<VV> Corvettes> Not so fast, G.I.!

[Tony Underwood]

At 07:49 AM 1/22/2007, ChiefTAM at aol.com wrote:
>Don't know if I agree with all of this.  I have owned and driven Fords  and
>Chevys.  I bought a 77 L82 Corvette new, loaded with everything, 
>for  $9598.00
>and for the day, it was reasonable in power and average in  economy.  I now
>own a new C6.  Fantastic car.  Fast, Powerful,  Efficient!  You can buy a new
>base 2007 Vette, which is a dang good car,  for under $40,000.00 which is the
>best performance bang for the buck you will  find.


I'll spout off and agree with this, in that the current Corvette is 
an engineering success that's hard to beat for the price.   If you 
want a great GT car, your money is best spent on the current 
Corvette.   The Viper may be faster, stop quicker, corner harder etc 
(however not by a very wide margin) but it's almost twice the price 
and it's rough, arrogant, vicious, and demanding.   The Corvette is 
smooth, refined, relatively quiet, and docile enough for grandma to 
take it to the grocers and back.

The Corvette, since the introduction of the C5, has proven itself to 
be a fine car.    However, it *is* a specialty vehicle intended to 
fill a niche.

Ford's Mustang is intended to fill another niche, and it's doing it 
in fine style.    The two do not compete on the same playing 
field.     It's the same thing as the Corvair vs the first gen 
Mustang.   They're simply not alike.   Neither was a substitute for 
the other nor were they intended to be... in spite of the prototype 
Mustang having been a simple "me too" Corvair copy to counter the 
initial success the Corvair enjoyed after Motor Trend's accolades.


tony..