Aerohawk

Did anyone see the new Popular Science article testing the '02 Z06, Boxter S, Toyota MR2 Spyder and Audi TT Quattro? They had the Z at 4.7 0-60 among several other ridiculous results. I'm not sure if I remember correctly, but I think they had the Z last in the slalom course and complained that the *** -end wouldn't stay put. My question is simply this: what moron was driving this thing and how do I get his job?

beggar

I'll have to check it out if I find it at a newsstand. Yeah 4.7 0-60 is quite pathetic. That's even worse than R&T's time in the 2001 Z06. What else did they say about the 2002 Z06? How did they like it?

Z06Scott

Wouldn't it be something if the 2001s turned out to be faster than the 2002s? Must be those racing rings. I guess we'll have to wait for the outcome of the next test to know for sure.

Guest

The 2002 is 13 lbs lighter than the 2001. Maybe it was a 500 lb. test driver, who just ate at the shoney's buffet, driving. My 2000 C5 coupe did 4.7 to 60(G-Tech).

Zapper

LOL

KellyZ06

Well, a lot of people didn't think it was going to test out at 3.9. Have to see other mag reports as they come in.

tjfees

Smaller, narrower cars are inherently easier to drive in the slalom since the center of gravity does not have to move as far from side to side as it will for the Z06.

In another test, Motor Trend had the same problem driving the Z06 after driving the BMW and the Porsche. The Z06 and the M3 tied for first in the slalom test.

JMHO

Aerohawk

tjfees,

You make a valid point about the cg, but I really don't think that would have an effect large enough to counter the Z06's lateral acceleration and cornering grip. They described it's performance in the slalom as "cranky," and said that best results were obtained by driving the course "conservatively." I think that a car capable of 1 g lateral acceleration really ought to fare much better in a test that measures rapid changes in direction. It just sounds to me like the driver didn't know how to drive aggresively without breaking the rear tires loose.

The article's overall impression of the car was somewhat positive, although they described it as a "love-hate" relation, complaining about various thinks including, of course, the interior. These magazine people really need to get over the vette's interior. Am I the only one who thinks the interior is just fine, and would rather they didn't add burled walnut to the dashboard and $10,000 to the price tag?

[This message has been edited by Aerohawk (edited 07-21-2001).]

tjfees

Aerohawk, you're quite right. I guess the point I was trying to make was that the driver was not able to make the transition from the smaller cars and got in over his head with the Z06. I know, you have to practice with the throttle and steering. It's a matter of timing. On SpeedVision, Motor Trend said the same thing about their breaking the rear tires loose until they got it right!

pat97formula

Jeez guys, it's POPULAR FRICKIN' SCIENCE! This is hardly an automotive enthusiast magazine. It takes a lot of practice to wring every ounce out of these cars, and apparently that driver didn't have it.

You guys take all these magazine tests so personally- it's really bizarre to watch.

Electron Pusher

Pop Science??? Who would trust anything these people say. Cute yes, but accurate, never!!! I quit reading their magazine on a regular basis in Junior High when I learned enough and canceled my subscription. Their articles can sometimes be fun to read or real frustrating to read if you know anything about the topic they are writing about. Their work is nothing to trust!!!

Aerohawk

Exactly my point gentlemen. I'm an aero engineer and they do stuff on aerospace all the time that is so far off it's just plain funny. I really don't take it personally, hell, I don't even own a corvette. Just like taking pot shots at ill-qualified people pretending to know far more than they really do.

ncvetteman

Nevermind, it was Popular Mechanices..everyone is right, Popular Science doesn't now what its doing

[This message has been edited by ncvetteman (edited 07-25-2001).]

lutey

I don't think popular science got 12.9 out of the hardtop, it was Popular Mechanics..

Aerohawk

Popular Science August 2001 "Sports Car Power UP"

http://www.popsci.com/magazine/this_month/

Dean McManis

I read that Consumer Reports recently did a comparison between the '02 Z06 and several other cars and their top choice was the Toyota Echo, tied with the Pontiac Aztek.

Cited hits against the Z06 were low towing capacity, inadequate ground clearance, and the lack of proper child safety restraints.
And of course the lack of back seats.

-Dean.