Mid-engine C7 Corvette still being considered
Thread Starter
CL Community Team
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 30,277
Likes: 354
From: Canada
Mid-engine C7 Corvette still being considered
Mid-engine C7 Corvette still being considered
Posted Aug 22nd 2007 4:34PM
All the way back in January, veteran automotive journalist Peter De Lorenzo alerted us to the possibility that the next-generation C7 Corvette may arrive with a low-volume, expensive mid-engine counterpart. We haven't heard much about the rumor since then, but this week De Lorenzo reveals in his editorial that not only is it alive, but that GM is seriously considering dropping the front-engine/RWD drive layout of the car and switching it entirely to a mid-engine set up.
Citing only "impeccable" sources, De Lorenzo says that keeping the Corvette relatively inexpensive was the major obstacle for moving to a mid-engine layout. Supposedly Corvette engineers have found a way to produce a mid-engine Vette while keeping the cost reasonable, about around the price for a fully loaded Corvette Convertible today. Who knows how they've done it, but since Corvette faithful within General Motors would not allow the car's price to swell, the achievement was a must for the mid-engine project to move forward.
[Source: Autoextremist via Jalopnik]
De Lorenzo also makes the point that GM has never capitalized on the Corvette being the company's technological halo-car, but that a mid-engine car would do just that. Further, the current Corvette has no peer in racing, not in the ALMS GT1 class or at Le Mans. De Lorenzo suspects GM brass are seriously considering the opportunity to win it all in Le Mans with a Corvette Racing prototype car. Such a win would be the first for a domestic in a very, very long times (think Ford forty years ago).
A mid-engine Corvette could certainly happen, and all of De Lorenzo's arguments appear well reasoned, but we've heard no word of this being considered outside of the intelligible ramblings on Autoextremist. That doesn't mean it's all false, though.
Posted Aug 22nd 2007 4:34PM
All the way back in January, veteran automotive journalist Peter De Lorenzo alerted us to the possibility that the next-generation C7 Corvette may arrive with a low-volume, expensive mid-engine counterpart. We haven't heard much about the rumor since then, but this week De Lorenzo reveals in his editorial that not only is it alive, but that GM is seriously considering dropping the front-engine/RWD drive layout of the car and switching it entirely to a mid-engine set up.
Citing only "impeccable" sources, De Lorenzo says that keeping the Corvette relatively inexpensive was the major obstacle for moving to a mid-engine layout. Supposedly Corvette engineers have found a way to produce a mid-engine Vette while keeping the cost reasonable, about around the price for a fully loaded Corvette Convertible today. Who knows how they've done it, but since Corvette faithful within General Motors would not allow the car's price to swell, the achievement was a must for the mid-engine project to move forward.
[Source: Autoextremist via Jalopnik]
De Lorenzo also makes the point that GM has never capitalized on the Corvette being the company's technological halo-car, but that a mid-engine car would do just that. Further, the current Corvette has no peer in racing, not in the ALMS GT1 class or at Le Mans. De Lorenzo suspects GM brass are seriously considering the opportunity to win it all in Le Mans with a Corvette Racing prototype car. Such a win would be the first for a domestic in a very, very long times (think Ford forty years ago).
A mid-engine Corvette could certainly happen, and all of De Lorenzo's arguments appear well reasoned, but we've heard no word of this being considered outside of the intelligible ramblings on Autoextremist. That doesn't mean it's all false, though.
The relative affordability/performance ratio is what made the Vette it is today so it will be interesting how they will pull this off. If priced right I would be all over it as I already like the current C6.
Lexus Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 94,328
Likes: 236
From: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
I'm not sure I buy De Lorenzo's arguments about a switch to a mid-engine layout keeping costs down.
First, with that layout, you have to have a more complex cooling system, with the radiator up front, LONG hoses for the coolant running underneath the car back to the engine, and more sophisticated electronics, sensors, and wiring for the cooling fan due to its longer distance from the hot engine. Longer hoses, of course, also means more coolant to fill them up.
