1993 Chevrolet Corvette Convertible - Shimmy, Shimmy

My on again, off again search for a fourth-generation Corvette convertible continues and my latest muse was this 1993 I found in a dealership lot on my way home from the office recently. Resplendent in 40-Anniversary badging, it has only 60,000-miles on its analog, ruby-red ticker. LT1, automatic and an asking price, at the time, of $16,500. Woof. I don't care what kind of shape this is in, that's a crazy price. I don't care for the color either but what the heck, let's go for a ride and see what the top of the rate card can buy me. 

Chevrolet made these fourth-generation, or what are referred to as "C4's", from 1984 through 1996 and I find many a fan of the "Stingray-body" or third-gen (C3) Corvettes are begrudging fans of them. I get that. Even I, given the choice and all things being equal, would choose a C3 over a C4 but things are not equal. Not even close. A C3 rides and handles like a truck built in a third-world nation compared to a C4. Through my foggy goggles, most of the design flaws of the C4, and there are many, are forgiven,  when Chevrolet made convertible C4's available starting in 1986. 

First things first, for the uninitiated, getting into and out of C4's is ridiculously hard and you either find it charming or you want no part of them after throwing your back out. These cars are impossibly low to the ground, and you have to step up and over frame rails that are absurdly high; it's like jumping up and into a garbage can. I've never been a passenger in one but on the driver's side, you have to use the steering wheel as a grip bar as you gymnastically swing yourself into the overstuffed bucket. Once you're in you feel like you're in a spaceship, but getting there is quite the struggle. It ain't for everyone. 

While material fit-and-finish on 1993 Corvette's is improved over earlier C4's. it's still, forgive my bluntness, crap. The plastic is chintzy, when you tap on it, the dash rings hollow, the sun visors feel like they're straight out of a Chevette too. Hope you're not adverse to digital dashes, keep in my this one with its mixture of digital and analog, is far superior to the junky video game set up 1984-1989 C4's had. I'd stay away from those although there are analog kits that drop right in replacing them. You'll pay through the nose for it, though. Hope you're handy!  

This one started up without a hitch and sounded marvelous. However, throttle tip-in was unimpressive,  My '77 with maybe 200-horsepower feels spritely, snappy in comparison. Probably due to its tall, 2.73:1 axle, you don't get the first impression you're behind the wheel of a 300-horsepower automobile, my '77 with god's-green-earth 3.08 gears out back feels spritely and energetic at parking lot speeds. On the road, it's a different story. Stab the gas and this takes off. It's not incredibly fast, it's more in line with many of today's cars as power has become such a, yawn, commodity. Contemporary road tests peg a '93 with the LT1 and an automatic going from zero-to-sixty in 5.6-seconds. Quite fast for the times but rather unspectacularly these days. My son's 2017 Camaro V-6 zips to sixty in 5.2 seconds, a C8 can rip to sixty in under three seconds. That's insane. 

These cars ride surprisingly well, so does my '77 for that matter. The ride wasn't flinty, jarring and harsh like it was on a 2002 Camaro Z28 I had years ago, even the 2005 Ford Mustang GT I had most recently. Amazing what an independent rear suspension can do to smooth the edges off a sports car's ride.  Trust me on that one. I think I could live with this car all day long. Maybe even take an overnighter with the wife. That would be nice. Anyway, similar to my '77, it's a different story when the roads get rough as is often the case up here on "The North Coast" (Ohio). I hit a heavily pock-marked road on my test drive and I felt the car was going in every direction possible save for forward. Shimmy, shimmy, coco-pop. And then some. 

A lot of that had to be due to the lack of a roof adding rigidity. That and this car ain't no spring chicken despite the low number on its odometer. 1993 was not thirty years ago, was it? Good grief. 

Funny, during most of my test drive when I wasn't trying to put the gas pedal through the floor boards, I I actually found the car rather...ummm, gosh, dare I say, ordinary? Made me wonder what the point of a Corvette was in the first place if it doesn't feel anymore special than say my wife's 1995 Lexus SC400. This one was impossible to get into and out of, is claustrophobia inducing with the top up, the steering is annoyingly heavy and didn't feel all that much faster in a straight line that my V-6 powered, 2009 Toyota RAV4 is. Boy, that sounds really sad. What's more, this '93 was not half the visceral, manly challenge to maneuver that my restored but still woefully crude yet entertaining '77 is. You "drive" my '77, this thing I felt I was somewhat along for the ride. 

