I seriously doubt that. Few people don't know what a Corvette is. Of those that don't, they at least know what a low slung sports car looks like.

I know a lot of people who don't know the differences between all the different 3 or 5 series BMWs. Car guys? Sure, they know. But the average everyday person? Trust me, an M3 is just another 3 series to them.

While the Corvette is a Chevrolet, I think it's the kind of product that trandscends the label. Go to a car show some time and see if the "average person" or even the "average teenager" hangs around the Corvettes or the M3s. At every car show I've gone to, the Corvette is one of the few cars that always has a line. One of the very few that isn't over $80k.

 

damn...your input is VERY good ein Tier...i will definitely take your opinon and experience into consideration....as for the whole "symbol" status and curb appeal thing....i truly dont care about that....dude i was born and raised in miami and thats all i saw every single day and still see it today after i left a year ago....its very boring and annoying....too fake for me honestly....so why would i consider a "symbol" status car like an M3?....simply put.....i have goals and i achieve them....it's moreso for MY personal satisfaction to know that i accomplished my goals and was able to purchase a 50k car at 24/25....than to try and impress everyone else around me....

 

I've had bad luck with Porsche and Mercedes in my last few cars so I've ordered a C6 coupe. As for service, I bet if you paid the Chevy dealer $750 for a routine service, they'd be just as charming as the Porsche dealer.

The C6's performance is in another league compared to the cars you mentioned. You've really got to drive one for yourself. Explaining it would be like trying to describe sex.

 

Topspin just said he's 50, I think you're confusing him w/ Sla07.

That said, who cares about "curb appeal." Buy the car you like not the one you think is going to impress people.

 

I think whoever made that post assumed we were comparing it to cars remotely close to its price range. I doubt this guy is cross shopping a corvette with the SL65.

 

You're right, I got them confused. And I agree 100%.

 

Really? Wow. Texas rocks. The only cars under $80K anyone lines up for here are the M3, Subaru WRX STi, and Mitsubishi EVO.

 

Yes, I'm 50 but I'll accept 24!
By the way, I test drove a bmw z4 and found it very boring. My 330i was much more entertaining. I think it had to do with expectations. When you get into a sedan and it handles in a sporty way it's very exciting. When you get into a roadster and it handles the same way, you're dissapointed.

 

I've driven the 330 and ridden in the Z4 and totally agree. Was shocked at how unsporting the Z4 was. I was hoping it was the driver. Guess not.

 

Would you consider waiting for the M-version of the Z4?

 

IMHO, a Porsche is the most overrated, overpriced car on the planet.

I had a '95 911. I bought it new. At the same time, I also had a Nissan 300ZX twin turbo. Not only was the Nissan a better built, better performance car, the Porsche was in the shop so much, I barely drove it...except back and forth to the dealership for service. Within three months, it developed more rattles than ANY Corvette I've ever owned. I kept that POS less than a year. I kept the Nissan for eight.

A good friend purchased a 1999 911 cabriolet last year. The car had 15,000 miles on it. He has since spent over $8,000 on engine and transmission issues. I drove his Porsche and he drove my new C6 vert a couple of weeks ago. His Porsche rattled worse than my '84 Z51. So much for that legendary fit and finish BS. The car handled very well, but rode poorly and seemed VERY underpowered. He drove my Vette and was blown away at the power, comfort, handling, and ride quality. He stood there looking at both cars, admitted feeling pissed for dumping so much money into his car and really getting so little satisfaction in return.

There is no question that Porsche has built some great benchmark cars, but based on my own personal experience, they have yet to impress me. I gave them a chance.....I wanted to love the 911, to "get" the Porsche experience. Never happened.

Sometimes a car has an inherent character in which the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This is what a Porsche, for all it's hype and price, should be. It's not. It's just another overpriced car. My C6 vert has found that automobile sweet spot in my heart that hasn't been touched by a car since I had my '66 Vette roadster 20 years ago. That's a hard place to reach, but this car has found its way there. No Porsche ever has.

 

I don't really love the styling of the Z4, M or not, so it's not on my radar.
If you really want a true sports car experience test the Honda S2000. That thing is really a track car that is totally raw and for me would not be a good daily driver. But it had the best stick I ever drove, snick, snick with short throws.
The Vette is far better looking and much more better all around IMHO.

 

I have an honest question because I really want to understand and I'm not that up on technical aspects of high performance cars.
I understand from many on this forum that the vette's value and most of the money put into the manufacturing of this car is in the performance area and not in the interior or "creature comforts" in spite of what many people see as recent excellent improvements in those areas.
I just read about the new Lexus LS 460 due out this spring which it is assumed will retail somewhere in the 60's. (I drive the current LS430 so I am well acqainted with this model-sporty it isn't and apples to oranges to a vette, I know). However, it will have 380 hp, 0-60 in 5.5,
a 19 speaker Mark Levinson sound system that is an upgrade on the current one that is home quality, top of line nav, latest techno advances like auto parallel parking, interior close to a Bentley in terms of wood, leather etc.
So what I really want to know and understand is, since the vette is a world class race car that I think uses an engine which, while very effective, is a rather old style push rod technology and the interior, sound system, nav etc is not where the big $ is invested, what are the tech features of the engine, transmission etc that make it world class?
Please don't misinterpret my post, I am looking for data and I know that this forum is composed of people who are experts on the vette, something I am not.

