|
SPECIFICATIONS----------------------
Years Represented: 2000-2004
Class: Sports Car
Type: 2-door coupe
Country: United States
Host: GT4 & GT5
Price: 53,570 (GT4, 2000 Z06,American Showroom)
54,200 (GT5, 2004 Z06, Premium lot)
GT4 Mileage: 0.0
GT5 Mileage: 210.4
Construction: sheet-molded composite fiberglass bodywork, steel/aluminum frame & chassis
Length: 179.4" // Width: 74.4" // Height: 47.7"
Wheelbase: 104.5"
Overhang: @ 6-1/4 feet
Track: 61.9" [F] 62.0" [R]
Ground Clearance: 5.5"
Steering: power-assist rack & pinion
Turning Circle: 40.2 feet
Weight: 3,105 pounds
Weight Distribution: 50/50
Tires: P245/45ZR-17 [F] P275/40ZR-18 [R]
F. Suspension: unequal-length double wishbones, coils,
R. suspension:
Brakes: vented discs w/ vacuum assist front & rear
Engine: 5.7 liter OHV V8
Aspiration: natural Construction: aluminum block & heads
Fuel System: sequential port fuel-inj.
Valves per Cylinder: 2
Bore x Stroke: 3.90" x 3.62"
Compression Ratio: 10.5:1
GT4 Idle: 750 // GT4 Redline: 6,500 // GT4 RPM Limit: 7,000
Idle: 900 // GT5 Redline: 6,250 // GT5 RPM Limit: 7,000
The current results were gained from the 2000 Z06 of GT4 as a 0.0 mile-car. In GT5 I used the 2004 Z06 found in the
Premium lot after 200+ miles of engine break-in. No oil change or engine rebuild. NOTE that the 2000 model engine was tested
as-is, with less power than the '04, and power cannot be gained by 'breaking in' engines in this game.
Quoted Horses (GT4): 379 @ 6,000 rpm
Quoted Torque: 358.02 @ 4,800
Tested Horses (GT4): 379 @ 6,000 rpm
Tested Torque: 357.96 @ 4,800
Quoted Horses (GT5): 405 @ 6,000 rpm
Quoted Torque: 400 @ 4,800
Final Horses (GT5): 406 @ 6,000
Final Torque: 399 @ 4,500
GT4
Pounds per HP: 8.19
Lbs. per Ft-Pnd: 8.67
HP per Liter: 66.9
Credits per HP: 141.34
GT5
Pounds per HP: 7.65
Lbs. per Ft-Pnd: 7.78
HP per Liter: 71.66
Credits per HP: 133.50
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Layout: front engine / rear drive
Differential: 3.42 limited-slip
0-60 mph:
GT4: 5.550 seconds
GT5: 4.920 seconds
0-100 mph:
GT4: 11.900
GT5: 10.390
0-150 mph:
GT4: 25.416
GT5: 22.700
400 Meters:
GT4: 13.927 @ 111 mph
GT5: 13.234 @ 114 mph
1/4 Mile:
GT5: 13.261 @ 114 mph
1000 M
GT4: 24.113 @ 147 mph
GT5: 23.181 @ 150 mph
1 Mile:
GT4: No Test
GT5: 31.662 @168 mph
Test Track:
GT4: N/A (forgot...) GT5: 51.550 (Daytona)
5:49.307 (Test Track X)
100-zero mph
GT4: 3.833 seconds
GT5: 5.200 seconds
GT4 Top Gear RPM at 60 mph: 1,500
GT5 Top Gear RPM at 60 mph: 2,500
GT4 Top Speed @ Redline
1st: 40 mph
2nd: 65 mph
3rd: 95 mph
4th: 137 mph
5th: 165 mph
6th: 179.58 mph @ 4,600 rpm
GT5 Top Speed @ Redline
1st: 48.0 mph
2nd: 70.5 mph
3rd: 96.5 mph
4th: 139.8 mph
5th: 166.5 mph
6th: 196.6 mph @ 5,500
EXTERIOR / HISTORY-----------------------------
There’s a word
which often goes along with those who drive and rate sports cars: enthusiast. To be a driving enthusiast
means to immerse oneself into the most passionate examples of the automotive world. Enthusiasts aren't driving something
because it can haul all their friends around or become their latest commuter to and from work or beat CAFE standards,
they are buying and driving because they love to drive. In America, this has often meant Corvettes. So it's the Year 1997.
As trends go, GM and Chevrolet needed an updated version of their star machine, which hadn't had a makeover since the mid-'80s.
The C5 generation was their final result. By the mid-'90s, the automotive sports car market had broadened. Early versions of the Corvette: C1 through C3, garnered
strong sales partially because they had very little direct competition here in America, and only vague assuages from the manufacturers
of other continents.
C4, there was a stronger presence of competition from Japan, and Europe. Japan, I believe, was the lesser threat.
