Maybe we should look at that Factory Five GTM I talked about earlier. It uses Corvette parts, like the motor, suspensions except w/coilovers, tires, wheels, etc. The only big difference I can tell is a "composite" body, I think some Lexan gets used, and it weighs in at 2200ish.

 

Out of curiosity, I weighed my C5.

For the record..... On the scale, it weighed in at 3380 lbs.

1) I left the all the mats in the car, includiing the cargo area mat. Misc other stuff ie: radar detector, XM radio, cleaning supplies, fix a flat ect. (-25lbs)

2) I have a NX system wet system with all the extras and a 10 lb bottle about 1/2 full. - (-30lbs)

3) I filled it up so 16 gallons x 7lbs = - (112 lbs)

I also added C6 black motorsport wheels, with larger tires. (275s in front, 305s in the rear by the way.)

Base weight around 3213 or so.. ??

This is a loaded car with most options.

Not bad I guess

 

One of the problems the bowtie guys faced was making the structure rigid. The glass body offers no strength as it does in metal vehicles and in fact makes for a real challenge trying to keep things stable. Corvettes have been plagued with squeaks for the first four generations (C1-4). The hydroformed frames and advanced computer generated analysis of structures has greatly improved the last two generations of Corvettes. The balance between light weight materials (Alum engines,suspension components,composit springs,etc.)and the extra weight needed to provide a rigid platform needed for performance handling, maintaining body panel integrity, and obtaining a crash worthy package is always a compromise. I personally think they did a great job.

 

Corvettes are not made of fiberglass.
They consist of a composite material.

 

My bad, I thought the bodywork was a fibreglass mold, a bit like a Lotus Esprit is

Still I don't care I'd own a Corvette even if it was made from wood. They look fantastic.

 

Yes I think it probably is. But that does all depend on your view point.

If you take a TVR, like the T350, it's a 2 seater front engined RWD car, just like the Corvette.

But it is smaller in every dimension, so that's a bit of weight saved straight off.

It also uses an aluminium Straight 6. So no matter how light an LS1 is, the TVR uses the same material but with 25% less cylinders, so it will be lighter.

Also I think the gearbox is smaller and more compact too, the T56 on the Vette isn't what you'd call compact in size.

The TVR and Corvette are pretty similar, as the TVR uses a spaceframe chassis and a fibreglass body. But TVR's don't come with ABS or traction control, air bags, often no air con or even electric windows. All these things save weight.

So I don't think the Corvette really is that heavy, because it's a whole package, and modern crash safety standards are requiring more and more. The TVR is a small production vehicle and it doesn't have to apply to all of the safe safety, noise, emissions standards as bigger companies.

Even the lightweight Ferrari's are getting a bit portly these days. But with thir use of modern electronics (E-Diff's and such) and modern tyres they are faster than ever.

Yes the Corvette maybe more of a middle weight contender, as opposed to a light or fly weight competitor, but all things considered I think they are pretty darn good.

 

That's entertainment!

 

I think you're all right - definitely more of a middle weight. At any rate, for its size, even amongst other middleweights, the performance is just incredible. I had no idea the vette was no longer fiberglass...when did that happen? I always figured the C5 "composite" meant fiberglass.

I keep thinking that aside from components and body, the frame has to be a heavy creature in itself. What you say, Hal, about the frame needing to bear a greater burden makes sense. I'd expect the frame to bear the burden in the first place. BTW do framed cars last longer than unibody cars? I've heard of metal fatigue degrading the strength on unibodies.

