box

I could not agree more, at the end of the day you get what you pay for. The more I play with my 911, the more amazed I am at the engineering and quality of the thing. I am an engineer myself (EE) and I could not have designed the 'magic trick' Targa roof system if my life depended on it. Having owned a Targa where you had a special wrench to remove the top, this thing is just a joy and explains some of the cost of the car. The engine, the chassis and the tranny are just marvels as well. All that plastic? Hello, it's a performance car--weight matters! A lot of guys were grousing over the plastic oil pan as if Porsche did it to be cheap--not at all, in fact, brilliant. But I digress...

I drove a top end Camaro a few years ago as a rental and was literally shocked at how cheap and flimsy the interior was. Now I wonder if, coming off of a Porsche, I'll have the same feeling about the C8. They HAD to cut costs somewhere and their attempts at cheap labor blew up in their faces.

Really cannot wait to drive the C8.

neanicu

Please explain as an engineer how plastic oil pans and other engine parts for that matter are " brilliant ". It's been proven time and time again that they fail from heat cycles in comparison to the long lasting aluminum. As a matter of fact,some curious automotive journalists bought 2 oil pans from the exact same car : the aluminum pan was from the earlier model year car and the plastic one was from the later model year car,but same engine. Guess what the weight savings were : 1 lb in favor of the plastic. Please,let's not hide the truth...it's about money,simple as that! And look up the term " planned obsolescence " also...

Back to the regular scheduled program...

osu s2k

You are correct re plastics, my 958 cayenne rigidplastic coolant lines failed, my 92 nsx had rigid aluminum, no failure

box

Google deeper, learn some materials science.

neanicu

I don't need to,I have hands on experience...plenty I might add... Plastic fails every time!

Porsche911dream

Please stick to EE as you know nothing about Mechanical or Materials Engineering. (I'm a Mechanical Engineer).

stealthpilot

Are you an idiot? The base price of the Camaro is $25k. It's not surprising it is full of cheap bits. The base price of a 911 is $98k.

Now just because are driving a high end camaro doesn't mean the interior panels are made of a different substructure. It's like my $200k 911 Turbo S has the same flimsy plastic center console tunnel as a base 911.

The Corvette will have an interior structure of a $60k car. At $60k interiors are pretty good. At $25k they are terrible. At $97k they should be amazing. I personally find my 911's interior to be pathetic given the price point.

wizee

Completely off topic but marginally relevant to the theme of performance bargains: I recently discovered that 2016/2017 AMG GT S cars have depreciated to around 50-60% of their new price, making them cheaper than a well specced C8 (you can get a good one for $70k USD). They have better performance than the C8 Z51 (slightly faster than a C8 or 992 S from a roll and around track), a nicer interior than any 911 or C8, and are more rare than any regular 911 or Corvette. Realizing they’re such a bargain, I went ahead and bought one, love it, and am not even slightly tempted by the C8 any more. I’m still eyeing the 718 Spyder, but that’s a very different car with a different purpose (agility rather than outright speed or luxury).

box

No, but you are clearly a moron.

jkautz

Last C7 finally

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mot...-c7-built/amp/

Looks like the strike pushed C8 production to March/April

neanicu

C8 Stingray Convertible Z51 driven by Jay Leno :

MXA121

Looks like Motor Trend REALLY liked it. (Car of the Year, as expected since they chose it over the 992S once already)
https://www.motortrend.com/news/chev...ar-of-the-year
They also dialed back the understeer comments and blamed the brake pedal. They were pretty harsh on the styling. Lots of other good insight on how it drives, sounds, etc...

hf1

Even if it wasn't ugly (and getting uglier by the minute) the C8 wouldn't enter the top 30 cars (used or new) that could potentially replace my 996 GT3 or 987 Boxster. The reviews (heavy, quiet, comfy, dull brakes, understeer, "daily supercar") only confirm that estimate. Same for the 992. I'll take a 5 series or E class for that, thx.

My fun cars see hardly any traffic lights, highways, or traffic. 0-60 means almost nothing for my intended use (backroad carving). I'll test drive a C8 when they start overflowing dealer lots, but my current expectations are not high.

Just some feedback in case Chevy hoped to target folks like me as potential buyers. Though I doubt it. I'm sure they'll have plenty others they'll make happy. It's all good.

K-A

The C8 looks uglier, cheaper and more "GM-y" every time I see it. That rear doesn't hold the specialness and exotic factor of a mid engine car, and the ridiculous obsession with luggage space and golf club/grocer getter usability will ensure it won't encroach on exotic cars. It's big and bloated, for one.

The overzealous and desperate lines and styling will age quickly and date the car prematurely.

I'd take one for a couple of years and have fun with it, but as always the 911 is the one I'll put a ring on.

Seriously. The car seems like it was originally intended to be a Cadillac more so than a Vette, when you see these reviews.

RobertR1

You can easily tell which posters are moving chicanes on a track by what they reference for their arguments.