Corvette question
 

So as to not hijack the new Corvette thread.

Older Corvette's are fun to drive, but to me they feel as if they are coming apart with every shift. Is this typical?

Consider that Mercedes are the primary focus of my automobiles, and even those almost fifty years old, such as a 300 SEL, feel tight when stomped on.

Is this feeling a part of the Corvette appeal, something one must live with, or just me?

I’m biased but would suggest that is why there are Mercedes……and then everything else.

Yep...I wasn't very impressed. Noisy, hot, over rated.

It would generally stand to reason that a vehicle with twice+ the sticker price would hold up better over time than the lesser priced vehicle.

My father's '66 Vette was around $4500 when new. It's been driven hard, prior to and during his ownership. It's loud, rough, primitive, fit and finish isn't good and it's a helluva lot fun to drive, turns like it's on rails and is violently quick. Folks used to a refined driving experience, and likely driving a vehicle that would have sold for 2-4 times as much, would probably hate it. I chalk it up to appeal and something one must live with.

I find both driving experiences appealing and not mutually exclusive.

I've heard that the vette gets them wet. what else do you need to know?

Those T-tops never could seal worth a damn...

That's the truth!

My Dad purchased a '69. It rode as if it were a fiberglass body placed on top of a Chevy pickup chassis.

Based on the amount of silicone liberally applied along the t-top mating surfaces by the PO, my Dad deduced that cruising was best limited to absolutely sunny days!

That is an excellent point.

A 300 SEL 6.3 in 1970 stickered at $15,500. For that sort of money you should expect the best and with the 6.3 you received it. My memory is a bit vague, but I recall a friend buying a Corvette then for $7,000 or so.

The current issue of Car and Driver has an article about a new Alfa that is said to be coming to the US. The author tells a story about how a Ferrari rep once drove a Corvette and said it was not in the same league as Ferrari. The author pointed out that a Ferrari was not $50,000. He then when on to praise the new Alfa which stickers at an expected $55,000 and comes from the same company that builds Ferrari.

And the Corvette's appeal to the fairer sex cannot be underestimated.

That's not surprising at all. I recall my dad bringing home a new Olds wagon sometime in the 80s. Tailgate didn't latch right, a couple power windows didn't work, the trip odo didn't reset, and one side of the turn signals didn't work. GM just had generalized quality issues during certain time periods, not restricted to Corvettes.

As far as safety, you don't buy a sports car to be safe, you buy a Volvo wagon.

Well you can either spend $90k on a new Corvette or $200k+ on an Aston Martin or an SL65/63 AMG.

The Corvette will still be faster but not as refined.

Its all what your looking for.

As others have said, it's supposed to be a racecar with turn signals and cats. My truck is loose, flexy, and rattles-which is expected of a cheap pickup. Speedbumps with the solid rear axle are like getting slapped in the back of the head(when traversed straight-on)

I have owned two, a '65 and my current '86. Even after a thorough restoration, the '65 was a horrible driving car. It was loud and fun but I was never really confident with it in the turns. It was also jiggly, squeaky and rattly.

My '86 is a HUGE technological leap over the '65. It handles fantastically and it's pretty quiet on the highway. However, it's hot, the ride is choppy and the body shakes in town.

The first generation that I've driven that addresses all of that is the C5 ('97 and up). That car is tight, solid and quiet. I would assume everything from then on is good.

I see a new red one in my neighborhood every so often. I see it and think, "trying too hard" - I'm sure it's a real hoot to drive however.