Why does the Corvette suspension get no respect?
01-09-2008, 08:18 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Why does the Corvette suspension get no respect?
I watched a breif segment of Top Gear the other day and the guy really made me mad. He tested a C6 and of course really ragged on the "plastic interior" and degraded american cars in general. What automobiles do they produce that they should hold up for examination???? Also, he kept saying "we have the 911" so why is America trying to sell us a Corvette? Wow, the last time I checked the 911 was made in Germany.
Sorry, ok the rant is over, here is the question: Both Top Gear and Mario Andretti complained about the antiquated suspension that uses leaf springs so if leaf springs are no good why are they on Corvettes and what should be used instead?
Sorry, ok the rant is over, here is the question: Both Top Gear and Mario Andretti complained about the antiquated suspension that uses leaf springs so if leaf springs are no good why are they on Corvettes and what should be used instead?
01-09-2008, 08:31 PM
#2
Pro
Member Since: Jul 2007
Location: Medicine Hat Alberta
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked the same question to Jeff Myers over at LPE (great guy, really intuitive and freindly) and it seems to me that it depends on what your gonan use your suspension for. Pulled this off the Wikipedia (which, in fact, is actually useful):
Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.
Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace.
Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of gravity of the car.
Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1980 have been.
As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.
Also as used on the Corvette, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs.
Some disadvantages:
Packaging can be problematic; the leaf must span from one side of the car to the other. This can limit applications where the drivetrain, or another part, is in the way.
Materials expense. Steel coils are commodity items; a single composite leaf spring costs more than two of them.
Design complexity. Composite monoleafs allow for considerable variety in shape, thickness, and materials. They are inherently more expensive to design, particularly in performance applications.
Cost of modification. Due to the specialized design and packaging, changing spring rates would require a custom unit. Coil springs in various sizes and rates are available very inexpensively.
Susceptibility to damage. Engine fluids and exhaust modifications like cat-back removal might weaken or destroy composite springs over time. The spring is more susceptible to heat related damage than conventional steel springs.
Perception. Like pushrod engines, the leaf spring has a stigma that overshadows its advantages.
So, overall I think they were looking for adaptibility over performance. Don't know why....
Hey, here's a funny snippet. Leaf springs are generally used for more load-bearing capabilities rather than straight performance. I guess GM was concerned about the rate of obesity in America. JK :P
Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.
Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace.
Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of gravity of the car.
Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1980 have been.
As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.
Also as used on the Corvette, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs.
Some disadvantages:
Packaging can be problematic; the leaf must span from one side of the car to the other. This can limit applications where the drivetrain, or another part, is in the way.
Materials expense. Steel coils are commodity items; a single composite leaf spring costs more than two of them.
Design complexity. Composite monoleafs allow for considerable variety in shape, thickness, and materials. They are inherently more expensive to design, particularly in performance applications.
Cost of modification. Due to the specialized design and packaging, changing spring rates would require a custom unit. Coil springs in various sizes and rates are available very inexpensively.
Susceptibility to damage. Engine fluids and exhaust modifications like cat-back removal might weaken or destroy composite springs over time. The spring is more susceptible to heat related damage than conventional steel springs.
Perception. Like pushrod engines, the leaf spring has a stigma that overshadows its advantages.
So, overall I think they were looking for adaptibility over performance. Don't know why....
Hey, here's a funny snippet. Leaf springs are generally used for more load-bearing capabilities rather than straight performance. I guess GM was concerned about the rate of obesity in America. JK :P
01-09-2008, 08:31 PM
#3
Lepus-temperamentalus
You have to remember, the Corvette is the best sports car in the world, for the money.
It's not the best sports car in the world.
Sure, they have the 911 and for a base price of $73,500 stripped, they'll sell you one. That's the cost of a Z06 that will kick that 911 all over the track.
Chevrolet could upgrade some parts of the Vette, the interior, suspension and even the engine, but then you'd be paying $100K for it.
Don't worry about these euro-snobs. For what they pay for a 911 Targa 4S, you can buy two C6's.
It's not the best sports car in the world.
