Corvette Stingray Redesign

For its 60th anniversary, Chevrolet has redesigned the Corvette for 2014. It looks surprisingly like a Corvette.


For its 60th anniversary, Chevrolet has redesigned the Corvette for 2014. It looks surprisingly like a Corvette.

LAT (“GM unveils 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray“):

General Motors Co. on Sunday unleashed the 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, the seventh generation of the classic American sports car and the first new version since 2005.

The Stingray boasts an estimated 450 horsepower and 450 pound-feet of torque, making it the most powerful standard Corvette in history, GM said. The highly anticipated unveiling came on the eve of the North American International Auto Show in Detroit during a special preview at the city’s Russell Industrial Center.

“For 60 years, the Corvette has represented the state of the art in performance cars,” said Mark Reuss, GM North American president, as he stood on stage next to a fire-alarm red Stingray, its tarp just pulled off. “Since 1953, through the good times and the bad times for this company, there was always Corvette, demonstrating what it means to win — to be the best.”

The Stingray, a storied name first used in 1963, represents an important launch for General Motors as it tries to rebound from bankruptcy and shore up declining and historically low U.S. market share. The company will also use the Detroit auto show to formally debut its new Silverado and GMC trucks and its Cadillac ELR — a plug-in hybrid based on the Chevy Volt that’s aimed at the California market.

USAT (“Corvette celebrates 60th with stunning makeover“):

The Chevrolet Corvette is 60 years old this week, and that’s a miracle. Many miracles, in fact.

The iconic American sports car has survived a troubled birth, quality problems and development delays. it has overcome threats from recessions and regulations. And it has outlasted waffling by Chevy parent General Motors over whether such a car should exist at all.

It appears, through all that, to have become younger than ever.

After a few VIP sneak peeks in the past weeks, Chevy unveiled the 2014 Corvette Sunday night​ at a reception here for an estimated 2,000 reporters, editors, Corvette buffs and auto insiders. In a melee almost extinct from modern auto unveilings, the car was greeted with fierce applause and shouts of approval and, once executives were done talking, a rush to get near the car onstage.

The new car is a radical, high-tech overhaul of an already exotic machine, and makes its offical debut Monday at the first media-preview day for the Detroit’s North American International Auto Show.

The redesigned sports car is the seventh-generation Corvette, the so-called C7, and Chevy is reviving, for the base model, the Stingray name first used on a 1959 race car, then on the radically redone 1963 Corvette.

More than an exotic indulgence by an automaker rescued from ruin by U.S. taxpayers, Corvette is an international symbol of GM’s status as a top-tier automaker — the kind of credibility that GM needs as it continues to rebound from its 2009 bankruptcy reorganization.

The Corvette has gone from a modestly priced sporty car to an expensive full-fledged sports car over the years. But every generation is instantly recognizable as part of the line. The only analogue that’s stayed more true to its original design is the Porshe 911, which has gone through modest cosmetic changes since its 1963 debut.

FILED UNDER: Science & Technology, , , , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.


  1. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    At least “corvette” and “stingray” have ocean-themed names. I still laugh at the “Mustang Cobra.” Only in cars do horses and snakes get along so well…

  2. Franklin says:

    It’s really not that expensive if you compare it to the 911. It typically costs a good 40% less for similar numbers on paper, although magazine editors would take points off for overall driving feel and some other quality issues. As many complaints as one might have about GM regarding their strategies, ho-hum cars and trucks, and bailout, the Corvette is not one of them.

    The new car looks decent, it’s been a steady improvement since two or three generations ago when the Corvette was butt-ugly (literally, the butt of the car was really damn ugly). Thumb’s up here.

  3. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    I was never a fan of the “coke-bottle” generation (1968-1982). I’m glad they went to the 63-67 years for inspiration.

    Now if they’ll just offer a split-window option…

  4. C. Clavin says:

    “…The Corvette has gone from a modestly priced sporty car to an expensive full-fledged sports car over the years…”

    Relatively speaking…for what it is…it’s inexpensive.

  5. James Joyner says:

    @Franklin: @C. Clavin: It’s more expensive than the Nissan 370Z, which is probably much closer as a driving machine than the 911.

  6. Franklin says:

    But then I believe you’re biased on that front, are you not?

  7. john personna says:

    The base 2013 Corvette is $50K, which really just puts it a bit above a Suburban. I wouldn’t be surprised if that was true in 1967 as well.