Thanks for the weigh in basser...those sound like appropriate numbers. And also:"Still I don't care I'd own a Corvette even if it was made from wood. They look fantastic. " dead on man

 

Im sorry but I still dont see where its "middle weight".
I dont see any of those cars posted road race with the exception of a porsche(which is heavier) and every once in a while you see a lotus (3043 lbs) or a vauxhall 220 (2045 lbs). The vauxhall 220 is very light I agree but a tubro charged 4 cyl that only makes 220 flhp is rediculous.


lotus weight
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2003/lot...599/specs.html

vauxhall weight
http://www.fast-autos.net/vauxhall/vauxhallvxr220.html

 

Hey Adnectere. Can you not read? The corvette is a light car period. We give you example after example of factory optioned cars that anyone can buy and most are heavier than a vette. It has nothing to do with whether I like the vette or porshe or whatever. Don't you know what a FACT is. Every post you say **** that is not true or based in fact. The engine in the corvette is one of the lightest v8s of that displacement in the world. You state "the big question is where is the weight hiding"


You are obviously a very stupid human being. I hope you are just trying to get a rise out of people cause I would hate to thing you are serious. You were the guy who brought up porsches. Since you think you know something. Give me a list of production fully optioned automobiles that are lighter than a Z06 corvette. They have to have over 400 hp( i am spotting you 100 hp) and go at least 160 mph(spotting you 38 mph.) Do not say that the performance doesn't matter or you will show how stupid you are. Corvettes have large brakes and wheels and tires which all add to the wt of the car. It is easy to make rice burners light because the wheel and tires are golf cart size. do you drive a yugo or a geo metro...I think the metro is lighter than a vette.

 

To all you retards who say the vette is made out of fiberglass, you just disqualified yourself from any future credibility in statements made concerning anything corvette. I don' think there is an ounce of fiberglass on a stock C5.

Most of the posts in this thread by the thread starter are just repaeating why is the corvette such a fat american pile of crap when there are 4 cylinder cars in the UK without windows, rearview mirrors, and even fenders(they are open wheel cars) that can weight 700 lbs lighter then it and are better then anything american becasue they are made in europe so they are automatically superior.

Us as americans will go back to our corner becasue we are retarded overweight racists who can't build a car and have a president with the equivilent of a 3rd grade education

Our corvetts will kick your cars asses, we have bigger dicks then you, and Canada sucks!

Did I miss anything?







******!

 

99 FRC 3,174 pds.

 

Chuck...yes, I am literate. I do in fact agree and disagree with some of the things other people have said, even you. Your post was a little too defensive - I'm not attacking Corvettes in any fashion.

I will agree that the Corvette is a light car period. It is light for any style of car. But when you deal with sports cars, weight becomes an obsession and they're all very good at shedding the pounds. There is a good list of factory cars with varying weights. And like so many good posters have said, there are various reasons for different weights. I'm no expert in Vipers, for instance, but the v10 in them is by nature heavier than an ls1. Is this bad weight? In my opinion, decidedly not. In the same vein the larger brakes, tires, etc. that add to a Corvette's capability over a normal car will raise the weight. And again my answer is that this is decidely not bad weight. I also agree that an LS1 is just a marvelous little powerplant, and whether you're an engineer type who enjoys the more esoteric nature of it, or you simply enjoy the powerplant for what it produces, you can't go wrong with it. And a statement like "Where is the weight hiding" is...if you'll go back and look over other posts...showing that I simply don't know where any weight can be taken off realistically. I'm sure you could trim vehicle dimensions like they did on the C6 or switch from runflats to a lighter tire or similar items, but there is nothing glaringly heavy about it - that's why it's hiding! A Corvette drives like a light car and the comparison of weights on different cars is simply a my figure vs. your figure vs. joe's figure argument now. That's why I wanted to get off the Porsche subject (initially brought up because of similar performance-a debatable subject in itself) and into other vehicles. 300BHP brought up a good list of "other" vehicles we Americans don't normally think about. Some are reasonable comparisons, maybe the Marcos if it uses an LS1. Others aren't - I don't consider a Caterham or a Noble a reasonable comparison hence "I'm not necessarily talking about the Caterham, etc. or anything that tiny in specific. "

