When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Debunking the myth/propaganda of the C5 "terrible interior"
I've noticed a few youtube reviewers (savagegeese and Doug DeMuro for example) unfairly rag on the C5's interior, because hey! it's fun to use tired American car/GM stereotypes. I'm creating this thread to give my assessment of the interior and welcome others to share their thoughts as compared to other cars of the same era. I think the interior is more than acceptable for the era- you have to remember the Porsche 911 interiors of the same era were not nice; the original NSX interior looked the same and just as bad as the Acura TL; and the Ferrari F40 had as crappy an interior as you can get, yet you don't hear people ragging on those cars because they put them on a pedestal and they get a free pass.
So I'm going to break it down:
Door panels: nice, sleek design and high quality and premium feeling soft touch rubberized buttons.
Instrument cluster- well designed, all analog gauges laid out nicely and highly informative to the driver, especially with the availability of the Driver Info Center which shows you real-time coolant temp, oil temp, oil pressure, etc. right on the dash.
Heads up Display which cannot be found on any other sports car of the era.
Seats: Nice to look at but not the best bolstering. Somewhat curable with the free "seat bolster mod".
Steering wheel- a little larger than ideal and boring looking, but there are ways to dress it up. I simply added a piece of white tape to the top center to make it look more sporty and called it a day.
Squeaks from interior: absolutely zero on my car unless you're forcefully going out of your way to unnaturally push interior pieces to make them create sounds. Then again, Z06s don't have targa tops which are prone to squeaking.
Weak points:
Shift **** (way too 90s/outdated looking)- cheap $20 fix
Arm rest - cheap material- cost me $40 to cover with a real nappa leather cover
HVAC/radio/center console- these are the real weak points of the interior. Very "GM" looking with GM/Delphi fonts etc. Replace the stock head unit and center console. HVAC unit there's no current way to replace with something nicer, but concealing it behind a flip-up door could be a good solution to hide it. Either that or maybe some CF user with the skills can get creative and create a 3D printable faceplate for it with better aesthetics. I added a small "LS6" plaque to mine which looks stock and improves the look of the center console.
Compared to:
NSX:
Porsche 911:
Ferrari F40:
Mk IV Supra:
Last edited by ArmchairArchitect; 10-16-2019 at 07:17 PM.
Why is the C5 interior STILL a debate/discussion...it's a ~20 year old GM product....time to move on people.
Call it amazing, call it ****, who cares. Most buy a C5 for performance per dollar spent. It's cheap GM plastic molded together to be aesthetic to the eye matching the smooth curves of the exterior. No more, no less.
Your radio, seats, and steering wheel still look somewhere between meh and crap, depending on opinion. You can replace those, but the crap factory hvac front-end not so much. Have I mentioned that other GM cars of the same vintage had significantly better looking hvac controls?
Some cars have plastic that rattles more than others. That's luck.
The F40 was supposed to look stripped-out; that's part of the aesthetic.
Nothing is "debunked." This is just one in a long line of opinions that could have safely been kept to the thread about the interior being (or not being) meh.
Why is the C5 interior STILL a debate/discussion...it's a ~20 year old GM product....time to move on people.
Call it amazing, call it ****, who cares. Most buy a C5 for performance per dollar spent. It's cheap GM plastic molded together to be aesthetic to the eye matching the smooth curves of the exterior. No more, no less.
Your radio, seats, and steering wheel still look somewhere between meh and crap, depending on opinion. You can replace those, but the crap factory hvac front-end not so much. Have I mentioned that other GM cars of the same vintage had significantly better looking hvac controls?
Some cars have plastic that rattles more than others. That's luck.
The F40 was supposed to look stripped-out; that's part of the aesthetic.
Nothing is "debunked." This is just one in a long line of opinions that could have safely been kept to the thread about the interior being (or not being) meh.
why does his interior look like crap or did I read this wrong? Anyway this is an over debated subject. It’s a great car with a timeless body style and a better than expected interior for its age. I enjoy my C5.
Why is the C5 interior STILL a debate/discussion...it's a ~20 year old GM product....time to move on people.
Call it amazing, call it ****, who cares. Most buy a C5 for performance per dollar spent. It's cheap GM plastic molded together to be aesthetic to the eye matching the smooth curves of the exterior. No more, no less.
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-
'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
NCM Sinkhole Donor
CI 5, 8 & 11 Veteran
Originally Posted by smitty2919
Why is the C5 interior STILL a debate/discussion...it's a ~20 year old GM product....time to move on people.
Call it amazing, call it ****, who cares. Most buy a C5 for performance per dollar spent. It's cheap GM plastic molded together to be aesthetic to the eye matching the smooth curves of the exterior. No more, no less.
