Hmmm, I can't understand why you would buy a car like a Vette and never drive with the traction control off. Are you scared? or just like the look of a nice, fast car?

 

Hmmm, the bottom line is it doesn't matter if he drives with TC on or off. His car, a stock C6, isn't traction limited and doesn't warrant concern over the setting. Especially over 35mph...

 

Back in October, I was at the track and a guy had a Gallardo. He was running mph, in the heat, that was just a bit quicker than my modified C6. He claimed to be stock. I love the C6 but it isn't exactly that fast from the factory, TC or not. I've never had the privledge to drive an exotic though.

 

TC off makes a differance from a slower roll for sure. A 35mph punch can break the tires loose, I've done it, especially in the colder weather. Doing the same with the TC on, the car isn't as fast. I noticed it right when I got the C6 that if accelerated harder with the TC off at lower speeds. perhaps at 50-60 there isn't a differance but down low it's very noticeable.

 

 

I am a newbie here, but I will be trading my '05 RX8 in on a 2007 C6 Base model.

I'm not sure how similar the TC is between an RX8 and a C6, but I can definatly tell a difference...even from 35mph rolls...when my TC is off and on. Take for example a Scion TC...which is a slow car compared to the RX8...with my TC/DSC on...either from a stop or a roll...the TC would always have a car or 2 in front of me. With it off, I was always about 2-3 cars ahead of him.

 

Learned something, thanks!

 

I respectfully say you're wong. There is a distinct difference in second gear especially with the pedal to the metal. I could see someone losing the car without the TC to inhibit the acceleration. I'm not a Tech freak, and certainly not a mechanic, but I am an experiences driver who has logged many miles in many different very fast cars. Whether it's the HP, or the Tourqe, the car is faster, and definately dangerous without the TC on.

I'm just scared,,,,what can I say? BTW, I've owned 2 Vipers and didn't have a choice.

 

I've never owned a true "exotic", but have driven a few & my gut reaction was the polar opposite of yours.

To me speed is important but not the deciding factor when purchasing a car that is basically going to be a toy. I figure I can have any car modded to the HP levels I desire and/or can afford.

 

Very interesting comments and perspectives from Steve and the other posters.

 

WOW..so much for my observation... I'd like to see the two cars from a rolling start... I wonder if there would be a difference in the results?

 

that C6 did a pretty good job against tha Gallardo from stop. i would also like to see them go from a rolling start to

 

Serendipitous posting. I've been vacillating recently between keeping my '06 C6-A6 or trading it in on a '07 Z06, or '98 Ferrari 355 (which is about the same price). Reliable american HP and Torque vs. satisfying a childhood dream. Your post seems relevant.

 

 

Live long and prosper!

 

i agree. i LOVE THE LOOK AND TECH OF THE GALLARDO, ITS HOT . that being said, the difference is, IN NO WAY worth the extra 150k+-. again, they are two totally different cars but not 150k+- different for my needs and desires. IMHO.

 

I'd love to line up my 'ole measely, antiquated pushrod c6 against some exotics

 

It looked to me like the C6 really dogged it off the line. Didn't look like the driver had good launch, was he driving a manual? One race is not definitive.

 

I honestly thought the Z06 would pull the Gallardo harder than what it did. I was more suprised by that one than the C6 race. The guy in the standard c6 did alot of spinning off the line.

 

I just sold my '98 Lambo Roadster. It was supposed to have 535 engine hp. The torque was around the same number!! It was also a much heavier car than the C6.

Two completely different cars. I had a supercharged C5 (dyno'd 504 rwhp) prior to the Lambo. The Lambo would take the C5 off the line -Lambo is all wheel drive - C5 had to be "pedaled" in order to keep from just roasting the tires. Once at a roll, the C5 would take it.

That doesn't matter though. You can't compare the two cars! Each provide a much different experience. The Corvette is much more fun to throw around and I'm not surprised that the original poster thought it was faster, because it "feels" faster.

However, the Lambo is an AWESOME car and the Italians really know how to transfer an extremely visceral feel to the driver. Take the top off and have a V-12 ROAR behind your head and you'll know right away why they call the Lambo a BULL! Open it up and the torque that is transfered to the road is amazing. The "pull" it provides across a broad rpm range is very impressive.

Having said all that, why did I sell it and buy a C6? Because TO ME (read: my OPINION) the difference between the two cars is not worth an additional $100k. (give or take).

I don't regret having experienced the ownership of my youthful "dream car" but to all of you out there that haven't and have the pleasure of owning a C6, take comfort that the car you have, while not the SAME, they are still JUST AS MUCH FUN as the exotics that cost MULTIPLE times a C6 cost.

One of the biggest things is the IMAGE. My Lambo drew a TREMENDOUS amount of attention. If you like that sort of thing, maybe it's worth $100k extra to get it. But that's not me. It made me uncomfortable and I felt like I had a bullseye on my forehead. I can have just as much fun in the C6, have an extra $100k in the bank, and have that fun much less conspiculously.

Oh, and I didn't even bring up maintenance costs on the Lambo...

Guys and gals - ENJOY YOUR VETTE!!!







Sorry the pictures are so big. I tried saving them smaller but then they looked awful. I'm sure there is a way to do it, I just don't have the time right now to figure it out!