Pictures of ZO6 and ZO7 package aviation-style winglets
02-16-2014, 09:51 PM
#61
Le Mans Master
Well if you can't tell the piece of plastic on the C7 is an evolution from the exact same thing on the C6, I don't know what else to say.
The Z06 is not using the same fenders as the C7 Stingray, evidenced by the shape of the fender vent. So I doubt GM is saving any money by not making it wide enough. Their approach to the design is probably more expensive and somehow more durable, aerodynamic or lighter. I guess someone needs to ask Tadge the question.
At least the C7 won't have the plastic front splitter. The new CF splitter is nice.
I think GM has brought us an incredibly good looking car, that will out perform all of its predecessors and most other competitors.
The Z06 is not using the same fenders as the C7 Stingray, evidenced by the shape of the fender vent. So I doubt GM is saving any money by not making it wide enough. Their approach to the design is probably more expensive and somehow more durable, aerodynamic or lighter. I guess someone needs to ask Tadge the question.
At least the C7 won't have the plastic front splitter. The new CF splitter is nice.
I think GM has brought us an incredibly good looking car, that will out perform all of its predecessors and most other competitors.
C7 BAse and C7 Z06 have the same front bumper this is where the problem occurs. If it was a proper wider bumper like on the C6Z06 the fenders could have been not just widened but widened properly to cover the tire.
Not at all an evolution as that implies a positive forward step. This is a cheap visually clunky step backwards, to avoid cost of a properly widened front bumper. I hope no one thinks that sharing a front bumper is somehow an advantage in any way, besides saving manufacturing costs.
02-17-2014, 12:19 AM
#62
Instructor
Probably my biggest disappointment of the car. I have seen much better photo shops of the rear end also, but my goodness, plastic add on parts had to come from the beancounters.
Really GM...
Really GM...
02-17-2014, 01:14 AM
#63
Safety Car
No one is debating that the front fenders are wider - but they are pinched towards the front to meet up with the front bumper.
C7 BAse and C7 Z06 have the same front bumper this is where the problem occurs. If it was a proper wider bumper like on the C6Z06 the fenders could have been not just widened but widened properly to cover the tire.
Not at all an evolution as that implies a positive forward step. This is a cheap visually clunky step backwards, to avoid cost of a properly widened front bumper. I hope no one thinks that sharing a front bumper is somehow an advantage in any way, besides saving manufacturing costs.
C7 BAse and C7 Z06 have the same front bumper this is where the problem occurs. If it was a proper wider bumper like on the C6Z06 the fenders could have been not just widened but widened properly to cover the tire.
Not at all an evolution as that implies a positive forward step. This is a cheap visually clunky step backwards, to avoid cost of a properly widened front bumper. I hope no one thinks that sharing a front bumper is somehow an advantage in any way, besides saving manufacturing costs.
and NOW, evidently after an almost assured deep reflection, the problem is that the front bumper isnt wide enough?
Love how people keep saying "costs savings" as if there was a problem with it.
Next time just write this stuff down so you can keep up with your own bs.
.... and there I go again feeding the trolls. Ill never learn!
02-17-2014, 06:03 AM
#64
Le Mans Master
So the front fenders ARE wider? huh.....
and NOW, evidently after an almost assured deep reflection, the problem is that the front bumper isnt wide enough?
Love how people keep saying "costs savings" as if there was a problem with it.
Next time just write this stuff down so you can keep up with your own bs.
.... and there I go again feeding the trolls. Ill never learn!
and NOW, evidently after an almost assured deep reflection, the problem is that the front bumper isnt wide enough?
Love how people keep saying "costs savings" as if there was a problem with it.
Next time just write this stuff down so you can keep up with your own bs.
.... and there I go again feeding the trolls. Ill never learn!
If the car had a proper Wider front bumper the marketing department wouldn't have to brainstorm and land on "Spats" for the black plastic fender flares that are more at home on a 4x4 or a Jeep.
It's awesome if you like it and all but it is not a proper solution to the issue.
The "spats" are going to be a trend copied by exactly 0 cars in this price range.
Somebody in the C7R team screwed up royally - probably gonna get fired for widening the fenders PROPERLY.
Yeah this looks way worse without the spats.
Last edited by Hirohawa; 02-17-2014 at 06:21 AM.
