Corvette Blue Devil a go

Marty Howard · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 1:19 pm

Blue Devil is a go, will come with around 600 hp.
from leftlanenews, and Autoweek

Quote:

GM’s head of performance cars Tom Wallace has confirmed to AutoWeek that the company will build a much-rumored ‘Blue Devil’ Corvette. According to the report, the car will have around 600 horsepower. Wallace said GM is actually considering requiring purchasers of the Blue Devil — and maybe the Z06, too — attend a driving school as part of the price. We’ll keep you posted as more details emerge…

Sources say it will weigh under 2900 lbs, and maybe as little as 2600 lbs.

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 2:35 pm

Sorta silly if you ask me. I used to be a fan of this kind of thing (actually had a Porsche Carrera GT on order), but now I think it's simply "too much." A car with that kind of power and that little weight, even at a reasonably hefty price tag, is going to kill people at track days. That's assuming you can find a track day that will even let you run it. I honestly think we're not far from tracks going to requirements like drag strips have...if your car has X horsepower/pound you're going to be required to have a certain level of safety gear that's going to include a cage.

At least I hope so. I know this goes down the slippery slope of legislating safety, which I'm generally against, but these cars are getting so attainable that they are killing people, and many of those people *are* "good" drivers.

What's worse is that the Blue Devil may be so attainable that you have people getting killed on the *street* because of it. That said, the performance level difference between a Blue Devil and a C6 Z06 may not matter as far as how dangerous the thing is very much...that current Z06 will bite you plenty fast on street rubber. But all it's going to take is one mistake where someone kills a family of kids on the road and we're *all* going to pay the price in terms of *real* legislation.

--Donnie

Keith Vail · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 2:49 pm

I wish I knew what company it was that sold a performance car but you had to be a holder of a current SCCA race license. I actually think this would be beneficial with the companies offering cars like this that people can afford. I honestly just don't see the point of a car with so much power that is sold as a street car. But then again what do I know my car only has 128 bhp. I look at it that the C6 Z06 is already a lot of car and will probably get someone hurt seriously along the way. I go by the experience that my uncle had. He bought a 1997 Viper brand new and then got a Hennessey 650 turbo kit installed. Next thing I hear he wrapped it around a telephone pole. He is not a great driver but had the money. The mandatory racer's license to buy some of these cars is a good idea in my opinion.

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 2:53 pm

Keith Vail wrote:

I wish I knew what company it was that sold a performance car but you had to be a holder of a current SCCA race license. I actually think this would be beneficial with the companies offering cars like this that people can afford. I honestly just don't see the point of a car with so much power that is sold as a street car. But then again what do I know my car only has 128 bhp. I look at it that the C6 Z06 is already a lot of car and will probably get someone hurt seriously along the way. I go by the experience that my uncle had. He bought a 1997 Viper brand new and then got a Hennessey 650 turbo kit installed. Next thing I hear he wrapped it around a telephone pole. He is not a great driver but had the money. The mandatory racer's license to buy some of these cars is a good idea in my opinion.

Honestly, there are a lot of idiots with race licenses too. No slam on anyone in the group that runs SM (especially Diane), but there are some horrific drivers in that class. (and some very good ones, as well as safe ones) They all have competition licenses. - AB

Les Davis · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:04 pm **Posts:** 2059

It doesn't require a car with spectacular performance to kill yourself and others. People do it all the time in rather mundane cars. The average econobox these days is nearly as fast as a sports car of 25 years ago and almost any car sold today will go 110 or so, plenty fast enough to do alot of damage.

An average 20 something kid with a decent job can buy a used Camaro and mod it to similar power/weight ratios that cars like this produce without the handling and braking capabilities of the supercars. Far more dangerous to me, so far, modding cars hasn't been legislated much other than in the Republik of Kalifornia.

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:14 pm

Keith Vail wrote:

I wish I knew what company it was that sold a performance car but you had to be a holder of a current SCCA race license.

Plymouth and Dodge did that with the first year (1994 produced MY 1995) Neon ACRs. Ford did it with the Mustang Cobra R, but it wasn't just SCCA IIRC.

However, Les and Aaron are right. A fast car is not required to be stupid and dangerous, nor is the ability to acquire a racing license prevention thereof.

Marty Howard · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:18 pm

Les Davis wrote:

It doesn't require a car with spectacular performance to kill yourself and others. People do it all the time in rather mundane cars. The average econobox these days is nearly as fast as a sports car of 25 years ago and almost any car sold today will go 110 or so, plenty fast enough to do alot of damage.

An average 20 something kid with a decent job can buy a used Camaro and mod it to similar power/weight ratios that cars like this produce without the handling and braking capabilities of the supercars. Far more dangerous to me, so far, modding cars hasn't been legislated much other than in the Republik of Kalifornia.

With such cars out as the WRX, Evo, and any LSx powered vehicle..getting over 400 HP has become common place and inexpensive. Look at the cars in a modern High school parking lot.

