Wrong. The 2014 Corvette Does Not Have “Camaro Taillights”
53
You’ve probably seen, heard, or read the misinformed notion that the 2014 Chevy Corvette Stingray has “Camaro taillights”. Having read yet another comment stating this to be the case, I decided it was time to set the record straight and put an end to this “Camaro lights” lunacy once and for all.
For starters, it’s important to recognize the concept of a design language. Sometimes known as a design vocabulary, a design language is an overarching theme that guides the design of a complementary set of products (or other elements of the product). Since both the Corvette and Camaro are performance vehicles from Chevrolet, it should come as no surprise that the two vehicles might utilize some common inspiration in their respective designs.
But that’s not to say that the C7′s lights are the same as those found in the Camaro. While they may appear to have a similar design aesthetic, the lights on the Corvette are much more intricate, with a three-dimensional and sculpted lens housing using indirect LED lights. In fact, Corvette designers drew inspiration for the C7 from fighter jets and the stingray animal, so while the overall aesthetic of the rear lights might appear similar to that of the Camaro thanks to common elements of a design language, the pieces don’t share any parts.
And for those who need quantitative proof that the C7′s rear lights don’t share any physical elements with those of the Camaro, look no further than the rear ends of both vehicles: the C7′s lights have five (six on the outside) distinct corners, while those of the Camaro have four. That’s pentagonal vs. tetragonal, for you math geeks. Knowing this, would someone ever compare the design of the Pentagon to that of a shipping container? No, they wouldn’t.
So can we stop with the insane Camaro comparisons? At the least, don’t call them “Camaro taillights”.
Google+
I’m pretty sure the outer lense is hexagonal; maybe Chevy was really copying the Mazda RX3.
I’ll use the same comparison I did weeks ago when the C7 had it’s debut.
A lot of people think the new Ford Fusion looks like an Aston Martin, and sure, on it’s own it seems to draw inspiration from an Aston (DBS is the closest, I suppose). But put them side by side and you see how off they really are.
Now, the Camaro vs C7 tail lights are even further from resembling one another than the Fusion vs DBS. THEY LOOK NOTHING A LIKE.
Helen Keller could see this! Even today! and she’s been dead 40+ years.
Any body who is saying they look the same is either hating, trolling, or just following the hating-trolling crowd and not actually looking for themselves.
Wrong. If you have to explain how something doesn’t look like something else because alot of people think it does, it DOES look like something else.
If a lot of people “think” something looks like “something else” when in reality it doesn’t, perhaps those people need to see an optometrist (or two).
so style is not up to interpretation? are you REALLY saying that? how on earth do you write in the automotive industry for a living? car design is all about looking like other things and inspiring ideas of other things. why do you think they call them muscle cars, or mako or mustang or viper or gallardo or laser or civic or tundra, or STINGRAY…. are you starting to catch on? this ass of this car fails to inspire anything in me but “camaro/bleeding mascara/squinty robot puckering”.
So you’re saying that people shouldn’t trust their own eyesight and ability to reason and just agree with their snap judgements and gut reactions?
Has anyone ever called you an idiot?
Grawdaddy:
Please argue for the sake of argument. That last sentence was uncalled for.
When you’re arguing with someone who can look with their own eyes and lets the opinion of the masses dictate his world view, then by every measure, he IS an idiot.
It’s taken millions of years of human evolution to get eyesight and just as long to develope our reasoning faculty. A Cannell is effectively saying “I just follow the crowd and let them do my thinking for me!”
A deserving “title” for someone who can’t think on their own.
Grawdaddy:
Point well taken.
I can understand where he’s coming from, though. Perception is a difficult thing to refute; when mixed with skewed logic and an adamant minority, you have the makings of a cult.
They will never give up their round taillights (which is a tougher nut to crack than the pop-up headlights). I tried.
opinions of the masses? the c7 rear end is ugly, camaro-ish, and a mistake. thats my opinion. i dont know or care what the “masses” think, and neither do you.
going with your own eyesight isnt agreeing with your gut reaction? what kind of nonsense contradiction is this..
man…it never ceases to amaze me how low-brow the corvette community seems to be…
Ahhh…so if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…it’s a turkey ?
I don’t think critics are being literal Alex, they just mean they look more like the Camaro tail lights than those of previous Corvettes and no amount of eye exams will correct that.
