2002 Corvette Z06: 'It Just Feels Beat Up'

What do you expect? It is a GM product, after all.

James, based on your description, "beat up" seems to be a nice way of saying "crappy".

At this used car price point you can get raw speed or sophistication, but rarely -if ever- both in the same car.

Low blows at GM, as always. All C5's are like this. But look, they aren't the newest cars anymore.

Still, for a weekend car, you can't really get much more performance for the dollar.

Still waiting for the Recaro seat upgrade....

I think it's pretty clear by now where the development money went with the C5 and C6 Corvettes. It's easy to respect the performance capability/value, but the entire package is a bit of a love it / hate it proposition.

at this mileage - the car is still essentially new. Either the previous owner beat it up or it was built poorly. Based on my experience with a 99 Camaro, I would say that its 70/30. The car wasnt the best built, but my Camaro with 100,000 miles sounds like it was just starting to experience the issues this car has at half that...

Just a typical product from GM in the last 20 years. What could you expect. For those saying you cant get performance and quality for this price you are out of your mind. If a $20k Honda can make it to 45k miles without issues, this "supercar" should be able to do the same.

I wouldn't dare put this in the "supercar" category though. This can't touch any styling from anything European, Japanese, or the Ford GT. It is what it is, a car meant for driving straight with a big motor. The Corvette hasn't been the real deal in the last 15 or so years.

I'm not really that happy with the fit and finish of the interior in my '03 Z06. But I forget all about it when I realize how little I paid for it (back in 2005) and then lay into the throttle. I don't regret for one minute my decision to take this car over an '02 M3 or a new STi or a new Evo.

One time, I made a girl cry with this car. Literally made her so scared, she cried. I didn't go out with her again. Instead, I found a different girl, did the same thing, except she proclaimed that I should never ever sell this car. Then I married her.

kasrhp: So by the same logic, a Ferrari should never have any mechanical issues? Good luck with that one.

And I'd like to see your $20k Honda performance car line up against this beatup "supercar" and see what's what.

I feel the same way after driving my '92 C4, it's nice for a little bit but gets tiring after a couple of hours. As for the window going down making the door flex inward and the door not staying open on an incline, also the interior being rough, I have none of that.

I'd like to know how a comparably-priced Boxster (or 911) feels.

So, did you get the Z06 sideways and show her what the car is actually for, or did you just drive to Bed Bath and Bodyworks to get something for one of her friends?

It will be a rare woman indeed who could appreciate what the Z06 is actually for. Hell, most guys aren't sure.

46K miles?

That's nothing.

Agreed that "beat up" = "crappy"

fiancee! congrats.

"One time, I made a girl cry with this car. Literally made her so scared, she cried. I didn't go out with her again. Instead, I found a different girl, did the same thing, except she proclaimed that I should never ever sell this car. Then I married her."

I love that! Best line I've read in a while. Awesome.

Are you saying you don't like it? Compared to what? Sounds like you need a nice ride in a Honda or a Toyota.

Show me what's out there for this kind of money with this kind of performance, and I'll take your comments a little more seriously.

C5z06er,
You clearly missed my point (who could have guessed with your handle;)

Why does a $20k Honda have better fit and finish than this Vette? I wasn't talking performance but rather finished quality of the vehicle. By your points, it is OK this thing is a piece of junk as long as it hauls. I'm saying it should haul a$% and have the quality craftsmanship to have the rest of the vehicle last. Is that such a bad thing? Do you want to throw more money down the drain fixing things that shouldn't need fixing? I'd rather put that money to performance mods or future tires, etc.

But I guess you could keep making excuses for GM. Its clearly getting them far. Maybe one day they can outright own their own company again.

@kasrhp

Relax a little.

"I'd like to know how a comparably-priced Boxster (or 911) feels."

I realize that the sample size for my statistic is one, but I have a fair amount of seat time in a 2000 Boxster S. The car currently has about 40k miles on it, and everything except the slightly foggy rear window has held up extremely well. The doors don't creak, the leather still looks great, and the interior still looks and feels up to the standards of a new car. In fact, a lot of people who ride in the car think that is is brand new. To be fair though, the Z06 would eat it for breakfast in a straight line.

