The upcoming mid-engine Corvette C8 will be the first-ever production Corvette with a mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout, but the idea behind the car is hardly new.
General Motors experimented with mid-engine platforms for the Corvette for a number of years, beginning its research with the CERV I project and later implementing its know-how with a number of rather innovative mid-engine, Corvette badged prototypes throughout the 1960s, 70s, and 80s.
Motor Trend recently got the chance to sample a number of these early mid-engine Corvette prototypes, including the first, the 1969 XP-882. GM has kept these cars under lock and key for so many years, barely acknowledging their existence, reading about what it’s like to drive them feels a bit like researching UFOs or Area 51.
So what did the publication think of these somewhat alien crafts? The publication said the 6.6-liter Small Block V8 powered XP-882 had “delightfully light steering effort and near Porsche-like road feel,” and also added that “when pressed hard through a corner, it remains neutral, although the tail can be brought out with a little throttle-induced oversteer.”
The magazine later hopped into the 1969 XP-895, which featured a larger Big Block V8 engine. This car seemed to handle a lot like the XP-880 with “delightfully delicate” steering feel, although it felt “quicker off the line,” than the XP-880.
Chevrolet also let the writer ride shotgun in the 1990 CERV III prototype, which features a twin-turbocharged DOHC V8, all-wheel drive, all-wheel steering, and active suspension. Motor Trend said this car “feels farthest from being sorted out,” due to its loud engine note and turbo noise, audible solenoids, and early active suspension system. The GM employee in the driver’s seat claimed the top speed of the prototype was 225 mph, which would place it in the upper echelon of supercars even today.
Be sure to read more about the driving experience at this link.
Source: Motor Trend
Subscribe to GM Authority for more mid-engine Corvette news, Corvette C8 news, Corvette news, Chevrolet news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
They couldn’t fix the cerv III headlight?
The first three times the tech found nothing wrong with it, now the faulty part is on intergalactic back order.
nothing but the best quality from GM
That photo isn’t in the article, it’s this 4th rate site using it from when the car was out at another event, for some reason?
Coudn’t use a better photo huh GMAuthority?
But I’m glad you noticed and had time to s**t on it, I’m sure you have the same attention to detail when you’re making french fries or cleaning piss of the mens room floor or whatever you do.
C7 was mid-engine rear drive; the engine is mounted behind the front axle. The only real difference is that in the C7 the passenger cell is behind the engine and in the C8 the passengers sit in front of the engine.
Fiero, corvair, both had engines above/behind the rest axle, so not “mid-engined”.
Sorry but 50/50 balance and even if everything between the axles is not the point of the C8.
The point here is to place as much weight in the center of the car and as low as possible. This caused the car to need less energy to turn and pivot as the mass is centralized.
Take a bar bell and put the weight at the end of a long bar and then try to twist your wrist. Next use a short bar with the weight to the center. Now twist your wrist back and fourth. It takes less effort and is much more controllable.
There will be a big difference in handling. While the owner may not notice a ton of difference the computer will be needed less to control the car and the driver will be more directly involved.
Also the Fiero has the engine right in front of the axle. The transaxle chain goes to the back of the car and the diff is behind the engine.
Exactly.
Furthermore, it’s a myth that the optimal weight balance is 50/50. It’s more like 43/57. Extra weight over the rear wheels enables more distributed weight balance under hard breaking, which lets the rear brakes contribute more. Then on corner exit the driver can get on the throttle sooner with more weight on the rear wheels.
Another thing that gets left out is placing the driver in front of the engine lowers the seating and cowl. This lowers the center gravity for better handling and aero. Also adds more leg room.
I was out in a mid engine car today and you know you are sitting low when you are eye level with a compact cars door handles. I even looked up to a C6.
In a perfect world, the engine is centered in the middle of the car, while the driver is strapped to the roof. Perfect balance!
Although, very difficult to steer while screaming 🙂
In a more serious vein, those prototypes from that era, are amazing.
Much respect. But, I must wonder why they didn’t move forward sooner?
Loss of customer base?
GM’s executives have until recently been too risk averse and reluctant to invest the necessary R&D into a Corvette. And of course it seems like GM is always struggling to remain profitable so more often than not the bean counters are searching for models to terminate.
Originally the C7 was to be a mid-engine Corvette but then GM went bankrupt so they had to scrap it and do a minor refresh and call it a C6. If you compare the C7 frame to the C6 frame they are nearly identical, and the C6 frame is nearly identical to the C5 frame.
The mid-engine C8 will be the first significant architectural change to the Corvette since 1997 when the C5 was introduced with a torque tube that positioned the transmission with the rear differential for better weight distribution.
Actually the C8 was never scrapped. It was the C7 but when Lutz presented it GM decided to refresh the C6 to a C7 with a longer wheel base to mine the engine back more. Tadge stated the C7 pushed it back as far as they could.
GM actually did the right thing as the plowed the money into CUV models, mid size trucks and more profitable models.
Like it or not while the Corvette is a treasured icon it is not a priority model at GM. It needs to make money and if another model can make more money it will be a priority.
FYI this is not my opinion but what Bob Lutz stated.
You’re arguing semantics. The mid engine C7 was scrapped and don’t start in on a pedantic explanation of how the C7 is actually a “front mid-engine” car. The engine is in front of the occupants.
Of course they they saved their work and when C8 development began they already had a good start, but the C7 never became a mid-engine car. It will be fascinating to finally learn the tale of exactly how the mid-engine C8 came to be at GM.
As for the Corvette needing to make money, welcome to reality at GM and every other automaker except maybe Tesla. Of course the Corvette needs to be profitable. In fact when government auditors assessed GM’s books during the bankruptcy, they discovered that the Corvette was one of the only profitable models in GM’s lineup and so they ordered GM to keep it. Many at GM had wanted to terminate it, which goes to show just how imbecilic much of GM management are.
It’s not pedantry if the C4 through to the C7 were indeed front-mid engined whereas the C8 is rear-mid. A front engined layout has the engine ahead of the front axle, of which no Corvette has ever had.
Engine layout has nothing to do with where the driver sits, and never has. Only the drive wheels matter.