02-17-2014, 07:55 AM
#65
Scraping the splitter.
Well if you can't tell the piece of plastic on the C7 is an evolution from the exact same thing on the C6, I don't know what else to say.
...
At least the C7 won't have the plastic front splitter. The new CF splitter is nice.
I think GM has brought us an incredibly good looking car, that will out perform all of its predecessors and most other competitors.
...
At least the C7 won't have the plastic front splitter. The new CF splitter is nice.
I think GM has brought us an incredibly good looking car, that will out perform all of its predecessors and most other competitors.
I don't see how such a cheap piece of plastic could have been anything but "aesthetic" (if you like that kind of thing).
S.
02-17-2014, 02:13 PM
#66
02-17-2014, 03:11 PM
#67
Safety Car
The level of ignorance is quite stunning.
A fender on a jeep is not the samething as an aerodynamic aid as a wheel spat.
but what do I know... im just a guy in the internet.
A fender on a jeep is not the samething as an aerodynamic aid as a wheel spat.
but what do I know... im just a guy in the internet.
02-17-2014, 04:07 PM
#69
Le Mans Master
Yeah, I always thought that cheap plastic lip on the C6 Z06 looked like garbage. But it blended in nicely with the cheap plastic filler panel they used on the back of the oblong-shaped front wheelwells.
I don't see how such a cheap piece of plastic could have been anything but "aesthetic" (if you like that kind of thing).
S.
I don't see how such a cheap piece of plastic could have been anything but "aesthetic" (if you like that kind of thing).
S.
So using black cheap crappy plastic on the top of a fender that will receive virtually no debris from above in lieu of a properly widened and painted fender is 10X as bad. Thanks for helping me make my point Snorman. C6 Z06/ ZR1 wide-body again helps illustrate the point that should be self evident without referring to any other car. Glad you came around
02-17-2014, 04:19 PM
#70
Le Mans Master
Guess they figured out how to get the same aerodynamic advantage without them somehow - hint - properly widened fender that covers the wheel.
The "Spat" designation and the "Aero" advantage is straight out of Mad Men episode - "Our tobacco is toasted". Whoever came up with this idea of spinning this awkward solution as a positive should get a big big raise the way some people here are eating it up.
02-17-2014, 04:54 PM
#71
Le Mans Master
They are different from what I am talking about - they are not used as fender extensions to cover the tire width. . A lot of sports cars have some sort of deflector or plastic in this area. There is probably a universal reason that they are not painted as others have stated probably for debris and abrasion issues.
The issue with the "Spatz" is the plastic used on the fender (not Bumper) to cover the tire width is just poorly executed. And I do not think we will be seeing this from other manufacturers as they will continue to widen fenders with proper extensions that are body material and painted.
02-17-2014, 06:21 PM
#72
Safety Car
Everything you are expression concerning the wheel spats is strictly based on your opinion.
Not facts.
Furthermore, take a look at the rules an regulations for the GT Le Mans class.
http://m.imsa.com/imsa-rules-and-regulations
I truely enjoyed the sections regarding what is permitted for bodywork and what is not. Go and take a look if you even care to learn something.
FACTS.
Not opinions. You dont like them... think they are cost saving rocker extensions because gm didnt want to pay for the extra inch of fender... no matter how rediculous you male sureself out to be.... those are your opinions.
NOT FACTS.
With that... how much do you think gm is saving on the cost of the fenders with the. "cost saving" rocker extensions? Its about an inch wide and perhaps 6-7 inches tall tapering to a point.
Do you see how ridiculous the notion is??
Now lets exercise some common sense for a minute and leave our bs at home. The mear fact that the racecar doesnt have an aerodynamic aid has more to donwith the extensive regulations they must adhere to than anything else.
But lets use your logic... then I guess the displacement of the LT4 is all wrong because it doesnt match the racecar, the supercharger is all batshit backwards because the racecar is NA, the front grill is all screwed up because it doesnt have those larger yellow lamps in them and lets not forget about the massive wing on the back. Man do the c7 z06 engineers look stupid by not even getting that right.
Hell if its not on the racecar then its not necessary and vice versa.
RIGHT?????
Again the ignorance and the lack of common sense is brutally stunning lately when it comes to the new vettes.
