First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"Smarty" > wrote in message
...
> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>
>
>
>

Big surprise. Looks just like you thought it would. The hard top lines
with the rear glass seem to be very distinctive. That all goes out the
window and becomes ho hum with the convertible version. Too bad the
convertible is not a folding hard top. I hope that it is at least electric
up and down.

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"uncle_vito" wrote in message ...


"Smarty" > wrote in message
...
> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>
>
>
>

Big surprise. Looks just like you thought it would. The hard top lines
with the rear glass seem to be very distinctive. That all goes out the
window and becomes ho hum with the convertible version. Too bad the
convertible is not a folding hard top. I hope that it is at least electric
up and down.

To be really with it -- add 4 portholes on each side. All kidding aside, it
really is not a significant makeover. Looks big, though.

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"uncle_vito" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Smarty" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Big surprise. Looks just like you thought it would. The hard top lines
> with the rear glass seem to be very distinctive. That all goes out the
> window and becomes ho hum with the convertible version. Too bad the
> convertible is not a folding hard top. I hope that it is at least
> electric up and down.
>
Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like the hard
(soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the convertible looks much
better than the coupe and for some reason it does not show all the add on
scoops/vents.

Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few reasons and
the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT and DI, each head
gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor actuator and all the wires
for same. Plus all the added bolts and screws to just hold it together.
Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the push rod valve covers. Now lets talk
timing chains, one for the old pushrod and three for the DOHC, 9 sprockets
in place of 2 and the worst part is well over 400 link pins to wear on 3
chains with 16 timing marks versus one. All that to get rid of the 16 push
rods. Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6 with none of that
crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red line, sounds good at
7,000 but not worth the cost.

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"Dad" wrote in message .. .


"uncle_vito" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Smarty" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Big surprise. Looks just like you thought it would. The hard top lines
> with the rear glass seem to be very distinctive. That all goes out the
> window and becomes ho hum with the convertible version. Too bad the
> convertible is not a folding hard top. I hope that it is at least
> electric up and down.
>
Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like the hard
(soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the convertible looks much
better than the coupe and for some reason it does not show all the add on
scoops/vents.

Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few reasons and
the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT and DI, each head
gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor actuator and all the wires
for same. Plus all the added bolts and screws to just hold it together.
Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the push rod valve covers. Now lets talk
timing chains, one for the old pushrod and three for the DOHC, 9 sprockets
in place of 2 and the worst part is well over 400 link pins to wear on 3
chains with 16 timing marks versus one. All that to get rid of the 16 push
rods. Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6 with none of that
crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red line, sounds good at
7,000 but not worth the cost.

Given the size (Displacement) of the engine and the hp it generates, a DOHC
setup really is not needed. If GM decided to copy what Honda did with the
S2000 (small displacement and high hp) then it would likely be a given. Of
course belt setups have also worked well, but the only V8 I know of with
that setup is the Toyota V8 found in the Lexus and the truck. GM did make
an attempt with the Solstice, but it never caught on for some reason.
Perhaps that was also why Honda ceased production of the S2000.

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"Dad" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "uncle_vito" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Smarty" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Big surprise. Looks just like you thought it would. The hard top
>> lines with the rear glass seem to be very distinctive. That all goes
>> out the window and becomes ho hum with the convertible version. Too bad
>> the convertible is not a folding hard top. I hope that it is at least
>> electric up and down.
>>
> Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like the hard
> (soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the convertible looks much
> better than the coupe and for some reason it does not show all the add on
> scoops/vents.
>
> Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few reasons
> and the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT and DI, each
> head gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor actuator and all the
> wires for same. Plus all the added bolts and screws to just hold it
> together. Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the push rod valve covers. Now
> lets talk timing chains, one for the old pushrod and three for the DOHC, 9
> sprockets in place of 2 and the worst part is well over 400 link pins to
> wear on 3 chains with 16 timing marks versus one. All that to get rid of
> the 16 push rods. Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6 with
> none of that crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red line,
> sounds good at 7,000 but not worth the cost.


But the Toyota V-8 is an engineering work of art that does not develop valve
float at high RPM nor needs cam destroying spring pressures to do it. Just
as well that GM sticks to OHV engines. With the 'complexity' of DOHC, the
C7 would never be out of the shop.

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"uncle_vito" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dad" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>
>> Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like the
>> hard (soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the convertible looks
>> much better than the coupe and for some reason it does not show all the
>> add on scoops/vents.
>>
>> Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few reasons
>> and the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT and DI, each
>> head gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor actuator and all the
>> wires for same. Plus all the added bolts and screws to just hold it
>> together. Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the push rod valve covers. Now
>> lets talk timing chains, one for the old pushrod and three for the DOHC,
>> 9 sprockets in place of 2 and the worst part is well over 400 link pins
>> to wear on 3 chains with 16 timing marks versus one. All that to get rid
>> of the 16 push rods. Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6
>> with none of that crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red
>> line, sounds good at 7,000 but not worth the cost.
>
>
> But the Toyota V-8 is an engineering work of art that does not develop
> valve float at high RPM nor needs cam destroying spring pressures to do
> it. Just as well that GM sticks to OHV engines. With the 'complexity'
> of DOHC, the C7 would never be out of the shop.
By the time valve float would happen, which it don't when computer
controlled, your Toy would be two counties behind. Sorry, try again.