Datsun's 280ZX, Mazda's RX-7, and Toyota's Supra were the East's hot new sports cars, and most buyers of these three
rides were younger than those who bought Corvettes. And why would this be? Well it's because Datsun,
Mazda, and Toyota were offering newer models, which were 2+2s (their friends could come along, riding in the
'deathtrap' rear seats), and they were also cheaper. The Datsun ranged from $14,800 to $18,600 for instance,
according to ConceptCarz.com, depending on year and add-on options. Compare this to the 1984 Corvette's base price of
$24,800. Also by now, the Corvette had been in production for
over 25 years, attracting older buyers who were interested in the car partially for its heritage. Some of these gentlemen
(ladies rarely bought Corvettes) were looking at their brand-new rides as long-term investments, which would be worth
a decent amount of money someday, as long as these 'investments' were well-maintained. Exactly the sort
of thing younger buyers (who were more interested in flash and fast times, as they cranked up some Prince or Paula Abdul on their
way to The Gap or Hot Topic) tend not to care about.
The stronger worry for Chevrolet would've been Germany, with BMW and
Porsche particularly dangerous. And it'd be those 'swing buyers', buyers who were not 100% sure which car they wanted, who
could go either way with their cash. In other words, somebody from the age of yuppiedom who wanted a sports car might
want the Chevy, but they also might've been tempted by one of Germany's imports. The Porsche 911 Turbo of 1984, for instance,
boasted more power, higher speed, and faster acceleration than the brand-new C4. Nearly 300 hp versus roughly 250, respectively!
Either manufacturer (BMW or Porsche) boasted various models which could arguably tear the new Corvette a new one, out-handling
it on actual racing tracks, and so on. I
believe Chevy therefore lost a few sales during this age to these two different sides of the world. Nothing too drastic,
since we're still generally talking several different classes of buyer. It's not like General Motors was about to
lose its entire sports car market share! But they also couldn't ignore that the 'Vette did face some noise
coming from others, which were arguably better in certain ways. Starting with C5/the mid-1990s, factors such as these were about to change
even more drastically.
I've written up C1, I've written C2. C3, and started it all with C4. What car reviews site wouldn't want to continue
the trend? So here we are.
The C5 has been in the GT series since GT3: A-spec.
I'm only looking at this 'Vette as it exists in GT4 in a cursory manner, but then driving, testing, and racing the car in
GT5. In this final game, 2000 and 2004 models can be bought as a Standard ride (found in the used car lot), or as a 2004 year,
0.0-mile vehicle from the Premium lot.
C1:
1953-1962. The Chevy Corvette began its life with a European-inspired design. Demurely handsome. More about style, class,
and exclusivity than speed or power or menace, these early 'Vettes started off as underperforming weaklings. As the '50s shuffled
on and rock ‘n’ roll became the new music of choice amongst the nation’s youth, C1's looks changed from
graceful to garish, but so did the looks of many other American rides.
What
became most obvious: power increased as V8s replaced the original slant-6. 285 cubic inches to 327, with overall output rising
enormously from 150 to 360.
During the early years of this period, only Ford's Thunderbird
competed (briefly, yet directly) with C1 Corvettes. Both cars were 2-seaters ya see, with an emphasis on elegant décor. There
were also the Studebaker Speedster and Chrysler's new C-300, but neither of these were as prolific as Ford's latest hot seller.
Thunderbirds outsold early Corvettes 23 to 1 after their 1955 debut. But by the year 1957 the Thunderbird was clearly on a
different path. It grew vastly in size, including (of course) huge tail fins! Soon, it was no longer truly a part
of the Sports Car genre, and therefore no longer a serious threat for the Corvette. Still, Chevy opted to increase Corvette output
to their dealerships, which is a good thing because the car continued to sell.
A
total of 69,015 C1s were manufactured.
C2: 1962-1967. This was the
"Sting Ray" generation, which introduced Corvettes that were completely different from any examples prior to 1962, or after
1967. C2 (unlike C1) did not resemble anything from Europe, and remains the most distinctive era of Corvette to this day.
Engine (and therefore, power) options increased, along with a long list of customizations for gearboxes, interior options,
paint options, and so on. New for C2: an independent rear suspension matched with all disc brakes. Total output: 117,964. New ‘vettes often cost over $4,000 back in these days. Doesn't seem that much now, but
this was a premium price for any choice of motorcar back then.
C3: 1968-1982.
There was another drastic change in appearance, completely different from C1 or C2. But the Corvette still had all the pertinent
hallmarks: front engine/rear-drive, fiberglass construction, two seats, and was still America’s only mass-production
sports car, with direct competition from other worldwide manufacturers just about nil, in the sense that nobody else
was producing anything with all the traits just listed AND attempting to import into the States. Jaguar's XK (E-type) series
comes closest, I guess. Italian supercars of the day, for example, might've had more
power than C3, but virtually all of these were mid-engined. Some Italians had prices which dwarfed America’s best, and
none were as accessible for purchase. Style was still at the forefront
of what made Corvettes attractive, along with horsepower. However, C3 was NOT to be mistaken as anything to
fear in the handling/driveability/racing departments, at least not straight off the showroom floor. C3s were basically muscle
cars masquerading as sports cars, with up to 460 available horsepower from the ZL1, 427 c.i.d. V8 option of 1969.
Straight-line speed? Oh yes. Corners? Um.
But look. As critical as I am about C2 and C3’s lesser
handling and racing abilities, they made excellent drivers’ cars, strictly for motoring enthusiasts.
