Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

New C7 Rendering - could be IT

9K views 30 replies 18 participants last post by  Andonis 
#1 ·

I think this one is spot on. Or VERY close

More here

What do you think?
Brian? Is this the rear window you were talking about?
 
See less See more
1
#6 ·
The rear is very spot on, the front I think isn't there yet (as far as what the front will look like). A few things I think are off about it based on what we have all seen so far.
 
#7 ·
Ok, nice rendering, thank you!

One small thing, which to me is a big thing, but-

If you look at the illustration from the owner's manual, where it shows the back end of the car, and,

Look at the relationship between the height of the valances' horizontal bottom edge, and the lowest point of the vertical rear fender edge. In the GM illustration, the valance bottom edge comes down about two-thirds the height of the vertical edge of the rear fender.

In this rendering, the valance looks to be about half the height of the vertical fender edge.

Not a big difference I think, to most folks. but to me, that vertical fender edge is a bit too much like traditional Cadillac tailights, you know, those big vertical ones, and the huge open gap between this long vertical edge, and the area of the exhaust pipes, leaves this big gaping chasm. (I am aware this generates downforce) To me, that chasm looks odd, kind of awkward. It actually makes the rear fender edges all the more prevalent, makes them stick out like a bump on a log. They hang down kind of lonely, with no apparent relationship to the rest of the rear end. Drawing your eye to them, brings this fact front and center in your perception, which exacerbates their awkwardness. (to me)

So in GMs' manual illustration, this "chasm" isn't as pronounced. It's a bit smaller, and to me, this makes the rear end look more acceptable. To me, the rear fender edges look more integrated into the rear end as a whole, minimizing their long vertical "Cadillac-iness". There's a new word, right there! :) The higher the valance, the more those fender edges contrast with the car, hanging down like turkey neck jowls. They either need to make the fender edges higher, or keep the valance edge lower, to avoid this old-lady, sagging-fatty triceps look.

I know, a very small difference to be sure, and not one that most people would sneeze at. I'm reluctant to even mention it. It's kind of funny, when you listen to peoples' objections to some aspect of the car that they don't like, and when you look at it, and you're reading their slant on it, you're like "What the hell is this guys' problem, he's straining at a gnat", where to you it's no big deal, but something else entirely ticks you off. That's what I feel, reading the objections of some guys. There are so many people, each with varying tastes, it's amazing GM could even design a car that can sell at all. Well, everyone has their little differences of opinion, or pet things that they like or don't like. I've heard people say they hate the headlights, I love the headlights. Some say they don't like the tailights, but I think they look cool. (Go figure, right?) :)

But that big gap between the bottom tip of the rear fender edges, and the exhaust pipes, well, that's a HUGE issue right there! (/satire)
 
#8 ·
The window...yes, absolutely. This is about as close as anyone will get in rendered form I think. There is a bit of a "telephoto lens" perspective used in this view that is stretching the car a bit but the relationship between rear glass, tail end spoiler, and deck seem basically spot on.

Personally, I've been on the fence for a while about the design but have been reserving judgement until PHOTOS of the car surface. If it looks like this image, however, I believe I will like it.
 
#11 ·
This one was my favorite rendering . When it hit the internet there were a few guys that mentioned minor flaws : Being a photoshop from a 2011 Z06 Carbon (note the wheels), its rear glass keeps the C6 curvature. The actual C7 glass will be flatter with the lower corners more squared. The scoops are missing from the top of the quarter panels and the hood bulge is high. The actual C7 window sills sweep upward more going rearward from the mirrors, reducing the height of the windows and quarter windows. The door handle recess shape is wrong and as mentioned above, the rear valence proportion is off. To me this car looks great though.

Later a guy redid it in black, then gray, then white. The final version, in black, had the LEDs in the taillamps replaced with a neon outline which was closer to the real C7, the best yet
 
#12 ·
...Being a photoshop from a 2011 Z06 Carbon (note the wheels), its rear glass keeps the C6 curvature...
This also explains why the length of the rear fender between the wheel well and the rear end of the car is greater than other images we've seen.
 