I could give a list, like the other cars, of ones with similar capabilities. But you obviously won't find any approaching the corner/brake/accel of a Corvette for within...say an extra twenty-five thousand on up. The very fact that a c5 z06 can be bought for 50k and have 400 hp whereas comparables are maybe a Ferrari 355 or a 911 Turbo or...etc is why so many have the z06's! I wouldn't say that performance doesn't matter...but other things count too. Would it be better to have the z06 have more power if it cost more money? Or if it had to pay a gas guzzler tax (which btw in the market right now the c6 vette/z06 are the only cars >400hp that dont pay gas guzzler!)? What if you sacrificed run-flats? There are some things, big or small, that matter to the consumer just as much as a number. Some cars, like the ones I mentioned above at any rate, say the F355 or the 911 Turbo...those cars are heavy because of certain add-ons and they're supposed to be more luxury-oriented. Is that a bad thing? Would you buy one and then strip it down the bones to gain performance? If it's only performance you want (which is the criteria you gave me, but obviously not the only thing that matters) a smaller production motor with shorter gearing would accomplish much the same numbers, but would be a different sort of driver (which is why you bought a z06 instead of an m3, albeit slower). It's obvious there that equal performance means different things to different drivers. (My car: I drive a 98 Camaro, but the family has 2 C5's that I get to toy with until I can afford my own! I've got ~20k miles on them from me, so I consider myself part of the Corvette family).

Ferrets: I have no clue if the C5 is composite or fiberglass. I just assumed it was fiberglass. I've seen a damaged body panel and it had the look. Fiberglass is a composite after all. Is the C5 just polyurethane? Or something else? I'm intrigued here - please elaborate and fill us in.

And the Corvette, read a few posts above, is referred to as "our beloveds"...not a fat blabla. I think not so many people regard it as a fat pile of crap as you think...ricers and such after all, set camaros/corvettes/vipers as serious benchmarks. And like above, I don't count Caterhams or the like equivalent. Nothing says we can't build solid cars, no one is arguing against there. Or that we have the biggest dicks. Or that our president has a third-grade education. (I think the only thing anyone will dare argue against is the president comment )

 

My '99 FRC weighed 3080# with 3/8 tank of fuel on a NHRA certified scale...that ain't heavy.

 

Composite means plastic just like a Saturn..they have not been made out of fiberglass for a long time..there is more fiberglass in a F body than in the Corvette..actually the F body has body panels made of steel, composite, and fiberglass...keep in mind that with added horse power you need the stronger drive train and bigger brakes ect. to make the car road worthy and crash worthy..sorry didn't mean to hijack the thread..


Shipping weight on a 2002-2004 Z06 printed on the invoice is 3045 pounds that is with aprox 2-3 gallons of fuel in it..hardly a porky car considering the performance and luxury items that it has.

 

Guys, don't be pedantic. Corvettes, including the current C6, are made of "fiberglass."

The term "fiberglass" refers generally to glass fiber materials used in composite structures. And obviously when somebody says that something is "made of fiberglass" they mean that it is made from a resin reinforced by fiberglass. Nobody is suggesting that Corvette fenders consist of nothing but a loose pile of glass fibers. Sheesh.

A "composite" structure, by the way, is one consisting of a (usually plastic) resin reinforced by a fiber material. All this talk of composites and fiberglass being mutually exclusive is nonsense. The most commonly-used composite material is fiberglass (in conjunction with a plastic resin, of course).

And before anybody glibly points out that the Corvette brochure mentions body panels made from "SMC," you should know that Sheet Molding Compound is a glass-fiber-reinforced polyester resin in sheet form. The popular meaning of the term "fiberglass" certainly includes SMC, which can be considered a type of fiberglass/polyester prepreg intended for use in closed molds.The damaged panel had those wispy glass fibers hanging out of it because it is made of fiberglass. Your assumption was correct.

 

Not that I agree with this, or maybe I do...That was the funniest post Ive read on this site in quite some time!!!

 

You can play word games all you want ...they used to be made of fiberglass but the they are made of a different material now...it is nothing like the fiberglass they were made of years ago...check out what a Saturn is made of ..same same but the old Vettes were nothing like that..happy new year