Second, you probably couldn't use any of GM's existing transmissions, final-drive differential units, suspensions, or drive shafts on an all-new mid-engine layout......you would have to start more or less from scratch by re-engineering all four.....and that, of course, costs money.
Third, like with high-powered Porsche 911's, when you have a lot of torque in a mid-engine or rear-engine layout, you will probably have to use different size tires front and rear (larger ones in back, of course), along with traction/stability control, to help keep the rear end firmly planted in sharp turns and the tires from breaking loose under hard acceleration. Countless older Porsches were spun out and wrecked in sharp turns learning that lesson. That, of course, adds to production costs by having different front and rear tire and wheel sizes.
So, if De Lorenzo is correct, and GM can do all of that and STILL keep the price down, perhaps that means serious cost-cutting in other areas......like maybe using Chrysler-type junk parts for hardware and trim.
First, with that layout, you have to have a more complex cooling system, with the radiator up front, LONG hoses for the coolant running underneath the car back to the engine, and more sophisticated electronics, sensors, and wiring for the cooling fan due to its longer distance from the hot engine. Longer hoses, of course, also means more coolant to fill them up.
Second, you probably couldn't use any of GM's existing transmissions, final-drive differential units, suspensions, or drive shafts on an all-new mid-engine layout......you would have to start more or less from scratch by re-engineering all four.....and that, of course, costs money.
Third, like with high-powered Porsche 911's, when you have a lot of torque in a mid-engine or rear-engine layout, you will probably have to use different size tires front and rear (larger ones in back, of course), along with traction/stability control, to help keep the rear end firmly planted in sharp turns and the tires from breaking loose under hard acceleration. Countless older Porsches were spun out and wrecked in sharp turns learning that lesson. That, of course, adds to production costs by having different front and rear tire and wheel sizes.
So, if De Lorenzo is correct, and GM can do all of that and STILL keep the price down, perhaps that means serious cost-cutting in other areas......like maybe using Chrysler-type junk parts for hardware and trim.
Last edited by mmarshall; Aug 22, 2007 at 07:00 PM.
Trending Topics
Lexus Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
From: A better place
That picture is a very old one: the car pictured is the CERV III prototype. The CERV prototypes over the span of several decades were created by GM as engineering prototypes for possible future Corvettes, and to show off in general GM's technical and engineering capabilities.
The CERV III originally surfaced as the Corvette Indy Concept in 1986 as a teaser in a way, and the actual CERV III concept was shown in 1990 in Detroit.
Red one is the Corvette Indy prototype, and the blue one is the CERV III. CERV III is quite amazing actually, even for a concept; it is a mid-engine concept that had a 5.7L LT5 twin turbo V8 making 650HP and 655 lb-ft torque. For 1990, these are incredible numbers. It had a 225mph top speed, 4 wheel drive, 4 wheel steering, a 6 speed auto transmission, electronically controlled active suspension and the body was a combination of carbon fiber and fiberglass.
Zora Arkus Duntov, widely considered to be the father of the Corvette, for decades tried to convince GM to approve a mid-engine Corvette, but GM would always shut down the idea.
Maybe this time GM will actually build a mid-engine Corvette, but I still have my doubts. Even if they do, expect substantial cost cutting in the interior and/or a considerably higher price tag than what the Corvette currently has.
The CERV III originally surfaced as the Corvette Indy Concept in 1986 as a teaser in a way, and the actual CERV III concept was shown in 1990 in Detroit.
Red one is the Corvette Indy prototype, and the blue one is the CERV III. CERV III is quite amazing actually, even for a concept; it is a mid-engine concept that had a 5.7L LT5 twin turbo V8 making 650HP and 655 lb-ft torque. For 1990, these are incredible numbers. It had a 225mph top speed, 4 wheel drive, 4 wheel steering, a 6 speed auto transmission, electronically controlled active suspension and the body was a combination of carbon fiber and fiberglass.
Zora Arkus Duntov, widely considered to be the father of the Corvette, for decades tried to convince GM to approve a mid-engine Corvette, but GM would always shut down the idea.
