We’re only a few weeks away from the dawn of a new age for the Chevrolet Corvette. The mid-engine C8 Corvette will debut on July 18th and usher in a radical redesign for America’s time-tested sports car. While fans are eager, one notable individual is a little worried.
Jim Mero, a Corvette ride and handling engineer of 34 years, now retired, spoke on the Overcrest podcast in a new episode. There, he uttered some pretty dramatic words: “I worry about the mid-engine (Corvette).”
What has Mero somewhat doubting the move to the mid-engine layout is the current car’s performance capabilities. Mero, the same engineer who lapped both the C7 Corvette Z06 and Corvette ZR1 around the Nürburgring Nordschleife for unofficial lap times, confessed he was part of the mid-engine C8 Corvette development team before his retirement.
Thus, he was there when executives signed off on the move to a mid-engine layout. He recalled the engineering team rented what was considered the best mid-engine and rear-engine sports cars at the time. The benchmarking group included an Acura NSX, Ferrari 458 Italia, Audi R8, and a few Porsche 911s.
In benchmarking tests, Mero said the current Corvette Z06 “smoked them.” It gave the team pause, per Mero’s comments, to perhaps reflect on the switch to a mid-engine layout.
Executives disagreed, per the retired engineer. They liked the feel of driving the mid-engine Corvette at speeds well below the car’s limit and noted the view from the driver’s seat was better than that of the front-engine C7 Corvette. However, Mero said he countered the points saying the mid-engine car offered far less utility. The C8 Corvette will still fit a golf bag, but perhaps not much else in its “frunk.”
Mero hasn’t been a part of the team for years now, but he said the C8 engineers will need to “reinvent the wheel” to try and perfect the car’s formula. He noted the mid-engine car will not offer a perfect weight distribution (50/50) and understeer will be a big problem to overcome. This is a fan who’s completed 15,000 laps in Corvettes, so he knows a thing or two about how they behave.
In the conversation, Mero argued the mid-engine car likely wasn’t necessary to achieve the team’s performance goals, but he reckons it will still be “crazy popular.” We’ll soon find out if a mid-engine layout was the right move.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more mid-engine Corvette news, Chevrolet news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Source: Overcrest Podcast
Comments
Well I am personally very excited to see the new Vette. Also have heard that the interior will finally match the price of the car.
Cannot wait for 7/18/19
I am a fan of how Front engine cars drive as they are inherently more stable. The dont slalom as well with their higher moment of inertia, but they are more stable at speed, and are more stable once in a turn. The weight distribution is not an issue as the current corvette has a slight rear bias and the camero shaved off 3 inches when it moved to the alpha platform to maintain a 50-50 weight distribution.
It’s a myth that 50/50 is the optimal balance. With more weight over the rear axle, braking force is more evenly distributed front and rear so the front doesn’t have to do most of the braking, and of course there is more traction for the drive wheels.
Less inherent stability means the car is easier to turn and much more agile. Historically this meant that mid-engine cars could be more dangerous in the hands of amateurs, but modern electronics have negated any of the danger (so long as it’s well tuned). Porsche has even tamed the rear engined 911, a car that would actively try to kill its owners back in the 70s by introducing them to lift throttle oversteer.
Well there are two schools of thought to this.
The main thing is to get the weight more centralized and 50/50 is fine but the more centralized it is the better turn in and less rotation the car will experience.
As for utility the Vette was never a mini van. At best most carry a couple cases or a set of clubs.
The real advantage here is the ability to add AWD finally. The old car just did not have room. The new car can have it and it would remove the under-steer. Also the electronics masked the old cars wicked ways and I am sure any areas that need tuned out will be in this car too.
Jim got all he could get out of the old car but as we have seen with the last ZR1 it is on the ragged edge and could not push any farther. It is a great car but physics are in play.
Jim with the last car was to the point where he was on the ragged edge and even stuffed one into the guard rail at the ring after earlier putting 4 wheels off on that lap. He was right at the 7 Min mark.