Your opinions dont means tre pitos when it comes to why a the corvette team decided on wheel spats vs a "properly widened fender".... more OPINIONS.
Not facts.
Furthermore, take a look at the rules an regulations for the GT Le Mans class.
http://m.imsa.com/imsa-rules-and-regulations
I truely enjoyed the sections regarding what is permitted for bodywork and what is not. Go and take a look if you even care to learn something.
FACTS.
Not opinions. You dont like them... think they are cost saving rocker extensions because gm didnt want to pay for the extra inch of fender... no matter how rediculous you male sureself out to be.... those are your opinions.
NOT FACTS.
With that... how much do you think gm is saving on the cost of the fenders with the. "cost saving" rocker extensions? Its about an inch wide and perhaps 6-7 inches tall tapering to a point.
Do you see how ridiculous the notion is??
Now lets exercise some common sense for a minute and leave our bs at home. The mear fact that the racecar doesnt have an aerodynamic aid has more to donwith the extensive regulations they must adhere to than anything else.
But lets use your logic... then I guess the displacement of the LT4 is all wrong because it doesnt match the racecar, the supercharger is all batshit backwards because the racecar is NA, the front grill is all screwed up because it doesnt have those larger yellow lamps in them and lets not forget about the massive wing on the back. Man do the c7 z06 engineers look stupid by not even getting that right.
Hell if its not on the racecar then its not necessary and vice versa.
RIGHT?????
Again the ignorance and the lack of common sense is brutally stunning lately when it comes to the new vettes.
Your opinions dont means tre pitos when it comes to why a the corvette team decided on wheel spats vs a "properly widened fender".... more OPINIONS.
02-17-2014, 08:11 PM
#73
Le Mans Master
They are different from what I am talking about - they are not used as fender extensions to cover the tire width. . A lot of sports cars have some sort of deflector or plastic in this area. There is probably a universal reason that they are not painted as others have stated probably for debris and abrasion issues.
The issue with the "Spatz" is the plastic used on the fender (not Bumper) to cover the tire width is just poorly executed. And I do not think we will be seeing this from other manufacturers as they will continue to widen fenders with proper extensions that are body material and painted.
02-17-2014, 10:06 PM
#75
Safety Car
02-17-2014, 10:45 PM
#76
Rocks, gravel, and track debris, guys. Wise up.
02-18-2014, 12:45 AM
#77
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Oct 1999
Location: Charlotte, NC (formerly Endicott, NY)
Posts: 40,126
Received 8,958 Likes
on
5,346 Posts
I can't decipher much of what you are saying with all the typos, but you are incorrect. On the C6 Z06 there is not a huge piece of plastic covering what should be a wider flush fender and a wider front bumper that where implemented as a cost saving measure. That "widget" could be removed and no one would notice it on the C6 if you did that on the C7 counterpart you would have a lot of exposed front tire that would look like you got a wider wrong size.
Leave the terrible looking version to the people who want an engineered package for having a blast with the car. Hell, a lot of us only wash our cars once a month or less.
Bill
02-18-2014, 01:41 AM
#78
Le Mans Master
Don't buy one and be happy. It is obvious you wouldn't use the car for what it is intended to do. No sense wasting your money buying a capability you wouldn't use. The power can't be used on the street since there isn't anyplace where you can open it up and let it rip so go with the base Stingray (which has the same problem just less of it). It exists for the people who can't put their foot to the floor and hold it there for several minutes at a time.
Hope your mouth enjoys the taste of your Nikes.
And C5 Z06
Any dry lake beds in NC? Foot to the floor too - for miles.
Nice assumption. I don't like what is IMO a poorly executed design element - a piece of black plastic to widen the fender - somehow means I don't drive the way "it is intended to...". Any other dumb conclusions you want to leap to as to who I am or how I drive Sherlock? Make a grown up counter argument without attacking me or your pathetic attempt to put me down.
You are not the only person on this forum who drives the Corvette as it was "intended".
Steve
Last edited by Hirohawa; 02-18-2014 at 02:07 AM.
02-18-2014, 02:03 AM
#79
Le Mans Master
Everything you are expression concerning the wheel spats is strictly based on your opinion.
Not facts.
