I recently saw a tweet that stated as a matter of fact that alternative music began when REM released Losing My Religion 1991. The birth of the genre. I have only the merest passing of interest in REM but even I know that whatever left-of-the-dial credibility the band had was spent the moment they signed for Warner Brothers in 1988. To grungy twenty-somethings in 1991, REM were naff – an opinion that was only temporarily altered by the crunching overdrive of the album Monster in 1994. Trying to figure out the beginning of alternative music is an exercise in futility – British and American music bores will have differing viewpoints, but one thing can be agreed with absolute certainty: Michael Stipe whinging into a microphone over a fucking mandolin is definitely not it.
Our lives are punctuated by these moments when music and culture intersect. Nothing changes at all and then everything changes at once. In a way they’re like old flames and previous jobs, things that timestamp and forge who we become. Cars have moments like this as well. Over a long enough timeline, a definitive form appears that affects everything from then on. For the Corvette, the C4 is that point. A complete rethink of what it meant to be America’s sports car, the 1984 C4 is a pivotal moment in Corvette history.
The C4 Corvette isn’t just another eighties techno-wedge. It set the template for the following three decades, defining what the Corvette could, and should be. The C4 is a groundbreaking design that is built on ideas introduced with the 3rd generation GM F-bodies, and it emerged during a tumultuous period of GM history under the supine design leadership of Irv Rybicki. Grab a cold domestic beer from the cooler, it’s time for Damn Good Design.
The First Corvette Was A Disaster
The Corvette story did not have an auspicious start. Harley Earl’s idea was to use GM’s industrial might to compete with imported, mostly British sports cars that GIs returning from Europe had fallen in love with. For cost reasons, GM management insisted it used off-the-shelf components. To speed up the time to market it had a body crafted from an experimental material known as glass-reinforced plastic. What emerged at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in fall 1953 was an expensive, underpowered and badly finished mess that was neither pure sports car nor refined roadster. It didn’t sell well and would probably have died on the spot were it not for two things: the appearance of a competing two-seater car from Ford – the 1955 Thunderbird, and the intervention of a legendary GM engineer named Zora Arkus-Duntov.
Zora Arkus-Duntov was a colorful European emigre whose wife was a dancer from the Folies Bergere. Before war set the continent on fire, he raced motorbikes and cars, and after fleeing to the US he would go on to be instrumental in turning the early Corvettes into potent performance cars. In 1953 Duntov wrote an internal memo highlighting the image and perception problem Chevrolet faced in the eyes of young hot-rodders who ate, drank and slept Ford. He knew enthusiasts were going to race the Corvette and make it competitive by slapping Cadillac engines in them, so why not develop a range of performance parts for the new Chevrolet small block V8 engine? Even back then GM management were more interested in their martinis than European sports cars, but Duntov’s introduction of ever higher output V8s, four-speed gearboxes, under-the-skin technical advances, and a racing program eventually turned the Corvette into a serious performance machine and sales finally took off.
His engineering and racing priorities eventually led to the C2 Corvette of 1963 losing one of its trademark features – the split rear window. GM VP of design Bill Mitchell had been inspired by the Bugatti Type 57 Atlantique, but Duntov the pragmatic racer hated it, considering it a designer’s flourish and impediment to rear visibility. For the 1964 model year, it was gone, and the ’63’s iconic status was instantly assured. Towards the end of the sixties, customer tastes were changing rapidly, moving away from rolling jukeboxes and towards a sleeker, more refined appearance. This meant the C2 was only on sale for four years. It might have ended up being even less than that but issues ramping up for production meant even though the C3 was just an extensive rebody of the C2, its introduction was pushed back to 1968.