The sort of folks who opened their road atlas to a random page, plunked their finger on some random location, and then found
themselves driving on roads they’ve never traveled before, heading toward some town or village they'd never heard
of before, not even knowing if the place has a decent tavern or restaurant! … These sorts of variables might not
even matter in a Corvette. Because in a car such as this, it’s more about the journey than the destination,
as engines rumbled and exhausts burbled and premium octane gasoline dwindled. There was a price increase
during C3’s reign from just over $4,000 to just under $20,000, which went a bit outside the bounds of inflation increases
of the decade. Apparently not a prob for true Corvette enthusiasts, who were prepared to deal with this. Total output: 542,741.
C4: 1983-1996. Resembled the racy-looking
C3; most anyone somewhat knowledgeable about cars could look at the new C4 and say "that's a Corvette." But C4s weren't quite
as wildly swooping with their bodywork, nor were they quite as eye-catching. Style went down, aerodynamic efficiency and ergonomically-pleasing
lines went up. More sleek, less snazz. However, all the key points were still there: two seats, fiberglass body, and more
power than any other GM product. The Corvette was now a wedge like the Triumph TR7. Still distinctive, but stylistically tamer
than any version of Corvette before.
One of the best features of C4? Gone was the muscle car-ish
aspect associated with earlier versions. The C4 could go fast, but it could also slow down, and corner with more confidence.
The price of the Corvette continued to climb during C4. Toward the end of its era,
buying a brand-new example, purchasers would need to lay down close to 40 grand! Total output: 358,180.
C5: 1997-2004.
Continued the wedge-shaped trend started for C4. Wedges are some of the most aerodynamically-sound profiles on the civilian
automotive market for coupes after all, so why not?
Compared to the somewhat angular C4, C5's lines have become
more sculpted, more wind-tunnel obvious. Also more eye-pleasing in my opinion; yet the car is still identifiable as a Corvette.
The C4's slight smile (whatever it is... can't think of an apt word here) is gone from the front bumper/driving lights area.
C5's got a more serious look. Its nose angles downward, while the front fenders and wheel arches have become slightly more
bulbous. More muscular. But really, the main difference between C4 and C5 besides the
actual car? Finally, the Corvette had more competition, sales-wise
and spiritually. Example: we’ve got Japan's new Mitsubishi 3000GT, Acura's new NSX, the Impreza and Lancer sport
sedans, Mazda's racy new FD-series RX-7, which featured much more power than before. The Toyota Supra and Nissan's 300ZX were
becoming stalwarts, several years into a newer generation. Most of these models were now featuring as
many horses as Japan's so-called 'Gentleman's Agreement' would allow.
Although none of these could
match the Corvette's basic raw power, let's consider that by now, the game wasn't just about power. Everyone else was using
smaller engines backed by turbos, everyone else was playing with varieties of fuel injection and variable valves, in
an effort for speed matched with better economy, while the Corvette's V8 remained the heart of a dinosaur. True, most patriotic
types here in the States ignored these newcomers as they Bought American just like their fathers, and their fathers’
fathers. But some drivers more worldly would sometimes consider these others, mostly because they were fresh and new.
Basically, the point I’m trying to make: the sports car market during C4 and into C5 was becoming more crowded.
But I'm not even talking exclusively of Europe or Japan, I'm
talking right here in the U.S.A. Starting in '92, the Corvette was no longer the undisputed King of our streets and
highways. Because now it had to contend with and heed Dodge's Viper!
The Viper entered the arena with a fresh new look, more menace, and (most of all), BIGGER engine, and more
power! This is the car C5's designers and marketers now had to consider. Although Chrysler Motors
ultimately would not be able to topple much of GM/Corvette's exclusive dominance (the Viper’s production numbers remained
too low), the Viper was at least spiritually top dog on American pavement. A stoplight stomp between the ship and
the snake could only end in one way, assuming both cars were not modified. It would take years for Chevy to
catch up horsepower-wise, which did not happen until the C6 generation came along.
The Z06 weighs just over 3,100 pounds in our games; perfectly average for a V8-powered sportabout of the early New
Millennium, and close enough to reality. I didn't detract any weight from the car in GT4 as I drove and tested, but in the
fifth game, this can be reduced to a very acceptable 2,583 pounds with all three stages.
Driving from the interior view (in GT5) is a mixed experience, whether this experience is
Standard or Premium. The latter's got a darkened dash and console area which is neither flashy nor distracting. Totally appropriate
per the genre. The all-important tachometer sits just to the right of the driver's left hand, and speed lies just to
the right. Though the tach can be hard to see at times (especially since it does lie in a shadowy area) it's definitely visible
at a glance.
My main, huge criticism are those mirrors.
The driver’s mirror is completely off-screen, useless unless we turn the avatar’s in-car head. Even so,
here we have one of those pieces of glass which reflects on an odd angle. If somebody's in our left-rear, we can't even see,
because of the way the mirror is badly aimed. The center piece is mostly visible and is oval-shaped, yet a bit small. Both of
these issues become annoying at times since the Z06 is a rather wide machine, meaning occasional bumped fenders are in the
future. Plenty of windshield to view and command, such a shame it's so hard to see what's going on behind and both flanks.
