What's after Z06?

Barking Rats wrote:
> Careful - similar comments were heard for years about the hide-away
> headlights...

A fair point!


> (Several months back there was a discussion here about GM's styling and
> I commented the Corvette looked to me like a Viper

Yeah. But part of this is engineering - both cars are designed for the
same purpose in solving the same challenges (low drag and minimum
surface area in a front-engine sports car) and with a given state of the
art there's usually one optimum solution to a problem. If two
organizations use similar processes optimizing their work they'll likely
converge to similar designs. The closer you move towards the state of
the art's optimum solution the less latitude there is. Thus they have
similar layouts, a similar shape, similarly placed openings, etc.

By the same principle American and Japanese fighter designs began to
converge at the end of WW II, the Space Shuttle looks a lot like Buran
(the Soviet shuttleski), and Concorde looks a lot like the TU-144.

-- V

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:54:21 GMT, "Tom in Missouri" >
puked:

>Very much Viper-ese.
>
>But if you look at the whole Chevrolet line-up, or all of GM's for that
>matter, you see that GM Design has lost the ability to think for themselves
>and are copying a lot of look from elsewhere. Most of it isn't a good look
>they are copying.
>
>Bill Mitchell must be turning about 6500 rpm in his grave over some of this
>stuff.
>
>GM Design was usually fresh and occasionally radical. There were often
>copying of traits of others in parts, but so does everyone else. But the
>overall design never copied.

They ripped off the PT Cruiser, the Ford Mustang and Ranchero pretty
much...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

While I'm inclined to agree with "Tom in Missouri" that the front end
of the C6 Vette has some styling cues similar to the Viper, you have
remember who had what first. Vette had the front end and hood treatment
before Viper, but Viper had the headlights first. The sides of both
have some similarities, the most prominent being the cooling ducts at
the rear of the front fenders. Having said that, I think the Vette's
ducts look better. The rear end is quite distinct between the two and I
personally like the Vette better. In fact, the Vette kicks serious
Viper ass!

Now, getting on to lab~rat's comments, lab~rat must be too young to
know where Chrysler got the retro design for the PT Cruiser. Check out
these three links and you'll see that the PT Cruiser had its origins in
the Chevy Sedan Delivery, which I believe was made in this design from
1947 to 1952. Here are three links for you youngsters:

http://www.hotrodscustomstuff.com/holdrite.html

http://www.calcruisingauctions.com/a...em.asp?ID=5899

http://www.classictrucksweb.com/feat...ban/index.html

So I'd suggest to you that GM's HHR is not a ripoff of the PT Cruiser,
but a reclamation of a style GM created in the 40's!!! Now as far as
the Mustang and Ranchero are concerned, I have no idea what lab~rat is
referring to. The Mustang was certainly the first so-called pony-car,
but my recollection is that Ford (John De Lorean) created it because
Ford had no competitor for the Corvette and Ford wanted a low-cost
alternative for sportscar lovers.
My recollection of the Ranchero is that it was created in 1957 and ran
until the late 70's ('79?). Assuming that lab~rat is comparing the
Ranchero to the El Camino, I believe the El Camino ran from1959 until
1987. The El Camino may have been (and probably was) created to compete
against the Ranchero, but the cars looked nothing alike in 1959. IMHO
the Ranchero was a much nicer looking vehicle in '59. So there you have
it, polite, sincere and accurate recollections from someone who was
there.

Cool Jet wrote:
> While I'm inclined to agree with "Tom in Missouri" that the front end
> of the C6 Vette has some styling cues similar to the Viper, you have
> remember who had what first. Vette had the front end and hood treatment
> before Viper, but Viper had the headlights first. The sides of both
> have some similarities, the most prominent being the cooling ducts at
> the rear of the front fenders. Having said that, I think the Vette's
> ducts look better. The rear end is quite distinct between the two and I
> personally like the Vette better. In fact, the Vette kicks serious
> Viper ass!
>
> Now, getting on to lab~rat's comments, lab~rat must be too young to
> know where Chrysler got the retro design for the PT Cruiser. Check out
> these three links and you'll see that the PT Cruiser had its origins in
> the Chevy Sedan Delivery, which I believe was made in this design from
> 1947 to 1952. Here are three links for you youngsters:
>
> http://www.hotrodscustomstuff.com/holdrite.html
>
> http://www.calcruisingauctions.com/a...em.asp?ID=5899
>
> http://www.classictrucksweb.com/feat...ban/index.html
>
> So I'd suggest to you that GM's HHR is not a ripoff of the PT Cruiser,
> but a reclamation of a style GM created in the 40's!!! Now as far as
> the Mustang and Ranchero are concerned, I have no idea what lab~rat is
> referring to. The Mustang was certainly the first so-called pony-car,
> but my recollection is that Ford (John De Lorean) created it because
> Ford had no competitor for the Corvette and Ford wanted a low-cost
> alternative for sportscar lovers.
> My recollection of the Ranchero is that it was created in 1957 and ran
> until the late 70's ('79?). Assuming that lab~rat is comparing the
> Ranchero to the El Camino, I believe the El Camino ran from1959 until
> 1987. The El Camino may have been (and probably was) created to compete
> against the Ranchero, but the cars looked nothing alike in 1959. IMHO
> the Ranchero was a much nicer looking vehicle in '59. So there you have
> it, polite, sincere and accurate recollections from someone who was
> there.
>

Let's change De Lorean (a GM guy through and through) to Lee Iacocca
(father of the Mustang in the mid-60s -- before he went on to fame at
Chrysler.) The Mustang grew into a pony-car but started out as a
compact small personal car, with rather chintzy interior trim. At that
time Chevrolet was dressing up their rear engined Corvair, transforming
it from an economy sedan into a sporty turbocharged coupe and
convertible. The Mustang commitment started as an anemic 6. A four was
considered. The 289 arrived on the scene and the rest is history.

