The future of Corvette

[Maelochs]

Regardless of how old the motor might be, the CR.7R was plenty quick at the Roar, and apparently was sandbagging there as well.

When I see and hear that thing roar past me, I don't think i will be worrying about when the component parts were designed.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by TF110

Nothing wrong with that. "Tried and true with a touch of new" sounds good to me.

It just seems sad to me that Chevrolet, and the article says they have to use the old engine due to ACO rules that still affect the GT cars. (Lemans is the reason that there will be no GT cars from either Dodge or Chevy at Detroit).

Up to this point the production based GT cars were based totally on the ones in the showroom, from chassis to power-train.
Now it is drifting towards NASCAR close is good enough.

If the rumored flat-crank version of the Corvette comes out, that will be large diversion in the race car from the production one.

The article also explained the reason for the camouflage on the test cars; it was to hide the shape of the up coming ZO6 which the race car is based on.

[CTD]

If the LS5 engine is still quick enough, it actually makes sense to start with it in the new chassis, as it's easier compare the C6.R chassis with the C7.R.
When (and if) a new engine is developed for the C7.R, it will be easier to develop and finally calibrate if they know the chassis is performing as it should with a proven engine.

[Maelochs]

I would take that a step further: if the current engine is still winning races, what would be the rationale for spending a lot of money and energy developing a replacement?

With GT-GT+ regs coming at some not-to-distant date, why not wait to see if there are any rules there which could be exploited in one's favor before building something new? If the current engine can keep the car competitive, why take the risk of dropping to the back of the pack while a new engine is sorted--particularly if in a year or so FIA and the factory might decide to go in a different direction?

As I noted above, the Vette was as quick as anything else at the Roar, and the drivers admitted to throttling it back some to not get BoP'd out of contention. So ... the new engine ios for ... ???

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I would take that a step further: if the current engine is still winning races, what would be the rationale for spending a lot of money and energy developing a replacement?

With GT-GT+ regs coming at some not-to-distant date, why not wait to see if there are any rules there which could be exploited in one's favor before building something new? If the current engine can keep the car competitive, why take the risk of dropping to the back of the pack while a new engine is sorted--particularly if in a year or so FIA and the factory might decide to go in a different direction?

As I noted above, the Vette was as quick as anything else at the Roar, and the drivers admitted to throttling it back some to not get BoP'd out of contention. So ... the new engine ios for ... ???

Very interesting thoughts there.
And in that connection, do Ferrari have any plans for a major upgrade or replacement for the 458 before the GT-GT+ rules?
The 458 is getting a bit old, and without a replacement the C7.R will be the newest and probably last car build to GTE regs.

[CyberMotor]

Originally Posted by CTD

Very interesting thoughts there.
And in that connection, do Ferrari have any plans for a major upgrade or replacement for the 458 before the GT-GT+ rules?
The 458 is getting a bit old, and without a replacement the C7.R will be the newest and probably last car build to GTE regs.

Me thinks that the new crop of sportscars coming in 2015-2016 with their new technologies are going to blow our minds.

Shapes, propulsion, energy sources and performance are going to make us say a collective, "Wow!"

[Maelochs]

Yup.

I'd be really surprised if the GT-GT+ rules don't have a section on hybrids, and another on diesel/petrol equivalency, and well as NA vs. forced induction and 2WD vs. AWD.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I would take that a step further: if the current engine is still winning races, what would be the rationale for spending a lot of money and energy developing a replacement?

?

So you are saying if Chevrolet spent x millions to build a new production engine that might not be winner out of the box, hide that fact by using the old school engine.
Not a good way to promote one's new products.

In reality to quote Doug Fehan-- " What would be the point of building a brand new power train for the C7 R , if it still needs to be 5.5 liters, still limited to 500 hp -- NONE.

The article goes on to say it would take millions to develope the new engine and in the end you are still stuck with, the for all purposes, the same old, same old.
The sanctioning body was relieved Chevy stuck the old school engine.

So the GTs are now in the same spec. racing arena that GARRA was so criticized for, even though it is LeMans and the ACO, not GARRA, that put it there.

Maybe in a couple of years the boys running Daytona will write a new set of GT rules that are more like the ones ten years ago or even better.

[Maelochs]

"So the GTs are now in the same spec.racing arena that GARRA was so criticized for, even though it is LeMans and the ACO, not GARRA, that put it there." (Emphasis added.)