I don't know about you guys but when I'm screaming up an on-ramp ripping shifts I try to take as much time out of my day as possible to dry-hump the panel fitments in my car that costs less than used Accord

@Sebastian

You haven't experienced the dreaded Rear Main Seal/Intermediate Main Seal oil leak? I started looking into 996's and it sounds like a big problem for that gen's engines.

"I'd like to know how a comparably-priced Boxster (or 911) feels."

I too would be curious about a 996's durability and it would be an AWESOME long term test for IL (or me, if I could afford it). =P

Could you get us some interior pics please?

I think it's funny when people try to fetishize quality recognition as some sort of defense mechanism against criticism. Make the point of view that you disagree with seem gross/perverted. What a childish reaction.

Welcome to the world pre-owned GM cars. If you think THATS beat up, I owe you a ride in my 180,000 mile, 16 year old firebird.

@sabastian and @moar_revs,

I have a 2000 Boxster S with 113,000 miles. No RMS problem. Nothing creaks. The plastic rear window went Yellow-Brown at at 100,000 miles, I replaced it with glass. The transmission is granchy on second gear. Not bad for such and old, and cheap, car.

The Z06 is FAST but I wonder about how it would feel over 100,000 miles.

I have a 2004 C5, and because it's the 24 Hours of LeMans commemorative edition, it has a nice, all shale/neutral 2-tone (light beige/deep tan) interior It may not be up to 2010 standards, but I think it's plenty nice enough. It doesn't feel beat up, but maybe that's because IT HASN"T BEEN! None of the panels are misaligned. The doors do not creak. Everything works. And since it has magnetic ride control, that probably has contributed to keeping it from being pounded to death by an overly stiff suspension. The car has basically been trouble-free.

In many ways I like the design shapes of the C5 dash better than the C6, where the C5's feels more wrapped around the driver, and the passenger side is more interesting to look at, too. I also like the styling of the C5 sport seats better. Granted, the C6 has better materials and tighter tolerances. But for a car that was designed in the mid-90's, I think the C5 holds up pretty well. http://tinyurl.com/297pqah

@yamahr1 That is one nicely cared-for machine you have there. You're right about the two-tone interior; it really bumps the look of the interior up a few notches. Enjoy your Vette!

My face gets cramps from the grins I get everyday when I mash the gas pedal on my C5Z.

I bought a 94 Trans Am at 100k miles, and let me tell you, that thing felt twice its mileage.

The first day I bought it, I swung out the cup holder, and it broke off. The piece of plastic covering the auto tranny stick was a bit dirty, so I started cleaning it, and it poked right through. I lifted open the trunk, and found out it wouldn't stay open. The windows opened and closed - very, very slowly. The interior was leather, but it was so faded and unsupportive, I wish I had gotten cloth seats instead. And the doors were so heavy when I opened them, I was afraid of slamming them shut.

A few months later, there was an alarming smell of both gasoline and coolant filling the cabin. The engine started pinging - I thought it was my tranny acting up because it wasn't accelerating. The cat converter went out. The MAF sensor went out. The spark plugs needed to be changed (huge pain in the rear). One of my friends leaned onto the antenna, and it snapped off like a brittle twig.

My head lights wouldn't pop up anymore. Every time I used a turn signal, it wouldn't self cancel. Cruise control stopped working. Every time I took a right turn too fast, gas would flow out of the gas cap.

I could go on forever, but I won't...

I will never own a Honda. They all have shitty brakes and no torque.

Also forgot to mention. One day I was driving along, and one of my t-tops flew off. Now that was fun.

The fit and finish in my 2007 Civic Si isn't that good. Lots of rattles and road noise.

Warranty repairs:
-Valve cover gasket
-3rd gear malfunction
-check engine light

Still need repair:
-2nd gear crunchiness/grind

All this at 35k miles of normal driving, no racing.