In contrast to its short-lived predecessor the C3 remained in production for fourteen years. Initially a sharp design based on Mitchell’s 1965 Mako Shark II show car, by the early eighties, for enthusiasts it was an embarrassment. Now weighed down with energy-absorbing plastic bumpers at each end and barely powered by a variety of smogged-to-death motors, the Corvette had gone soft, going from lean rock and roll star to overweight lounge singer. Bizarrely these later C3s were some of the strongest sellers, shifting well over forty thousand units a year between 1976 and 1982, something the factory where it was built was not equipped for. From “The Decline and Fall of the American Automobile Industry” by Brock Yates:
“Between 1968 and 1982 the Corvette was produced in a crowded, inefficient plant in St. Louis, Missouri. In certain years the assembly line, which was designed to produce about 30,000 units a year, pumped out over 40,000 sports cars that demonstrated shamefully poor workmanship”.
Badly built, badly performing, and thanks to a chassis dating back to 1963, horrendously out of date, not for the first time in its history the Corvette was suffering from an identity crisis. Was it a soft grand tourer or an out-and-out sports car to take on Europe’s best? Like a middle-class university student, the Corvette was going to take a gap year to get its head together and find itself.
Enter Roger Smith
By the late seventies GM, and the American auto industry at large, were in deep shit. Recessions, oil shocks, imports, tightening emissions, and crash legislation had dealt body blow after body blow to the domestic industry. GM itself was an unwieldy, disparate organization with out-of-date factories and a testy workforce. Into this morass stepped new CEO Roger Smith who took over in 1981. Determined to modernize and rationalize the corporation, Smith invested heavily in state-of-the-art factories and attempted to streamline vehicle design and engineering by consolidating the previously independent vehicle divisions. Time would later judge these efforts and Smith’s tenure harshly, but GM had to do something. The new Corvette would be one of the first products to benefit from this modern approach. Yates again:
“Serious pilot projects such as the new GM Corvette are already underway which offer interesting contrasts with the past. The Corvette is considered to be an “image car,” a vehicle that will represent the Corporation’s best efforts in engineering and performance. In recent years the automobile had become a travesty”.
Design work for what was meant to be the all-new 1983 C4 Corvette began in 1978. Arkus-Duntov had been pushing for a mid-engined Corvette in the background for years, and GM mucked about with the idea, even building the rotary powered Aerovette. But the desire to increase space, comfort and visibility for passengers meant the front engine layout was to remain. Arkus-Duntov retired in 1975, and his successor David McLellan would be responsible for engineering the new car. Chevrolet studio chief Jerry Palmer would lead the design with direction from Chuck Jordan and Bill Mitchell’s replacement as VP of Design, Irv Rybicki.
How The C4 Was Influenced By The 1982 F-Body
Form follows function is an overused cliché, but Palmer and McLellan were keen that the term drove the design of the C4. This wasn’t to be a flashy car covered in tinsel like the early C1 and C2. It was going to be an aero-driven design that was all new from the ground up. Luckily for GM they had already introduced such a car with the 1982 F-body Firebird and Camaro. With their laid-back windshield at 62 degrees and wrap-over tailgate glass, the ’82 F-Bodies were smaller, lighter, roomier and much more aerodynamic than the cars they replaced. GM was about to use all it had learned on those cars and put it to use on the C4. Looking at the rendering below, the F-Body influence is clear, particularly in the B pillar, which would later change to be raked back and a lot slimmer.
The basic exterior theme was nailed down quickly – by 1978 full size clay models appeared that were recognizably the C4, although as ever the detailing is what took time. Interestingly these pictures below, dated 1979 are captioned ‘turbo coupe’, and the side view rendering, dated 1980 has a small turbo badge on the fender, but I can find no information as to whether GM was considering a turbo motor for the new Corvette or not. Although glass-reinforced plastic had been used on the C1 out of expediency in the intervening years it had become something of a Corvette trademark. Together with four round taillights and pop-up headlights these features would ensure the new car would remain immediately recognizable as a Corvette.
Initially, the C4 was intended to be a fall 1982 model – the new plant at Bowling Green was built, but the new car was such a leap forward over its predecessor it wasn’t going to be ready in time, so it was kicked to a spring ’83 release. Then the story goes, Lloyd Reuss (father of current GM President Mark Reuss) demanded the new car have a lift-out targa roof panel, as opposed to the T-tops that had been planned. This wasn’t done on a whim – both the 911 and Ferrari 308 were available as targa models, cars the new Corvette was intended to compete with. Removing the central T-bar required putting strength back into the C4 frame, which is why you’re when you open the doors you have to climb over a small wall to get in. Although a number of prototypes and pilot cars were built during 1983, the production car was punted again to 1984 – and the C3, now being built in the new plant, staggered on for another year.
Underneath the wind tunnel-honed exterior, the C4 used a steel frame, welded together by robots in the brand new plant in Bowling Green, Kentucky. This enabled significantly better interior packaging. The above image shows tape drawings generated from computer-generated data points overlaying the C3 and C4 packages for comparison purposes. In the final event, the new C4 was 8.8” shorter, 2” wider, 1” lower and a staggering 220lbs lighter. With a windshield angle of 64 degrees and the cut off Kamm tail, the drag coefficient was 0.34 (compared to 0.44 for the C3). Remember this was two years before the 1986 Taurus, the car that popularized the idea of aero-led design for the mainstream market.
The C4 was hi-tech on the inside as well. The instruments were an Atari fever dream that might have looked more at home on the Space Shuttle but contained useful functions, like being able to swap instantly from imperial to metric units. This was GMs ‘why use one button when three will do’ period of interior design, and the plastics used would shame a Monogram plastic kit. Money had to be saved somewhere, and neither Porsche nor Ferrari were paragons of ergonomic science at the time.
Breaking Down The Design
When it appeared in 1984 the C4 Corvette was nothing less than a state-of-the-art spaceship. Our friends at MotorWeek devoted a whole episode to it and came away raving. But the real brilliance of the C4 is its exterior design, which would influence the next three generations of the car. First, that form follows function line was not just some marketing nonsense. McLellan and Palmer really meant it. Look at just how clean and simple the side view is – I’ve said it before but keeping things simple but not simplistic is incredibly hard to do. There’s an incredible amount of restraint on show here in the lines and the detailing – not something American cars of the time were particularly known for.
The black trim line running around the entire car is necessary because of the limits on how big the GRP panels could be molded – it’s why the Lotus Esprit and Ferrari 308s have the same detail (although the 308 later switched to steel bodies it kept the line). But what’s clever about the C4 is how the one-piece clamshell hood uses it to hide its shut line. It helps the car look solid, and opening the hood becomes an act of theatre: the engine, front suspension and tires revealed in their entirety to impress onlookers.
The salad shooter wheels are instantly iconic but there is a functionality to how they look. The vanes, directional for each side of the car, draw in air to cool the brakes. Their flat surface helps the aero and the black center hides the wheel lugs. Making wheels different for each side of the car is expensive because you’re tooling up twice. In the C4’s case, they were tooling up FOUR separate wheels, because the rears were wider than the front. This is normally the sort of thing GM would cheap out on, so it shows how serious they were at making a genuine performance car.
Suddenly here was a Corvette that not only looked modern, it was modern, representing a genuine effort on the part of GM to drag themselves into the modern era. I always think the best designs could be subtly updated and be on sale today. And with the C4 in a way that’s almost what happened. In 1991 the auxiliary lighting at the front was subtly updated to wrap around the sides and the black body side trim became body colored. The rear fascia became a convex shape and the rear lights gently squared off. The interior ditched the Space Invader instruments, and the hard-edged interior was fluffed up and rounded off. The C4 effortlessly shed its eighties neon jacket and was bought bang up to the nineties overnight, and it remained fresh until it was replaced in 1996. It remains the second best selling generation Corvette of all time (after the C3) at 360k units sold over 14 years on sale.
The Legacy Of The C4
Of course, you can’t buy a new C4 today, but its design was so good it influenced the generations that followed. The C5 and C6 were careful evolutions of the same theme – a sharp nose, wrap over glass hatch, strong raked B pillar, wedge side profile, and four round taillights set into a body color panel. The C7 changed up the formula somewhat, adding aggressive creases and raked C pillar with a conventional hatch, but you can still trace a direct line from it back to the C4. The C4 gave the Corvette a signature look for the next 36 years, right up to the introduction of the C8. But more than just a visual identity, the C4 was a quantum leap forward over its predecessor, representing the moment in time the Corvette really re-embraced its role as an out-and-out sports car. It would solidify its performance credentials with the introduction of the fearsome 32v ZR-1 in 1990, a car specifically designed to be the fastest production car in the world.
