Racer X

They could take the same basic Fiero structure, widen it a few inches, lengthen a few inches. Remove the spare and put a double arm suspension up front. the problem is the transaxle. Where do the source a strong enough one and use double a arms? Upgrade the frame with hydroforming in places. Use the same mill and drill body mount placement and use carbon fiber or lightweght plastics for the body panels.

Suggested Dimensions:
Length 170 "
Width 73" (not including mirrors (maybe use cameras instead with monitors at the sides of the dash or a merged rearview screen that shows both sides and the rear view as a continuous view instead of the rearview mirror) performance models 76"
Height 47"
Track front 62"
Track rear 62"
target curb weight 2800 pounds maybe 2900 at the most

Weight distribution target 47/53
Wheels should be no larger than 18" on any model to reduce unsprung weight, and rotational mass.

If a front and rear leaf spring is used, it should be adjustable through a proprietary method (GM contact me if you want to buy the idea )

range96

I would start with a Ford GT layout and bring the price down with mass production. It had a bulletproof and strong transaxle (Ricardo) that accommodates double A-arms. It is also set up for north-south engine layout.

I wouldn't want a modern Fiero, we already have those...

Racer X

A north-south (longitudinal) layout creates different problems and most have shifted away from it. I think mostly unless the car is long it eliminates rear storage space, and put the rear wheels at the back of the car. The Ford GT was longer than the Vette (10") and had a 106.7 inch wheelbase (inch or so longer). I personally prefer a shorter wheelbase for more agility.

What modern Fiero do we have?

range96

I was thinking MR2, but realized it's out of production for 5 years now.

The Boxter/Cayman is in a different category.

Still, I have no desire for a transverse engine configuration. Something like the RCR Superlite (or even the FF GTM) is what I had in mind.

rcallen484

Would raising the front end put more weight on the rear tires? Seems like it would (intuitively).

Almost There

The corvettes highest spec configuration right now is 285 front, 345 rear. To make handling perfectly optimal it would need a load on each tire proportional to its width. Of course you could do that by reducing the rears to around 265mm but then that could be suicide in a front engine car, and sub-optimal since a rearward weight bias is preferable in all dynamic situations. The only logical move for the vette is too remove as much weight off the front axle as possible; radiator, battery, engine mass, ac compressor, cf hood, increase wheelbase, anything...

*the counter gear used in the lfa, as well as using a mid-engine transaxle (sls amg) is a genius way of shifting the cg rearward as well.

Racer X

Not really, what it would do is cause more rear weight transfer on acceleration, in part by raising the cg. This was done in the old days in drag racing. This was ntil they be came more sophisticated in suspension design and tuning to cause the squat and transfer, plus it was bad for the car at the top end of the track.

It is a terrible thing to do in a sports car.

rcallen484

I was thinking of just making the front wheels same diameter as the rear and eliminating the forward leaning rake I like that look in a hotrod but would just "flat" be better in a sportscar?

Racer X

The wheels and tires aren't the final determination of "flat", it is the springs. Also the it would not be the wheel size but the tire height that would cause rake if the springs were not adjusted to accomdate.

Bigger front wheels would increase braking distance and deaden the steering due to greater gyro effect, unsprung weight, and rotational mass.

The wheel size differences are purely for looks.

rcallen484

I understand overall wheel/tire outside diameter is what we are talking about here. Reduce rears to same as fronts thereby reducing rear height by about 1/2 inch. What would that do? My C6 definitely "appears" to have that hotrod looking slight rake that I, in fact, like (see avatar photo <--------). But would a flat, even stance perform better?

goatts

The C6 design is the result of many hours of track, road and wind tunnel testing. Also benefits from racing program.

rcallen484

I tend to agree with you STRONGLY, which is why I think that MANY of the mods that many of our brethren do to their machines are ill-advised performance wise.

Racer X

Remember the engineering criteria for the Corvette have to fit the masses and all conditions they are likely encounter. Guys that mod and lower and such, know they have to be careful at driveways. If they scrape, they blame themselves. With a stock car the masses blame GM for not designing it properly.

It is possible to make the Corvette better for specific purposes if you are prepared for the trade-offs. Sometimes the only trade-off is cost.

JustinStrife

It depends on what mods we are talking about, and what performance points are being compared. I know my blown 402 will make sandwichs out of any stock corvette in a straight line, and will outbreak and outhandle any stock c5 or regular c6. It wont however, get near the fuel economy of a stock LS1/2/3/6/7.

rcallen484

Yep, the word "performance" can, and does, encompass many, many different criteria.

Jinx

Thank you for the humorous mental picture. Making sandwiches... because who wants mincemeat anymore?

JustinStrife

It's a new, greener society. Think healthy.

redzone

This.........

Jinx

See post #27 in this thread.

range96

We no longer remove the spark plugs at every 6,000 miles to clean them. Most people don't do it even at the recommended 100,000 mile.