We will see a lot of things in this change not possible with the last. Over time this car will be very competitive to much more expensive cars.
The AWD ability is what will really set this car apart from previous generations IMO. For those who order it, the cars will bite hard. Folks also can’t forget, this was Zora’s dream. It’s part of the heritage and history of the Corvette lineage. Much like being a Chevrolet (Bob).
“Also the electronics masked the old cars wicked ways and I am sure any areas that need tuned out will be in thiscar too”
Soooo a tendency for snap oversteer, and intial understeer will be solved by electronics, not some percived superiority of mid engine dynamics?
As to AWD. Its ONLY advantage is traction on launch. In turns and even in bad weather – with outh the aid of electonics and trick diffs – it induces understeer, or simultaneous over and understeer. Also known as “watch the awd car suddenly turned sideways and slid into the guardrail”
I guess this is to say, these days engineering tricks are doing all the work now. More often than not; at the limit – modern high performance cars do their best to bend physics to their will.
Since the C5, the Vette moved to transmission rearward where it integrates into a transaxel which acheives the same 50/50 weight ratio…Reading the GT-R track war stories, many don’t care where the engine is but want AWD…The Vette hybrid/”E-Ray” is rumored to have EV motors turning the front wheels yet it’s unclear how this will effect handling and how much room it will eat from the cargo department…
From the Execs standpoint, it does make a lot of sense a current Vette is the stereotypical “mid life crisis car” so a drastic change may help chip away at that image. A mid engine car allows for a more exotic look which looks great on a Chevy dealerships lot and finally it further differentiates itself from the Camaro/ZL1…
The mid life crisis thing is ridiculous. I’ve heard it too but it’s still ridiculous. Many people go through phases in their life and want to get back to what made them young. Or what they enjoyed or dreamed of in their youth. Now they’ve made the money to do some of those things after years of hard work. Some buy boats or motorcycles, some go on big trips or build bigger houses, some go out and buy a brand new truck, others go get a fast car. Hot rods or sports cars, doesn’t matter. What does matter is the Corvette is a car many dreamed of owning and now they can. I don’t get what the big deal is there. It’s no different than a guy turning 50 who wanted a Porsche as a kid so he buys one. So what?
The average Vette owner is around I think 60 years old and I certainly see more “old men” drive them and rarely see younger folks driving a late model one…The average Porchse owner is pegged around 48 years old; a Porsche does have a tiny rear seat which does provide some usability in certain situations like kids, one friend sitting sideways or slightly more cargo room…
Mid-life! Try end of life. I’ve seen Vette owners with walkers. At least they had enough room in the hatch to store them. Lol
I’d worry more about the future demographics of those that are going buy the car, than the car itself.
Agree. It will be interesting to see how this transformation plays out.
*POPCORN* time!
I like the bold move, but I wish they would keep the C7 platform as well. I’ve heard, “Well, the Camaro can now take over that spot.” The thing is, the Camaro is not a sports car. It’s a Pony/Muscle car. Two different animals. A totally different buyer demographic.
I would love to see the C7 loose some weight and downsize a bit, allowing traditional Corvette buyers the option to buy what they “think” a Corvette should be, and the option to move up to the C8 as well.
I don’t think the traditional Corvette buyer that is not happy the C8 is totally changing its DNA and heritage, is going to go out and buy a Camaro now that the C7 is discontinued.
Zcat,
I agree completely.
My thoughts initially were that GM should keep the F/R configured “Corvette Stingray” in production and redesign it to be downsized with a lower price so that it becomes more of a Nissan 370Z-like product; that should lower the age of the buyers to address part of the demographics issue. Then launch the M/R layout for the top-tier “Corvette Zora” that becomes more of an Audi R8 competitor. With the Zora’s increased sophistication, it will attract wealthier, better educated buyers which helps with another aspect of the demographics challenge.