Which makes me wonder what it is I'm looking for exactly in one of these. My wife and I already have a "sporty" convertible in our 2004 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GTS that's quite the nimble little handler,  I'll stop short of saying it's out and out entertaining to drive not that I found this '93 "gotta-have-it" awesome. Out little Mitsu drop top is comfortable enough and doesn't come with the litany of sacrifices a fourth-gen Corvette forces one make. 

My plan right now if I find a C4 convertible is to sell the Eclipse and my '77 Corvette; the C4 taking the place of both. On paper at least. My 26-year-old, semi-auto-enthusiast son would kill me as he's not a fan of any C4 and adores our '77 although he knows how primitive a ride it is. Time is right at the moment to find a good deal on a C4 drop top too as folks who are sick of theirs and want to off load them want to do so before they have to pay for winter storage. Which, up here, is literally just days away. 

P.S., this is still for sale more than a month after my test drive and they've dropped the price, incrementally, to $15,300. That's better but the closer I could get it to ten-grand the more I'd be willing to put up with funky color. 

 

1989 Chevrolet Corvette and Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z - A Tale of Two Chevy's

 

On the clear coat surface, that the 1989 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z on the left has an asking price some twenty-two-thousand dollars more than the 1989 Chevrolet Corvette on the right is a mind-bender. More like a fender-bender, actually. Both are in similarly stellar condition although, honestly, the IROC is in better shape overall. Lower mileage too, just twenty-four thousand or so on its thirty-four-year-old analog ticker compared to some forty-three thousand on the Corvette. That enough to warrant the  $33,000 asking price for the IROC compared to the relatively scant $12,000 for the Corvette? Oh, hell no. Well, not in my book anyway. 

I'd be hard pressed to find anyone, an automobile enthusiast or not, who'd find the IROC superior to the Corvette. The Corvette is more comfortable, has a better ride, handles better, accelerates faster and has a higher top speed. In general, it's tons more fun to drive. I didn't mention anything about appearances either. 

Subjectively, through my foggy goggles, any fourth-generation Corvette in convertible guise is vastly more handsome than any Camaro too, even a top-dog IROC-Z. If the Corvette wasn't a convertible, I'd say they were dead-even in styling; both double battered and deep-fried in 1980's day-glow, fastback\hatchback cheese. If the Corvette was a coupe, tip of the chin spoiler would go to the IROC-Z but not enough to out weigh the superior driving dynamics of the plastic-fantastic. 

But the proof is in the actual numbers - third generation Camaro Z28's and IROC's are worth more and, in many cases significantly more than C4 Corvettes. This IROC here doesn't even have an L98 engine; it's has the 5.0-liter, LB9, Tuned-Port-Injection engine. Again, my opinion, this is akin to sacrilege. How in the name of Madonna, Wham! and Michael Jackson is this remotely possible?  

Well, it's not unusual for cars that were less expensive when new to appreciate more than more expensive ones. For example, a 1970 Cadillac Coupe deVille convertible in good condition has an average retail value of $16,500 and a Chevelle SS in just "fair" shape is worth around $55,000. Chevelles in "concours" or pristine condition, especially if they're original and unrestored, can go for well north of a hundred-grand, you'd be hard pressed to fine a museum quality Cadillac worth $50,000. Meanwhile, the typical Chevelle SS probably went out the door when new for under five-thousand and the Cadillac for more than sixty-five-hundred. 

Meanwhile, our '89 IROC here stickered for a tad under $25,000 and the Corvette for around $40,000; that's roughly the same cost differential between the 1970 Cadillac and Chevelle. In any event, again, what in the name of leg warmers is going on here? 

Much in the same way the '70 Chevelle shreds the '70 at the 2023 box office, it's the market that drives these values regardless of what your opinion of the vehicles is. The bottom line is "Gen-X", or those born between 1965 and 1981, value third-generation Camaros more than they do fourth-gen or "C4" Corvettes. Don't take my word for it, either. According to Haggerty Insurance, Gen-X'ers make up thirty-two percent of Haggerty's customers, and they have more than half of the third generation Camaros they insure. Meanwhile, more than half of the C4's they insure belong to "Boomers" or those born between 1946 and 1964.  