I agree. Yes the interior had a lot of plastic and sometimes items wore out way faster than they should, but it is what it is. No real value bringing up the subject on a 15-22 year old car. GM made improvements as time went on with the C6/C7 and now the C8 so they at least eventually listened. The C5 still remains a very affordable car that delivers good performance for the dollar.
As many times as I have had the interior apart in both of the C5's I have owned, I kinda appreciate the shitty qualities - it makes it easy to disassemble the damn thing in about 23 minutes! Hell a C3 interior is more difficult to deal with!!!
But damn I am tired of hearing people try to talk themselves and others into believing there are some refined qualities to the GM plastic. It just is what it is - most of us simply grin when we get within 15 feet of a nice C5. Be glad, and take the bad with the good.
I don't have all that many complaints with the C5 interior. Or my C5 anyway. I lost one of the plugs in the door underneath the handle, which I guess is common. I have the rocking seat issue, which I haven't bothered to do anything. The seat covers are very thin and the seats themselves don't strike me as being durable. I'm ok with everything else. Mine is tight with no rattles, I like the AC/heater controls. I am fortunate in that I don't have the automatic climate control, so I don't have those issues. I consider it to be on par or a bit better than most GM cars of that era. It has better materials than my 97 Tahoe.
I thought it was better than the plastics/design used in the C6 when I sat in one several years ago.
Recently redid my interior. New leather and foam, shift ****, shift boot, floor mats, visors, and center console/radio bezel.
Other than the large steering wheel and the dated radio, I actually don't mind the interior. It's not bad for over a 20 year design. I just use an iPad mini for music and nav.
I don't have all that many complaints with the C5 interior. Or my C5 anyway. I lost one of the plugs in the door underneath the handle, which I guess is common. I have the rocking seat issue, which I haven't bothered to do anything. The seat covers are very thin and the seats themselves don't strike me as being durable. I'm ok with everything else. Mine is tight with no rattles, I like the AC/heater controls. I am fortunate in that I don't have the automatic climate control, so I don't have those issues. I consider it to be on par or a bit better than most GM cars of that era. It has better materials than my 97 Tahoe.
I thought it was better than the plastics/design used in the C6 when I sat in one several years ago.
go on amazon and order the plug for behind the door handle. They come in pairs. They are cheap to purchase and a perfect fit.
I agree with OP (obviously) that a myriad of cars lacked interior refinement, in the 90's. The focus on interior refinement has risen dramatically in 2000+ namely because the German car companies focused on interior quality and were finally making their tank cars faster. Prior to that, sure...German cars had great interior, but they didn't even make it into the conversation because they were getting destroyed in the performance realm. The C5 and C5Z took no criticism for interior quality, in the 1990's...I remember it well. Frankly, the Viper was much worse at the time, the Mustang Cobra R was just solid axle on a chassis no one loved and trying to find itself. Porsche had gone watercooled and the 993's were getting destroyed by Corvette Z06's at more money...so that conversation was out.
The perspective is being lost, and this is just the case of how a movement of people can somehow steer the rudder of history and time. There is little truth in automotive journalism, because these people are transients. They moved into that journalism space, in some cases via accident or promotion. Not to mention, many of them aren't car builders, they are car thinkers....big difference.
The C5 and C5Z took no criticism for interior quality, in the 1990's...I remember it well..
I have to echo this quote. I have a bunch of old car magazines from the C5's debut and through the run. No one at the time hated the interior. In fact in most instances it was praised. But a lot of those same magazines thought the seats were very supportive, so there is also that
The sticker on my 99 C5 was 55 grand and in no way should a car with that price tag have left the factory with seats of this quality 20 years ago, my 2003 Acura RL listed for like 40 or 45 and the entire interior is made so much better from start to finish.
I just recently sat in a 2012 GS and that had way better seats than my 99 so they have gotten alot better but as stated a car that cost over 50 grand should have gotten better seats...
my 2003 Acura RL listed for like 40 or 45 and the entire interior is made so much better from start to finish.
A 2003 Acura RL is as fast and handles as well as a 2003 C5?
I'm not saying the C5 has a "great" interior but it does have an "adequate" interior considering the performance and cost. To put it in perspective, a 97 C5 could keep pace with a F355 through the quarter mile and made only 30 less horsepower (345 vs 375). What other base Vette could nearly challenge a V8 Ferrari of the same year? The money was spent where it mattered for a sports car (performance). Once again, the interior is adequate. It's comfortable, the ergonomics are good, the materials are...okay, but they are easily changed if you wish. ...Won't argue the seats though, they do suck for any sort of track driving.
10-16-2019, 07:11 PM
Debunking the myth/propaganda of the C5 "terrible interior"