Sure, they have the 911 and for a base price of $73,500 stripped, they'll sell you one. That's the cost of a Z06 that will kick that 911 all over the track.
Chevrolet could upgrade some parts of the Vette, the interior, suspension and even the engine, but then you'd be paying $100K for it.
Don't worry about these euro-snobs. For what they pay for a 911 Targa 4S, you can buy two C6's.
01-09-2008, 08:39 PM
#4
Race Director
Jeremy Clarkson only likes Brit sportscars - particularly the Aston-Martin DB9 if I recall. Go figure.....
But that doesn't mean ALL Brits dis American cars - there are a fair number of Corvette enthusiasts in GB. I care about what they say and think - not so much about Jeremy Clarkson...
Sophisticated sportscars use coils and coil overs, and only have fine hand crafted and hand fitted proper leather in the cockpit. The amenities are more luxurious than the lowly C5 and C6. But those cars cost much more and really don't offer much more performance.
Evil-Twin once said that the Corvette is a $100K car being sold for $50K, something has to compromise - I'll take the plain old Chevrolet.
But that doesn't mean ALL Brits dis American cars - there are a fair number of Corvette enthusiasts in GB. I care about what they say and think - not so much about Jeremy Clarkson...
Sophisticated sportscars use coils and coil overs, and only have fine hand crafted and hand fitted proper leather in the cockpit. The amenities are more luxurious than the lowly C5 and C6. But those cars cost much more and really don't offer much more performance.
Evil-Twin once said that the Corvette is a $100K car being sold for $50K, something has to compromise - I'll take the plain old Chevrolet.
01-09-2008, 08:42 PM
#5
Race Director
Actually Jeremy claims to be a Ferrari man on all the other episodes. The show is pretty critical and I can see why they said what they said. It's a sports car and rides like one, so of course the ride will/should be not Mercedes-like. Keep in mind, these are the same guys that can find faults with the F50 and TVRs. Don't be too offended.
01-09-2008, 08:48 PM
#6
Race Director
What's the big deal. Spend about $15K and get a super suspension system and leather interior and still have lots of change left over.
All of the foreign cars have plastic in them too, they just cover it with cloth or leather.
All of the foreign cars have plastic in them too, they just cover it with cloth or leather.
01-10-2008, 12:01 AM
#8
Le Mans Master
And here is his ending lines of his C6 review.........sounds like he liked it a LOT
August 29, 2004
Corvette C6
A vulgar plastic pram - I love it
Jeremy Clarkson
In fact, the new Corvette weighs 128kg less than a BMW M3, and this shows. I had a few laps of the Top Gear test track in an example with tyres that had been modelled on Kojak’s head and, whisper this, I loved it. Yes, the gearbox was a serious nuisance and it didn’t have quite the subtlety of a Porsche or a Beemer. It squirmed quite a bit under braking, for instance. But the steering was sharp, the grip was mighty and the speed was always intoxicating.
This gave me a problem when I climbed out and gave the keys back to the man from Chevrolet.
“What did you think?” he asked. “Oh,” I scoffed. “Left-hand drive, vulgar plastic rubbish.”
But actually it isn’t. It is an extremely likeable car and you can easily forget the railway junction gearbox and the jiggly ride and the cigarette-paper quality when you examine the price tag. It’s likely to be about £45,000.
So there we are. The only thing that would stop me buying one is my wife. But since you’re not married to her, I’d go right ahead.
Last edited by jrprich; 01-10-2008 at 02:37 PM.
01-10-2008, 12:07 AM
#9
Instructor
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: studio city ca
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-10-2008, 01:16 AM
#10
Advanced
Member Since: Apr 2005
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
I have to chime in here. GM did not compromise on the C5's front and rear suspension architectures or materials (ok, maybe the bushings could/should have been better). The C5 has front and rear forged aluminum wish bone suspensions - which provide extremely good suspension geometry control - especially considering the stock rubber bushings used... Most C5 owners will not drive their cars hard enough to really appreciate how well they handle - and how well engineered their suspensions are....
Why do you think so many C5s are being competitively autocrossed and road raced? Just go over to the General/Autocrossing & Roadracing forum and check it out....