It’ll be interesting to see how Corvette buyers react to the C8. I think with the Cadillac brand, GM has chased new buyers that haven’t fully materialized but the cost of that was losing much of their old clientele. While the C8 may be an exciting new chapter in the life of the bowtie brand’s sports car, there is clearly risk involved with this new direction.
Well said.
I especially agree with the scenario of making the C7 more like a 370Z, but maybe a tad larger.
This would lower the price, attracting (new and younger consumers-as you stated), and keep the traditional Corvette buyer happy.
After years of development and fine-tinning the C7, I can’t for the life of me figure out why GM doesn’t take our advice!!!
Oh. And I feel sorry for the those that down vote other people’s opinion. If you disagree, and are a mature adult, no reason to hide in the bushes and push the little down vote button. Simply state your opinion in a non-neandrathal way.
If I vote, it’s always an up vote. Otherwise, I let it go or present my version of how I feel on the matter.
That’s it 🙂
Down voters, still hiding in the bushes?
Simple minds…I’m sorry for you.
But if it makes you feel better about yourselves, good job!
Well, there are a lot of C7s out there now, and plenty to satisfy the used market. Most all purchased(non-leased) Corvettes are well cared for anyway. While they won’t be as rare as the Cayman 6, -whose owners know what they have and aren’t letting them go, -no matter what a new car salesman at the Porsche dealer says. the C7 will still probably hold some respectable resale value.
Once the C8 is here the demand for the new C7 will dry up fast. But the used market will have a lot of low mile models for sale as some great prices. The C7 will run the path of the C6.
Large supplied of low mile cars with limited buyers makes it a buyers market.
what many mistake is 50/50 balance is the whole equation. It is only part of the story.
They key is 50/50 but more so to move the weight to the center of the car.
You can have a car like the present car with 50/50 but the weight of the engine is on one end and trans axle at the other.
Or you can move the engine to the middle of the car and get less polar moment.
To test what I am saying take a bar bell with two 25 pounds on each end of a 4 foot bar. Then just hold it and twist your wrist to turn it back and fourth. It takes a lot of energy to move the weight even if it is even.
Now take the same two weights and add them to a short bar one foot in length. Then perform the same test with the weight more central to the bar near your hands. It takes much less energy to move it and it is much easier to control.
The long and short of this is while it still have electronics it will be less controlled buy a computer to keep it under control. This car will have much more natural ability with out the computer than the present car. The present car is much like a F117 air plane that would not fly very well with out the computer.
The principal of central weight is a simple fundamental of better handling.
It also lets you put the driver lower in the car to lower the center of Gravity. They no longer have to sit up to see over an engine that has only gotten taller with the supercharger.
Jim has contributed much to the C6-C7 and these are his babies so I know why he is a little defensive as he was one of a group that did a damn good job getting these cars to handle as they do.
The problem as pointed out by Tadge they can no longer move the engine back any father. the wheel base is as long as they can make it and the only way to move weight is to relocate the engine. This is not a new idea and many have moved to this in the search for more performance. It helps in handling, it helps in braking and it sells cars to younger people.
Scott I really enjoy reading your comments on GM authority. They are well thought out and informative, especially to a simple gearhead like me. Keep it up.
The ideal weight distribution for a rear engine car is 40/60
C8 is technically a mid engine car; Mero said the C8 will be more like 35/65…
I actually meant Mid-engine. The rear engined 911 used to be closer to 35/65. It may be different now.
The Mclaren 720S which is pretty well the standard at the moment has the following specs:(The Ferrari 488 has the same weight distribution at 41/59)
Weight
V Max km/h (mph) ……………………………………………….341 (212)
DIN Kerb Weight [fluids + 90% fuel] ………………1,419 kgs (3,128 lbs)
Curb Weight, USA [fluids + 100% fuel] ………….1,424 kgs (3,139 lbs)
Dry Weight ……………………………………………………………Base: 1,322 kgs (2,917 lbs)
Dry Weight ……………………………………………………………Minimum: 1,283 kgs (2,828 lbs)
Weight Distribution …………………………………………….Front: 41%
Weight Distribution …………………………………………….Rear: 59%
The C7 can’t put the power to the ground. In order to improve traction, 60% is the magic number for the driven wheels on a mid-engined car.