Makes sense, on paper, especially if we look at this technically if not clinically. The Camaro IROC-Z was the aspirational car of Gen X they could, at least in theory, afford. And back-in-the-day. many a "kid" drove one plowing every penny they made into paying for them, the gas they inhaled and insuring them. Unless they were lucky enough to have parents who footed the bill. Never discount how powerful a part nostalgia plays in this as well. Meanwhile fourth-gen Corvettes were not only way more expensive, they were driven by older folks as well. 

In the end, while I find third-generation Camaros, especially IROC-Z', flinty, crude and cheap, not that C4's are by any means bastions of refinement, I'm fixing to get me the performance buy of a lifetime, one of these days when I trade up to a C4 convertible. For my money, it's a whole lot more car than an IROC for not much money. 

1990 Chevrolet Corvette Convertible - Not "The Gotta Have It" it Needed to Be

 

Like I mentioned in my soliloquy about a 1986 fourth generation Corvette last November, I like C4 convertibles. I like them a lot. So much so that I've put myself on a quasi-serious on-and-off search to find one. To that end, I found this 1990 last week for sale down in Akron. Just 39,000 miles on its thirty-two-year-old digital ticker and what I deduced was a more than reasonable asking price of $13,995. My wife agreed to come along for a looksee south to kick its tires. I promised a round on the links afterwards so that helped convince her. 

I was a taken back by her reaction to old red here; she was smitten. Big time. So much so that she mouthed silently to me, "I want this" as we sauntered around it.  She added that she liked this better "than our car" referring to our 1977 Corvette that we've had for ten-years now. 

I liked it too although I stop short of saying I like it better than our '77. C4's aren't everyone's cup of tea and I'm not the biggest fan of them either but there is something about the convertibles that's very "Hollywood". Throw in ones that have the optional and very expensive removable hard top, like this one has, and you've got a cross between Scarlett Johanson and Sophia Vergara. They're still no C2 or C3 convertible, but the removable or droppable roof does whittle away most of the design sins of C4's. 

Chevrolet built these fourth generation Corvettes from 1984 through 1996 incrementally improving them every two to three years or so. Convertibles came along starting in 1986. For 1990, the dashboard was redesigned, and the driver's steering wheel now had an airbag. 1990 Corvette's also benefitted from the 5.7-liter, 240-horsepower V-8 engine, code-named "L98", that replaced the dubious "Cross Fire Injection" engine of 1982-1985 infamy. And the L98, while less powerful than the "LT1" engine sold in Corvettes from 1992-1996, was less problematic too. 

Somewhat ironic then that what made our test drive less than earth moving was the L98 had a very noticeable misfire. So much so that it muted a considerable amount of the engine's performance. I could tell the engine still had some serious poke, but it's hard to tell how much gusto the engine actually had. 

While this car wasn't nearly the disappointment that '86 last fall was, after a fairly long test drive, my takeaway was more "meh" than "I must have this thing". And the culprit for my ambivalence had more to do than a phlegmy, out of tune engine. A lot of my sentiment stems from that after my rebuilding of the front and rear suspension on our '77, it rides like new now. Sure, this car handled better, actually much, much better, but not to the point it made our '77 weak-kneed in comparison. Well, on the street at least. On a track it would be a different story but who takes their car on a track anyway? The brakes didn't grab with the tenacity that our '77's do either. They worked fine in Caprice or Impala kind of way but they didn't have the kind of herculean grab I would expect.

We thanked our salesman for his time and for him to give me call when the engine's tuned up so I can take it for another spin. Even if I found it flawless, I wasn't about to say, "shit, I'll take it"! Part of me was thankful the car was somewhat of disappointment; it not only made my getting out of the dealership easy, I also don't have to be concerned about making a decision or divorcing ourselves from our '77. 

On the way back north for a round of golf my wife said, appropriately, that with regards to taking a C4 convertible for a serious spin, "I got it out of my system". She was so right. I still want a "C4 convertible", but this pretty red head didn't make me want to rush into anything. Despite what Covid has done to the used car market, $15,000 is still $15,000 and that along with the little things here and there didn't make it the "gotta have it" it needed to be. 