    The ZR1 is a bargain for a car that extreme, and will probably turn in better track times than any Porsche costing same or less.

  8. James Joyner says:

    @Franklin: I had a 350Z Roadster, which I traded in for a BMW 328i convertible after my wife died. A 2-seater is pretty worthless with two small kids and only one driver.

    The Corvette is a more powerful car than the Z, but it’s much more expensive. And it’s still not a true sports car in the sense that the 911 is.

  9. john personna says:

    @James Joyner:

    What’s a sports car anymore? When it is all about who can break 200 mph on a closed airport, then yeah, the ZR1 runs with them. That’s the new “Top Gear” definition.

    When it is about running a car with “adequate power” through the gears, and dicing corners, none of the above qualify. My last sports car, a Honda S2000 with only 240 hp, but a 9000 rpm red-line, qualified .. in my biased opinion.

  10. Tony W says:

    Beautiful car, unfortunately, it is still made by Chevrolet….

  11. john personna says:

    BTW, it strikes me that the Scion FR-S is a sports car, in the old sense, for small money.

  12. C. Clavin says:

    Wow…no wonder you support a political party that you don’t agree with.
    The ‘vette is closer to an Audi R8 than a Datsun at about half the cost.
    The Z is in the same class as a Camaro…only vastly underpowered…handles about as badly too. Holy snap-oversteer Batman.
    If you need to compare it to a Datsun…try the GT-R.
    And before you get all uppity…I had an ’83 280ZX 2+2 with T-Tops and 265,000 miles on it…before I lost it in the divorce. Still maintain it and drive it.

  13. Franklin says:

    @john personna: I have one. She’s nice. And I can still fit two kids in the back (but I don’t think that will be true when they’re bigger).

  14. Liberal Capitalist says:

    As an owner of an’89 convertible vette, I frown on this soccer mom’s version of a “sport’s car”.

    If you want to make an American sports car, make it brutal, Spartan and powerful.

    If you want it to sell in other parts of the world, make it handle in turns.

    Sadly, my Fiat Bertone X-19 could out-handle any Corvette in a curve.

    Man, I miss that orange targa-top go-cart.

  15. michael reynolds says:

    My kids are teenagers. My son is six feet tall and is not fitting into that tiny bookshelf they call a back seat. So I’m not allowed to drive a fun car.

    Just one more thing they forget to warn you about when you have kids: you will seat four comfortably, five in a pinch. Same way as when you’re married you don’t get to have a trophy wife on the side. No heads-up on that, either. I’m just saying, there should be full disclosure on the whole married-with-kids thing.

  16. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @michael reynolds:

    I’m just saying, there should be full disclosure on the whole married-with-kids thing.

    We’d just give up the “married” part then.

  17. Franklin says:

    @Liberal Capitalist: To be fair, your Fiat at 2000 pounds could probably out-handle just about ANY modern street car in a curve purely due to the mass. It sounds awesome, although I’m not sure I would want to be in an accident with it.

  18. Tyrell says:

    @Tony W: I have always wanted to just drive a Mercury Cyclone powered by the Ford Boss 429 600 horsepower engine. Price is now way too high for me.

  19. Bennett says:

    The truest modern “sports car” is still the Mazda Miata. Light, revs good, 2 seats, great handling, cheap. Lots of amateur racing leagues to join.

  20. C. Clavin says:

    “…To be fair, your Fiat at 2000 pounds could probably out-handle just about ANY modern street car in a curve purely due to the mass…”

    Mass…and low Center of Gravity.
    Of course with that era of Fiat you had to worry about it falling apart mid-curve.

  21. Lib Cap says:

    @C. Clavin

    Yep… Mass, low center of gravity, and a center mounted engine, sitting right behind you…

    I used to freak the unknowing out by opening the hood… then opening the trunk… NO ENGINE !!!

    Hmmm… maybe I should go pick this one up:



    (ps: more stuff falls off my ’89 vette… Nothing like a sports car built by a committee, run by accountants. Still, the top down is good fun.)

  22. anjin-san says:

    I’ll let you know after I’ve been out on the track in one.

  23. anjin-san says:

    a true sports car in the sense that the 911 is

    I think the Cayman is actually more a pure sports car than the 911 now.

  24. grumpy realist says:

    I had a boyfriend who described the 350Z as a “poor man’s Porsche.” Would buy one if there was any room in the trunk.

    Having a car that has more horsepower than your standard beginner’s jet has always seemed to me a waste of money. Where do you get to use it?