It’s just like every other new Corvette…and given time most of us will come around – remember the complaints about the square ZR tail lights on the ’95 and the non retractable headlights on the C6 ? It shows that Corvette people care. Personally I think the “corporate design” thinking is a little backward : OK for the Camaro to have Corvette design elements but not the reverse. Having said that, other than the odd shape of the lights, I like the C7′s rear view, looks like a NASA “lifting body” design from the 60′s & 70′s ! Way cool ! And the rest of the car is fabulous ! In a year the tail lights will be old hat.
“Taillights inspired by fighter jets”… c’mon, man!!!
The 2014 Corvette taillights are “inspired” by the Camaro, the 2013 Malibu, and the 2014 Impala. I would challenge Alex to put pictures of the Malibu & Impala taillights side by side with the Corvette, and the similarity would be obvious. Pictures of the Corvette wheel and Ferarri FF wheel would show they are identical. Pictures of a Ferarri 599 or F12 will show how similar the C7 is to them.
Bill — the tail light do bear resemblance to fighter jets. Have a look at these:
http://www.bigstockphoto.com/image-9826676/stock-photo-f-18-fighter-jet,-rear-view-with-canopy-open
http://www.freestockfor.us/wp-content/uploads/ftp/airshow_7_bg_101902.jpg
Do you not see a resemblance?
The afterburner nozzles on jets are round. Maybe your photos make a better case for round taillights on a Corvette!. I see much more resemblance of 2014 Impala and even the restyled Traverse taillights in the taillights of the Corvette. It’s quite clear this is the “corporate look” dictated for all new Chevrolet taillights. That doesn’t make it “good design”… it’s just the corporate “suits” making bad decisions. The ultimate verdict will come from paying customers (like me) who make up the core market for the Corvette. We will vote with our wallets.
Bill, a design vocabulary is not a “corporate look”… perhaps “corporate cues”, or better yet — “brand cues”. The fact that the photos of the jets are round don’t necessitate the tail lights of a vehicle to take the same shape… one can still be “inspired” by something and adapt it in another way.
That said, you’re absolutely right — the “ultimate verdict will be come from paying customers”. I, for one, will be buying one sooner or later. I wouldn’t have said the same about the C6. The design of the C7 is the determining factor here, at least for me.
Alex, just because you are so willing to drink the GM Kool-Aid, you should not expect everyone else to do so. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about the design of a vehicle, and you will get nowhere insisting that everyone who doesn’t agree with you is “Wrong”. My viewpoint is that GM could have done better on the design of the rear of the C7, and try as you might, that is not something that you can prove “wrong” (as you seem to insist on doing). If you think it’s OK for a Corvette to have taillights that look like the came from an Impala or a Traverse, good for you. But don’t expect everyone to agree with you.
Unlike you, I have laid down large sums of money on multiple occasions over the last 22 years to purchase Corvettes (not to mention a lot of other GM vehicles). If GM expects that to continue, they need to design vehicles that compell me to do so.
Whether they are the same or not, I still love them
Perceptions are what counts. If people perceive that the tailights on the C7 resemble Camaro tail lights, all of the design and geometry jargon won’t change that perceprion. And, my perception is that they remind me of Camaro tail lights because they are angular. Real Corvette tail lights are round or oval. Oh, and by the way, I don’t care for the tail lights on the C7.
I din’t realize that fighter jets had tail lights. Do they have turn signals as well?
@ Alex…..I think your commentary is accurate. The lights may share some “design aesthetic” or an “overarching theme”, but that’s about all. I think tail lights have tended to be unique design aspects in many different models (e.g. Cadillac, Camaro, Thunderbird), so when another car’s lights look similar it rubs us wrong. Funny how we have a much diffent acceptance of similar headlights. Remember when they were all round and much the same size? Only the headlight bezels set apart different models.
They are different. Thats fursure!
But clearly not different enough for people to see the difference between the two.
I’d rather something completely unique with no potential for comparison to a $24k Camaro.
I have a Camaro and aside from the number of tail lights 4. The color red and the fact that they light up and live on the back of the car. they have nothing in common.
except that they both live on Chevrolet cars. I am relieved however that Chevy decided to not put those horrible chrome bezels around the tail lights like on the camaro.
Lets see now….which one is the Camaro?
A 996 is still a Porsche, a Testarossa is still a Ferrari, and a 2014 Stingray is still a Corvette.
Blame those early leaks and renders for starting this ‘Camaro taillight’ rubbish, especially that one from Car And Driver with the rear view virtually lifted off from the Camaro with a Chevy badge to boot.
(‘Rump Roast’ they called it, rump roast indeed.)
Nothing better than the official blurb to explain all this drama:
“The 2014 Corvette Stingray is engineered to defy convention. Designed to dismiss the ritualistic and the cliché. Created to oppose the expected, abolish empty traditions and explore the unknown.”
