 25 years what i'm talking about... just remember... you'll be saying... geez i should have listened to my parents... they were right... about many things.

[Andonis]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

Adonis, if you ever get the chance, read "All Corvettes are Red." The author was allowed to sit in meetings and document the Corvette C5 program for years. It covers the on-again-off-again authorized development plus all the off-the-GM-books covert work that GM employees - at risk to their careers - did to crate the C5. You don't need to like the design to appreciate learning about the inside working relationships between engineering and design and all the obsticles that could have killed corvette. Also, the last section of the book shows the orgainization of Corvette responsibilities as they still are today. Although the names have changed, it provides good insight into who was responsible for what, even on the C7.



JMHO

sounds like a must read book to me ASAP. I like these inside information (not just foreigner) stuff. as you say it makes me think it might have the answers to all the questions i had before. i always wanted to know everything about corvettes. i don't really know why myself, call me crazy, but somehow corvettes have a magical atmosphere that attracts me.

[leshelt]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

Adonis, if you ever get the chance, read "All Corvettes are Red." The author was allowed to sit in meetings and document the Corvette C5 program for years. It covers the on-again-off-again authorized development plus all the off-the-GM-books covert work that GM employees - at risk to their careers - did to crate the C5. You don't need to like the design to appreciate learning about the inside working relationships between engineering and design and all the obsticles that could have killed corvette. Also, the last section of the book shows the orgainization of Corvette responsibilities as they still are today. Although the names have changed, it provides good insight into who was responsible for what, even on the C7.

JMHO

An excellent read! Read it when it first hit the streets. Gives a really good insight into what it takes to bring a new concept to production.

[Chris Draper]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

Unfortunately, many of them look better than the C7.

I like this one...

...but I would not want to see GM produce it as a new Generation. They need to push the design envelope, not fold and crease someone elses designs.

That looks terrible. The proportions are way off. And you can buy a real 63 cheaper then these kits.

The kits are about $80k plus the price of the donor C5/C6.

For that price, you could have one of these Superformance Grand Sport replicas (about $80k plus the cost of whatever drivetrain you want). And these are now officially licensed by GM.

[dreamcars99]

Originally Posted by OC Vic

Well, sure, if you wanna get real, then nearly all styling changes are bullshit.

Bodies are changed every so often to make you feel like your model is out of date, and you need a new one.

Does anyone think this myriad of straight lines on the Aventador are really each all that important? Is this really an improvement over the Muci? Only a child would think that a new body style is actually any real change for the good. (Except if we're talking cooling, downforce) Actually, the Aventador, while largely angular, is really in interplay of angles and subtle curves. Like the the rear light tapering into the tail, as seen on this orange one below.

If a car is ALL angles, with no curves whatsoever, then it doesn't engage your eye. Kind of like a Hummer, or the Aztek. Those are examples of vehicles that don't have the needed balance between angles and curves, to approach anything that could be construed as artful.

Styling is really just fashion. But that doesnt bother me, even if it's only partly functional. Sometimes, bullshit styling can look exciting. Cars are art, as much as they are science. They change the way we feel about ourselves, and reflect our emotions.

lambos, have always been angular and peculiar, it is their purpose, all after the Countach, its a tribute to heritage.

The C7 is part curves, part angles, and then that wildly absolutely bizzare rear end.

100000% different cases. Lamborghinis are not meant to be beautiful, they are meant to have panache. Corvettes have usually been beautiful, functional, purposeful.

The C7? Clear case of form over function, of designers gone drug-binge in vegas.

[dreamcars99]

Originally Posted by Mr. Funk

I think that this current polygon trend is to do in part with advancement in technology. With the machines of today I imagine it is much easier to mass produce a complex shape accurately compared to years past.

except

1. Lamborghini has a heritage of polygons, of angles, of gauche bizzare shapes
2. no other maker is pursuing the lambo route, not Ferrari, not Jag, Not BMW not Benz, not Audi, not ANYBODY
3. the C7 hardly accomplishes a lambo shape, it accomplishes something completely pointless, angular and odd, yet curvy, can't make up its mind, fails at everything.

[dreamcars99]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

Frankly I'm glad they decided to make some changes to the design rather than just opt for another refinement like Porsche does. There are certainly merits to both policies, but it's rather late in the game for Corvette to adopt the Porsche approach.

If by retro, you mean a Mustang / VW bug type of retro, I'm glad they didn't go down that road. There are some outstanding aftermarket outfits that make some beautiful (and some not) conversions of late model vettes into various 50's and 60's designs with various degrees of coolness.

I'm not a fiend for the Transformers Stingray, but at least it is a forward looking, sleek design in most respects. Some think that concept was a good blend of retro and future. Unfortunately, it was not very aerodynamic or even practical as a production car.

IMO the Vette team gets an "A" for deciding to make a big change. Unfortunately, IMO, their design decisions and execution gets a D- from me.

^^^^^^^^ this.

EVERY render by an enthusiast was more congruent, more beautiful than the actual C7. The actual C7 reeks of contempt for Corvettes past, the renders reeked of stylized impractical.. LOVE of corvettes past.

I can't believe they made the C7. I AM MID TO LATE 30S, GM, SCREW YOU, NONE OF YOU ACTUALLY, OBVIOUSLY, EVER THOUGHT CORVETTES WERE COOL. i sure did.

aaaaagh! I get all worked up when i post here. Just agitated. I can't believe these kids made this design, I am convinced drugs were used.

[rickv]

Im still waiting till I see one in person. I'm praying it comes off much better.

[Ugolino]

The more I look at the car the more I like it, I like the front and side views. but I just don't know about the back. You can see the overall marine-influenced theme from the front and side, but the back end has no relation to the rest of the car, it's just kind of different-looking.

Is there anyone here who thinks the back of the C7 is beautiful? If you set aside your instinct to believe that a new version of anything must by default be better than the thing it replaces, you have to admit that the rear of the C6 is an example of scultped, subtle beauty.

It's a bit jarring and disappointing to see the lovely angled planes of the front of the C7 sweep around the sides and terminate in a confusing mish-mash of opposing angular shapes, all fighting for prominence with each other; it's like a geometrical war zone back there. I don't quite know what to make of it, but maybe this is what Chevrolet was going for: to leave you scratching your heard wondering what you're looking at.