Classically, in the Ford product line, the Thunderbird was positioned
against the Corvette as an upscale personal automobile. Two distinctly
different cars but they each had their own devotees.

I think the Ranchero - El Camino comparison is valid. Trivia: The El
Camino served as a flower car for many upscale funeral directors in the 60s.

--
…PJ
’89 HookerCar, ’02 E-blu 6-spd Coupe

PJ, that's the problem with old age - I get some of the names right,
some of the time! <lol> You are indeed correct - it was Lee Iacocca who
pushed development of the Mustang. Launched at the 1964 World's Fair
in New York, the Mustang immediately became known as Ford's new "pony
car". Here's an informative link:

http://home.comcast.net/~gt69registry/history.html

As you pointed out PJ, the base Mustang engine was a 170 cubic inch
inline 6 cylinder and the optional V8 was the 260 cubic incher that
went on to become the 289 cubic inch engine in May of 1964.

While you are right that "the Thunderbird was positioned against the
Corvette", the T-Bird was only considered to be a sports car in its
1955-1957 2 seater years. In 1958 it became a personal luxury 4 seater,
although it certainly competed against Corvette and took away a lot of
business from them.

John De Lorean was of course most well known for developing the Pontiac
GTO option in the redesigned Tempest for 1964. Some would argue that
the GTO was the first factory muscle car.

On 21 Dec 2005 18:23:24 -0800, "Cool Jet" >
puked:

>
>Now, getting on to lab~rat's comments, lab~rat must be too young to
>know where Chrysler got the retro design for the PT Cruiser. Check out
>these three links and you'll see that the PT Cruiser had its origins in
>the Chevy Sedan Delivery, which I believe was made in this design from
>1947 to 1952. Here are three links for you youngsters:

Thanks for calling me young, because my odometer's about to roll over
another digit in a couple of weeks. Those vehicles may be before my
time, but I AM aware of the design influences. My comment was based
on the retro incarnation of them. I doubt GM would have came up with
theirs had the PT not been wildly successful.

My wife bought one and we took a bath with it. They don't hold their
value. Oh well, live and learn...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:06:05 -0800, PJ > puked:

>I think the Ranchero - El Camino comparison is valid. Trivia: The El
>Camino served as a flower car for many upscale funeral directors in the 60s.

I didn't realize that. For all the bluster about bringing back the
Chevy F body, I'm surprised that the public is so tacit in requesting
a new Elky. They seem like the perfect vehicle to reintroduce.

Of course I may be biased since I have a '66...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

>Thanks for calling me young, because my odometer's about to roll over
>another digit in a couple of weeks.

<lol> My odometer just rolled over again last week!

>Those vehicles may be before my time, but I AM aware of the design influences.

I'm happy to say that they were before my time too, but I remember
seeing one or two hotrodded. We used to call them "Bun Wagons" because
of their popularity with local grocers.

>My comment was based on the retro incarnation of them. I doubt GM would have came up >with theirs had the PT not been wildly successful.

I can't disagree with you there lab~rat. Chrysler took an old GM design
as the pattern for their retro vehicle and probably sold more PT
Cruisers than GM sold the original Sedan Delivery. Now that the PT
Cruiser has dominated this market segment, the light belatedly came on
at GM. Sad really.

In article .com>,
says...
> Man, the more I read about the Z06, the better it gets! I'm wondering
> how can Cheverolet improve on it? Like what's the next model gonna be
> like?
>
> Here's the things I can think of, I'm probably way off base, but I like
> to dream:
>
> 1. Mid-engine Corvette
> 2. Carbon Fiber body frame
> 3. Sequential Manual Gearbox
> 4. Supercharged
> 5. Carbon fiber driveshaft
>
> How can they make this car any lighter than it is? Perhaps swapping
> out aluminum parts for magnesium?
>
> What do you think guys? How can they impvoe on this car?
>
>
CONVERTIBLE!

1. They already make a convertible.
and
2. Aluminum doesn't like being flexed so they aren't going to cut the
top off the Z06.

Bchbound wrote:
> In article .com>,
> says...
>
>>Man, the more I read about the Z06, the better it gets! I'm wondering
>>how can Cheverolet improve on it? Like what's the next model gonna be
>>like?
>>
>>Here's the things I can think of, I'm probably way off base, but I like
>>to dream:
>>
>>1. Mid-engine Corvette
>>2. Carbon Fiber body frame
>>3. Sequential Manual Gearbox
>>4. Supercharged
>>5. Carbon fiber driveshaft
>>
>>How can they make this car any lighter than it is? Perhaps swapping
>>out aluminum parts for magnesium?
>>
>>What do you think guys? How can they impvoe on this car?
>>
>>
>
> CONVERTIBLE!