Zora Arkus-Duntov died in 1996 so wouldn’t live to see the Corvette adopt the engine position he advocated for all those years ago, but I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to say it might never have happened if it wasn’t for the C4, the Corvette that genuinely changed everything all at once.
Once again, I have to extend my heartfelt thanks to the staff at GM Heritage Archive, whose researchers dug into the archives for these exclusive studio images. They provided so many great pictures there will be a follow-up to this article in a few days, showing more of the design process for the C4, so stay tuned.
All other images GM Pressroom.
C3 has always had the worst visual design to me. It is just overwrought with odd proportions that remind me of a Matchbox car, or even a kit car. It’s especially glaring in person.
The early ones are really good I think. The lack of decoration balances out the outrageousness of the shape.
I got a special publication from Road & Track when it was introduced that detailed all the things they’d done to build the C4. After years of stuffing an Impala 305 in it with fake dual exhaust, we’d all given up on the Corvette as a performance car.
The C4 was something else. It wasn’t perfect and still seemed cheap, but it was an improvement on the C3, which at the end of its life was all show, no go.
It’s hard to understand how much and how often Corvettes got dogged on. They were piloted by stereotypical dudes with white shoes and belts, a combover and a late middle age paunch.
It makes me really happy to see 20 somethings now buying C5s and the like because they’re a huge performance bargain. But that was unimaginable in the early 80s. Corvettes were just show ponies and not serious cars.
I don’t remember which magazine (probably Car & Driver) had an issue when the C4 was released that had a fold out showing all the cool features. IIRC, it also had cutaway views. I remember watching my friend down the street carefully open it and show off the illustrations. In his garage was his dad’s ’63 Split Window, which would later be painstakingly restored and is now a show winner.
Wonderful.
Fully agree. The design is awesome and indeed probably the best Vette together with or even beyond C5 and C6. But then I sat in a C4 and drove it, great cruiser but no sports car, and the ergonomics are so bad
HECK YES. C4 is my favorite corvette, and I don’t think it’s just because I grew up with it. The issue with it, is the overall performance, since the tech just wasn’t there to make the car that fast, or that reliable. So the powertrain, utter shit. The design, the chassis, what the actual CAR is? Brilliant.
I regularly see C4 project cars for $1500-3000, and they’re almost always first gen C4s, but I think the design is cleanest on those anyway, the facelift is handsome in it’s own way, but the very first C4s are just sharper.
So if the chassis and body design are awesome, imho this is the perfect platform for engine swapping. Instead of a Mustang or a Camaro with a live axle, you get IRS and a way wilder, more exotic bodystyle. You could swap in LSs if you want to really go fast, but I think the design has other merit as well.
One of the ideas I’ve kicked around for a while, was TDI swapping a C4. You’d have the exotic looks, killer suspension, and importantly, a really slippery drag coefficient… coupled with a emissions scandal 1.9L TDI; chipped would get you about the same amount of HP as the 1st gen, but with a ton of torque, and efficiency. Then throw on some aero friendly turbine wheels, and running the narrowest LRR tires you could find.
I haven’t done the math but I bet you could get around 45-50mpg at mpg at freeway speeds, and it would still handle well because the suspension design and brakes are great. One of the things that makes cars exciting, are how they feel closer to the limit. The BRZ coming out with narrow LRR tires sort of proved this theory out; that a car that acts ‘loose’ but is ultimately slower on a track, can be a superior street car.
I really wanna build a C4 with a more modern drivetrain. Even hybrid swaps sound interesting, especially if you can boost their performance a bit for “fun” but still have that efficiency.
I’m going to stop talking about this now before I start cruising FB marketplace…. but a TDI swapped C4 is a bucketlist build for me.
Edit: One question; you mentioned the hood split line was due to FRP size limitations, but as far as I know there are no size limitations; see: marine industry, boat hulls, etc. Did you mean the draft angles being negative behind the front wheel?
