well, thats just stupid now, isn't it?? Why would you want your signature all american sports car to be on the same level as your classic family car???? goes to show you, even people in high ranking positions can be dumb.....

His claim of the Z-51 option feels stiff. How would he know how stiff it really is unless he drove another non Z-51 optioned C7 to compare it to? Every time some one called him out on how he got to drive one the subject was evaded. This whole post sounds fishy and the part of don't tell GM I drove one? What is this some James Bond sh***t.

This. And what's with all the C7 threads started here that begin with "I know this is the wrong forum, but I'm special so I'm posting it here anyway?"

Why no, no it doesn't....:rolleyes:

Who cares, blah blah blah.

A GM employee that im related to has the car right now for testing a glitch in one of the cars systems he had a hand in designing. It's a car that now has a third generation version of the part that was going wrong but it appears the third time is the charm. He wanted me to listen to something while driving and get my opinion if the sound was annoying or not. The sounds I heard were nothing but good! :thumbs:

Thank you

I own a non Z51 C6 and against my car this is pretty bone jarring. I myself wouldn't order it I don't track my cars and after awhile I would get tired of the harshness. For some it might be fine but its not for me.

Cool now were talking. You have to realize on this forum we like some kind of info to back up what your saying especially anything as far fetched as driving a C7.. You had to know we would be calling for blood when you started this thread with out some kind of info to at least substantiate your post.

I figured it out after thinking about Ford, how everything Ford designed in the early 90s (think Tuarus) had oval lights, interior gauges etc. Theme carried over to all Ford's product line.

Wondering of ol' Ed didn't work at Ford sometime earlier in his career.

Tough crowd here! I was happy to read the OP. Thanks for posting it. I agree with the style points. I'd like to like the C-7 but I'm not there yet. And yes, it's the back end that really put me off it. I waited to see it and once I did, I bought my GS. Very happy with it. I went by the Museum last week ad was disappointed to see that they don't have a C-7 on display. I expected to get my first look at one in person. Too bad.

Mr. Welburn has been with GM since 1972. He did not work for Ford - or any other car company - previous to that.

Got it. :cheers:
But, he'd sure have fit-in at Ford considering his styling philosophy. :D

The tail-lights issue reminds me of the kitten-birthing from the change from retractable headlights way back when the C6 was new.

Well when C6 arrived I didnt like it much then and I still dont like some of the styling aspects today when I look at my car at some angles they will never please everyone. However I think the C7s rear end is Vile! and totally inappropriate for a Corvette. I will end up buying one in The future but im going to have a real hard time with that goofy looking a$$ end. Im hoping they may soften it up some in the future and make it less cluttered and busy looking.

I would have liked round tail lights on the C7 better, but the rectangular ones really are not that bad.

What I don't like is all that black on the rear ... I guess it only looks ok on a black C7. On any other color, it just looks way too 'busy' back there ... kind of a 'In Your Face' kit car look that wasn't thought out too well.

oh well

Sky Topp,

Thank You for taking the time to post your quick impressions review of the C7. :thumbs:

thanks for the review...the more I think I of about it, the more I realize that GM saved me a bunch of money with the ugly rear end 'cause I will wait for the C8 and drive my beautiful Victory Red C6 in the meantime:lol:

My complaint exactly. I've no problem with different, but busy/tacky is not good.

No question about it.
I don't like the rear end. :ack: