: When did Corvettes stop being rattle traps?



orconn
12-28-12, 02:17 PM
Judging from comments in recent threads I take it that from the first cars in the mid fifties Corvettes had a reputation for producing cars that were real "rattle traps." I know for a fact that until at least the mid 1960's that Corvettes rattled, squeaked and seemed to have a lot more noise going on than other cars of the era. Did this phenomenon continue into the eighties and nineties?

I know the the Jags I owned and certainly the Lamborghini from the 1960's that I owned were at least as free from rattles and squeaks as anything else produced during that period.

I have never personally owned a Corvette, but those that I have ridden in seemed to have a lot more going on in the noise area that just the sound of a high performance engine! What have the last few generations of Corvettes been like?

creeker
12-28-12, 03:24 PM
Around 1969 a friend of mine had a 63 vette., I remember I wasn't impressed with the fit and finish, the roof also leaked,which was a trait of these cars.

truckinman
12-28-12, 04:36 PM
I drove an 09 and it seemed fairly solid. My buddies 91 def rattled. His 97 wasn't TOO bad tho

Jesda
12-28-12, 06:21 PM
If you want to hear what it sounds like to fill a shoebox with Lego pieces and shake it violently, try an Audi Q7.

orconn
12-28-12, 06:36 PM
Really! Is the rattle from body component noise or mechaniccal engine noise? I know those enamored of German cars used to wax poetic on the cacophony of "diggety diggits" produced by the valve noise in German engines (and a lot of other metal on metal sounds coming from the engine compartment).

To be honest that is why I passed on either a BMW Bavaria or a Mercedes back in the early '70s and opted for the silky smooth Jaguar XJ6 instead.

I had thought things had changed greatly in the interim years. While its' engine was certainly noisier than a Seville or a Jag XJ, I don't remember my 2002 Mercedes being noisy, and certainly not rattling.

Jesda
12-28-12, 07:33 PM
The Q7's rattles are mostly from the interior. The V8 engine is sweet, the trans shifts promptly, the brakes are fairly aggressive, and the suspension is nice and firm without being harsh, but the whole inside of that truck sounds like a garbage sack filled with little army figurines.


I thought there might have been some of the last owner's stuff left in the back when I drove it so I pulled over and opened the hatch and found nothing. Searching through Audi forums revealed that the Q7's build quality issues were widespread.



From http://jesda.com/2012/11/24/quick-drive-2009-audi-q7-v8/


As a representative of a dealership in Missouri, I get access to car auctions and have the freedom to drive any of the 500-1400 vehicles on the lot any day of the week. I sampled several cars today including a 2012 Chrysler 300 V6, Mercedes-Benz C350 Sport, BMW X5 4.6, 1992 Cadillac Eldorado, and 2007 Lexus SC430 (recently named “Worst Car In The World” by Top Gear).

I climbed behind the wheel of a 2009 Audi Q7 V8, the worst-built modern automobile I have ever had the misfortune of driving. At 66,000 miles, the arm rests, door panels, and dashboard creaked like the shutters of a 100 year old abandoned house.

The center arm rest wobbled back and forth while providing audible feedback in the form of squeaks, groans, and rattles. Pulling the handle to shut the door produced yet another creaking noise, and leaning back or side to side in the seat produced yet another series of cheap, plasticky sounds.

The buttons on the MMI knob, radio, and climate controls felt chintzy and hollow while the Bang and Olufsen premium sound system paled in comparison to the HK Logic7 system used in most Land Rovers, Mercedes-Benzes, and BMWs. There was plenty of bass and plenty of treble yet none of it was pleasing to listen to. The motorized tweeters that rise up from the dashboard are a neat little trick, however.

Additionally, the MMI knob moves up the list of menu items when you rotate right and down the menu when you rotate left, a frustrating configuration that’s unnatural and opposite of other luxury cars that use similar interfaces. The display itself comes across as cheap and unsophisticated with large pixels and jagged text.

Rolling down the road, it rattled furiously like a sack full of Lego pieces. It was noisy enough to prompt me to ask my friend if he noticed any loose cargo in the rear. After pulling over to check, there was nothing found and the rear hatch door, once fully opened, wobbled like a table with uneven feet.

On the plus side, the 350-horsepower 4.2L V8 developed a high-pitched, racy roar at full throttle complemented by strong and responsive brakes. The third row seats are easy to fold down by pulling one strap to fold the head rest and one latch to drop the seat. Of course, the power folding third rows in the Lincoln Navigator and Infiniti QX56 are preferred.

http://jesda.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/wpid-2009_audi_q7_scottsdale_az_96639958310907377-2012-11-24-17-22.jpg

Pros: Engine, brakes, and styling.
Cons: Deplorable build quality.
Conclusion: Anyone who paid $60,000+ for a new Q7 was ripped off. Badly.

orconn
12-28-12, 09:03 PM
Jesda, do you now where that Audi Q7 was built?

EChas3
12-28-12, 11:27 PM
I have a friend with a 2003 50th Anniversary Corvette convertible. It's tight & quiet, even with MRC on Performance.

96Fleetwood
12-29-12, 09:51 AM
The C5s seem to hold up well. My friend's C5 is solid at 80k miles. The C6 Vettes are pretty quiet. Even my Father's 2007 Z06 was rattle free....but who knows what it would sound like at 80k miles.

Submariner409
12-29-12, 11:44 AM
You want Corvette mechanical noise and creaks ???? Drive a 1967 427/435 4-speed fastback for a while. Who needs a radio ???

LS1Mike
12-29-12, 01:34 PM
http://modernmusclecars.net/forums/vbgarage.php?do=getimage&id=35
This was my 91, it had some rattles but it got beat pretty hard and with the vert, I think it is to be expected.
Most C5s I have rode in feel just like my WS6, which has held up well and has no rattles.

The C6s I have rode in are pretty tight, you can tell they spent a bit more time in the design of these.

Jesda
12-29-12, 02:24 PM
Jesda, do you now where that Audi Q7 was built?

Wikipedia says Slovakia.

orconn
12-29-12, 03:42 PM
Hmm! I quess there are no Turks to put together the German cars in Slovakia!

Nothing worse than a poorly put together German car, poor assembly brings out the true nature of German "over engineering!" Rattles and squeaks are not very confidence inspiring at 140 mph on the Autobahn!

talismandave
12-29-12, 03:55 PM
http://modernmusclecars.net/forums/vbgarage.php?do=getimage&id=35
This was my 91, it had some rattles but it got beat pretty hard and with the vert, I think it is to be expected.
Most C5s I have rode in feel just like my WS6, which has held up well and has no rattles.

The C6s I have rode in are pretty tight, you can tell they spent a bit more time in the design of these.

When the picture came up and I hadn't seen your text I was sure it was going to be,"Who cares about rattles!":lol:

That model is about the only Vette I ever seriously considered. Ironically the most unloved. How did you like it and would you recommend one?

orconn
12-29-12, 04:10 PM
^^^ that model Corvette is my favorite, but guess its' styling was just too subdued for the "boy racer" set!

The only Corvette I have had any real experience with was my aunt's 1966 Stingray roadster. Great looking car, but I hated the "sitting in a bath tub" driving position and yes it rattled and squeaked and was at its' best when sitting still and viewed from a distance. This Corvette was replaced by a Mercedes 450 SL which again suffered from the "sitting in a bath tub" syndrome. It didn't rattle or squeak but had very dead steering and drove like the "bank safe" its' construction supposedly mirrored. Those seventies 450 SL's were very popular with the Beverly Hills "boulevard set," but very unimpressive to the "drivers" of the day. To drive one is to know what the term "numb" means when applied to an automobile! Even with its' rattle and squeaks, I would prefer to drive the Corvette any day! (Not to mention it was a helluva lot better looking!)

Not my aunt's '66 but close enough:

101712

LS1Mike
12-29-12, 05:08 PM
Well the car was an L98 that I bought with low miles(22,000). Picked it up in 1998. I owned it for 5 or 6 years. Was good a car, fun to drive, easy to live with and reliable. The L98 is what it is and with the 700R4 would tick off 13.90s. Brakes were nice. Handling, even by today's standards, was pretty dang good. The ride is what you would expect from a C4 a bit rough but enjoyable.

I purchased a set of true GM C4 ZR1 rims from a wrecked ZR1. Three years into it, the car got a 383 stroker, cam, headers, and large tube runner intake. Made a HUGE difference. Car ran low to mid 12's after that and was still an easy daily driver. It would easily run 11's but I kept the stock gears and street rubber. Only got rid of it when the wife got pregnant. That is when I picked up the WS6. While I owned the Vette I also always had a Z28 (2 LT1 cars and 2 LS1 cars) and while the Camaros were always faster and even though drive trains are similar and build qualtiy between C4, C5 and F-bodies is similar, an F-body will never be a Corvette. I do miss it.

http://imageshack.us/a/img339/5404/vette1w.jpg

The Stroker motor
http://imageshack.us/a/img339/3263/stroker.jpg

Koooop
12-29-12, 05:37 PM
I can't hear the crappy standard radio in my 69 at speeds over 40MPH. It rattles, handles like shit but it looks so damn cool!

talismandave
12-30-12, 03:21 AM
Thanks for the info Mike. That is a really beautiful car you had. I love the color. So nine to see one that isn't red or white or worse silver. I don't know why but I see a lot of them in silver? Not a color I would normally associate with a Corvette. I really like the design on those. It seems more honest and less pretentious than some of the newer designs.


I can't hear the crappy standard radio in my 69 at speeds over 40MPH. It rattles, handles like shit but it looks so damn cool!

