Corvettes Rule!

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
On the contrary: it's MUCH safer to be in a car that is designed to go fast than to be in one that isn't. Those cars can swerve and stop in situations that would cause other vehicles to spin or flip, and their safety cells tend to be very strong.

A good sports car like the Corvette is a comprehensively engineered machine. It's not just an average car with a big engine. It has the brakes, handling, and structural rigidity to match the horsepower.

Almost any car can crack 100 MPH these days. Keeping it under that speed is a matter of driver restraint no matter what car you're in.


It is not safe to drive above 100 mph in just about any car on public roads. The highest design limit of any highway that I know is 85 mph. Above that, no vehicle is guaranteed to remain on the ground. If you drive over a small hill at 100 mph, your car will likely lift off the ground. If the road is curved, that will cause your car to fly off the road. At that point, the design of the car in terms of performance becomes irrelevant as far as safety is concerned.


^^^^^^^^^
Of course this is the attitude I expect of most Prius drivers/owners.
They just do not, nor will they ever "get it".

 

[fdcg27]

This has what to do with this thread?
Did anyone say above that the Corvette you buy from a dealer is somehow the same as the cars that run in a silloutte racer series?
Anyway, the 911 GT3 RS costs rather more than any Corvette, and had C&D run one, the ZR1 might still have owned it.
Had Porsche thought the GT3 would have ruled, I think Porsche would have supplied a loaner.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
On the contrary: it's MUCH safer to be in a car that is designed to go fast than to be in one that isn't. Those cars can swerve and stop in situations that would cause other vehicles to spin or flip, and their safety cells tend to be very strong.

A good sports car like the Corvette is a comprehensively engineered machine. It's not just an average car with a big engine. It has the brakes, handling, and structural rigidity to match the horsepower.

Almost any car can crack 100 MPH these days. Keeping it under that speed is a matter of driver restraint no matter what car you're in.


It is not safe to drive above 100 mph in just about any car on public roads. The highest design limit of any highway that I know is 85 mph. Above that, no vehicle is guaranteed to remain on the ground. If you drive over a small hill at 100 mph, your car will likely lift off the ground. If the road is curved, that will cause your car to fly off the road. At that point, the design of the car in terms of performance becomes irrelevant as far as safety is concerned.


^^^^^^^^^
Of course this is the attitude I expect of most Prius drivers/owners.
They just do not, nor will they ever "get it".


Totally agree.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: qship1996
Originally Posted By: Barkleymut
Alright I'll be the first one to bring this up. In the original post it was mentioned that for ONLY $60K you can have a new one. Well for under $30K you can have a new American made sports car that goes 0-60 in 5 seconds flat. I love mine even if it doesn't brake, handle, or accelerate quite as well. And I get the awesome build quality that I am used to with Ford.



A Mustang is NOT a sports car, by any stretch of the imagination!!! Pony car, muscle car, secretaries car,but not a sports car like a corvette or even a Miata


Agreed. They should not be compared.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
This has what to do with this thread?
Did anyone say above that the Corvette you buy from a dealer is somehow the same as the cars that run in a silloutte racer series?
Anyway, the 911 GT3 RS costs rather more than any Corvette, and had C&D run one, the ZR1 might still have owned it.
Had Porsche thought the GT3 would have ruled, I think Porsche would have supplied a loaner.


AGREED!!

I've seen stock (except for tires) C6 Z06es show GT3s the quick way around a road course, more than once!!

 

[oliver88]

Yessiree...sure is great to see the Porsche/Corvette duel continue to this day...I remember when the 1970's 911S had a 2.4 litre engine and the Vette had a 327 or a 454 CI. Guess which one won the drag race back then...Guess which one is still probably running on the original drivetrain! Sure the Vette is an OK car given the platform they have to work with...but it ain't a Porsche. Comparing the two is apples and oranges. they are not in the same league.