Maybe this time GM will actually build a mid-engine Corvette, but I still have my doubts. Even if they do, expect substantial cost cutting in the interior and/or a considerably higher price tag than what the Corvette currently has.
ClubLexus Stories
Celebrating Lexus & Toyota from Around the Globe
8 Tips for Improving Your Hybrid or Plug-in Hybrid's Efficiency!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Best Lexus Models No One Remembers
Joe Kucinski
TRD Off-Road Premium: Best 2026 4Runner, Except This One Thing
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Lexus & Toyotas to Drive Before You Die!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Lexus/Toyotas With The LEAST 5-Year Depreciation
Joe Kucinski
Lexus LC500 Convertible Auction: A Preview of Rising Values?
Brett Foote
GX 550 vs TX 550: Best 3-Row Luxury Lexus Family Hauler
Michael S. Palmer
9 Best Lexus Models You Can Buy for Half Price (And 1 You Shouldn't!)
Joe Kucinski
2026 Lexus NX Buyer's Guide: Models, Features, Prices & More!
Brett Foote
Where does it state that? The way I interpret the above is that they are trying to keep the cost down at the same time admitting that a mid engine design is more expensive to produce vs a conventional front engine design.
Lead Lap
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
From: MA
I'm not sure I buy De Lorenzo's arguments about a switch to a mid-engine layout keeping costs down.
First, with that layout, you have to have a more complex cooling system, with the radiator up front, LONG hoses for the coolant running underneath the car back to the engine, and more sophisticated electronics, sensors, and wiring for the cooling fan due to its longer distance from the hot engine. Longer hoses, of course, also means more coolant to fill them up.
Second, you probably couldn't use any of GM's existing transmissions, final-drive differential units, suspensions, or drive shafts on an all-new mid-engine layout......you would have to start more or less from scratch by re-engineering all four.....and that, of course, costs money.
Third, like with high-powered Porsche 911's, when you have a lot of torque in a mid-engine or rear-engine layout, you will probably have to use different size tires front and rear (larger ones in back, of course), along with traction/stability control, to help keep the rear end firmly planted in sharp turns and the tires from breaking loose under hard acceleration. Countless older Porsches were spun out and wrecked in sharp turns learning that lesson. That, of course, adds to production costs by having different front and rear tire and wheel sizes.
So, if De Lorenzo is correct, and GM can do all of that and STILL keep the price down, perhaps that means serious cost-cutting in other areas......like maybe using Chrysler-type junk parts for hardware and trim.
First, with that layout, you have to have a more complex cooling system, with the radiator up front, LONG hoses for the coolant running underneath the car back to the engine, and more sophisticated electronics, sensors, and wiring for the cooling fan due to its longer distance from the hot engine. Longer hoses, of course, also means more coolant to fill them up.
Second, you probably couldn't use any of GM's existing transmissions, final-drive differential units, suspensions, or drive shafts on an all-new mid-engine layout......you would have to start more or less from scratch by re-engineering all four.....and that, of course, costs money.
Third, like with high-powered Porsche 911's, when you have a lot of torque in a mid-engine or rear-engine layout, you will probably have to use different size tires front and rear (larger ones in back, of course), along with traction/stability control, to help keep the rear end firmly planted in sharp turns and the tires from breaking loose under hard acceleration. Countless older Porsches were spun out and wrecked in sharp turns learning that lesson. That, of course, adds to production costs by having different front and rear tire and wheel sizes.
So, if De Lorenzo is correct, and GM can do all of that and STILL keep the price down, perhaps that means serious cost-cutting in other areas......like maybe using Chrysler-type junk parts for hardware and trim.
I hope they do pull this off, I could live with some cost cutting in the interior, because I really couldn't care less about the quality of interior materials. I've read that they're trying to price it so the base price of the C7 coupe would be around the price of a loaded C6 convertible (~60-65k), which is not too far out of range for a car with amazing performance
Cool concept but funny looking concept car. Whoever created that concept forgot that when you put the engine in the middle, you don't need such a long front end. Looks like that car still has a V8 up front as well as in the middle.