If I had to guess, it’s more of a reference to how tightly the shut lines could be accurately molded in GRP/FRP. TVR is notorious for styling touches that were in fact needed to hide the huge gaps in tooling runout.
I know the Esprit and 308 have the split line because of the size of the moulds, but it’s possible technology improved by the time the C4 out. BUT GRP has to be thicker in auto applications than steel, which is why an Esprit can; use off the shelf seals.
Fantastic article Adrian, thank you so much!
I may be in a minority here, but I think it’s among the best looking Corvettes and the best one all around at the time.
I hadn’t notice the function of the side trim, and it’s indeed brilliant, it helps keep the design clear and focused.
C4 is still highly underrated to this day. If I were to get a Corvette I’d be looking for a C4 ZR1 or a C5 Z06.
Excellent write-up and great points. I’ve definitely been imbued with a newfound appreciation of the restraint and sophistication in the C4’s design (esp. compared to the mass of random shapes the C7 and 8 are riddled with.
As a kid I thought the C4 was a boring, overly-80s design. But now it seems like a masterpiece.
It is well known that Chuck Jordan was a big Ferrari fan and the Monza was partially inspired by the 365GTC/4. I’ve always wondered if the proportions and smooth shape of the front of the C4 were at least partially influenced by the Daytona (Jordan owned one).
It’s very possible it was an indirect influence.
I was 15 when the C4 was released. There’s few things I can recall as clearly as how I felt about the design ethos of GM toward this, the F-bodies, and Fiero during the early 80’s. They were striking, very different than their predecessors, and completely of the time. 40 years later, the C4’s design is the one that still looks contemporary. And yes, it was a complete spaceship when it arrived – a stunner, that performed well enough to legitimately keep pace with the European contingent. Also loved the way they sounded, especially at idle. GM may not have been good at low restriciton exhaust, but they knew how to make a great, deep resonant tone.
Extra thanks to Adrian for including the notes on media used for the renderings. On behalf all who were inspired by things like this to learn how to do it for ourselves in one way or another, I salute you.
His (Duntov?) engineering and racing priorities eventually led to the C2 Corvette of 1963 losing one of its trademark features – the split rear window.
The ’63 MY was the first of the C2s. How can an automotive site make a rookie mistake like this?
Secondly, it was Mitchell who killed the split window due to costs.
Adrian is saying that the split rear window of MY’63 was lost for MY’64.
Exactly what I was saying. I didn’t think it was hard to understand, thank you.
Duntov was instrumental in getting it removed, but he wasn’t solely responsible. Stories of customers removing the split on their ‘63’s are a myth – that would have been far too much work, although dealers may have done it once the ‘64 became available. Bill Mitchell would never have backed down of his own cognisance.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/curbside-unicorn-hunt-1963-corvette-without-a-split-rear-window/
Zora hated the split window right from the start. He was definitely a big reason why it was changed.
IMO C6 was peak corvette. The new middy has a certain appeal, buy the C7 blech!
The C6 has such a clean design. It looks great in all colors.
The C7 is a great overall shape, but there’s way too much surfacing detail. Because of this, it only looks good in dark colors where the black plastic and extra body lines disappear. It’s almost like you’re looking at two different cars when you compare a yellow C7 to a black one.
However, get behind the wheel of a C7 and you will forget all about the busy design.
I owned a c3 (silver) and a c6 (black). The 3 was cramped for me and rode rough. The 6 was perfect imo. A couple of friends had a 62 and 63 and they were similar, Bad ride and cramped. Nice looking cars though. I still prefer the 6. Haven’t had an opportunity to ride/drive a 7 or 8 yet. Someday maybe. My brother asked me years ago my opinion on buying a Boxster. I redirected him to a Corvette which imo is a better car overall given where we live, the terrible local dealer and service experience and him possibly not fitting.
I’ve got a C7 but think the C6 is a much better looking car. From talking to guys who have owned both, they prefer the C7 driving experience. It’s a much stiffer platform than the C6. A C7 with MagneRide is something else. The different suspension levels really transform the car from a relaxed cruiser to a stiff corner carver.