The new C8 needs to be a really good GT car along with being a great sports car. This is one thing the 911 had in common with the C7. Both are great GT cars, meaning 2 people along with their stuff can cross hundreds of miles effortlessly. Hope the C8 can live up expectations….
A ‘GT’ car has nominal back seats. A ‘Sports’ car has no back seats. Two passenger only.
While a GT or sedan may have sports car like handling and performance, they are not sports cars.
A Corvette has never been a GT.
I agree with Pete. Whenever I see a Vette of any age on the roads the driver is almost always a baby boomer. In my mind the younger set would sooner be driving whatever else is available. Even if the driver is female the age range is still the same, no matter how much hair dye, Botox and make up she has on.
50/50 is perfect with the car sitting still. Once in motion, a slight rear weight bias (44/56) is preferable.
A mid engine Corvette might be a day late and a dollar short. Remember the Pontiac Fiero? This isn’t GM’s first rodeo. Baby Boomers? Yeah. Millennials? Who knows. Great car on the way? Maybe. I own a C7. I love it but it is NOT the best driving vehicle in that price segment. Perhaps C8 makes it a better ride. I put my deposit down. I will almost certainly buy one. But I have my eyes wide open.
Probably the most compelling paragraph from Fiero’s wiki: “A mid-engine layout was originally chosen as a way to reduce both aerodynamic drag and vehicle weight to improve fuel efficiency, and also for its handling, traction, and braking benefits. However, the sports car potential of the mid-engine layout was not realized when the Fiero debuted. As a cost-saving measure commonly employed at GM, the tires, brakes, and suspension components were carried over from other GM economy cars (like the X and T platforms). As a result, the handling and cornering abilities of the initial Fiero were merely on par with other contemporary sporty coupes (Road & Track 1985). Additionally, the Iron Duke I4 motor, which was designed for optimal running at low RPM, was unsuited to drivers who purchased the Fiero expecting a quick, high-revving motor more in keeping with the design of the car. As drivers attempted to frequently run the engine at greater RPM than it was designed for, the engines experienced a number of reliability problems and breakdowns were frequent.”
Even as a mid life crisis car who cares??? The Corvette has been production for 66 years!!! I bought my 1st Vette @ 17 years old along with a couple other buddies. Now @ 64 I owned over 30 Vettes & my buddies & myself still buying & selling. I see younger guys in the newer generations. I just had my C6 Yellow convertible @ a Limerock event & was not short of younger dreamers & questions.from the younger Vette owners.
Why rent 911s instead of Caymans if you’re testing mid-engine competitors?
Fair question since the Cayman is a mid engine two seat sport coupe and the 911 is a rear engine GT with (back seat); yet the answer is simple, Mero is claimed the stingray with performance package “smoked” the 911 so going with the Cayman would be a complete waste to benchmark against…
Mr. Mero needs to remember who’s paying his retirement check! Bet they didn’t listen to him and now he’s a sore lose.
Sorry meant to say a sore loser……Damm self correcting.
Sure having a lot of issues with the CAPTCHA
As a gray haired 5 the Gen Camaro 1le owner with track time and 40 States I see a lot of garage queen owners be it hell cat , mustang GT What ever is the most HP at the time, I am Shure that having a mid engine Corvette will be the same but after 3 years it will fade to the newest thing.