A Corvette is what it is......They are like old Harleys...you have to love them to own them. Vettes have awesome engines inside of a poorly put together rattle trap of a body with crappy seats. There it is.....it that does not bother you then you should be happy. If you are looking for Rolls Royce like quality you should not buy anything from GM. I would never own one personally after my family had several of them over the years.....fun but they just fell apart after several years. The last few LT cars IL has had has not changed my mind one bit about GM quality....it is still below the industry average.

@lt1boy -- No offense, but sounds like you bought a really crappy car. I mean, it was broken the day you bought it. Live and learn.

kasrhp says:

02:43 PM, 04/27/10

C5z06er,
You clearly missed my point (who could have guessed with your handle;)

Why does a $20k Honda have better fit and finish than this Vette? I wasn't talking performance but rather finished quality of the vehicle. By your points, it is OK this thing is a piece of junk as long as it hauls. I'm saying it should haul a$% and have the quality craftsmanship to have the rest of the vehicle last. Is that such a bad thing? Do you want to throw more money down the drain fixing things that shouldn't need fixing? I'd rather put that money to performance mods or future tires, etc.

But I guess you could keep making excuses for GM. Its clearly getting them far. Maybe one day they can outright own their own company again.

---------------------

No, I think you don't get my point. Or you haven't realized that your point is dumb. You're saying that it is ok for a $20k Honda to be slow because it is reliable and holds up well, but an 8 year old $20k Z06 that is insanely fast sucks because it doesn't hold up as well as a Honda that has probably never been revved over 4k RPM.

My C5Z has 64,000 miles it's in great shape, and I'm the second owner (took it at 20k miles when it was 2 years old). I drive the hell out of this car. I have had no problems with it, but I take good care of it. For a car this fast and that attracts this much attention, it is extremely cheap to own. A used Boxster may cost about the same up front as a used Z06, but the Boxster's maintenance costs will undoubtedly be more.

At what point in the beginning of this article was the Z06 going to be copared to a Buick Enclave...or any other family sedan that is made for comfort or long trips? When you own a Z06 (I have an 04 Z06), your main concern is "how far can I push the gas pedal and the car without being scared to shizzle?"
My Z06 is a very fun car that literally plants itself to the road from 80 mph and up. I Luv knowing that even a brand new 2010 Shelby mustang with 540 hp is NOT quicker than my old, rattling, brute 2004 Z06.
This car should of had a long term test about how fast you trash any mustang owner.
This car is not for "Driving Miss Daisey" around to get an ice cream cone.
The funnest car I have ever owned.

c5z06er : "A used Boxster may cost about the same up front as a used Z06, but the Boxster's maintenance costs will undoubtedly be more. "

...because?

@c5z06er,

"No, I think you don't get my point. Or you haven't realized that your point is dumb. You're saying that it is ok for a $20k Honda to be slow because it is reliable and holds up well, but an 8 year old $20k Z06 that is insanely fast sucks because it doesn't hold up as well as a Honda that has probably never been revved over 4k RPM.

My C5Z has 64,000 miles it's in great shape, and I'm the second owner (took it at 20k miles when it was 2 years old). I drive the hell out of this car. I have had no problems with it, but I take good care of it. For a car this fast and that attracts this much attention, it is extremely cheap to own. A used Boxster may cost about the same up front as a used Z06, but the Boxster's maintenance costs will undoubtedly be more."

So, who was talking about a Honda's speed? I was merely talking fit and finish, just like I stated. I also did not say that the Vette sucks, but rather GM makes poorly crafted vehicles. Once again, these are general comments, and not every vehicle will be the same. I am glad you like your Vette, and it hasn't fallen apart.

Why is it so hard for you to come to the realization that barring the performance aspect of the Corvette, the materials and build quality are not up to par? Also, when you talk about the $20k price point, I am saying a brand new Honda/Toyota,Subaru etc has better quality materials, is better put together, and is more solid of a vehicle than a $70k Chevy Corvette. I am not speaking of performance, but rather the fit and finish. There are plenty of performance cars out there also that you could get for that price, with better build quality, that will dance with the Z06.

http://www.insideline.com/cadillac/cts-v/2009/comparison-test-2008-bmw-m5-vs-2009-cadillac-cts-v-vs-2009-mercedes-benz-c63.html

I am just wondering why people defend The poor build quality of the Corvette, by saying its ok because of the performance. Why not get both? For that price point you should. you can have your cake and eat it too;)

Corvette = "Cheap Speed".

