yellerz51

GM is light years behind the competitors....

When the GTR came out it was considered highly complex car that was unreliable.. Ok fair enough.

Then you look at cars like the Audi R8.. Not as fast as a ZR1... Ok it's a tick slower.. But it's so much more than sheer numbers.

But now you have this....




IMHO
While the ZR1 may be faster in some small way the car is light years ahead in technology. I am afraid that GM will never catch up.

With launch control, real 7 speed dual clutch gear box and a 3 second 0-60 with very low 11's in the 1/4 it's actually faster on on paper in some respects. But in the real world where in the ZR1 traction is ALWAYS a problem this car would crush it, hands down. And year after year the car will be improved upon..


I am a fan of the ZR1 and own one but jeez... Every super car has a decent paddle shift transmission and AWD. GM would need to invest a small fortune to get this but I just don't see it happening. GM are you listening.. Invest in the future or be history.

SnapperDragon

First, congrats on being able to afford a zr1.

Next, GM is a volume car builder, not a boutique or limited run car builder. The philosophy is to mass produce cars first, and then upscale from there. Obviously, the upscaled cars will resemble the cars they were derived from. I don't think GM will build a lot of one-off cars (ala the Ford GT).

Next, the ante will always be upped each year by the competitors. I know what you mean about the high tech. I guess if you are into that, you should probably consider the other cars. The zr1 is what it is using the more "basic" but very well refined tech that GM has developed over the years.

All cars are engineering tradeoffs. I suppose if you prefer the tradeoffs in the Porsche you should probably try and get that car.

I personally prefer American cars, even if they are "simpler" or "cruder" as other people and magazines say.

GM also does seem slow to introduce new features sometimes. But until the new C7 comes along, each and every Corvette will just be an offshoot of the existing platform. I think that is how it works.

A lot of good tech went into the zr1 but I suppose you found one piece (the trans) that seems boring technologically speaking, I don't know why GM would invest heavy dollars in a racing trans only to have it be used in a few thousand cars. I don't see that being compatible with what they offer in th Corvette: super car performance at reasonable prices and even good gas mileage for everyday use. Tradeoffs.

I stopped worrying about other cars having more HP and performance than what I got a long time ago. That is something that will never end and if bugs you a lot you will just need to keep upgrading each time your car gets eclipsed. The car mfg'rs love you for this.

The ZR1 has the most HP of any passenger car GM has ever made, so it is at the pinnacle of what they have offered. The Zr1 shares a lot of parts with the other Vettes and that saves $$ on r&d and keeps the cost reasonable. I guess if you truly want an exotic car, you may have to look at the new ones coming out like the one you are comparing it to.

thebrander

You'll also probably notice that GM cars have been outperforming the other brands with older technology at much lower prices. It's an "arms race". The new 997 Turbo is Porsche's answer to the ZR1 (and other cars in that performance bracket). GM and other brands will strike back, but if you don't have to use the latest more expensive technology to go faster than your competition, then why do it? Why play a card that you can play years down the road once it's less expensive and you've run out of ideas using the old stuff?

I love GM's practical approach at beating the competition. Let the rich snobs show off their technology, while the Vette's and Vipers kick their *** at the track.

SnapperDragon

I love the fact the GM engines get called "dinosaur pushrod technology" but like the poster above mentioned, the "older" tech seems to be doing quite well against the competition.

In Europe, they have some kind of law which penalizes in taxes cars with engines over a certain displacement. I suppose that has a lot to do with the very complex designs they have going on to do the same thing: go fast.

Like I said before, it's all about engineering tradeoffs.

Anyway, when you drive your ZR1 you should be proud of what GM was able to produce at a reasonable cost that now gets compared to all the "exotic" super cars out there. Also, any time you are in it and are driving around....just look around you and see if you can spot anything remotely in your performance category. Chances are, you will not. Besides, other than bragging rights around your friend circle what does it matter that a newer car came out that could "beat" yours? Unless you track them and do it for $$ I don't see what it matters. You press the fun pedal and hold on.

yellerz51

I am just concerned for the future of the Corvette... It seems that they are getting leapfrogged in technology and they are literally out of cash to do anything about it.

Time to take my dinosaur on an X-mas gift run!

Kyle Lemish

Owned and driven many P car turbos.....Great cars....... but Ill keep my ZR1! I have a hard time calling the ZR1 low tech!

gt500SuprSnke

That is a nice car. I bet it would be fun to drive.

rhipsher

It's the same old problem that they have always had. To many bean counters and not enough budget wiggle room. Porsche and Ferrari have allot more wiggle room. And of course their cars are allot more expensive. I think GM did a great job with the new ZR1 considering. I wonder what kind of Porsche they would turn out under GM management and the same budget limitations. That would be really interesting to see.

zeshawn

Well, lets not compare the ZR1 to the million dollar exotic cars out there, although it can beat more than a few in terms of performance, but comparing the ZR1 to this new Porsche is spot on in terms of price at least.