I’m interested in the AWD implementation and wish the C8 had an engine and a motor–the former driving the rear wheels and latter driving the front. More total, usable torque could be applied to the wheels without tire spin. Love the horizontally opposed 3.0 6 cyl in my Outback, as it lowers the COG raised by the AWD. GM could make a HO6.0 engine to lower the C8 COG. BTW, I own a 1996 modified C4 with a high compression 383 making 505 ft/lbs, a 7000 redline, better brakes, headers & exhaust, 373 differential, etc. The AC works, the atmosphere likes the retrofitted cats and o2 sensors–and the lights flip 🙂 Restomods are great!
That’d be an engineering nightmare, would be far easier to implement a dual motor (one per axel) setup and have the engine soley act as a full time generator…Not even a plug in, gas feeds the ICE generator and the motors turn the wheels…While I understand this would alienate a lot of Vette customers, if this can get into low 2 for the 0-60 and GM can offer it for under $100K, that would certainly throw the smackdown on the Tesla Roadster 2.0…
Hi,
Actually hybrids aren’t a nightmare when already starting with a car already using an engine to drive one wheel set. I agree that twin motors would be ideal. Motors have no torque curve, just max torque the instant current is applied.
I guess my point was why not just add a motor to an engine along with the AWD drivetrain when this incremental hybrid solution has already smoked at raceways like Laguna Seca. However, your point is well taken regarding the twin motor endpoint solution. Hey, 600 instant ft-lbs per axle is 1200 total that won’t just sit on the track while only the tires move. 🙂
And for some efficient fun, you could use silver circuits with zero resistance by encasing them with liquid hydrogen. Open the electric circuits to an appropriate current source and it would loop for years. Hey, there’s a prototype MRI that cools its circuit coils with liquid hydrogen instead of the standard liquid nitrogen. Been running more than four years on a single charge. Of course it’s small and can only image rats–but that’s a good start towards less expensive human MRI costs. 🙂
Cheers.
Seeing as until the current version of the vette the name plate was incapable of things like turning and stopping(typical American muscle issues) im unsure what his worries are?
The 70s called, they want their Corvette stereotype back.
Hey, we can’t all own a Mini Cooper. 🙂
Hats off to Zcat! What’s your address so I can send you a nice bottle of Bourbon?
You nailed it.
I’ve owned 3 corvettes over the years, a base model; Z06 and now a ZR-1. I am excited about the C8 mid-engine as we all should be since it’s progress. However, I can assure you. I will NEVER buy a Camaro to replace the experience of owning a Corvette. My personal thoughts tell me the new 8 Gen Corvette is actually going to create more demand for used front engine Vette’s versus buyers giving Chevy $70k for a tuned Camaro. Once the price gets over $100k for a new Vette, my money is on fresh demand for used front engine Vette’s. Want evidence? Just look at the used market for used 911’s – and those older 911’s can be outrun by a new Camry Hybrid. But, you can’t deny the satisfaction of a guy who buys an older 911 – because it is a 911 and not a Boxster (hint: Camaro).
Wayne, thanks for the nice gesture!
Sipping a good bourbon is not something I do or prefer on a regular basis. But, I would not turn it down!
In fact, I went to my friends new Jewelry store opening a few weeks ago. They had Bourbon tasting mixed with all kinds of things/flavors. I guess I could get with the Bourbon thing after that experience. Especially, when it’s free! Ha!
I agree with your statements/comment.
It’s all about the experience. Something that’s fading away.
Sad, but true.
I hope the C8 is more than we expect.
We shall see.
Also, GMA and my iPhone, do not make for an easy posting. They need to address this. It drives me crazier than I already am. :/
Jim is correct. The engine re-location was not required for performance.
The engine re-configuration WAS required to stroke the egos of those in power at GM. The guys in charge (including one guy who can’t handle driving a C7) are the ones who will go down in history, patting themselves on the back, as the ones who FINALLY built the rear-mid engine Corvette that has been teased for ~50 years. Sales might tank, but they did it.
That’s completely false. Go tell that to Lambo, Ferrari, McLaren, Ford, Audi… They will laugh at you.
And could it be that “Lambo, Ferrari, McLaren, Ford, Audi”… are shooting for a six figure market that requires a mid-engine, and more importantly… the look of a mid-engine.
