Talk:Chevrolet Corvette (C7)

grammar, tense

The past perfect tense is all over this article, I tried to clean up as much "announced it will be" type language, but got frustrated and stopped. These are all past tense things.

Also, the specific information on the different packages is written very poorly and needs a rewrite. Altogether, this page reads rather unacademically- it's filled with useless information like the date GM announced they were going to officially announce the car. Seriously?Coemgenv (talk) 02:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Please do not spam this article with commercial junk

Come on, guys, this is Wikipedia, not Yellow Pages or Craig's List - don't try to advertise your dealerships or parts stores or garbage "blogs" through the clever use of copypasted information. It's not really helpful, will be removed and will only make the normal people hate you and your business. 98.116.53.5 (talk) 15:50, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Coupe

I do recognize a need to differentiate various versions of the same car, but given that the Corvette has never been anything but a coupe (nor is it likely ever to be), is it really necessary to say that's what it is?

Once, sure, but repeatedly?

--Mfwills (talk) 13:12, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Illegal recording issue?

Saw this news story and wondered if it should be mentioned in the article. Nyth83 (talk) 02:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Editorial?

"The C7 was designed not only to provide a bold styling statement, but also to incorporate an interior makeover to put to rest past complaints about the quality of interior fit and finish. While overall the C7 attempts to provide an evolutionary redesign to an iconic theme, the 5th generation Chevrolet Camaro's squared rear end provided inspiration, to C7 designers, incorporating aggressive angular elements that disappointed many Corvette enthusiasts. The C7 received instant criticism for some of the most overstyled elements of the car. "The rear contains what will surely be the C7's most controversial styling elements. It's all creases and vents back there, with aggressive trapezoidal taillights similar to those found on the current Camaro and quadruple-barreled tailpipes lined up in a neat row in the center of the rear valance", wrote Jason Kavanagh for Edmunds.[5] Other designers found the C7's large front grille to be a rather unattractive reversion away from the Corvette's prior four generations of grille-less designs that pulled cooling air from beneath nose. Functional aerodynamic aids are tacked on or cut into every body panel of the C7, often juxtapositioned against sharp creases. This is a radical departure from the prior generations when the Corvette's clean muscular styling revealed no tack-on spoiler, few body panel creases, and only semi-functional gills for front brake cooling. In addition, past Corvette models minimized the size of headlamps or even hide them altogether. The C7 reverses that clean minimalist styling language with oversized, intricately styled headlamps with LED accents."

This whole section does not belong in a Wikipedia article.  It looks more like a column in a magazine, rather than stating facts.  
I say we get rid of it entirely, as it only cites one source, but that's because it actually was a quote.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chevrolet Corvette (C7). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141222140302/http://www.gm.com/article.content_pages_news_us_en_2014_aug_0820-8speed_0820-corvette-8-speed-lead.html to http://www.gm.com/article.content_pages_news_us_en_2014_aug_0820-8speed_0820-corvette-8-speed-lead.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chevrolet Corvette (C7). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150810125333/http://blackvette.net/2015/05/03/corvette-selected-to-pace-indy-500-for-13th-time/ to http://blackvette.net/2015/05/03/corvette-selected-to-pace-indy-500-for-13th-time/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:13, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Merge suggest

Why on earth does 2017 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport Collector Edition have its own article? There is already more than enough (possibly over-detailed) info on that specific edition on this page. --Vossanova ^o< 16:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Good question. Carguy1701 (talk) 13:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if it was appropriate to add that much info into the master article, so I did a new page. I just didn't want to dominate and take over the page by putting that in. If no one really minds, I don't have an issue with merging it....Kpauley (talk) 20:48, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Too much color detail

Does it really benefit the public to list the production count of every single interior/exterior color combination and color change every year? Wikipedia is not a sales catalog, nor is it an indiscriminate list of information. Please consider what is important about the Corvette C7, rather than statistics for hardcore fans. --Vossanova ^o< 14:13, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

I would have to agree. There is just too much options and pricing information there. I took care of the pricing information but will have to see what information about colour and options need to stay. U¹ _quattro TALK 02:19, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Corvette "C8"

The Corvette C8 is NOT a successor to the C7. Heck, it wouldn't be called the C8 either. So it shouldn't be added as the successor to the C7 again and again. Such additions would be dealt with accordingly. U1Quattro (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Uh...you ARE aware that GM announced on April 11 that the car will debut on July 18 of this year, complete with some teaser shots of prototypes carrying signage with a red 8, right? I think GM considers it the successor. Carguy1701 (talk) 01:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