That is the beauty of the mid engine car. Short front overhang with exceptional cabin view. Look how far back the drivers seat is. That pretty much negates the whole up front cabin of a mid engine car. Your drivers view is shot. The dashboard is too deep.
That is the beauty of the mid engine car. Short front overhang with exceptional cabin view. Look how far back the drivers seat is. That pretty much negates the whole up front cabin of a mid engine car. Your drivers view is shot. The dashboard is too deep.
Lexus Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 94,328
Likes: 236
From: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Citing only "impeccable" sources, De Lorenzo says that keeping the Corvette relatively inexpensive was the major obstacle for moving to a mid-engine layout. Supposedly Corvette engineers have found a way to produce a mid-engine Vette while keeping the cost reasonable, about around the price for a fully loaded Corvette Convertible today. Who knows how they've done it, but since Corvette faithful within General Motors would not allow the car's price to swell, the achievement was a must for the mid-engine project to move forward.
Lexus Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 94,328
Likes: 236
From: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
I had forgot about the difference in wheel size on the present car.But even so, that is a minor factor at best ....perhaps I should not have even brought it up. The real enginering money, I think we can both agree, will be in the radically different drivetrain and rear suspension a mid-engine car will require.
Thread Starter
CL Community Team
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 30,277
Likes: 354
From: Canada
Corvette: Move to Midengine ?
Date posted: 08-23-2007
DETROIT — Parts suppliers are atwitter about the prospects for a midengine Corvette. And that discussion — which has occurred repeatedly since the 1960s — is heating up again inside General Motors.
But it's not going to happen, say Inside Line's sources. Such a move is a long way from being a done deal, with the C7 not due until about 2013, and a decision to go midengine is not imminent. In the meantime, numerous enhancements will be made to the C6 Corvette before the C7 arrives.
Proponents argue that a midengine Corvette would allow them to do things with the sports car that can't be done with a front-engine version, not the least of which is boost acceleration. Such a car would go a long way toward establishing GM's global technology leadership, a top goal for the automaker, they contend.
Other sources and outside analysts don't buy that a Corvette, with its hallmark for affordability, can go midengine without a significant cost bump that would have to be passed onto the customer — or eaten by GM, not a desirable situation in light of the automaker's struggle to stay in the black.
Forecasting firm Global Insight says GM's move to a midengine Corvette is risky business.
Global Insight warns that GM risks the current price advantage Corvette has over comparably performing competitor sports cars. "But to move the model into the more rarefied territory occupied by the Porsche 911 and Audi R8 would move it out of the affordability range presently enjoyed by its current owners."
What this means to you: You can have your midengine Corvette, but it won't be a free lunch.
Date posted: 08-23-2007
DETROIT — Parts suppliers are atwitter about the prospects for a midengine Corvette. And that discussion — which has occurred repeatedly since the 1960s — is heating up again inside General Motors.
But it's not going to happen, say Inside Line's sources. Such a move is a long way from being a done deal, with the C7 not due until about 2013, and a decision to go midengine is not imminent. In the meantime, numerous enhancements will be made to the C6 Corvette before the C7 arrives.
Proponents argue that a midengine Corvette would allow them to do things with the sports car that can't be done with a front-engine version, not the least of which is boost acceleration. Such a car would go a long way toward establishing GM's global technology leadership, a top goal for the automaker, they contend.
Other sources and outside analysts don't buy that a Corvette, with its hallmark for affordability, can go midengine without a significant cost bump that would have to be passed onto the customer — or eaten by GM, not a desirable situation in light of the automaker's struggle to stay in the black.
Forecasting firm Global Insight says GM's move to a midengine Corvette is risky business.
Global Insight warns that GM risks the current price advantage Corvette has over comparably performing competitor sports cars. "But to move the model into the more rarefied territory occupied by the Porsche 911 and Audi R8 would move it out of the affordability range presently enjoyed by its current owners."
What this means to you: You can have your midengine Corvette, but it won't be a free lunch.