The stories you here about poorly designed/compromised Corvette suspensions can be attributed mainly to the C3's rear suspension which has single trailing arms with half shafts acting as upper links on each side: this suspension has MAJOR toe and camber control problems - especially when coupled with its stock rubber bushings - and high torque/horsepower motors - and poor weight distribution and.....This suspension design was basically used from 1963 through 1982. (Yes, GM did go to composite leaf springs, etc to reduce unsprung weight - but you basically had an early 80's Vette running with an early 60's suspension design....)
The C4's front and rear suspensions were major improvements over the C3 - as (overly) expected, but they were still flawed...stock, both are camber limited....
I owned/raced a Porsche during the late 80's, and while you may hear many Porsche owners tout their cars' suspensions/handling - the 911 rear trailing arm cars (through 1992!) were notorious for a handling flaw known as trailing throttle oversteer - which is a deadly trait in the hands of a novice. The Porsche 911 front suspensions are very cheap to manufacture Macphersion strut setups....they are however especially effective on rear weight biased cars...
Take pride in your cars - and learn to performance drive them on a closed course (autocross, performance driving school course or other)....and please drive safely on public roads....
PS: I'm not a fan of the mono-leaf spring...no matter how hi-tech it might be touted to be....I'll take coil overs any day....
I have to chime in here. GM did not compromise on the C5's front and rear suspension architectures or materials (ok, maybe the bushings could/should have been better). The C5 has front and rear forged aluminum wish bone suspensions - which provide extremely good suspension geometry control - especially considering the stock rubber bushings used... Most C5 owners will not drive their cars hard enough to really appreciate how well they handle - and how well engineered their suspensions are....
Why do you think so many C5s are being competitively autocrossed and road raced? Just go over to the General/Autocrossing & Roadracing forum and check it out....
The stories you here about poorly designed/compromised Corvette suspensions can be attributed mainly to the C3's rear suspension which has single trailing arms with half shafts acting as upper links on each side: this suspension has MAJOR toe and camber control problems - especially when coupled with its stock rubber bushings - and high torque/horsepower motors - and poor weight distribution and.....This suspension design was basically used from 1963 through 1982. (Yes, GM did go to composite leaf springs, etc to reduce unsprung weight - but you basically had an early 80's Vette running with an early 60's suspension design....)
The C4's front and rear suspensions were major improvements over the C3 - as (overly) expected, but they were still flawed...stock, both are camber limited....
I owned/raced a Porsche during the late 80's, and while you may hear many Porsche owners tout their cars' suspensions/handling - the 911 rear trailing arm cars (through 1992!) were notorious for a handling flaw known as trailing throttle oversteer - which is a deadly trait in the hands of a novice. The Porsche 911 front suspensions are very cheap to manufacture Macphersion strut setups....they are however especially effective on rear weight biased cars...
Take pride in your cars - and learn to performance drive them on a closed course (autocross, performance driving school course or other)....and please drive safely on public roads....
PS: I'm not a fan of the mono-leaf spring...no matter how hi-tech it might be touted to be....I'll take coil overs any day....
01-10-2008, 02:11 AM
#11
Pro
Member Since: Jul 2007
Location: Medicine Hat Alberta
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-10-2008, 02:25 AM
#12
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 2006
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 7,251
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
14 Posts
I asked the same question to Jeff Myers over at LPE (great guy, really intuitive and freindly) and it seems to me that it depends on what your gonan use your suspension for. Pulled this off the Wikipedia (which, in fact, is actually useful):
Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.
Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace.
Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of gravity of the car.
Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1980 have been.
As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.
Also as used on the Corvette, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs.
Some disadvantages:
Packaging can be problematic; the leaf must span from one side of the car to the other. This can limit applications where the drivetrain, or another part, is in the way.
Materials expense. Steel coils are commodity items; a single composite leaf spring costs more than two of them.
Design complexity. Composite monoleafs allow for considerable variety in shape, thickness, and materials. They are inherently more expensive to design, particularly in performance applications.
Cost of modification. Due to the specialized design and packaging, changing spring rates would require a custom unit. Coil springs in various sizes and rates are available very inexpensively.