Furthermore, take a look at the rules an regulations for the GT Le Mans class.
http://m.imsa.com/imsa-rules-and-regulations
I truely enjoyed the sections regarding what is permitted for bodywork and what is not. Go and take a look if you even care to learn something.
FACTS.
Not opinions. You dont like them... think they are cost saving rocker extensions because gm didnt want to pay for the extra inch of fender... no matter how rediculous you male sureself out to be.... those are your opinions.
NOT FACTS.
With that... how much do you think gm is saving on the cost of the fenders with the. "cost saving" rocker extensions? Its about an inch wide and perhaps 6-7 inches tall tapering to a point.
Do you see how ridiculous the notion is??
Now lets exercise some common sense for a minute and leave our bs at home. The mear fact that the racecar doesnt have an aerodynamic aid has more to donwith the extensive regulations they must adhere to than anything else.
But lets use your logic... then I guess the displacement of the LT4 is all wrong because it doesnt match the racecar, the supercharger is all batshit backwards because the racecar is NA, the front grill is all screwed up because it doesnt have those larger yellow lamps in them and lets not forget about the massive wing on the back. Man do the c7 z06 engineers look stupid by not even getting that right.
Hell if its not on the racecar then its not necessary and vice versa.
RIGHT?????
Again the ignorance and the lack of common sense is brutally stunning lately when it comes to the new vettes.
Your opinions dont means tre pitos when it comes to why a the corvette team decided on wheel spats vs a "properly widened fender".... more OPINIONS.
Not facts.
Furthermore, take a look at the rules an regulations for the GT Le Mans class.
http://m.imsa.com/imsa-rules-and-regulations
I truely enjoyed the sections regarding what is permitted for bodywork and what is not. Go and take a look if you even care to learn something.
FACTS.
Not opinions. You dont like them... think they are cost saving rocker extensions because gm didnt want to pay for the extra inch of fender... no matter how rediculous you male sureself out to be.... those are your opinions.
NOT FACTS.
With that... how much do you think gm is saving on the cost of the fenders with the. "cost saving" rocker extensions? Its about an inch wide and perhaps 6-7 inches tall tapering to a point.
Do you see how ridiculous the notion is??
Now lets exercise some common sense for a minute and leave our bs at home. The mear fact that the racecar doesnt have an aerodynamic aid has more to donwith the extensive regulations they must adhere to than anything else.
But lets use your logic... then I guess the displacement of the LT4 is all wrong because it doesnt match the racecar, the supercharger is all batshit backwards because the racecar is NA, the front grill is all screwed up because it doesnt have those larger yellow lamps in them and lets not forget about the massive wing on the back. Man do the c7 z06 engineers look stupid by not even getting that right.
Hell if its not on the racecar then its not necessary and vice versa.
RIGHT?????
Again the ignorance and the lack of common sense is brutally stunning lately when it comes to the new vettes.
Your opinions dont means tre pitos when it comes to why a the corvette team decided on wheel spats vs a "properly widened fender".... more OPINIONS.
They are saving money by having only one C7 front bumper that works on both models. Can we agree on that?
Therefore a compromise was struck and we get spats instead of a properly widened fender. I don't know how many times I can say this over and over again. GM chose not to build a wider front bumper as with C6 Z06/ZR1/GS. Wider fenders narrow bumper creates a pinched in area where they mate - hence the plastic fantastic solution to cover the tire. But if we call them "Spats" it will be all fancy.
If you think the spats where used because of racing regulations or somehow it is superior to what is industry standard - fenders that actually cover the tires - you need to step away from the cool-aid and get some fresh air.
I think we will have to just disagree on this one.
02-18-2014, 03:26 AM
#80
Don't buy one and be happy. It is obvious you wouldn't use the car for what it is intended to do. No sense wasting your money buying a capability you wouldn't use. The power can't be used on the street since there isn't anyplace where you can open it up and let it rip so go with the base Stingray (which has the same problem just less of it). It exists for the people who can't put their foot to the floor and hold it there for several minutes at a time.
Leave the terrible looking version to the people who want an engineered package for having a blast with the car. Hell, a lot of us only wash our cars once a month or less.
Bill
Leave the terrible looking version to the people who want an engineered package for having a blast with the car. Hell, a lot of us only wash our cars once a month or less.
Bill