"Next Generation Corvette". They wouldn't call it that if it wasn't the successor. Also, C7 production has been confirmed to end this summer, so they won't coexist. --Vossanova ^o< 13:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

That too. Carguy1701 (talk) 13:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Just like a Ferrari 550 is a successor to the Testarossa line, even though it has different engine layout, Next Generation Corvette should be considered as a successor to Corvette C7.YBSOne (talk) 10:56, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Ybsone that's a bit of funny coming from you who doesn't believe a sedan can be a successor to a coupé. U¹ _quattro TALK 02:21, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I would rather wait when the car is actually introduced to see what it is called and what it succeeds. It's better than clogging up the article with made up facts from the automotive press. The prototype for the mid-engine Corvette is called ZERV, not C8. That is enough to confirm the false information being spread. Vossanova that can also mean a revamp or a new beginning for the Corvette rather than being a successor for the C7. I know it's production would be ending but I would rather wait when the car is actually introduced so we can have more reliable information. U¹ _quattro TALK 02:26, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Far as I can tell, ZERV is an internal name, just as Y2XX was the internal name for the C7 during development (that's per Jalopnik, which is where ZERV is mentioned; it's namedropped on some LinkedIn profiles), and nothing more. Given the emphasis on the 8 in 7.18.19, I'd say it's pretty clear where GM stands on it. Carguy1701 (talk) 03:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

That's just media speculation. The ones who call it C8 have no proof of where they got their information. So the sources are unreliable and shouldn't be used. U¹ _quattro TALK 03:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Also, you calling the car C8 just because it has a red 8 in the date printed on the camouflage is also a personal assumption. U¹ _quattro TALK 04:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

I think that's what GM wants us to think because it'll be true. Carguy1701 (talk) 14:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Don't listen to someone who cannot find any info and go ask a Chevrolet. I did: http://www.bozhdynsky.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/corvettec8.jpg How hard was it? YBSOne (talk) 16:48, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I would just wait for the unveiling and would then add content tot he article. Carguy1701 you shouldn't be supporting rumours at all. U¹ _quattro TALK 13:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Ybsone then what is the point of arguing? U¹ _quattro TALK 13:18, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

I fail to see how supporting what GM has confirmed (the emphasis on the 8 and calling it the 'next generation Corvette') is 'supporting rumors'. If you really want to get into rumors, let's talk about the 5.5 liter DOHC flat crank V8 Car and Driver has mentioned a few times. I'm pretty sure that's a rumor simply by virtue of the fact that flat crank V8s had a hard time with NVH over 5 liters (just as anyone who has driven a GT350 with it's 5.2 liter flat crank V8); I haven't seen a single edit on here that mentions that one. Or we could talk about the rumor that states that the range-topping variant (supposedly called the Zora) will have a twin turbo version of the aforementioned 5.5 liter engine coupled with an electric motor on the front axle for a total combined system output of about a 1,000 bhp; I haven't seen that whopper mentioned here either. Both of those are rumors and I'll treat them as such until I see some evidence that they exist. All I HAVE seen is what everyone can agree on: that this is the next generation Corvette, and more than likely, it'll be called C8. Carguy1701 (talk) 02:43, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't know what part of GM's statement you actually don't get Carguy1701 they are telling you to wait til July 18 so wait til that date. I don't know why people have no patience and instead they rely on what the automotive press claims. They haven't put an emphasis on the 8, it might be red due to some other reason as there is an absence of information about why it is red from GM itself. GM is making the car and they know better about it. What I'm trying to say is that wait for the company to unveil the car and we'll see what is right and what is wrong. I don't know why would you be triggered at a discussion topic which was posted way long before this information even surfaced. U¹ _quattro TALK 07:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, they have, by virtue of it being red, where all the other numbers in the date are white; they want it to stand out. You are blinding yourself to information that is clear as day to everyone around you. Carguy1701 (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Carguy1701 why don't you let it be? Wait til July 18 and we'll see who is right. The fact that you are arguing on a year old thread when there was very little info available on this model proves how repulsive you are.U¹ _quattro TALK 14:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if something got lost in translation, but full-on insults aren't necessary. Keep it WP:CIVIL. Maybe post about this on Wikipedia Talk:CAR to get more input. --Vossanova ^o< 18:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Fine. Carguy1701 (talk) 20:55, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Designer