I’m not against mid-engine sports cars, I have owned (9) in the past nearly fifty years, starting with Lotus Europe JPS, and ending with the last MR2, and in between an X-19, a Dino 246GT and a 328, and several Pantera, and that doesn’t include several Formula Ford’s and a Formula 5000.
After several thousand hours of track time I have learned and observed one thing, mid-engine and rear engine cars are not as safe or forgiving as front engine cars for the average driver. Even for those with considerably more skills. Those configurations are harder to read at the limit, and harder to impossible to recover once it is exceeded.
The new electronic nannies will help, but physics will not be denied once limits are exceeded. Another thing… mid-engine sports cars are not as dynamically fun to drive as front engine cars. There are a lot of compromises made to make mid-engine cars safe to drive at the 9th percentile. Those compromises slow dynamic response. Give me a Miata any day for sure driving fun.
Are you suggesting that every one of those vehicles is faster than a Corvette?
My original point remains correct.
Thanks for sharing such a great information with us. Your article is very unique and all information is reliable for new readers. Please keep it in the future, thank you for sharing such helpful article. Please continue to uphold
can i fit a pod in a boulder vape
Talking cars is more fun than the Pandemic which now has taken at least 412,000 of our fellow citizens. My 90 yo mom in Assisted Living survived an outbreak there and last week received the first of her two vaccinations that will protect her from Covid-19 – – and the Sars she would likely get due to COPD and some permanent scarring of her lungs (survived a gas explosion and fire as a child). The lack of a viral payload is cool and she suffered no joint pain or headache.
Anyway, I enjoyed the comments about the COG being more than just front to back weight ratios. The COG is a moving target in all 3 spatial dimentons. Unsprung and sprung weight ratios on independent suspensions with swing axles can be a blast or a widow-maker if horizontal travel moves the COG like a quantum path of an electron. It’s location will be somewhere and then somewhere else nearly simultaneously! But there are engineers who’ve made a helluva living by understanding how to keep the chassis located over the tires while anticipating the next inertial battle. Back in the day, every Grand National crew had the guy who could, after a few radio words from the driver, was ready to adjust the “wedge” height and angle, change a bit of tire pressure, add some lead tape to the chassis and remove dangerous oversteer. These are the dudes who would fabricate control arms with additional travel in order to add weird caster angles pushing the drive wheels further ahead of the steering idler arm and thus the pivot point of the steering box for just the right downforce the driver needed to induce neutral or slight oversteer to the front tires that a driver preferred on a given track.
Yeah, this is kinda dry and arcane irrelevance to a lot of folks. But the point is important: the COG moves and sways unless everything is welded, and some twitchy cars like F1 open wheel setups still get suspension rods welded to their pivot points (not as often these days as in the 70s. The hardware has never been more adjustable. And drivers like to avoid futures
that include disc removal and fusion 🙂 GM has some really good engineers. If an engine is coupled directly to a trans housing and shaftb and the differential gears and cover, they’ll determine to correct way to locate the chassis whether the static weight ratio is 40/60 or 35/65. But they’ll also pick a design for the horizontal roll of the body up and over the springs and struts.
Last, I’d mentioned the idea of a hybrid like the Porsche which placed a 480HP motor up front to drive the forward wheels. This allowed them to remove a heavy Turbo system from the rear engine, reduce it’s HP to 500 hp from 690 and better locate it over the trailing wheels. That’s still 980hp which reduced wheels pin and tightened the steering. This prototype set the single lap record at Laguna Seca by a couple of seconds. Not quite the feel of the 70s Whale Tail 911s, if you ever lusted for radical oversteering combined with tire rubber slinging you to the Shadow of the Valley of Death 🙂
Hey, somebody buy or lease the 2021 and let us know what you think. I’ll wait two years and find has 14, 000 miles and save the depreciation cost. 🙂
Cheers