C5 purchasers could also opt for a brand-new gimmick: speed could
be displayed right upon the car's windshield, directly in front of the driver's eyes! Although we don't have this HUD
in the C5, we can see it in action if we get a C6 or C7.
Another
factor for some drivers to contend with is price. This latest version of Corvette has predictably gained: finally hurdling
the $50,000 mark in real-life, and in the game (assuming we buy a new model). Used models can always be had for less, but
not much less. I just found a 2000 with just over 29,000 miles, which cost 41,041. I did not need to buy it though.
Good luck ever finding one of these in GT5 any time soon, assuming I change my mind.
ENGINE / DRIVETRAIN --------------------------
As stated, by the time C5 became Chevy's golden boy, the Corvette was now firmly in competition with
Dodge's Viper, along with others from all over the world, and this meant an obvious upgrade of power was in order. Consider
this: many of the V8s during C4 did not rate as highly with top available power, compared to C2 or C3 (not including lower-production
ZR-1 or Callaway motors), and this includes Net power figures, not Gross.
One of the things the Corvette's engineers did right was they re-located the car's transmission toward the rear,
so that actually we've got a transaxle back there rather than just a set of shifting gears. This shifted the car's weight
so that it's got 50/50 distribution, front to rear.
GT4 C5 began in '97 equipped with the infamous LS1 powerplant, which replaced the former LT-designated units mostly used
for C4, all of which were also close to 5.7 liters. The main upgrade here had to do with metal. Older engines were cast
iron, whereas the new LS was lighter-weight aluminum. LS1 is what the 2000 model in this game (and also as a Standard
in GT5) has under their hoods. This engine (like the Viper's V10) was still using overhead-valves and pushrods; outdated material
when compared to the rest of the automotive world, or so it would seem. Starting in 2001, LS1 was upgraded to LS6. More power,
basically.
Unfortunately, the LS1 as portrayed in GT4
hasn't got that throaty burble at idle, which I've come to love in the succeeding Gran Turismo (as well as real-life). Nor
does it rattle and rumble as those revs rise. GT4's got the LS1 sounding more like a shop-vac during its best RPMs: weeeesh!!!
Ugh. I've heard leaf-blowers with more conviction.
But...
it's a healthy powerplant, definitely useful to do some damage while pitted against plenty of AI in this game. Although I'm
not doing any racing in GT4 these days, chances are using a C5 Corvette during early events still equates to cheating. I'm
guessing it can destroy portions the best the Clubman Cup has to offer, for instance.
Behavior-wise, there's a slight pause off the line before some initial torque kicks in. Things then begin to
heat up quickly as revs climb from 3,000 to 4,000 to 5,000. Out of nowhere there's that lovely small-block swell of power,
causing those rear tires to slightly slip as dynamic twist-force energy gathers force. Yeah, buddy.
In this game we've got top power which rates as follows.
Stage 1: 471 @
6,000 // 437 foot-pounds @ 4,800 Stage 2: 583
@ 6,000 // 532 foot-pounds @ 4,800 Stage 3: 695
@ 6,000 // 614 foot-pounds @ 4,800
Supercharged: 579 @ 6,000 // 582 foot-pounds @ 4,800
And unfortunately, I'm not going to be playing with any
of this today. My journey into GT4 was merely to get some preliminary driving impressions and testing results, but nowadays
(as we'll see) my skillz are nowhere near where they once were. But, that's plenty of power for lots of situations, I'd
imagine. Those who wish to contain more of it will need to spend a million on the Corvette C5R racing monster.
GT5 To start, a Premium version of this car's 5.7 liter engine begins its life with 393 horsepower straight from the
dealer, and ends up just over Chevy's quote of 405. This takes roughly 200 miles of driving. Plenty for the Supercar
Festival, the first set of races during which a C5 won't just blow the enemy away.
But consider this. In the year 1997, America's newest 2-seater sports car, the Dodge Viper, had a five year
head start over Chevy. Dodge was already proving to the world how good their new toy was, not just in publications and on
the streets, but via racing. Too many successes to mention, not without some topic-straying, that is. The LS1's 400+ was definitely
an improvement over the LT generation's average of 330, but also underpowered when compared to the Viper (which started somewhere
near 450). Non-Z06 versions of the 'Vette began with just 345 horses, but the Z06 itself was still way behind
the snake. Which is odd. During C4's reign, the Corvette fell instantly behind and remained so, even with powered-up ZR-1
engines!
The LS1, presumably, should've landed
a better blow, right? 450 horses, oh yeah? Well how about we up this to 500? Mustang versus Camaro. STi
versus Evo. And so on.
But Chevy didn't go there. The Z06
in our games entered the sports car arena with an obvious lack of energy, roughly 50 horses less than Dodge's snake.
Seem odd to you? It's as though General Motors went out of their way to make sure there would not be a more
direct fight between these two. But why not?