Susceptibility to damage. Engine fluids and exhaust modifications like cat-back removal might weaken or destroy composite springs over time. The spring is more susceptible to heat related damage than conventional steel springs.
Perception. Like pushrod engines, the leaf spring has a stigma that overshadows its advantages.
So, overall I think they were looking for adaptibility over performance. Don't know why....
Hey, here's a funny snippet. Leaf springs are generally used for more load-bearing capabilities rather than straight performance. I guess GM was concerned about the rate of obesity in America. JK :P
Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.
Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace.
Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of gravity of the car.
Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1980 have been.
As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.
Also as used on the Corvette, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs.
Some disadvantages:
Packaging can be problematic; the leaf must span from one side of the car to the other. This can limit applications where the drivetrain, or another part, is in the way.
Materials expense. Steel coils are commodity items; a single composite leaf spring costs more than two of them.
Design complexity. Composite monoleafs allow for considerable variety in shape, thickness, and materials. They are inherently more expensive to design, particularly in performance applications.
Cost of modification. Due to the specialized design and packaging, changing spring rates would require a custom unit. Coil springs in various sizes and rates are available very inexpensively.
Susceptibility to damage. Engine fluids and exhaust modifications like cat-back removal might weaken or destroy composite springs over time. The spring is more susceptible to heat related damage than conventional steel springs.
Perception. Like pushrod engines, the leaf spring has a stigma that overshadows its advantages.
So, overall I think they were looking for adaptibility over performance. Don't know why....
Hey, here's a funny snippet. Leaf springs are generally used for more load-bearing capabilities rather than straight performance. I guess GM was concerned about the rate of obesity in America. JK :P
01-10-2008, 02:46 AM
#13
Pro
Member Since: Jan 2007
Location: United Kingdom England
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clarkson has always been anti American cars so he finds it hard to actually like any. Having said that they were impressed by how fast the C6 went round their test track at the hands of the tame racing driver the Stig.
Again the Z06 impressed even more when they tested that and came in at half the price of a Ferrari, that's UK prices which are about £56,000 for a C6 Z06 which is $106,000! Compared to what you guys pay for the same car seems hardly fair to me but still makes the Vette a very good price for the performance you get.
This is reflected in second hand prices were you can buy a used 97 C5 for £14,000 $26,600 were as a 911 will cost twice that and more for a decent model.
For my money in the UK the C5 is the best value I can buy for the performance I get and the insurance costs are much lower than WRXs and EVo's and of course 911's
I will however agree that the plastics and leather are of very poor quality compared to run of the mill European cars let along exotic stuff.
Having said all this Clarkson did buy a Ford GT a couple of years ago and raived about that but he had to sell it because it kept breaking down mainly alarm problems.
He now has a Lamborgini Guyardo spyder.
I find the C5 to be the best handling car I had even owned of the 50 or so cars I had and the performance and level of equipment is outstanding.
Air con, traction control, LSD, cruise control, Electric memory seats and mirrors and the HUD is fantastic. Your don't get these on european sports cars!
The C5 rocks and kicks **** here is the UK
Again the Z06 impressed even more when they tested that and came in at half the price of a Ferrari, that's UK prices which are about £56,000 for a C6 Z06 which is $106,000! Compared to what you guys pay for the same car seems hardly fair to me but still makes the Vette a very good price for the performance you get.
This is reflected in second hand prices were you can buy a used 97 C5 for £14,000 $26,600 were as a 911 will cost twice that and more for a decent model.
For my money in the UK the C5 is the best value I can buy for the performance I get and the insurance costs are much lower than WRXs and EVo's and of course 911's
I will however agree that the plastics and leather are of very poor quality compared to run of the mill European cars let along exotic stuff.
Having said all this Clarkson did buy a Ford GT a couple of years ago and raived about that but he had to sell it because it kept breaking down mainly alarm problems.
He now has a Lamborgini Guyardo spyder.
I find the C5 to be the best handling car I had even owned of the 50 or so cars I had and the performance and level of equipment is outstanding.
Air con, traction control, LSD, cruise control, Electric memory seats and mirrors and the HUD is fantastic. Your don't get these on european sports cars!