You and I obviously don't speak the same language.

And yes, even if Chevy spent millions on a new motor it might not win right out of the box. I know you know that too, so I assume your question is rhetorical. Thing is, your implied answer ignores your own knowledge.

I think I have made my points clear, but I thank you for helping reinforce them.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

I don't see what the big fuss is about it not using the production based engine.thay have done this before,when corvette first entered gt2 in 2009 they were calling it the zr1 gt2.but It couldn't use the ls9 due to displacement and forced induction regs, so they used the 5.5L.id say they've done pretty good with it so far.plus what's the point in wasting money on an engine that will need development and take atleast a season or two to become reliable or competitive, by that time the next major shift in GT racing will be around the corner.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

I don't see what the big fuss is about it not using the production based engine.thay have done this before,when corvette first entered gt2 in 2009 they were calling it the zr1 gt2.but It couldn't use the ls9 due to displacement and forced induction regs, so they used the 5.5L.id say they've done pretty good with it so far.plus what's the point in wasting money on an engine that will need development and take atleast a season or two to become reliable or competitive, by that time the next major shift in GT racing will be around the corner.

An LS is an LS regardless of displacement.

The engine in the new Corvette is as different from the LS as the LS was from the Mouse motor.

They are not racing what they are selling. (I do sympathize with their reasons,)

[CyberMotor]

Saw my first C7 on the highway today. Saw the lights in the mirror and at first thought it was an Audi with the LEDs. Then it approached and saw that it was a Corvette. Next it passed and I said, "That looks different!" and realized that we had just been passed by a 2014 Corvette when I saw the sides and rear.

It was a convertible so didn't get to see all the lines but I liked what I saw.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by CTD

Very interesting thoughts there.
And in that connection, do Ferrari have any plans for a major upgrade or replacement for the 458 before the GT-GT+ rules?
The 458 is getting a bit old, and without a replacement the C7.R will be the newest and probably last car build to GTE regs.

The 458 may be old but there's nothing wrong with it. The only thing hampering the Ferrari is the drivers and the restrictor. Otherwise mechanically the car is well sorted, direct injection, and aerodynamically brilliant. It's everything you could every want in a race car.

[deggis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_4pYm7ZMG4

[David]

Practice 1 results for the Daytona 24 hour. Any news on why the #4 Corvette didn't practice?

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by David

Practice 1 results for the Daytona 24 hour. Any news on why the #4 Corvette didn't practice?

I was wondering the same thing?

DK

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by dxk1

I was wondering the same thing?

DK

Olly Gavin tweeted about some electrical issues. Tweet in question

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by David

Practice 1 results for the Daytona 24 hour. Any news on why the #4 Corvette didn't practice?

I see both the 3 and 4 are running in the second session which is on now!

DK

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Olly Gavin tweeted about some electrical issues. Tweet in question

Thanks! Looks like they may have resolved the issue as the 3 is out on track now for session 2.

DK

[David]

Practice 2 is over and the Vipers flunked Sandbagging.

From Corvette Racing Twitter page:

[deggis]

Special issue of Racer (free):

http://www.racermagazine-digital.com...vrolet_special

Objectively same for SRT:

http://www.racermagazine-digital.com...14_srt_special

[Simmi]

If anyone wants a customer C7.R they can have one straight away.

http://sportscar365.com/wec/corvette...ustomer-c7-rs/

[pdxracefan]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Olly Gavin tweeted about some electrical issues. Tweet in question

From what I read on Magnus Racing Ustream chat today, it was he #3 that had electrical issues. Started to leave the pits, had to be pushed back to the pit, and never qualy'd. Wll start from the back of the GTLM field, I believe.

[HORNDAWG]

Both cars had electrical issues. The #4 earlier in the day which caused it to miss practice time, and the #3 during the Qing session.











L.P.

[David]

Simmi If anyone wants a customer C7.R they can have one straight away.

HORNDAWG Both cars had electrical issues. The #4 earlier in the day which caused it to miss practice time, and the #3 during the Qing session.

Hi Lane,

For us number freaks, do we assume that race #3 is C7R-001 and race #4 is C7R-002? Or does the statement about a 'customer' C7.R being readily available indicate that more than two have been built and the factory is racing a later number?

Do you have any inside info?

Has anyone there peeked inside and taken a picture of the Chassis Number plate, e.g.



Thanks,