2. Let's chase Ferrari
GM vice chairman Bob Lutz reportedly has been pushing for a mid-engine C7. Two directions have emerged. The more realistic plan has Chevrolet building only an upmarket, mid-engine Corvette, while the other calls for two models: a conventional front-engine C7 and the mid-engine car and splitting Corvette off from Chevy to make it a prestige brand. Under either plan, the next Corvette will have a radically different design from the current car.
A mid-engine C7 would get a version of GM's upcoming "high-feature" V-8, expected to be an efficient, direct-injection 5.0-liter-plus gas engine with quad cams and four valves per cylinder and due to launch in 2009 to replace the Northstar V-8.
Building only the mid-engine C7 has its advantages. GM could sell the car at lower volume than last year's 36,000 C6s and fill in some of the loss with added sales overseas. With U.S. sales approximately halved, Corvette would have less effect on GM's CAFE numbers.
But switching to a rear mid-engine configuration requires a heavy, double-wall rear firewall, primarily to stop the engine entering the cabin in rear-end impacts. While a mid-engine configuration would offer a reduced polar moment of inertia, for inherently better handling, the setup is costly and will weigh more than a front engine car of similar construction. Besides, the C6 Z06 already enjoys a near-perfect, 51/49 weight balance.
Building a powerful, high-tech mid-engine car also could prove costlier than expected, as Ford discovered with its low-volume, short-run GT. The profit margin might not be as good as it looks.
We hear Lutz is backing down from his support of a mid-engine C7, though other powerful GM execs reportedly still favor it. Those at GM who prefer an evolutionary, front-engine C7 are facing a tough battle.
It makes sense because: It places Corvette at the cutting edge of supercar technology.
The downside: It'll be way more expensive and probably no faster.
...
>>next page