Here's something to consider, and I fully admit it's opinion. Vipers have never been as common as Corvettes. In my
lifetime I've seen less than ten Vipers on real-life roads, which contrasts with the hundreds, maybe thousands of
Corvettes I've gawed at. By 2017, just 32,000 Vipers had been constructed before the car was discontinued. Even if the comparison
to Corvette only includes C5, a total of 248,715 of these were built. So it wasn't like Chevy was worried about lost sales;
Chevrolet was confident people would still buy from them, since the main domestic alternative, the Viper, was not as easy
to get. Because of this, my opinion is Chevy was not about to try thrusting their product into some sort of V8 versus V10
horsepower war. At least not yet. Not until C6!
So
it seems: very rarely would a prospective Corvette buyer just say "nah, think I'll get a Viper instead," right?
A lack
of comparable power, which fortunately is not a problem for us!
The 5.7 liter
roars off the line better than it did in the previous game. Typical small-block power, but without the silly moment
of hesitation found in GT4. Select first gear, and the car daunts us with a perfect amount of rear-end traction matched
with top acceleration. A 4-second zero-to-sixty with a 13-second quarter, firmly in our grasp. Any other gear -- let's
say we try to bounce off the start in 2nd gear instead of 1st. Well that ain't happening, because there'll be a much more
obvious moment of slowdown, which is unlike the Viper's V10. But as revs build toward 4,000 there's that same sudden swell
of torque offered from the LS1. Here is where most racers will begin to crack some grins of goofiness.
Peak
power is achieved at 6,000 rpms, located just before the 6,250 rpm redline. The limit is located at 7,000, which is wonderful.
Means Chevy gives us plenty of leeway to make sure drivers don't screw up with over-revving and such. .
Power options in GT5 include this game's standardly-offered three naturally-aspirated engine builds
plus a supercharger.
Base Power // Foot-Pounds:
406 @ 6,000 // 399 @ 4,500 Full Auxiliary Power:
515 @ 6,600 // 462 @ 5,100
Full Stage 1 Power:
555 @ 6,700 // 490 @ 5,200 Full Stage 2 Power:
612 @ 6,800 // 532 @ 5,300 Full Stage 3 Power:
658 @ 6,900 // 564 @ 5,400
Supercharged power:
754 @ 6,400 // 683 @ 5,400
*Full
Auxiliary Power includes oil change, ECU, intake, and exhaust upgrades.
Gearing is an odd mixture. The first three slots clearly
are designated to help this car zoom and defeat America's favorite benchmark: the quarter-mile, and with ease. Gear 4
is somewhat taller. Here is where the driver will spend the bulk of his time while rolling along American highways,
most of which rate anywhere from 55 to 80 miles-per-hour. A decent mixture of fuel-economy and torque are available from
this section of the box. The car will be getting MPG somewhere in the mid 20s, yet won't need to sacrifice available
speed should some snobby Porsche or Audi pulls alongside, hoping for a match.
Gear 5 is really just a top-off. It's only slightly taller than 4. A perfect top-end racing gear for us. But where
things really get odd is Gear 6, which only becomes an option for us racers just after the car tops 150 mph. Now
we've got revs which barely putter along at 4,400 RPM. Really, there is no reason to ever choose this slot during racing situations!
… For real-life drivers this top gear is configured the way it was so the C5 could attain an incredibly high miles
per gallon rating of 34, which meant avoiding that dreaded gas guzzler tax! Chevy finally beats the Viper in this department.
Though Gear 6 is useful during races, the
car does continue to gather speed as it zooms upon a flat surface (and without a draft), never will the engine get
anywhere near its 6,000 rpm peak horsepower. The car almost makes it to 200 miles per hour around Test Track X before
it just gives up. On the other hand, let's remember that the C4 was also equipped with a super-tall sixth. If selected,
the car would actually LOSE speed in this gear, even during test track situations!
CHASSIS / HANDLING---------------------------
Another huge difference of C5, compared to any
other previous generation of Corvette, was how the car actually drove of course. Chevrolet could no longer ignore the real-life
reviewers and customers, some who'd been criticizing the Corvette's handling & drivability aspects for years, comparing
to newer sports cars of course. Sure, the car could go fast, and sure, it was a vast improvement over C3, which was easy to
beat since C3 wasn't made for handling at all. So for C5, Chevy really needed to show the world how much they'd stepped
up to the sports car plate. The new Corvette could move (duh), but was it also more agile than before?
What we've got here is a car which definitely has improved for sure. Driven
on bumpy streets and warbling pavement the Corvette's ride was harsher, but during any situation which had this
car rolling over smoother surfaces the 'Vette became a much more confident, controllable ride.
In real-life the C5 can be had with a couple different drivability options. Active Handling System was an option
during 1998, standard after the year 2001. This included all the typical computers and gadgets seen on so man other vehicles; ABS,
but also traction and stability controls, all the stuff us race-car drivers usually turn off (except the anti-lock braking,
of course).
There were also about a half-dozen suspension
packages; really somewhat of a surprise, because this meant Chevrolet was catering the C5 toward about a half-dozen different
types of customers. Some folks just wanted to cruise around, just like that dude with the road atlas in the opening section
of this article. Other drivers wanted to take their C5 to track days, or autocross-type situations. Still others wanted
a blend of behaviors from their cars: less firm perhaps on bouncy highways, but this could be switched.