The C5 rocks and kicks **** here is the UK
01-10-2008, 02:57 AM
#14
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 2006
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 7,251
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
14 Posts
Clarkson has always been anti American cars so he finds it hard to actually like any. Having said that they were impressed by how fast the C6 went round their test track at the hands of the tame racing driver the Stig.
Again the Z06 impressed even more when they tested that and came in at half the price of a Ferrari, that's UK prices which are about £56,000 for a C6 Z06 which is $106,000! Compared to what you guys pay for the same car seems hardly fair to me but still makes the Vette a very good price for the performance you get.
This is reflected in second hand prices were you can buy a used 97 C5 for £14,000 $26,600 were as a 911 will cost twice that and more for a decent model.
For my money in the UK the C5 is the best value I can buy for the performance I get and the insurance costs are much lower than WRXs and EVo's and of course 911's
I will however agree that the plastics and leather are of very poor quality compared to run of the mill European cars let along exotic stuff.
Having said all this Clarkson did buy a Ford GT a couple of years ago and raived about that but he had to sell it because it kept breaking down mainly alarm problems.
He now has a Lamborgini Guyardo spyder.
I find the C5 to be the best handling car I had even owned of the 50 or so cars I had and the performance and level of equipment is outstanding.
Air con, traction control, LSD, cruise control, Electric memory seats and mirrors and the HUD is fantastic. Your don't get these on european sports cars!
The C5 rocks and kicks **** here is the UK
Again the Z06 impressed even more when they tested that and came in at half the price of a Ferrari, that's UK prices which are about £56,000 for a C6 Z06 which is $106,000! Compared to what you guys pay for the same car seems hardly fair to me but still makes the Vette a very good price for the performance you get.
This is reflected in second hand prices were you can buy a used 97 C5 for £14,000 $26,600 were as a 911 will cost twice that and more for a decent model.
For my money in the UK the C5 is the best value I can buy for the performance I get and the insurance costs are much lower than WRXs and EVo's and of course 911's
I will however agree that the plastics and leather are of very poor quality compared to run of the mill European cars let along exotic stuff.
Having said all this Clarkson did buy a Ford GT a couple of years ago and raived about that but he had to sell it because it kept breaking down mainly alarm problems.
He now has a Lamborgini Guyardo spyder.
I find the C5 to be the best handling car I had even owned of the 50 or so cars I had and the performance and level of equipment is outstanding.
Air con, traction control, LSD, cruise control, Electric memory seats and mirrors and the HUD is fantastic. Your don't get these on european sports cars!
The C5 rocks and kicks **** here is the UK
I will have to buy you a pint when i am in the UK!
01-10-2008, 08:07 AM
#17
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Dec 2005
Location: sterling ct
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
having just sold my 06 carrera and having also owned 3 corvettes (2 were set up for road racing/ suspension/shocks etc) i can tell you that the "feel" and "precision" of the porsche along with the "feedback" one gets when driving is vastly superior to that of ANY corvette. a porsche is like a scaple vs a corvette is to a butter knife....you can get the job done with the corvette but you have to work that much harder.
01-10-2008, 08:33 AM
#18
Melting Slicks
having just sold my 06 carrera and having also owned 3 corvettes (2 were set up for road racing/ suspension/shocks etc) i can tell you that the "feel" and "precision" of the porsche along with the "feedback" one gets when driving is vastly superior to that of ANY corvette. a porsche is like a scaple vs a corvette is to a butter knife....you can get the job done with the corvette but you have to work that much harder.
01-10-2008, 08:59 AM
#19
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Dec 2005
Location: sterling ct
Posts: 2,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it isnt a matter of cost but since you asked my 06 from Clair porsche in ma costsed 82k, yes i know this is more than a z06...it was a company car and the lease was 1097 a month with 3k down. i could have picked any car...in lieu of the fact that i had just sold a 00 frc built by doug rippie- top end/suspension work...i didnt want a z06 so i went to the porsche. a z06 lease would only have been about 100-150 less depending on the down payment...around 2-5k for a 900-1000 mo payment.
