Nitrodamus

I would like to see the Z06 option available in the coupe and the vert for the C6!!! IMHO I would rather that GM just forget about the HT, never cared for the look anyway. Really, do they really need three different versions of the Corvette since the frame work is now much stiffer in the C6? I want the Z06 power and performance and be able to take the top off or even drop it completely in a vert!! :party: :seeya

Jinx

It ain't about what they can or can't build, it's about protecting the brand identity of the Z06. Dave Hill has already said the big motor (and the hardcore suspension) remain exclusive to the Z06 platform -- no pop-top for you!

Z06 will no doubt remain a fixed-roof coupe, but this go-round I don't think it will be a styling afterthought or low-cost glue-on. Some rumors say it'll get its own distinctive skin; some say it'll get its own aluminum frame.

Fifteen months until we know for sure, and two years before we can buy one. This forum will be flooded with little complaints about the C6 by then :-)

.Jinx

Corvette SSX

I was thinking that they should drop the coupe and just do a HT. I never really cared for the look anyway.

AP

While you can limit high HP to a HT model ... they cannot just drop the Coupe all together ...

Rocketblock

Sure they can!

RedHot

I hope not. :nono: I like the coupe.

And I think that gives us the answer...three body styles, Coupe, Vert & FRC. :yesnod:

bgood

You guys are on crack... There are quite a few Corvette owners that like the coupe fir the extra cargo room, ability to remove the top for an open cab feel, and for the styling. I'm glad to see that both coupe and HT versions exist for the car. Buy what you want... :D

vette-freak

Here is some food for thought. The biggest reason that the Z-06 platform in the C-5 was the FRC was do to failing sales of that model. There was some weight difference but Gm had to do something to save the engineering cost they had in the FRC. The C-6 has weight saving over the C-5 & from what Bob Lutz has said for the Z-06 version other "things" up his sleeve. The new Z-06 may be just a coupe with weight saving adaptations, bigger brakes & stiffer suspension modifications. There isn't a need for a FRC model & engeering.

Nitrodamus

Did someone say Crack?? :crazy: Ok, let me put my pipe down for a second and look in my GM crystal ball.... Ohh... I see a standardized C6 platform frame that is so multi-purpose that even a Cadillac could use it. It also will have the ability to accept Z06 only components screwed onto it and the HP engine dropped in and either the coupe or the vert body will fit on. Stick on some body moldings here and there, add a couple of decals, drop some of the options and add $10K... you have Dave Hill's unique C6 Z06 coupe or vert. BTW, I think brand loyalty is a very good thing, the first Z06 was a 63' coupe. Hmmm... anyone notice how the spy photos of the C6 reveal some of the 63-67 mid-year body creases :thumbs: :D

Finch

The coupe's rear glass/hatch is monstrous. One guy I know said "you could probably fit a grand piano under that rear glass." Despite that, I liked the look on my 97 (had to grow on me because the coupe looked a bit disproportionate at first) and the guy that said that also mostly liked the look :lol: coupes are great, but the look on the HT isn't THAT bad (as it is made out to be) :thumbs:

Edit: as an aside to all of this, I DO think GM should offer the whole Z06 package as a 'vert, and surely they would charge more money...somewhat like the M3 can be had in hardtop or convertible, etc.


[Modified by Pete99SS, 11:54 AM 10/23/2003]

clem zahrobsky

the FRC will be the performance model because there is a 80# weight difference between the FRC and the HBC and the weight is all at the top which hurt the skid pad numbers for a road race car. :chevy

scorp508

My guess is that the Z06 (or whatever it is called) will remain a HT, but this go-around will retain the lines of the coupe for aerodynamics.

RedHot

I would disagree. Part of the weight savings in the Z06 was eliminating the weight of all the glass in the hatch.

GDP

Offering the HP engine and suspension would dilute the image of the Z06. Even offering just the engine in the other models would do that.

yellow01

Just like the performance, name and image of the viper are diluted?

Nothin' personal, for sure, but I've never liked this arguement from Dave hill.

The C5 was around for 4 years before the Z06, and if anything it diluted the image of the base C5. Why do I have to compromise between being able to take my targa off and still doing track days with the performance version?

Kent1999

This might be a 'fun' rumor to spread if you don't like the FRC, but I haven't seen one single shred of evidence that this is the case.

The 'engineering costs' you mention were insignificant to GM, since the FRC is just a Vert with a fixed roof bolted/bonded on.

:rolleyes:

Runge_Kutta

Kent1999,

I completely disagree with you. And your "kill the messenger" line about
not liking the FRC is absolutely ridiculous. If you like the FRC, that's fine
but to deny what vette-freak said is naive. In 1999 sales of the
FRC were about 12.116% and in 2000 they were 6.205%. Sales were
tanking. Something had to be done.

I don't understand why so many FRC owners are so defensive that
they cannot reconcile their own personal affection for the FRC with some
other basic realities that aren't as happy.

Kent1999

No one is denying that FRC sales were *very* low. However, the 'leap of logic' that slow FRC sales prompted the Z06/hardtop combo is equally ridiculous, and to boot, is totally unsupported by any factual evidence.

Let's see if the logic holds up while we examine the chain of events:
1) GM created a HT using very few custom parts, and had very little invested in the HT model.
2) The HT turns out to be a very slow seller.
3) GM throws a large amount of money developing and certifying the new LS6 motor;
4) Now GM decides to risk all the dev funds sunk into the LS6 by deliberately tying it exclusively to its slowest-selling model, in essence, trying to save the little $ spent on FRC development by risking the big $ spent on the LS6 program.
???

Can you say you honestly think that's what happened? It just doesn't make sense...





[Modified by Kent1999, 12:00 PM 11/1/2003]

Runge_Kutta

When I spoke with a person on the Corvette marketing
team in 1998, they mentioned a higher-horsepower engine
that they were planning on using to help sales, if
needed. The LS6 was not developed on the spur of the moment
for the FRC sales tanking. You like to minimize the investment
costs of the FRC. It probably doesn't amount to a large
chunk of change but there certainly would be some egg on
some faces. How would FRC owners feel if there model died
in 2-3 years. How would GM or the Corvette legacy look?

Where did you get the idea that the LS6 was developed exclusively
for the FRC and in say, 6-12 months, in the midst of some sales
panic? Just maybe there was some original plan to offer a higher
performance engine in the course of the C5's life!!

Let me repeat: I don't understand why so many FRC owners are so
defensive that they cannot reconcile their own personal affection
for the FRC with some other basic realities that aren't as happy.

It's amazing this tired debate is rehashed over and over and
over ...

I also suffer from no cognitive dissonance because I monetarily
and emotionally bought into a car that, while I might truly like,
was the subject of a sales resusitation program.

SWCDuke

Consider that the next "hardtop" could be the glass hatch coupe with a fixed roof instead of removeable. This would increase structural rigidity and save some weight, while retaining the better look (my opinion), aero numbers, and cargo capcity of the glass hatchback design.

My choice would be a fixed roof hatchback, with a removeable sunrool panel. This will yield the option of semi-open air motoring while increasing the structural rigidity of a targa design. A removeable sunroof panel on a fixed roof design costs virtually nothing is terms of structural rigidity.

Duke