Just to let you in on where I'm coming from I drive what I'm talking about.
How about you?

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"tww1491" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Dad" wrote in message
> .. .
>
>
> "uncle_vito" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Smarty" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Big surprise. Looks just like you thought it would. The hard top
>> lines with the rear glass seem to be very distinctive. That all goes
>> out the window and becomes ho hum with the convertible version. Too bad
>> the convertible is not a folding hard top. I hope that it is at least
>> electric up and down.
>>
> Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like the hard
> (soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the convertible looks much
> better than the coupe and for some reason it does not show all the add on
> scoops/vents.
>
> Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few reasons
> and
> the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT and DI, each head
> gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor actuator and all the wires
> for same. Plus all the added bolts and screws to just hold it together.
> Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the push rod valve covers. Now lets talk
> timing chains, one for the old pushrod and three for the DOHC, 9 sprockets
> in place of 2 and the worst part is well over 400 link pins to wear on 3
> chains with 16 timing marks versus one. All that to get rid of the 16 push
> rods. Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6 with none of
> that
> crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red line, sounds good at
> 7,000 but not worth the cost.
>
> Given the size (Displacement) of the engine and the hp it generates, a
> DOHC setup really is not needed. If GM decided to copy what Honda did
> with the S2000 (small displacement and high hp) then it would likely be a
> given. Of course belt setups have also worked well, but the only V8 I
> know of with that setup is the Toyota V8 found in the Lexus and the truck.
> GM did make an attempt with the Solstice, but it never caught on for some
> reason. Perhaps that was also why Honda ceased production of the S2000.
>
>
Not sure what you're talking about as GM is still manufacturing the LE5
engine as well as the LNF used in the Solstice. The LNF is the GXP without
the turbo but GM offers an add on kit to make the GXP. These engines have
been produced since 2002 and are not what I'd call stellar performers. Since
that time all engines have had more squeezed out of them with the use of new
materials and computer control. Base design was Opel that were also used in
Saab, Fiat, Daewoo, Suzuki, Isuzu, Alfa Romeo, (heavily modified) and GM is
now putting a version in the ATS Cadillac. The ATS gets the highest HP of
272 from a 2.0 L with 260 lbf-ft with a twin scroll turbocharger. That's 136
HP per L from 2.0 L and the push rod only gets 103 HP per L from the 6.2 L
and I have yet to find a good measure of how fuel efficient the comparison
would be.

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

Smarty wrote:
> http://blog.caranddriver.com/first-i...eva-auto-show/
>
>
>
>
>

....I don't think I've ever seen a single convertible car that I
liked...this one is no exception to that.

--
- Rufus

First official images of 2015 Corvette C7 Convertible !!
 

"Dad" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "uncle_vito" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dad" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>>
>>> Why do you need an electric cloth top? On the other had I do like the
>>> hard (soft) top on the SC300, looks sharp. Actually the convertible
>>> looks much better than the coupe and for some reason it does not show
>>> all the add on scoops/vents.
>>>
>>> Still lust after its VVT and DI in a push rod engine. Just a few reasons
>>> and the first is the amount of sensors on the DOHC with VVT and DI, each
>>> head gets 4 camshaft sensors and cam position sensor actuator and all
>>> the wires for same. Plus all the added bolts and screws to just hold it
>>> together. Eighteen for the DOHC and 4 for the push rod valve covers. Now
>>> lets talk timing chains, one for the old pushrod and three for the DOHC,
>>> 9 sprockets in place of 2 and the worst part is well over 400 link pins
>>> to wear on 3 chains with 16 timing marks versus one. All that to get rid
>>> of the 16 push rods. Plus the engine gets less MPG than my old school C6
>>> with none of that crap. The only thing I like about the DOHC is the red
>>> line, sounds good at 7,000 but not worth the cost.
>>
>>
>> But the Toyota V-8 is an engineering work of art that does not develop
>> valve float at high RPM nor needs cam destroying spring pressures to do
>> it. Just as well that GM sticks to OHV engines. With the 'complexity'
>> of DOHC, the C7 would never be out of the shop.
> By the time valve float would happen, which it don't when computer
> controlled, your Toy would be two counties behind. Sorry, try again.
>
> Just to let you in on where I'm coming from I drive what I'm talking
> about. How about you?
>
>

I drive a Toyota Highlander and BMW 3 series. The DOHC VVT 6s in those
have absolutely NO problems. BMW is known for its smooth 6's. I have the
2.5L and it revs like crazy and gets great mileage. Need to use premium
but at the mileage it gets, I do not care.

Sorry, not interested in any DOHC that GM offers. The GM pencil pushers
that run the company only produced DOHC engines as a 'me too' to its
competition.

You seem plenty knowledgeable, Dad. You should go up against Hib
Halverson. Except Hib is an arrogant ass.