#14 ·
Still not sold on this design. I hate the camaro inspired lights but I really just want to see a real picture of the taillights and how they light up and what the horizontal red reflectors/lights on the rear are plus if the multiple vents are all functional or some are cosmetic. I have no doubt the C7 will be better than the C6 in performance and interior etc but I really want to see the real deal. 8 days and counting.

btw if you could choose, What color would you want the car revealed in?
 
#16 ·
Just a few personal observations, as we get closer to the actual reveal:

(A) I don't hate the design as much as I initially did. I still think it has a bit too much automotive origami about it, way more lines and angles than are necessary - but overall, it isn't THAT bad.

(B) I hope they have a great color palette planned for this car. Even on the renderings, the color seems to make a significant difference in how the styling comes off. Make mine dark green with a tan interior, please.

(C) I don't care what anyone says, the taillights still suck. A lame and derivative choice, showing a lack of stylistic initiative.

(D) I really didn't intend to buy a first-year C7 anyway, and now I think having that year to let the design grow on me (and GM to get the usual new-design bugs out) will serve me well. Might wait two years for the refresh. We'll see.

And finally, in the meantime I'll keep driving my extremely low-mileage C6 convertible. It's very lightly modded (more like "personalized", actually) and it's exactly the way I want it. Also in the meantime, I think I'll buy a nice C1 driver for sunny-day-only touring and take the C6 to the Florida condo. Anyone got a nice 1956-62 driver they want to go to a good home? Overall, I think the C7 is going to be a great car with a few features some folks (like me) won't like, but at the end of the day most of them (like me) will probably end up with one. And I bet we'll enjoy it a lot.

And the legend rolls on.
 
#19 ·
I agree...this is the closest yet for a rear-end render. I don't hate it. The last thing I'm going to say about the tail lights...I may have liked round or oval lights in a less origami-like bezel much better...another 7 days will tell. And...from a marketing perspective, maybe GM wanted the vette to have more congruency with the Chevy brand. The tail lights in this render look less Camaro-like...and more Chevy-like to me. The ones who will hate the rear the most will be the guys driving the cars 5 lengths behind.

I think when I see the real deal I'll want one. Designers can't please everyone. What we'll get is a completely new vehicle...the lightest, most aerodynamic, best handling, most lavish/comfortable, most powerful and fastest, fuel-efficient vette ever. That's pretty close to being a home run.

Look for this vette to win a "Car of the Year" award.
 
#20 ·
Compared to the CAD Manual Renderings

I'm afraid that this rendering is much shapelier than the real thing will be. The CAD/manual renderings are not nearly so lavish in curve and shape. Much flatter. And that's probably more accurate. Again, for reasons unknown, GM has systematically ground the shape out of C4, C5, and C6 earlier designs. An unfortunate and total departure from the Stingray and Makosharks...

Hope I'm dead wrong.

BTW, there is still no excuse for the epic awfulness of the clown teardrop affectation...
 
#21 ·
I'm afraid that this rendering is much shapelier than the real thing will be. The CAD/manual renderings are not nearly so lavish in curve and shape. Much flatter. And that's probably more accurate. Again, for reasons unknown, GM has systematically ground the shape out of C4, C5, and C6 earlier designs. An unfortunate and total departure from the Stingray and Makosharks...

Hope I'm dead wrong.

BTW, there is still no excuse for the epic awfulness of the clown teardrop affectation...
ACtually the CADs have show more curves in the rear then what this render shows. Also the spy shots also shows a curvy design for the C7 Corvette.

 
#28 ·
In November 2011 Patrick confirmed to ALL of us that the Jalopnik rendering was a dead on example of the C7 High Performance model. Only doubters are recently [surprised / disappointed / in denial / rationalizing].
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top