I would love to pick up a C6 coupe for a daily driver, though.
Sounds perfect. I’ve read similar opinions. A stiffer platform always works for handling. The 6 was a great daily. I even drove it part of one winter; not recommended in snow, ice or slippery conditions. Miss that car, easy service, comfortable, plenty fast for me.
Having owned a couple C6, plus other Corvettes, I agree with you.
I remember seeing my first C4. I was in Montreal. It looked so clean and chiseled. I still love its looks.
No mention of the “cross-fire injection” disaster of an induction system? I remember as a kid when these first came out, and the Tokyo-by-night dash was a video gamer’s dream come true. The cross-fire injection sounded cool. I somehow wished a 454 would show up, but hey, we were just little kids with crazy uninformed dreams. Fast forward many years later when I was on a C3/C4 hunt, I came across an advertisement for an 84 where the price seemed too good to be true. It was a half-disassembled nightmare, the interior was scattered across several cardboard boxes, and the intake runners had a mysterious baseball bat-shaped indentation across the top of them. I ended up with a C3 that I had for a couple of years before it became too expensive to keep repairing.
Article is more of a body design look-at. With that, I have endured some sideways glances after stating I want to keep the crap-fire (there are other nicknames also) on my ’84, the next year TPI was sorta better then the ’86 nailed it. A still-working dash is a thing, also.
Yes I concentrate more on the design rather than the engineering, otherwise we’d be here all week.
Like a long detailed discussion on the funny location of the handbrake? Yeah, the article could go on all week. But it was all part and parcel of the design and introduction, and probably every teenaged car nut’s fever dream when it rolled off the line, warts and all. Funny thing, I liked that dash from back then and, I still think it is cool today in some strange retro way. It would be a fun week-long discussion tripping down memory lane.
“ I somehow wished a 454 would show up”
Actually a 454 prototype was made, but never went into production. It was the Corvette ZR2…
https://www.motortrend.com/events/vemp-0906-1989-chevrolet-corvette-zr2/
https://trombinoscar.com/c4/ct8904.html
The idea behind the prototype was getting the same performances as the ZR1, but at a lower cost.
Adrian, what’s your ranking of Corvettes based on design alone?
Early C3, C4, C6, C2, late C3, early C1, C7, late C1, the shit I took this morning, C5, the puddle of cat sick Fifi did the other day, C8.
The C7 and C8 never met an unnecessary angle they didn’t like.
I was afraid…afraid he might answer, and where my ’72 would be on the list. Whew.
Surprisingly aligned, although I can’t speak for the design of your shit.
The early C3s, particularly the concept, is the ultimate “hot wheels” car to me. It’s what you’d give a child to explain what a sports car is.
Can I have that Four Rotor Aerovette instead?
Daaaaammnnnn!
Terrific write-up! You’ll hopefully end up with an eventual 2nd-gen Autopian member after I forward this on to my daughter.
She became a huge fan of these cars around the time she realized her first summer job wasn’t going to buy her a decent Miata, at least during the time-frame she envisioned. So, her first car ended up being a somewhat-crunchy $3500 C4 Corvette that she found on FB Marketplace and we drove 90 miles home without incident.
What a fun first car – far cooler than anything I owned at that age. Blue paint with a blue leather interior and the all-important superawesome80’sradtech dash still functioning. Of course the car started developing other issues soon not long after we got it home, but that was to be expected. Plus, being 15 with a learner’s permit, she couldn’t drive it on her own anyway.
While serving as a platform for learning some basic wrenching, we also used that car and our Chevy Spark as the two main time-builders for getting her license during the parental-training program we utilized. The goal was to have her car and license ready in time to drive 6 hrs. to Road America for their IMSA Sports Car Weekend and take it out for the Corvette-Corral parade laps.
We made it! She successfully completed her road test in the Spark (manual, btw) three days before we left. The Corvette had developed some power steering issues and we fixed that along with a completing a last good overall inspection roughly eight hours before departure.