Thank you.

 

whats that?

 

One thing that is unusual and different in the Corvette is the hydroformed chassis, wherein they use water to build the structural pieces of the car. This allows them to shape and form thinner metal and more complex shapes than previously possible. It results in a chassis that is extremely light and extremely solid.

But in some ways, the car is more than the sum of its parts. Yes, the engine is based on "crude" pushrod technology. Yes, it's kind of hard to point out exactly where the engineering money went. But when you put the car on the track, it all becomes clear. Just try to go faster for less money. Try to get comparible speed and similar luxury for less money.

Now, if you want to ride around in top quality leather with woodgrain accents and the smell of rich mahagony, well, the Corvette isn't your car. You can certainly find more luxurious cars for the same price, and they'll even be pretty quick around town. But if you put them on the track with the Corvette, they'll be sucking wind. If you want that level of luxury and Corvette speed, you're going to have to step up to something much more expensive.

I bought my Corvette because it was the fastest thing I could afford. The luxury aspect was just a bonus, though I will admit that I wouldn't buy a C5 because I thought the compromises made there were quite severe. I am currently considering both an Elise purchase, and I'm having trouble because as the car sits, it should either be a lot faster, a lot cheaper, or lot more luxurious. It costs as much as my Corvette, goes slower, and the interior makes no concessions to anything other than weight. You may find that the concessions the Corvette asks (an interior better suited to a $30,000 car than a $50,000 one) are too steep for you. That's not a bad thing, it's just that the Corvette is not the right car for you. The Corvette is not for everyone, though GM does an amazing job at making it appeal to everyone.

You really need to find a test drive. All these things will become very clear then.

 

The C6 LS2 engine is an engineering marvel. The LS2 produces 400 lb/ft of torque and 400 hp from 364 cu. in. More than 1 hp per cu. in. in a naturally aspirated engine is a benchmark that few motors meet. The naturally aspirated push-rod technology is admittedly old school, but generally considered more robust and reliable than overhead cam, turbo, and/or supercharged engines. GM Engineers intentionally chose the naturally aspirated push-rod configuration when designing the LS1 (the predecessor to the LS2) from scratch to make the motor as indestructible for consumers as possible. This car can be driven very, very aggressively, what would be considered abuse to most other cars, with no ill effect. The coupe Vette weighs 3179 lbs., giving it a power to weight ratio of 7.95 lbs. per hp, which is very low. The base coupe will accellerate from 0-60 in 4.2 secs, and cover a 1/4 mi. in 12.6 secs at 114 mph per GM's official numbers, and they are close if not spot on. None of the other cars you are talking about come near those numbers.

 

[QUOTE=Indy-hp]The C6 LS2 engine is an engineering marvel. The LS2 produces 400 lb/ft of torque and 400 hp from 364 cu. in. More than 1 hp per cu. in. in a naturally aspirated engine is a benchmark that few motors meet.

The BMW M3 engine produces 333 HP from approximately 195 cu. in. (3.2 liters) which is approximately 1.7 HP/cu.in.

 

[QUOTE=GSIRM3]Naturally aspirated?

 

Yes. And the Honda S2000 gets 237hp out of a naturally aspirated 134 ci (2.2 L) engine, which is 1.76 horsepower per cubic inch. 100/L is a pretty hard target to meet. Of course, the S2000's tor

The LS2 is a great engine, and I honestly think the small block chevy is probably the greatest engine of all time, but it is no technological marvel nor is it particularly efficient. However, in it's latest iterations (LS1|LS2|LS6|LS7) it is highly refined and that deserves some recognition in its own right.

I see the SBC almost like the Porsche 911. They started with a really great idea, and rather than replacing it, they refined it over the course of 50 years. In the end, you end up with a product that is perhaps not what you'd design with a blank slate today (like pushrods) but is so refined that even its inherent flaws are overcome and the rest becomes positively transcendent.

 

Agreed. I posted a few of the AMG cars tro illustrate they all have serious low end grunt (despite being on the heavy side - they move pretty quick) .

All this talk about power/displacement made me think of the current rotary engine. Its a N/A 1.3L putting out 240 Hp...it destroys the Honda with 185Hp/Litre. They should put a turbo on that thing to increase power & torque though (like the 2nd & 3rd Gen RX-7s ). I'm getting off topic, but a 4th Gen RX-7 with a triple rotor (maybe a turbo too )would be fun to battle with today's high end sports cars.

-Matt