This does get complicated. And like I said, it's rather surprising. Back in the days of C2 and C3 there were often
several engine/horsepower options. Nice to see that with C5 there were several handling options!
The base model had what was called an RPO "standard suspension". RPO is GM's
code for Regular Production Option, and I'm going to assume the 'standard' suspension included all the usual parts: dual wishbones,
coils, anti-roll bars, and so on. There was also the FE3 'sport suspension', which I'll assume meant stiffer coils, beefier
links and wishbones, and so on. FE3 was part of the Z51 Performance and Handling package found as an option during model years
'99 and 2000. I am going to assume this is what the C5 has in our game as the Standard automobile from 2000. But
there was also the F45 package, which included "on the fly" ride characteristics that included Touring or SPORT
modes!
But the options didn't end there. Starting in
2003 there was the F55 'Magnetic Selective Ride Control Suspension'. This configuration used magnetorheological
shock absorbers (wow) which meant the car's shocks were somehow controlled by electromagnets which changed stiffness by manipulating
special fluid within the shocks.
Apparently, this
bit of sci-fi is not what's in the Z06 of 2004. If somebody went for Z06 they'd be getting the 'racing-inspired'
FE4 suspension, with no other option included. Comparing the 2000-model car to the 2004 there IS a difference with each year's
Spring Rates: 5.4 front and 4.9 rear under the 2000, 6.5 and 5.8 for the latter car. Very good, Polyphony.
GT4 It's been a while since I've driven anything in this game. I first tried
to imagine (once again) what this car would be like to drive on radial tires instead of the medium-grade sports it comes with.
So... N-rated "Road" tires. And let's choose a track with plenty of turns, not so many straights. Because with 380 horses
right on tap, we already know the 'Vette's gonna be fast in a straight line.
How about Autumn Ring? Perfect.
One thing I can tell anybody reading this article: it's been at least eight years since I've driven or raced
anything in Gran Turismo 4, which means I won't be doing any racing, because I pretty much suck
at this games nowadays! My reflexes are honed for the latter games, I no longer had the delicate finesse I once
did a decade a go, and so on. Steering in particular seems incredibly sensitive and grabby, which is not a fault of the car
itself.
Driven around the track nice and
slow, like grandma's in the passenger seat because her ancient Caravan broke down so now she needs a lift to her local
Rotary Club meeting. The engine's note isn't nearly as gruff as what I'm used to from GT5 … hard to tell if
it's an actual V8 under that hood. Being patient, I kept the car's engine no higher than four grand with the revs.
Though
it's not being pushed, the Z06 in this game has a natural proclivity towards understeer, which happens most obviously
during the two hairpins, and also as the car begins to round its way up the 270-degree circle before the hill climb. Letting
off the throttle into this particular orbit is not enough--it's going to need some braking action! Even though I'm barely
rolling along at 50 miles per hour.
Otherwise, there's a nice mixture of front-end grabbing
along with neutral steering behaviors. The car can handle those switchback areas: turns 3 thru 7 or so, confidently
without any braking, for instance.
Push a little harder, and that's when things begin to dismantle.
It's just like that New Car Test Drive article I quoted as I drove the C4 Corvette. Here, let's read it again.
The Corvette's levels of acceleration, cornering, braking and top speed are
simply beyond the realm of most drivers' experiences. And it takes a highly skilled driver,
in a test track environment, to search the limits of its capabilities. For most of us, an occasional (if brief) romp
on the gas pedal, or an enthusiastic fling around a freeway cloverleaf, will be about the
most that can be experienced on a public road. With a car like the Corvette, stand on the
gas for just a few seconds and you're going very, very fast. On the test track, the Corvette holds its own with the world's best. Even for those long familiar with this
car's capabilities, its ability to accelerate, go around corners and stop is awe-inspiring. This kind of all-out capability has little relevance for daily driving, but it does promise a huge reserve
that the skillful and aware driver can use to help avoid many emergencies... Yeah,
not seeing anything close to this as I nudged the Z06 around the Autumn Ring. Again it's the same situation: needing
to brake early into turns, which, okay, I'm driving on crap tires, so that makes sense. So I brake early, roll the
steering appropriately inwards, yet the car still noses its front-end straight toward whatever
sand trap or barrier is nearest, with absolutely zero attempt of any sort of lift-off behavior or trail-braking offered
from some other sports coupes.
Here's a look at some of that same website's words for the C5. This
is from the Corvette's 1997 review, basically a non-Z06, just to keep things fair to this aging game.
Even with the basic suspension package, our test car’s responses were surgically precise, if you can imagine
a surgical instrument with 345 horsepower and great gobs of torque.
Okay, and...
Another part of the deal is stiff ride quality. You don’t get a sports car’s ability to change directions
without snubbing body roll and limiting up and down suspension motions, and when you do those things you’re obliged
to accept some tradeoff in comfort. Any suspension so conceived isn’t going to be very good at sopping up small bumps
and holes, and that’s true of the Corvette.
And how about a bit more...
And in the basic sports car mission–carving up switchbacks, or attacking an autocross course–the new
Vette has the reflexes of an Olympic gymnast. It’s a superb blend of muscle and finesse, with a much higher tolerance
for mistakes of the enthusiastic variety, complemented by brakes that are nothing short of raceworthy.