:lol:I love it! I also understand the sentiment. Have felt the same about other cars for various reasons. One that comes to mind is the MG TC, never owned one, got a lot of drive time in a friend's TD, Still want one in spite of knowing how they ride/drive!

orconn
12-30-12, 02:04 PM
^^^ Another one the falls in that category is an Austin-Healey. One of the great sports car styling designs, very uncomfortable to drive (steering wheel against your chest) and never missed an opportunity to shake rattle and role!

talismandave
12-30-12, 11:17 PM
The things we do for love!:helpless:

Aron9000
12-31-12, 02:46 AM
GM really fixed the squeak/rattle thing with the C5 in 1997. I've driven a 1995 Vette, LT1/automatic. It looked cool, as I love the C4 shape and interior design. Compared to the 1999 Z28 Camaro I had at the time, the Camaro was the better car IMO. WAY WAY WAY faster with the LS1 in it, the interior felt screwed together better(even if the dash design was a bit boring in comparison and the seats weren't as nice), and the main thing is that C4 Vette was a damn rattle trap, even with 40k miles on it. That Camaro didn't squeak/rattle with 100k on it.

truckinman
12-31-12, 11:40 AM
GM really fixed the squeak/rattle thing with the C5 in 1997. I've driven a 1995 Vette, LT1/automatic. It looked cool, as I love the C4 shape and interior design. Compared to the 1999 Z28 Camaro I had at the time, the Camaro was the better car IMO. WAY WAY WAY faster with the LS1 in it, the interior felt screwed together better(even if the dash design was a bit boring in comparison and the seats weren't as nice), and the main thing is that C4 Vette was a damn rattle trap, even with 40k miles on it. That Camaro didn't squeak/rattle with 100k on it.

I thought in 1995 the C4 had the LT4 with 330 hp? or was that just certain ones that were outfitted that way? I know in 96, the GS corvette had the LT4, as well as the 96 silver collectors edition models, but I thought I saw that they started putting the LT4 in them in 95. Could be wrong but just curious.

02603sec
12-31-12, 01:12 PM
My nassau blue 98 is totally stock ex the z06 wheels. 51k. It only has a little noise in the heat located in the targa top dvr side latch. The run flats are horrible but its both art and power.

LS1Mike
12-31-12, 02:25 PM
I thought in 1995 the C4 had the LT4 with 330 hp? or was that just certain ones that were outfitted that way? I know in 96, the GS corvette had the LT4, as well as the 96 silver collectors edition models, but I thought I saw that they started putting the LT4 in them in 95. Could be wrong but just curious.
No automatics had the LT4, and most cars were LT1 cars. LT4 cars are few and far between. Some C4's had them and a few select F-bodies.
As I am an F-body and Y-body guy I will give you the numbers.
6,359 C4 1996 Corvettes had the LT4, they were all 6 speed cars.
100 1997 Camaros had the LT4
29 Firebirds (spoken Firehawk) had the LT4
None of these cars were faster than the standard run of the mill LS1 cars that replaced them.
I had a 96 LT1 6 speed F car that I upgraded with some of the LT4 parts. Heads, Intake, Cam. I did not do any of the bottom end stuff as it did not seem to make much difference on the Dyno.

It would run consistent 13.2X at 107.xx mph. My fist trip down the strip in my paper tagged 151 miles 98 LS1 produced a 13.29 at 108.02 mph.

The Corvette went LS1 in 1997, the F-body in 1998.

The LT1/LT4 are good motors, but have a weird OPTI-Spark distributor, the water pump is ran off the cam, no belt and the they are reverse cool engines, that is to say the heads get cooled before the block. I do not miss them from a maintenance standpoint.

truckinman
12-31-12, 05:45 PM
No automatics had the LT4, and most cars were LT1 cars. LT4 cars are few and far between. Some C4's had them and a few select F-bodies.
As I am an F-body and Y-body guy I will give you the numbers.
6,359 C4 1996 Corvettes had the LT4, they were all 6 speed cars.
100 1997 Camaros had the LT4
29 Firebirds (spoken Firehawk) had the LT4
None of these cars were faster than the standard run of the mill LS1 cars that replaced them.
I had a 96 LT1 6 speed F car that I upgraded with some of the LT4 parts. Heads, Intake, Cam. I did not do any of the bottom end stuff as it did not seem to make much difference on the Dyno.

It would run consistent 13.2X at 107.xx mph. My fist trip down the strip in my paper tagged 151 miles 98 LS1 produced a 13.29 at 108.02 mph.

The Corvette went LS1 in 1997, the F-body in 1998.

The LT1/LT4 are good motors, but have a weird OPTI-Spark distributor, the water pump is ran off the cam, no belt and the they are reverse cool engines, that is to say the heads get cooled before the block. I do not miss them from a maintenance standpoint.

I gotcha mike! Yea I was sorta confused bout the lt4. I knew when both the f body and corvette went to the ls1 tho.

I love how everybody has a specific make or model of car that they can give any info asked of them. Lol. Mines jeeps. Still learning all I can bout the vettes and F-bodies tho. Lol.