1986 Chevrolet Corvette - Don't Meet Your Idols

How many times do I need to be reminded not to meet my heroes and idols? 

I was quite enamored of the "new-Corvette" when it first came out for no other reason than it was finally a Corvette that looked to be really all-new. For years prior Chevrolet touted the subtle and not so subtle changes made to the old Corvette, the star-crossed third-generation or "C3", as being substantial, world-changing and world-beating, Oh, how we longed for something all-new. Careful what you wish for.  

History the cruel judge it can be, we fast-forward the better part of four-decades and we find there's less respect for early fourth-generation or "C4" Corvette's like our burnt-orange '86 "drop-top" here than there is for "C3's". In particular the later ones like my 1977. Styling being the main culprit for certain no one would argue that a C3 of any year belongs on the same track as any C4. 

Most of the sins of the C4's styling, through my foggy goggles, were forgiven when Chevrolet came out with a convertible model in 1986. Built in partnership with the same talented folks who gave us the convertible 1982-1985 Buick Riviera and 1983-1985 Cadillac Eldorado, all the half-baked awkwardness of the fast-back was gone, replaced by a silhouette, top up or down, that's pure Hollywood. 

I found this one not far from my office. With only 43,000 on it's thirty-five year old ticker and a semi-digestible asking price of $10,500, the wife and I kicked its tires on a Saturday afternoon about a month ago. 

It's been years since I've driven a C4 and I've forgotten how hard they are to get in and out of. My '77 is certainly not as easy to get into as most SUV's or even a sedan but this thing is ridiculous. The "sill" so wide I had to take a giant stride to get over it then grab the steering wheel as I swung myself into a ball and plopped myself down into a seat that was somehow simultaneously rock hard and softly enveloping. 

My tiny wife had to do the same only her immediate reaction was different than mine. "Smells like (cigarette) smoke", she said. Sure as hell did. It was also filthy inside then again the salesman said it hadn't gone through service yet. Hmm, ok. 

The seat was too low and too far back and it wouldn't move. Then I noticed the manual was a 4+3; GM's goofy transmission that skips 2nd and 3rd gear when you're going slow to save gas. The engine has enough torque that you don't really need 2nd and 3rd when just cruising casually; when you're getting on it 2nd and 3rd are magically available to you. I've driven these before and thought nothing of them but sitting as low as I was, I felt as though I had to reach up to shift the comically long shifter. Awkward. 

Sitting as far back as I was, pushing the clutch in was a real joy. And it's heavy and long play didn't help matters. Finally I got the engine turned over and the big old L-98 didn't disappoint. It's growling manliness reminding me of the way engines used to sound. Actually, it sounded a lot like the L-48 in my '77 but...I digress. 

Then I couldn't find first gear. Or was that reverse? No, wait...isn't that fourth? I hoped and prayed I was in some forward gear when I let out the clutch and...I stalled it. Subsequent tries weren't much better until finally after maybe the sixth try, I got the thing to move.  

I tried in vain to shift out of first with about as much success as getting it in there; the sales guy must have thought I'd never driven a manual before as I herked and jerked it. It's been a long time since I'd driven a manual with as clumsy a gear box and with a clutch that might be failing too. 

I never left the dealer lot. 

I put it right back where I found it pulling through a parking space so I didn't have to attempt to find reverse. I popped open the clam-shell hood to peak at the engine and the passenger side hinge was collapsed; it took both me and the sales guy to prop it open. The wife had long given up and was sitting in our car playing Words with Friends. 

He called me nearly three weeks later after it "went through service". I thanked him for the call and told him I wasn't interested in getting another "project car" like the one I had already. Interesting how a dealership would sell such a rough car "as-is" especially with an asking price of $10,500. Did they service the transmission, fix the power seats and replace the hood-hinge? I didn't ask lest I give the impression I was still interested in it. 

Amazingly, as put-off by this car as I was, I wasn't dismayed. Well, maybe just a little as I think if I was to get one of these I'd opt for an automatic. I'm still casually looking for an L-98 powered, C4 convertible and I know if I put my mind to it I will find one. Only, again, not this one.