Emphasis on "cheap" (monetary and figuratively) apparently.

Personally, I find the ergonomics of these things to be even more atrocious than the build quality and materials used.

For 20 grand I'd rather have a GTO (6.0 litre).

Gotta love that Chevy quality. Actually, the American culture has influenced the design of cars like these. huh? you will never hear an editor speak words regarding excessive cheap build materials, feel and build quality regarding a Honda, Toyota, BMW, Mercedes etc. save for recalls and manufacturer glitches. When will American car company execs learn from the foreign manufacturers who consistently year after year after decade make better cars. There should be no excuses only shame on America for this FACT! go ask a trustworthy mechanic this is no secret!

deadviper says:

10:47 AM, 04/28/10

c5z06er : "A used Boxster may cost about the same up front as a used Z06, but the Boxster's maintenance costs will undoubtedly be more. "

...because?

You don't think that having service done a Porsche is going to be more expensive than on a Chevy? My oil changes on my vette cost about 50 bucks. And that's for Mobil 1 full syn. Not bad. If a boxster's oil change at the Porsche dealership is that cheap, then I'm wrong on this point.

@kasrhp: Let's get this straight -- I do not think the C5 has a great interior. Obviously, I thought it was nice enough to buy one though.

I think you are forgetting that performance costs money. This car could hang with the fastest Ferrari, Lambo, and Porsche of it's time. It still beats the crap out of new performance cars from Dodge and Ford. Brand new, it only cost a hair over $50k (not $70k as you mention. The new Z06 costs $70k, but also has a better interior, and more performance, both of which COST MONEY).

Here are the comparisons: Brand new Honda/Toyota/Subaru for $20k or an 8 year old Z06. If you want a nice daily driver, get the Honda/Toyota/Subaru. I hope you're comfortable, happy, and that your car has a great air filter so you don't smell smoke off the Z06's tires that just blew you off the line.

My point is that for $20k you can have the speed of the vette or the fit and finish of a Honda. BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH! You seem to disagree because you keep wanting to remove performance from the equation, as if it has no value, and just compare fit and finish.

Today for $70k you can have an M5, CTS-V, C63 AMG, or a new C6 Z06 with 505 hp. Again, the first three cars are certainly fast, and they will be more comfortable than a vette. But they will not be even close to as fast as the the C6Z.

You're comparing apples to oranges. I have an apple because I like apples. You have an orange, you like your orange, and you don't understand why anyone would want an apple because they don't taste much like oranges.

@ ravenstyle: I think Ford heard you! They've really been working on improving their build quality over the last couple of years. They have work to do, but they're headed in the right direction.

Oh and this:

kasrhp says:

I am just wondering why people defend The poor build quality of the Corvette, by saying its ok because of the performance. Why not get both? For that price point you should. you can have your cake and eat it too;)

----------

I agree, I'd like to get both. To get both will cost you $140k for a Porsche 911 Turbo or $180k for an Audi R8. Or you could pay $70k for a new Z06 and go just as fast, or $70k for a MB sedan and be just as comfortable.

@c5z06er,

"I agree, I'd like to get both."

-Thats all I am saying. Thats what I have been saying the whole time. Do you think it costs that much more money to have a _______ (any European or Japanese) interior versus the Vette interior? I was just pointing out how GM went cheap for a long long time. Its a shame. I think you are reading into things too much.

"You're comparing apples to oranges. I have an apple because I like apples. You have an orange, you like your orange, and you don't understand why anyone would want an apple because they don't taste much like oranges."

-Its good for people to like different things. I also understand why people like the Vette. I just dont like the idea of having a bad a@# rattle machine when peeling out. But, I get it. I always understood it. Just stop giving a reason why it's OK for it to be a piece of junk with a hell of an engine.