I figured the trip could be something like a first cross-country solo for new pilots. I’d take my ’82 Jaguar and her with her ’87 C4 Corvette. Being that the Jag has an ’87 Iroc Camaro 350 retrofitted, the two cars look surprisingly similar under their respective forward tilting hoods. Made for some cool pics at those all important gas-stop fluid checks.
At the track I’d say she was easily the youngest driver with possibly the roughest-looking car, but the case could be made that she also had the most fun. They split the 150 or so Corvettes up into similar types, so being in the C3/C4 group was just right as everyone was instructed to keep up or be called off of the track. Keeping up with an early 80’s C3 was no issue and still gave her a chance to hit 90 on the back stretch.
What a great weekend! Completing over 12 hours of driving, 12 miles of that (3 laps) on a racetrack, I can’t imagine a much better way to break in a license. It would have been even better if Cadillac had managed a podium finish in the GTP class, but it was still great just to see them race in person once again.
We did however, manage to find all three drivers of the winning Whelen Cadillac from the 12-hours of Sebring (that was our first IMSA race) and had them sign our 1/18th scale version of that exact car. I even got to exchange a few words in Portuguese with Pipo Derani (my wife is Brazilian) after meeting him and Jack Aitken in person. It was also cool to see that Alexander Sims, part of that winning Sebring team, was now racing Corvettes with Pratt Miller.
Digressing a bit, I was never even remotely into Corvettes, but over the course of the last year my appreciation of the C4 has skyrocketed. This post just reinforces that bit more. I might even pick one up for myself if I can ever kick my Jag and Caddy habit. In the meantime, with hers we’re planning a re-paint, new rubber seals, a new steering rack, and whatever else that could use improving to fill in whatever free-time we can find between now and graduation.
When the ’84 Corvette first broke cover in the spring of ’83, it looked to my 15-year-old eyes like the future. 40 years on, it still looks muscular and futuristic without feeling tryhard like the versions that came after. Make mine a 35th Anniversary version in that striking triple white. Thanks, Adrian.
Your servant. There’s an additional C4 flavoured treat coming as well. Stay tuned.
Having owned several Corvettes in my lifetime, the 1985 C4 was probably my least favorite. It handled great, but was constantly hampered by stupid things breaking, like the digital dash cluster. The list of things that broke in that car is never ending, but I hated that cluster. I was very happy to sell it.
Right, I hear you, but you loved the chassis. Now imagine a C4 with a modern drivetrain; hybrid, diesel, or chasing HP with LS engines.
Dude. It would be so sweet.
R.E.M… my first wife threw away my copy of “Green”. Bitch.
Beer; I drink Canadian if available. If not, Linenkugels.
Corvettes; a truck chassis with a plastic body until the C4.
The C4; one day I had an early C4 and a 928 in my shop. Both had 80k-ish miles showing. The 928 drove as though it was in its first year, the ‘Vette drove as though it was 30 years old.
The C8; lets remember that it was styled by the Aztek guy.
Corvettes; a truck chassis with a plastic body until the C4.
I don’t many trucks with an independent rear suspension.
Doesn’t the f150 lighting come with an IRS?
Sure, 40 years later and no ICE.
Well, this lead to a Motor Week rabbit hole!
I can’t wait until somebody makes a C4 kit… Hell, I might just beat them to it if I hit this number tonight
Re: Adrian’s rant on alternative music and REM – preach it, brother!!! With that said, early REM would be rightfully called alternative.
Yeah, but This Heat? Captain Beefheart? That was NOT where alt-rock started!
Epic article! Really captures the history of the Corvette.
I recommend Corvette Chief Engineer Dave McLellan’s “Corvette From the Inside” book. It’s the best Corvette book out there.
Adrian, I would love to see you give us your review of the C8. I’m not a fan but I’d love to read the expert’s opinion.
It’s shit. That’s my expert opinion.
That works!
I hope you’re not paid by the word for your reviews.
I honestly feel the 1989 year of the Corvette is the best, the year of the ZF-6 speed and keeping the early style of the 1984-1989 corvette. The rounded style is just …boring.
I really like the later ones.