Wow,
those are some glowing statements. So then how come the game doesn't reflect any of this? At all?
It's
like: okay, here I am, rolling down the slight Autumn Ring hill across the Start/Finish line, the crowd roaring
in my ears! The track levels off as the hairpin approaches. So. Now.... here's the turn... okay... brake.... turn-in...
brake … coast... turn in more drastically... whoa... BRAKE brake brakeBRAKEBRAKE!!!!….. ugh. Right
over the grass/the sand/into a guardrail. And there goes the super-slow ghost from previous laps, passing way ahead down
the next straight. Ugh.
And oddly, the rear of the car always behaves. NEVER breaks, even
when I try to surprise it by giving a wallop of gas out of one of those hairpins, front-end cranked left or right. Some drivers
may delight, I guess. But where's the fun?
On the plus side, the Corvette's brakes are excellent.
They're a little too grabby in fact, but this is a good thing. All too easy to brake just a little too forcefully,
a little too early, because otherwise you KNOW there'll be some pushing. Also, the C5 has a nice habit of really reacting as
it rolls over the blue & white curbs at the side of the track. Actually this is the only part of the New Car article's
words which reflect reality. Harsh ride? Yes this shows, even in the game.
And also, the Corvette's
traction from the rear, it's always 100% reliable, and probably remains so, even after pushing the engine deep into Stage
1 territory. If you're rolling into a hairpin, a kink, a chicane, and are wondering how much throttle to give as you
exit, the good news is there usually shouldn't be any debate. Just drop it all. Chances are, the car's 275-width rear tires
will be able to handle it.
But overall, can't help but release my critical side as I drove
this car about. Even after shodding the S2 medium sports which are normally equipped from the dealership the situation's
not really much better. Now the front end's grabbing a little more after I lift off the brakes, okay?
There definitely is some improvement. But it's freeking Autumn Ring!! .. I'm braking where I'd normally brake,
where I've been braking for years in the Gran Turismo series. And all I get in return
are complaints. "Nope, can't do that in this game, Parnelli. Who d'ya think you are?"
Best
lap with medium sport tires: 1:29.275.
Ugh. Let's move on to the next
game.
GT5 Preparing for my favorite race series once again: the Supercar Festival, where the Corvette's power is totally appropriate.
But first, I want to head to Autumn Ring once again.
Again I'm doing the grandma thing, rolling around the track nice and slow. Growling
from underneath that hood, as though the engine's tempting the driver to floor it! … But not yet.
Not until we get our nana to the Bingo hall, which, as it turns out, takes an entire lap. Being patient, I kept the car's
engine no higher than four grand with the revs.
Turns out, I could occasionally (and safely)
give 100% gas as I moseyed around with low RPMs; the car's rear tires could handle full-throttle at these lowish speeds. So
this is what it's like to drive an actual, real Corvette around town, I surmise. Not too much torque down low. Well, there
IS quite a bit being produced, but only once we're getting near to those peak numbers does any sort of calamity occur.
The
contrast between GT4's edition and the car I'm driving now starts to happen once more speed is gathered, of course. In GT4
it was all about understeer, with nearly zero options to assist in any other way. The rear felt mostly tame. GT5's version
feels more balanced, both in a good way and a bad way. Good, because as long as some discretion is used, the car behaves.
But things can go wrong from the front or the rear as more speed is gathered.
Up front it's the expected
understeer. All Corvettes understeer on entry, and this newest edition is not exempt. Good thing is, pushing up front
is easier to avoid in this game, and it's nowhere near (nowhere as final) to what's portrayed in GT4. I could trail-brake
slightly at times, especially as I guided the front toward those hairpins.
But the main diff between 4th game
and 5th: the rear can also lose it, and at a moment's notice. Also expected, since the latter, PS3-era games
represent oversteer more properly. Drop the hammer while exiting a turn, and be prepared for some mighty spin-cycle
action. Overall, the car is not so happy on these civilian-rated tires, but at least it has improved, compared to the previous
game. The C5 is not so one-sided.
What I didn't expect though was the damage control. In
effect, as long as the driver's ready for it, countersteer can be employed to counteract the sliding, and it's easy to catch
this car's wanton behavior while doing so. Give full throttle while immediately steering opposite often results in some rather
edgy (yet fun) driving as we stomp away from turn after turn. Get it right, and like a true sports car from yesteryear, the
C5 rewards us.
If there's a criticism to be made, it's how difficult it can be to gather inertia out
of tight, slower areas. Power is either ON or Off (with these cheaper tires). With nearly 400 foot-pounds on tap
and another 400 horses to follow, power is difficult to feather. The car pretty much demands to launch in straight lines;
erasing hundredths of seconds here and there while slipping some horses early is pretty much a no-no, which is one area where
the GT4 version's got an unrealistic advantage.
And of course, swapping radials for sports makes
a huge difference, an actual greater difference than was seen in GT4, and not just with the numbers. Confidence goes
way up. Lowest lap time while driving on comfort tires: 1:34.480. With medium sports (comparable to S2s in the 4th game) I
brought this down to 1:28.663. We can blame the 2004's extra 30 horses for that lower lap time, but let's also consider the
fact that GT4's 2000 model features shorter brake distances, because super-heavy braking is another unrealistic feature
of 4.