I really don't think this car is a piece of junk. My car isn't a piece of junk, for sure. It is crude and not for the faint hearted, but it has been that way since it was new.

And I do think it costs that much more to have a German or Japanese quality interior over the vette interior. If not, then why don't those manufacturers make a car that is as nice inside as their other vehicles, but goes as fast and is priced the same as the vette?

It's a sliding scale. Once you set the price point, when you increase performance, the relative quality of the interior goes down, or vice versa. The only way for both to increase is to increase the price point.

I think the point that most of the critics of this Z06 are missing is that no one knows if this particular car is actually representative of the average Z06.

The car was bought used, it appears the previous owner did not take care of it. The editors appeared to not even do a thorough test drive before purchasing. From what I have seen the previous owner did a crappy job of taking care of the car. It might feel beat up, because it was. Has anyone thought about that. Maybe, just maybe this car has been beaten on, way beyond normal and it is not representative of a typical Z06.

That is the whole problem of the long term tests, purchasing the car from someone else with no clue as to how it was driven, maintenance, etc!!! The only people who can speak from experience are Z06 owners.

There are many reasons for a car to feel beat up. In California, we have some incredible horrible roads. If you don't drive defensively trying to avoid potholes, your suspension takes a beating. I would venture a guess that the previous owner didn't give a s--t about the car or the suspension. He may have washed it, kept the interior clean and given it oil changes, but that is not taking care of a car.

A friend of mine and I have two differnt driving styles. We both have our cars maintained per the manufacturers recommendations, and usually our cars are built by the same manufacturer. My cars last nearly twice as long as his, even though I drive at higher speeds on the highway. Why, driving style. I try to avoid potholes and hit speed bumps slowly, he doesn't and his cars start rattling and feeling old within a couple of years. My cars don't. Noone can miss all the potholes, but the point is each car only has so many body shots so to speak before they start connecting and scoring.

Unfortunately most people drive like my friend, that is why cars age quicker.

After previously posting about my C5, and reading some of these anti-GM, anti-Corvette points of view, I think the best defense is that even if the C5 was less than perfectly engineered during its mid-1990's development, the C6 is hard to fault and has been the Corvette standard-bearer for the last 5 years now. Fit and finish compares well with virtually any car at its starting price, especially for when it was introduced. Yes the seats could be better, the inside material quality somewhat higher (although they've tweaked that pretty nicely since its introduction), and it should definitely have a unique steering wheel and not share the same part with the Chevy Malibu. All of that will certainly be addressed for the C7 we'll see in 2 or 3 years. Regardless, it's a carefully made car on a pretty slow-moving assembly line (I encourage all to tour the factory in Bowling Green, KY), a world class performance machine, and the exterior body panel fit and paint quality are damn near perfect as far as I can tell, with very narrow body seams. Dimensions and weight compare very closely to the Porsche 911. And I'm not saying anything different than almost every magazine out there. So why are there still so many pig-headed people who keep spouting the same crap about GM building junk, yada yada, when the objective facts for many years now just don't bear that out? Hey, you don't like the Corvette, that's fine. But I think a lot of you are just talking sh*t, and just somehow feel better about yourselves for hating GM out of all proportion to the real facts. Drive what you like, that's cool (like I ride a BMW sport tourer and a Yamaha sportbike, not a Harley.) The Corvette will still have an illustrious 57+ year heritage including superb racing credentials, and will probably remain quite collectible for a long time to come. I fully expect there to be a 75th anniversary edition Corvette with amazing performance at a reasonable price, even if it's running on hydrogen and can also drive itself, and that will be yet another generation of Corvettes that Americans really should be proud of.

sabastian says:

"@yamahr1 That is one nicely cared-for machine you have there. You're right about the two-tone interior; it really bumps the look of the interior up a few notches. Enjoy your Vette!"

Thanks very much. A few more photos give a better look at http://tinyurl.com/2c4bdk2

Corvettes are not real common up in the Seattle area, but they do turn out with the sun every now and then. Sometimes, I just gotta take a second look, particularly at the C6. The design is really outstanding.

Now, I am one of those people who flinches over poor interiors. I wanted the Caprice Impala when I was fresh out of college, until I sat in the interior. Once-piece molded doors that flexed strangely, with exposed metal screws everywhere, and cheap fuzzy carpets. Then I wanted a Grand Prix, but pretty gross inside and no manual. The Firebird was ridiculous, like it was made for fleet duty. I was done, and purchased a '97 Maxima, because it had a great motor and a manual transmission, and the interior did not make me throw up in my hands. Out of college, buying my first car, I wanted an American car with the heritage of the GTO, but the quality was not there. Now, Ford does appear to be at that quality level, and my wife and I were convinced enough to buy a Fusion. The Corvette has steadily improved, too, so who knows?! I think I'd be proud to own the C6.

Not sure what a GT-R build quality is like, but I'd cross shop it with a c6z06 since they're within the same price range, and me thinks you'd certainly get proper fit and finish and insane speed in that. So you really CAN have both.

lysine says:

"Not sure what a GT-R build quality is like, but I'd cross shop it with a c6z06 since they're within the same price range, and me thinks you'd certainly get proper fit and finish and insane speed in that. So you really CAN have both."

I imagine it's a great car, and I like the interior. But that GT-R styling is an acquired taste at best IMO. Then wasn't there an issue of blowing up the tranny using the launch control (or was it from not using it?) I honestly don't think Nissan quality is any better than GM's, which is to say it's at least acceptable, with some room for improvement. They strike me as riding for a long time on the coattails of the debatably (and until recently) sterling reputations of Honda and Toyota.

Now Honda has taken some clear missteps like the nearly panned new Insight, the horrible styling directions of Acura (plus the Honda Crosstour), their inability to bring out a new NSX, and the finally dawning awareness that they lag in noise control and have since, like, forever. And of course Toyota's problems go without saying, except surprisingly I've seen many articles questioning the interior quality of the Camry and particularly the Venza, including misaligned panel fits! Anyway, will Nissan's Japanese halo effect be damaged along with Toyota's? Seems to me lots of those devotees are embracing Hyundai and Subaru as the new Asian religions.

Several posts have implied that the car seems "beat up" because the previous owner didn't care for it properly. Thanks to aurakr for giving one interpretation of what this means. I'd be interested to hear any other explanations of what misdeeds the previous owner may have done to cause such symptoms.

I could understand that not avoiding potholes and taking speed bumps quickly could cause damage to a tire, wheel, or even a suspension component, as these components were likely selected trading off robustness/durability for performance and lack of weight - an alloy wheel will likely bend more easily than a steel wheel. Hitting a pothole is inevitable at some point even for the most careful driver; the consequence would be to replace one of the aforementioned components should they get damaged in that incident.

However, no amount of road irregularities could possibly contribute to almost every interior panel being "hard, hollow, cheaply grained or have nasty flashing on its edges." These panels were designed and manufactured as such. As regards other perceived items that make the car seem "beat up:" creaks in doors, softness of seats, trunk lid activation, etc. Perhaps too many jolts from the road surface contributed to this via chassis flex and wear on fasteners. But these things too can be designed to be more durable, and without the weight considerations of the suspension components and wheels.

It seems based on the observations of IL, GM's design targets for durability were too low if we expect a car to last in near-new condition to approx. 100k miles. Perhaps the design was influenced by cost considerations, so they provided components that will only withstand 50k mi of typical driving in near-new condition. Perhaps it was due to some other reason. Yes, by avoiding potholes, etc., you can make things last longer. But why should you need to baby the car to that extent when there are cars (mostly Japanese imports I'd venture to guess) - even the "average car" - of the same era that are far less costly that with less careful driving whose components can last far beyond 100k mi? IL's Z06 is experiencing the result of design decisions made by GM.

"Yes, by avoiding potholes, etc., you can make things last longer. But why should you need to baby the car to that extent when there are cars (mostly Japanese imports I'd venture to guess) - even the "average car" - of the same era that are far less costly that with less careful driving whose components can last far beyond 100k mi? IL's Z06 is experiencing the result of design decisions made by GM."

Agreed... sorry aurakr, but the "avoiding potholes" excuse is bullocks. I've been inside automotive chassis and body testing labs where the cars are pummeled on rigs for the equivalent of 100,000 or more rough miles. GM may not have set its design tolerances or durability targets high enough on the C5.

"However, no amount of road irregularities could possibly contribute to almost every interior panel being "hard, hollow, cheaply grained or have nasty flashing on its edges." These panels were designed and manufactured as such. As regards other perceived items that make the car seem "beat up:" creaks in doors, softness of seats, trunk lid activation, etc."

Absolutely. Hitting too many potholes does not make the door panel flex when you put the window down or cause the interior to be cheap. This is an initial build-quality issue.

That said, some of the comments are a little ridiculous. The C5 may have a cheap interior, but it is an 8-year-old car, with a design from 1997. Though I don't think the C6 interior is very good either (the Malibu steering wheel is pathetic)... I genuinely hope GM has gotten the message and the next-gen gets the appropriate upgrades.

"kasrhp says:

Just a typical product from GM in the last 20 years. What could you expect. For those saying you cant get performance and quality for this price you are out of your mind. If a $20k Honda can make it to 45k miles without issues, this "supercar" should be able to do the same.

I wouldn't dare put this in the "supercar" category though. This can't touch any styling from anything European, Japanese, or the Ford GT. It is what it is, a car meant for driving straight with a big motor. The Corvette hasn't been the real deal in the last 15 or so years. "

kashrp - you're so wrong it's not even funny. I feel sorry for you and your ignorance, and everyone else who wasted their time trying to educate you with their replies. Enjoy your Civic.

No sissies allowed..that should be the new rule for driving the Vette.

Haha, agreed stingray454.

I also agree that hitting potholes probably doesn't affect the way the panels line up or causes the door to flex when you roll the window down.

But I think it is idiotic to say these kinds of irregularities are unique to the Corvette. Have you never been in a Honda with less than a 100k miles on it, that was a complete pile of crap? I sure have. People do stupid things to their cars and the car ends up with the "bruises". My C5Z has 60k miles on it and exhibits none of these problems. It still feels like a solid car. And I have a 1/2 mile long gravel driveway.

I recall Jay Leno saying that one thing he loves about the C5 and C6 Corvettes is that you can't break them. The engines and drivetrains are great for each other.

All I can speak from is experience. My friend has had many Toyotas and Chevys and they all squeaked way before 70,000 miles. He is just so much harder on his vehicles. My friend's cars all have squeaked before their time :(

No you can not avoid all potholes, but you can try to avoid as many as possible. Slowing down for speed bumps doesn't hurt anyone, allows components to last longer, ie less repairs.

Manufacturers test cars for millions of miles before releasing them. Guess what once people buy the cars, they find ways to break them that no engineer thought possible.

However, we still don't know if this car is representative of the average Z06. Maybe IL should invite Z06 owners to test drive this car and see if it is "representative".

Sidestepping these religious wars for a moment, and although I doubt the editors actually read much of these comments sections, I'm going to try to make some constructive suggestions. The C5 sometimes has chassis squeak and other noise problems from worn bushings, like on the anti-roll bars, and replacing them all with aftermarket silicon bushings is a smart move. Worn or old tires, particularly the run-flats, can raise road noise levels significantly, not to mention seriously reduce traction; I found that swapping out the OEM Goodyears for Michelin Pilot run-flats made a big difference, with maybe just a slight trade-off in immediacy of turn-in. Another issue I've found can be the sport seats, which put leather and vinyl up against each other in spots and can make a that sort of squeaking, well, vinyl rubbing leather noise. A little silicon or similar helps, but needs regular retreatment to keep them quiet. GM meant well, putting vinyl on the side bolsters that get rubbed getting in and out of the car after customers complained about leather wearing in that spot, but it seems to have had this unfortunate side effect. Finally, the noise from the trunk area, which would probably be helped by those new tires, can be dealt with by any number of insulation packages available from the aftermarket, and my C5 has been modified as such. Do I think GM should have used more/better insulation to start with? Sure. But one of the truly great things about the Corvette is the incredible support for parts and accessories from the aftermarket.

I'm not sure what history Edmuns' car had, but something like the flexing door panel while operating the window seems irregular. I and other people have attested that our cars don't noticeably do that. I'm also suspicious because that stuff about the door creaking when opening, hard plastics, cheaply grained, misaligned, and nasty flashing, yada, yada, sounds like a gross exaggeration based on my experience owning 2 different C5s, which I've alluded to in previous posts.

Back to the religious wars, the people who are seizing this write-up as continued fuel for their irrational hatred of GM are complete idiots. The C5 has an exceptionally stiff chassis, pioneered the use of hydroformed one-piece chassis rails, solar rejecting glass, and uses other semi-exotic materials like the balsa wood floor sandwiched insert, magnesium cross brace in the dash, and magnesium framed targa roof (which the Z06 doesn't have, but is a marvel of engineering and manufacture.) The head-up display is also way cool, as are the phosphorous gauge markings lit by ultraviolet light at night. I also think the exterior design is aging extremely well, and it seems the writer agrees.

@yamahr1

You got a point with the trannies blowing up. It was launching the car without traction control blew up trannies and voided the warranty . Which now they've just said, you can't turn traction control off... The car needs it's nannies on to go fast.

I drive an Evo X MR, and at 24k miles, has a few rattles. Mitsubishi was never known for fit and finish and has arguably the lowest reputation of all the Japanese manufacturers...lol...but man I love the seats in the MR. I have no complaints, it costs half the GT-R and the vette and less than a similarly specced 335, 135, S4.... the list goes on. Heck I priced a G37 coupe with the same stuff I have in the MR and it went to 45k in a hurry.

@lysine

Cool on the Evo X. I like those cars a lot. I know what you mean about Mitsubishi. I had a 2000 Eclipse GT V6 that needed a new tranny the first year under warranty, but overall it was a good car I think. Back in 1990 I had an Eclipse GSX that was completely trouble-free, and that Mitsubishi turbo four is one of the sweetest engines ever, IMO.

"I and other people have attested that our cars don't noticeably do that. I'm also suspicious because that stuff about the door creaking when opening, hard plastics, cheaply grained, misaligned, and nasty flashing, yada, yada, sounds like a gross exaggeration based on my experience owning 2 different C5s, which I've alluded to in previous posts."

People also have different tolerances for these things. You may see a flash line and thing nothing of it. A writer who has sat in a hundred different cars sees a flash line thinks it looks crude and out of place. I have driven in the SAME car and the SAME TIME as someone and commented on poor plastic quality, and gotten a completely different response ("I thought it was fine").

These criticisms are all very valid. It is of course up to the actual buyer to determine if they care about those things. Or if they even notice.

@bimmerjay, who said "People also have different tolerances for these things. You may see a flash line and thing nothing of it. A writer who has sat in a hundred different cars sees a flash line thinks it looks crude and out of place. I have driven in the SAME car and the SAME TIME as someone and commented on poor plastic quality, and gotten a completely different response ("I thought it was fine")."

I don't disagree with you. But I've been in cars with sloppy flash lines and cheesy plastics, and in my experience the C5 is well within the standards of its day and reasonably well finished. I'm not saying it's a great interior, just didn't deserve the bashing it got from the writer, unless for some reason their C5 is not representative.

I really agree with the last few posts as a whole.

The point that I have been trying to make is that people were dogging the C5's interior, really throughout its production and especially since the C6 came out. They kept saying that at the 40k-50k price point, the interior should be better.

My response is, "Perhaps". The thing you have to keep in mind is you have a car that, performance-wise, could hang with $150,000-$250,000 cars of the same time period. There had to be some concessions, and GM didn't want to concede any performance.