Which is why I think we are seeing more and more tragic events on the news. We really need a better Drivers education system in the US. Look at what Europe has.

Les Davis · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:04 pm **Posts:** 2059

Oh yeah, I'm with you Donnie also in that cars like this are pretty silly. I used to want a really fast car, always thought, the faster the better and that there is no such thing as too much horsepower, but once I got to the point where I owned a reasonably fast car, that need has waned quite alot. Seems as though my statisfaction point is acheived in mid/low 13 second 1/4 mile car. I still sometimes feel like I wanna try out the 12 second car, but not such a strong desire anymore. I might still someday have the C5 Z06 Corvette, but it wouldn't really be just because its fast in a straight line, but more the total package.

Patrick Wellenius · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:26 pm

Is it really better driver's education, or is it simply a more prohibitive system? A friend of mine moved here from Germany after getting his license there. He said the test/fees alone were over (the equivalent) of $1000. Also the cost of insuring a young driver is higher, as is the cost of car ownership in general. The higher the cost of a teenager being able to drive their own car, the less likely you'll see reckless teenagers behind the wheel. I'm not making any suggestions, just comparisons...

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:32 pm

Patrick Wellenius wrote:

Is it really better driver's education, or is it simply a more prohibitive system? A friend of mine moved here from Germany after getting his license there. He said the test/fees alone were over (the equivalent) of $1000. Also the cost of insuring a young driver is higher, as is the cost of car ownership in general. The higher the cost of a teenager being able to drive their own car, the less likely you'll see reckless teenagers behind the wheel. I'm not making any suggestions, just comparisons...

Economic impediments will only reduce the number of idiots driving based on where the cost falls relative to income. A better education system will actually make for better drivers regardless of economic position and therefore have a much more long lasting and wide ranging effect. After all, rich idiots are still idiots.

Just my opinion. I have family in England and the cost of getting a license there is quite high. However, as my cousin Lucy told me, failing the test your first time is just about compulsary.

Patrick Wellenius · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:35 pm

True, being able to afford it doesn't make you any smarter about it. But, if it's particularly expensive, you'll think twice about doing something risky(at least I would). Plus, if it's more expensive, you'll put fewer drivers on the road overall, which makes for fewer idiots on the road.

And while education is good/necessary, you still have the cultural side of the problem. Teenagers are usually going to push their luck more than someone 10 years older than them, and they don't have the driving experience to save their butt if they get into trouble.

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:40 pm

Patrick Wellenius wrote:

True, being able to afford it doesn't make you any smarter about it. But, if it's particularly expensive, you'll think twice about doing something risky(at least I would). Plus, if it's more expensive, you'll put fewer drivers on the road overall, which makes for fewer idiots on the road.

And while education is good/necessary, you still have the cultural side of the problem. Teenagers are usually going to push their luck more than someone 10 years older than them, and they don't have the driving experience to save their butt if they get into trouble.

Seems to me that rather than just adding cost, your logic points to raising the minimum age for getting a license. Fewer people overall on the road and elimination of the most dangerous demographic. Money is just a circuitous way of getting there, IMO.

Patrick Wellenius · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:49 pm

Rich Anderson wrote:

Seems to me that rather than just adding cost, your logic points to raising the minimum age for getting a license. Fewer people overall on the road and elimination of the most dangerous demographic. Money is just a circuitous way of getting there, IMO.

Raising the minimum age is one way of getting it done. But money would make people think a little more before just tear-assin' down the highway or wherever. The money issue wasn't intended to single out younger drivers, but it would make everyone think twice about what they're doing.

It's the same reason newspapers cost 25 cents from the stand. The publisher doesn't make any real money from it, but they want people to associate some value with the product (newspaper). If you associate more value with having a clean record, fewer people will take that risk.

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 3:56 pm

Patrick Wellenius wrote:

Raising the minimum age is one way of getting it done. But money would make people think a little more before just tear-assin' down the highway or wherever. The money issue wasn't intended to single out younger drivers, but it would make everyone think twice about what they're doing.

It's the same reason newspapers cost 25 cents from the stand. The publisher doesn't make any real money from it, but they want people to associate some value with the product (newspaper). If you associate more value with having a clean record, fewer people will take that risk.

I personally don't believe that a financial investment will stop people from doing something stupid. Lets face it, average new car is well over $20K, and with median household income at $44K, that means people are often mucking about in half a year's work. That hasn't seemed to make much of a difference, so why would $1000 to get a license?

I could be wrong and I admit that median household income and new car purchase is not always relevant (IIRC I think median household income of a new car purchaser is closer to $75K but that could be wrong) but I am just skeptical that more money to get a license will make people more cautious. Insurance rate hikes aren't doing it. Why would license fees?

Patrick Wellenius · **Posted:** Thu May 04, 2006 4:01 pm

The high cost of getting a license was an example. You're right though, to many people $1000 won't make a difference. But those were just some ideas that came to mind. Other countries serve penalties on a percentage basis of your yearly income. Maybe that's a better one...

THSCC Forums

Corvette Blue Devil a go

Who is online