 

[fdcg27]

Well, I have had neither the Porsche nor the Corvette experience, but I have known those who have.
Based upon what I have learned, while I would love to have a 911, the Corvette is a far less troublesome car to own.
Pre-galvanized 911s suffer serious structural rust if you actually use the car as a daily driver in the north (what else is a street car for?), and the earlier 911 engines aren't exactly bulletproof as delivered from Zuffenhausen. Those pesky timimg chain tensioners!
Anyway, if locating the engine behind the rear axle centerline makes for such a good platform, how come no one else builds cars like that anymore?
Even Porsche located the engines of the Boxter and the Cayman the other way around.
The 911 represents the triumph of development over architecture.
The Corvette had the layout and suspension right from 1964 on.

 

[oliver88]

Porsche has indeed had a few engineering issues but many of these would only show up in cars that weren't maintained properly. Once you get behind on upkeep it can be problematic but in general the 911 engine is almost completely bulletproff. No other car maker has as many racing victories and most of those victories were acheived with the 911. So the 911 platform certainly can't be underestimated. Porsche has always refined their cars rather than redesign. The Vette starts from a clean sheet of paper way too often...But after all the back and forth the result is "different strokes for different folks" I suppose.

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: oliver88
The Vette starts from a clean sheet of paper way too often...But after all the back and forth the result is "different strokes for different folks" I suppose.


Huh? The C2/C3 Vettes ran from 1963 through 1982, basically the same architecture for 20 years.

The C4 ran from 1984 through 1996 ---12 years

The C5/C6 has ran from 1997 through 2010 and will run more years. Basically the same architecture for 14 years so far with m ore to come.


3 clean sheets in 48 years and the clock is still running on the 3rd sheet.

 

[JohnBrowning]

Recently sure! For most of their History though they where sexy to look at but where under powered and didnot handle well etc.....Definately not a world beater for a long long time! The ZR1 was the bugest thing that happened to add fresh blood to a dying brand and model.The current models are great bargins!

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning
Recently sure! For most of their History though they where sexy to look at but where under powered and didnot handle well etc.....Definately not a world beater for a long long time! The ZR1 was the bugest thing that happened to add fresh blood to a dying brand and model.The current models are great bargins!


The ZR1 is a great car, but the real credit belongs to those who managed to develop the C5 then refine it into the C6 while working within the GM environment. The foundation for the development of the ZR1 is directly linked to the C5.

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

Anybody who thinks the Porche is a reliable car compared to Corvettes (I'm talking pre-90s here) has 1)never owned one, and 2) is living in an alternate reality. I wouldn't even begin to bore you with the problems in the engines alone. I'd be willing to bet the only 60s, 70s to the mid 80s Porches with the original unrebuilt engines are ones that are almost never driven.

The Germans have always been able to build for max performance. Maintainability is something else (BTW - I have read an interesting documentary that promotes the theory they lost WWII because of maintainability and parts supplies for their equipment - it's very believeable).

One story worth mentioning. I had an acquaintance who had a '67 Mini Cooper S living in Los Angeles. He loved to race 911s with multiples of his horsepower in the twisties, or even on the straights. He usually won. How? The Porche drivers did a poor job (something still true today with 99% of the Porche drivers you find on the street) and it was a rare 911S that was actually in tune (there you go with that maintainability issue again).

On the track with professional pit crews and professional drivers they do great. On the street, they leave a lot to be desired. Unless you can afford your own full time factory trained mechanic.

 

[SteveSRT8]

I've had a few of both, and I would agree.

I took them all road racing regularly, all were near stock.

The maintenance on a Porsche will amaze you, the costs are astronomical. Even a do it yourselfer has to pay the unreal parts prices.

Porsche is the only make you will see for sale with "low miles, new engine"!

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: oliver88
The Chevy may perform well for a year or so...see what happens after it has a few miles on it...The Porsche will drive and feel tight as new even after 10 years. And there is much more to a cars overall performance capabilities than a Car and Driver test will ever show.


As I mentioned before, my 12 year old Corvette, with 111,000 miles on it, still feels tight like a new car. That wasn't the case with Corvettes built before 1997, but with the C5 and C6 they have proven themselves to be very well put together cars that don't rattle themselves to death.