The whole design team doesn't need a mention in the infobox. That is against what the template guides the editors to do. It should be mentioned in the design section of the article. U¹ _quattro TALK 14:59, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

You will need to provide evidence that supports that, word for word. Studying the template for the automotive infobox, your claim contradicts this. It is very much permitted and allowed, based on a line that lists "designer(s)". I don't believe you are in the position of tweaking template guidelines to your own desired result, without repercussions. Your continued reverts of previous (cited) content, based on your own sole mistaken belief, that Wikipedia does not allow multiple designers responsible to be listed, is laughable and is treading on territory of edit warring.
You have been blocked from editing for continued reverts of other user's content very recently. I'd suggest you closely again at what it is allowed and not allowed, or you'll risk getting into hot water again over this matter.--Carmaker1 (talk) 20:03, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

And you haven't even been innocent either Carmaker1. Seeing your history with others, I have seen that you have been blocked for long periods as well and bad mouthed about the admins. Give your "I am always right" attitude, I don't wish to cross paths with you again. The same was the issue with the users I had conflict with. As for the infobox template, I think I need to open a discussion on the talkpage of the template. I'll get back here with a clear cut explanation.U¹ _quattro TALK 14:04, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I've started a discussion here. Feel free to participate.U¹ _quattro TALK 14:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Related

@Sable232: based off of your statement, should the Audi RS6 be removed from the related under the Lamborghini Gallardo's page? After all, it only shares a powertrain. If you also watched the promotional video for the Equus Throwback, you'll see it shares many physical components with the C7 itself. It even has the same mirrors. Motortrend and various other websites say the GTZ is based on a C7, or "a modded Z06" etc, so I don't understand why you keep reverting the edits. Here, here, here, here, and here. What's the give? Obama gaming (talk) 06:39, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the Gallardo article and probably have never edited it, but yes, if that's the case the RS6 should probably be removed.

In general, a boutique automaker using parts from another maker's product doesn't make their limited-production hand-built vehicles "related" in this sense. --Sable232 (talk) 14:14, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

If they're both rebodied C7s, then I'd say they qualify as related (especially since the interiors are mostly identical). It'd be different if they used bespoke chassis and their respective builders were just buying powertrains from GM. Carguy1701 (talk) 16:49, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Sable232: Fair point on the Gallardo, but again, if you've read my articles, they refer to it as "Zagato builds GTZ over Z06", "The GTZ is really a modded Z06 underneath" etc, they're not bespoke chassis at all and I think as Carguy1701 says quite succinctly, they're essentially rebodied C7 Z06's.

See the first lines of the Road and Track article: "Italian coachbuilder Zagato has revealed today its latest limited-edition creation, the Iso Rivolta GTZ. Based on a C7-generation Chevy Corvette Z06, its elongated grand touring design pays tribute to the iconic 1963 Iso Grifo A3, which also used Chevrolet power under the hood." I would be inclined to think a coach-built version of a car would be related to the car it itself was based off of, no? Obama gaming (talk) 20:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Are these builders actually buying Corvette chassis from GM? --Sable232 (talk) 21:50, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Sable232: dude have you not read a single article that I've posted above? The first subtitle of the corvsport article: "The 2021 Zagato IsoRivolta GTZ is built on a stock C7 Z06 Corvette chassis." It doesn't matter if they're buying them from GM or not, it's literally just the same as a tuning company purchasing a chassis from either the company themselves or a customer, is it not to say a Koenig F50 is not related to a regular Ferrari F50 just because their chassis wasn't procured from the Cavallino Rampante themselves? Or that a 9ff GT9 is not related to the 997 upon which it was built on simply because "it's chassis wasn't bought from Porsche" themselves? I have made my claim, and I have substantiated it with what I believe to be sufficient evidence. Obama gaming (talk) 00:17, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't see how, since C7 production ended 3 years ago, unless GM is selling them frames (which is plausible but IMO unlikely). More likely possibility is that they're using existing cars, which IIRC is similar to how Fisker operated back in the mid 00s. Carguy1701 (talk) 00:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@U1Quattro: seeing as you have previously engaged in discussion here, I hope it's not too disruptive for you to give your 2 cents like Carguy1701 did too, please. Obama gaming (talk) 01:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)