They did it on purpose, to stir emotions no matter what. To separate the purists from the dedicated.
Round taillights are cliché, an empty tradition.
Round taillights do not a Corvette make.
Of course they are not “Camaro taillights”. But the problem is they are closer to the “design language” of the Camaro than the traditioanal “design language” of the Corvette. In the minds of many Corvette tail lights should be round or oval. Therefore the notion that the ‘Vette has “Camaro taillights”.
And that’s what the designers were exactly after: destroy preconceived notions.
When the leaks started coming in, I was also hoping that the taillights were round, that designers were just provoking controversy. When I saw the website for the C7, I finally understood why they did what they did.
They have finally mastered the art of form following function.
“When the leaks started coming in, I was also hoping that the taillights were round, that designers were just provoking controversy. When I saw the website for the C7, I finally understood why they did what they did. ”
You, sir, have won an Internet!
That’s what I’ve been getting at with the “round tailights crowd”. Round tailights would look like a horible afterthought and wouldn’t be cohesive with the rest of the car.
We’ve all seen that rear-fascia photoshoped C7 from last week, and we all agreed that if GM kept the round tailights, it would be a detriment to the C7 not being as revolutionary as it is.
To hell with tradition if is stands in the way of progess. Round talights would have made the C7 that plumbers car we’ve heard of. Welburn did the right thing and recognize when tradition must step aside.
Jay, you nailed it…
Alex….I beg to differ. They do look alike. They are red and when you step on the brakes in both vehicles they both light up. When you take you foot off the brakes the light go out. So you see the Camaro and the Corvette tail lights are a lot alike. I don’t know how anyone could miss that? :>)
Just in case you missed it, my earlier comment was Sarcasim. To me, the Corvette taillights have much more class than those of the Camaro.
I bought a new C6 in 2008 with the intention of trading it for a new C7 when they came out. The “Camaro” look-alike tail lights are enough for me to not trade for a C7. When I spend $70+ for a car I don’t want it to look like anything else …. I love my C6, but the new 2014 Viper is starting to have some “unique” appeal ….
@Joe… I have owned several Corvettes over the last 22 years, and loved every one of them. But the C7 is causing me to want to just keep my C6 Z06. It’s clear that the Corvette design team must really admire the Ferarri 599 (and the Ferarri FF wheels), since the C7 is basically a “knock off”. The taillight design was obviously dictated by “corporate”, since they resemble the Camaro & Malibu. The Corvette is supposed to be the “halo car” for Chevrolet, and shouldn’t be borrowing design from any other car. The Corvette designers could (and should) have done a much better job.
Joe:
Following your logic, you shouldn’t get the new Viper, because the 2014 Stingray ‘copied’ the front and it has 2014 Ford Fusion taillights so it’s no longer unique.
You should go for the Gumpert Apollo, it’s the only car now that doesn’t look like any other car.
Bill, those are my exact sentiments …. Corvettes are supposed to be unique and original …. corporate screwed the pooch with those tail lights …. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck — Its a duck! …. It doesn’t matter to me what kind of spin they put on it —- When I showed my wife a picture of the rear of the much anticipated C7, she asked me “Is that the new Camaro?” …. The 2014 Viper is looking better and better …. It may not be a Corvette, but at least it won’t be confused for its little brother.
You know when the C6 debuted people complained it looked to European and the C5 “was better”. And the C4 transitioned too far from the C3.
This is a new generation, do you want Chevrolet to keep making the C6 for 50 years, unchanged?
It isn’t like this design is revolutionary and completely off the wall different, they didn’t make a mid-engine car, with a forward-centered cabin, and AWD, with KERS. This is an evolutionary step for the Corvette.
It’s a new GENERATION, it has evolved, it is not suppose to look the exact same, but what it does do, is still say “Corvette” as a design.
When you make a front-engine, rwd, GT/track car, it is going to share a lot with other front-engine, rwd, GT cars. Get over it.
Hi Jay,
I agree 100%. However, the Gumpert, for some reason, just doesn’t appeal to me. The Viper and Jaguar F-Type come the closest to filing the void left in me by the C7. At 70 years of age, the next one will probably be my last one …. I’m leaning toward the Viper.
I am a past owner of a C5 Corvette coupe, and I would not hesitate purchasing new C7. I have no problem with the design; any of it. I am 63 years of age and have been a Corvette fan since I can remember, which is getting a bit less and less as I get older.
Railfan,
I know what you mean by age/memory …. I may have forgotten everything by the time the C7 is available.
Regards.