But as stated: confidence. Understeer diminishes with proper braking, trailing into turns while braking
becomes more of an intuitive factor, playing a bit with corner arcs and lines becomes more possible. The Corvette never becomes
as tossable as, say, a BMW M3, at least not at this track. But the C5 becomes overall more of a fun experience. We can begin
messing with partial fuel-moments as well, garnering throttlesteer with better results.
Take the
C5 to some higher-speed tracks on soft or medium tires, and we can compare further to that other American ride. The Viper's
always got a rather slithery feel, right? It slithers and skates around on the track, frequently losing small
amounts of grip and traction, yet maintaining plenty of control.
In comparison, the Corvette
feels solid, more planted. It's a wider car which does not use lateral moments of playtime as slyly as the Viper. When
the Corvette overcooks its rear for instance, the driver must make amends immediately, which is not as true of the Viper.
Comparing 'Vette to Viper, the latter almost seems to require moments when its tractability's going offbeat. The car's getting
sideways. Vipers enjoy events such as these, and so does a particular type of driver!
Chevy
went for a more particular, perhaps more conventional set of traits in the handling department: light-to-average understeer
up front while entering those wider, higher-speed banks and turns, hovercraft-like stability mid-turn. The Corvette's rear
feels more gluey than the Viper's, and it doesn't feel quite as safe when things go wrong, slipping about and such. -- Perhaps
someday I'll try to form a truer test between these two. Like the Lancer Evo versus the Impreza STi, each car's got their
specific behaviors; pros and cons for sure. Each one does things a little better (or worse) than the other.
One
of the only true criticism which really bothers while racing C5 was during those slower turns. The car can be flung into
high-speed kinks while bounding over curbs and grids, and it just shrugs most of the time. But one thing C5 doesn't
like so much are those super-slow, super-tight areas. Hairpins at Suzuka, Autumn Ring, and any city course, for
instance. The chicanes of Monza, Madrid, and Nürburgring GP/F. It's not so much that the car understeers heavily; it's more
that the Corvette feels like it's not having as much fun tackling these portions. All the sudden, it really needs
babying, taking up nearly the entire track just to maintain cornering arcs. Obviously, options during such times go way,
way down. Out-in-out, or else.
But ah.. that giant, more gentle loop, that lazy curve,
that sloping bank is just ahead! That's more like it.
Summary C5
was an interesting move away from the muscle of C4 and earlier versions, and toward the super-powerful 'Ferrari killers' of
C6.
PROS------------------------------------------------
1). The C5 is not a muscle car, yet it still retains a muscle car's V8 powerhouse. Please make your way
out the exit door, you haughty know-all Corporate Average Fuel Economy legislators.
2). Carefully sculpted aerodynamics. In this way, the Corvette was keeping up with the rest of the automotive world during
the '90s and into the 2000s.
3). Great down-low acceleration (esp. in GT5) followed by an easy 150+ mph during any straight section which is long enough
to accommodate.
4). 6-speed gearbox.
5). Quite the sporting drive! The C5 offers occasional surprising behaviors while cornering (including moments of damage control
when mistakes occur), allows one to hold a line, but then roars off down the straights. Mostly this is GT5 material once again.
6). Heavenly V8 rumbling (again, mostly in GT5).
7). Lots of decent power options in either game. Horses nearly double in GT5 at best.
8). An upgrade in handling went along with the car's upgrade of power. Minimal understeer (GT5) matched with excellent stopping
power (GT4 & 5). Razor-sharp aim on-entry matched with great traction while exiting (assumes the right tires are equipped
in GT5 with the exits). A lot of typical sports car attributes: lift-off, trail-braking, throttlesteer, etc., available while
racing other monsters.
9). Opinion: just a good-looking car. A true set of differences when compared to the previous generation of Corvette, yet
the C5 is still identifiable as a Corvette.
10). Weighty enough to keep the car stable at high speeds, yet the pounds do fall, for those who want to remove some of them.
11). Professionally dark interior in GT5's Premium version, which is neither distracting or gaudy. My favorite cluster device,
the tachometer, is visible, assuming there isn't a glare of sun blinding into the cabin.
CONS------------------------------
1). Pricey. Not the most expensive sports car on the market, yet for some who are trying to afford the
Corvette, there are a few others which can make similar performance without the cost.
2). Engine/exhaust sounds in GT4 come across as quite weeny.
3). Humongous amounts of understeer also in GT4, and even after sports tires are equipped. This is matched with a rear
which never allows any typical rear-drive's better traits. No slippy re-orbit placements while trying to introduce punchy
moments of power at the right time, for instance.
4). Super-tall 6th gear. Speed does gather when selecting it, but overall it's just better to replace the stock box for
a customized one, for those who want to get more serious with top-end momentum.
5). Thirsty fuel-management during endurance races.
6). Rare in GT5's used car lot, for those who want a Standard rather than a Premium version.
7). Poor lateral views in the interior views of GT5, Standard or Premium. Driver's side mirror just about useless.
Published: December 28, 2023
|
