I NEVER believe Hype, but....
Discussion
I always had a bit of sympathy for Corvettes, even the C4, but this C8 I can't.
You may say that I'm not happy because they moved the engine location, and in fact it is.
But not on a technical perspective but visually, it looks like they designed the front and the cabin and suddenly figured out that a V8 needed to be put at the back (and maybe the designers were not sure if it would be longitudinal or transversal so they make the rear train the wider they could).
I thought that this was maybe the pictures not giving credit to the car, but in flesh this is the same.
So very nice engines, nice chassis I guess, interesting interior but she is too callipygian for me.
You may say that I'm not happy because they moved the engine location, and in fact it is.
But not on a technical perspective but visually, it looks like they designed the front and the cabin and suddenly figured out that a V8 needed to be put at the back (and maybe the designers were not sure if it would be longitudinal or transversal so they make the rear train the wider they could).
I thought that this was maybe the pictures not giving credit to the car, but in flesh this is the same.
So very nice engines, nice chassis I guess, interesting interior but she is too callipygian for me.
Zeb74 said:
I always had a bit of sympathy for Corvettes, even the C4, but this C8 I can't.
You may say that I'm not happy because they moved the engine location, and in fact it is.
But not on a technical perspective but visually, it looks like they designed the front and the cabin and suddenly figured out that a V8 needed to be put at the back (and maybe the designers were not sure if it would be longitudinal or transversal so they make the rear train the wider they could).
I thought that this was maybe the pictures not giving credit to the car, but in flesh this is the same.
So very nice engines, nice chassis I guess, interesting interior but she is too callipygian for me.
Merci Vincent,You may say that I'm not happy because they moved the engine location, and in fact it is.
But not on a technical perspective but visually, it looks like they designed the front and the cabin and suddenly figured out that a V8 needed to be put at the back (and maybe the designers were not sure if it would be longitudinal or transversal so they make the rear train the wider they could).
I thought that this was maybe the pictures not giving credit to the car, but in flesh this is the same.
So very nice engines, nice chassis I guess, interesting interior but she is too callipygian for me.
"callipygian" - new word for me
Anyway - since it seems to mean a shapely derriere - I'm not sure it applies to this vehicle, which in my opinion is pyguglii 
Mr Cerbera said:
.... and £165 K is the latest market price 
So much for cheaper American alternative
It's a bargain compared to other cars with such an amount of performance.So much for cheaper American alternative
However, do buyers of a Bugatti or hypercars from Ferrari, Lambo or McLaren (you can add others), buy them for their performances?
It's totally useless on an open road (an even on a track this is debatable).
They are positional goods above all, and a Corvette will never be (except perhaps in US suburbs).
If users bought cars objectively, TVRs would be more valuable.
Forums | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff