We're all-in for Seeing the USA in your Chevrolet, in our case, a Corvette that is. We've toured thru 32 of the lower 48 in our 1980 L48 4speed-man. It is not as old as this '62, but it has been a truly reliable USA Cruiser. Oh, the trailer.  We had a '73 before the '80 which we traveled in.  My wife asked if the '80 would have more luggage room.  Honey, I told her, I've got you more space than you can use [not].  From 1977 thru 1981, Corvette had an RPO-ZN1 Trailer Package. We purchased a motorcycle luggage trailer, with 25 cu ft, hooked it up and off we went.  The trailers license plate....TRUNK!   ... View more

A Front Trunk, referring to the C8s front storage space. ... View more

As the old Corvette adage goes......never purchase the first year of a new Generation! ... View more

Sent my wife the Web link to Sam's Smithology. Can't wait for her comment regards... "You place your jewels on a bench and admire them." Just sayin'.   ... View more

A note of appreciation is expressed to Jack for an excellent article.   Jack, Don Sherman, and others in other Corvette publications, have contributed to an understanding  of all the aspects of the C8; LT2 engine, DCT, aluminum frame, etc.  They have provided significant insight into the engineering, development, and performance achievement of the C8. I believe there is more to the equation for the C8s great acceleration times than just more hp/torque, a rear weight bias providing better traction, and, therefore, less torque management.  Specifically, it has much to do with the C8s ridiculously high numerical, low gear, base-4.89 and Z51-5.17 final drive ratios. Comparing the C8 to my C6 2013 man-trans Grand Sport, the performance of which I am familiar with, the C6 GS 0-to-60 time is right around 3.8.  That is attained with a lower numerical, higher gear, 3.42 final drive ratio.  The power-to-weight ratio of my GS is around 7.7, the C8 is around 7.2.  Those numbers are not that disparate as to afford the C8 a one second+/- faster time.  Albeit, a 3.42 vs a 4.89 or a 5.17 final drive ratio is. I would venture to say if the C8 were equipped with a "more conventional" 3.42 final drive, the times would be closer to my GS 3.8 than its 3.0 - 2.9, probably around 3.5, give or take.  Still fast, but not what Corvette Team was gearing for [pun intended]. We all know one of the goals of Corvette Team was a 3, or more zealous, sub-3, 0-to-60 time.  That could not have been accomplished with a curb weight of around 3535LBS, 490/495HP, with a "more conventional" final drive ratio.  That dog wouldn’t hunt.  To be sure, Tadge and company computed, calculated and did simulations to figure out exactly just what ratios would be needed in order to achieve the C8 planned goal. At my age, 73, I recall when 4.10s and 4.56s were the final drive ratios of choice for drag racing.  Holy kryptonite, a 4.89 and 5.17 are radical in comparison.  Heck, given an abundantly high numerical, low gear, final drive ratio, I could get my Suburban to run a 3!  Just sayin'. Mike Waal Chestertown, MD retired tire guy & rubber guy, 40 years in the tire industry, 1/3 of those with Michelin ... View more

Going straight down the road is not Caster related issue, Bill.   Just a suggestion, if you haven't already and since you've tried everything else regards front end, check the squareness of your chassis, wheel base, track, and cross-wise [X] lf-rr, rf-lr. Also, if using leaf springs on rear, just another suggestion, make sure shackles are good and no leafs are broken, and the arc and spring-rate are equal side-to-side. I had a broken leaf in a rear spring once.  Every time I accelerated, even a little bit, shifting weight rear wards, the rear axle would skew, causing the car to wander left and right.   ... View more

Tires, and tire wear, are interesting subjects.  And at times misunderstood. Equana is correct on all points!  There is a lot of mis-information in the videos, but that wasn't Kyle's fault, and I didn't want to tear apart the article. If a vehicle is exhibiting tire irregular wear, bring the vehicle to a "reputable" alignment shop.  Have them align the vehicle based on two factors; how you drive, how the tires are currently wearing, even if the final numbers don't agree with, and are outside the factory numbers +/- range. Albeit, with high performance, fast wearing tires, it is some times hard to tell whether certain wear characteristics are toe or camber related. So tire inspection is very, very important. The "Set the Toe and Go" no longer works, and that kind of shop should be avoided. As a general statement, toe and camber are wear angles. Caster is for stability and self-centering. Toe-Out-On-Turns is built into the front suspension geometry via the Ackerman System, and is not adjustable. And, b-t-w, you can change the caster of a solid king-pin axle, it requires shimming the axle at it's attachment points with special wedges.  It is done all the time with big trucks, typically Class 6, 7, and 8. ... View more

Great article on alignment.  Most people never liked geometry in HS, some never 'got it'. But alignment, front and rear, is all about geometric angles, whether measured in degrees or fractions of an inch. I would disagree with the statement "Race cars ..... may use zero or even mildly negative camber because those angles keep more of the tire in contact with the road during a corner."  The amount of camber angle in race cars is very aggressive, not mild. Using my 2013 Corvette Grand Sport as an example, for street use I have it set at -0.5° negative camber.  That is all it needs to achieve a very good balance of handling AND tire wear.  From the factory, the camber is set at about -1.0° negative camber; which is too much for normal street use, and will result in accelerated inside edge tread wear, especially the rear tires.  Corvette Team sets it that way figuring us Grand Sport, Z06 and ZR1 owners will drive aggressively.  Not all of us do, however.  I don't, I just like the GS wide body.  My OE Gdyr rear tires wore out in 12,000 miles with 2/32 inside tread depth, 6-7/32 outside tread depth remaining.  The effect of camber, whether negative or positive, on those 12 inch wide tires at the outer edges is significant.  If I were to 'track' my GS all the time, camber would be set to about -1.5°, maybe -2.0° negative camber, depending on the track.  That is not mild.  As a matter of fact, Corvette Racing in the IMSA Series, and Corvette teams in the Trans Am Series, most chassis are set to about -2.0° negative camber. A lot of times you can actually see the amount of negative camber the Nascar guys use on the right front, and positive camber on the left front...very aggressive angles.   With kind regards, Mike Waal Chestertown, MD retired tire & rubber guy, 40 years in the industry, 1/3 of those with Michelin ... View more