It seems like AWD, dual-clutch transmissions and short gear ratios make for incredible acceleration, I really think the ZR1's 1st gear is as tall as the Porsches 2nd gear or something. Solving traction issues with ever increasing gear ratios is not fun. I did some calculations and at 7000rpms, the ZR1 would be doing 118KPH if im not mistaken (if not more) cant remember the exact figure, DAMN thats alot.

Now even if the ZR1 didnt come with a dual clutch tranny, even an auto would work for that power level, and the corvette transmissions seem to shift quite fast, especially with a little work on the transmission tuning, however AWD would always be nice.

HC Mechanic

My roommates Porsche Turbo S was just in the shop for a few weeks for some chassis creaking...and now the instrument lights go on/off when they feel like it

There are always trade off's, just don't forget who won the 24hr this yr

thebrander

Even if they do, they'll be reminded who Daddy is next year.

Guibo

A dual-clutch transmission wouldn't have to be used only in the ZR1. Audi have such transmissions in their lowest models (A3), and VW for some years now; the Mitsubishi Evo has had it for over a year. These transmissions are showing to be better for gas mileage as well. The Porsches with the PDK transmission get higher economy ratings than their manual counterparts.
GM wouldn't have to invest too heavily. Their transmissions partners have probably built similar units for other makers, and this is where GM can take advantage over Porsche and Nissan: introduce DCT's on their lower-priced, high-volume cars and they will benefit from amortization through greater production. Cars in this range generally have lower profit margins than low-volume, megabuck exotics, but VW have shown that infusing technology in lower cars can not only be profitable, but can also benefit in gaining marketshare. DCT's will also benefit GM's CAFE numbers too.

Right now, the cost/benefit factor favors the conventional autos as found in the standard Corvette. There doesn't seem to be much demand in the Z06/ZR1 which are higher performance and perceived as more driver-oriented cars. Who knows, if more people made threads like this, GM might listen. One can certainly make the case that they have been too slow to adjust to changing marketplace demands, too slow to anticipate new technologies...

1985 Corvette

I just don't get warm and fuzzy feelings over paddle shifters.

Where's the mechanical interaction? Where's the soul? You're basically pushing a button (pulling a lever, whatever) that is telling a computer to shift for you. People like Ferrari because they want a car with soul but end up getting cars that are shifted by computers. A gated shifter and a clutch pedal, now THAT was soul, not pulling on a paddle and keeping your foot to the floor while electronics shift the car into a gear.

I'm old fashioned when it comes to stuff like that I guess. I'm still impressed by the new technology, I would just rather have the stick shift, personally.

Racer

I have shifted 3 speeds, 4 speeds, 5 speeds and 6 speeds for years. My current Ferrari is a 6 speed. Old school? I have old school....427 big block Camaro with a close ratio Muncie and 4:11 gears, you don't get more old school than that. My point? I cannot wait to get my 430 Ferrari with the paddle shifts. I am really looking forward to experiencing technology at its best.

MyBeaches

Please NO PADDLE SHIFTERS! They are terrible for normal driving.

Uncle Sam

Disclaimer: I have a manual trans and I enjoy the "old school" fun.

Just as a price point reference Honda is putting a dual manual/auto paddle shifter on a $15K 2010 VFR bike. A Triumph 675 bike has an available clutchless (up) shifter on a $10K bike.

My point is the cost of electronics is getting lower all the time. It would be cool to have the option to shift w/o the clutch, once rolling, on a modern street Vette.

HC Mechanic

I'm sure it's in the works, GM Engineers are actually some of the best! I have read a few articles about them in Race Engine Tech.

Our V-8 is one of the most efficient designs around, and to me the sound of it IS the best!

zeshawn

also is probably one of the very few engines that doesnt get that ugly exhaust rasp tone when you throw the cats out

but the engine itself is old school. 2 valves per cylinder pushrod.

Now look at something like the golf if im not mistaken, 5 cylinders and 5 valves per cylinder damn. I think if GM put a little effort into that can produce engines that make much much more power than what they do now, and still maintain civility. Variable camshaft designs is one.

Displacement on demand found in the trucks can also be benefited from to help the big V8s shut off cylinders and crawl around in 4, especially at high-way speeds say 60-70mph 6th gear cruises.

Bolting on a SC ona 6.2liter engine was the first, I dont know if the main purpose was to make more power, but GM could have easily bolted on that SC on an LS7 and ran about 6psi for equivalent power (but they didnt). ZR1s out of boost fuel consumption is really really good, minus the short 6th gear ratio which kills highway MPG.

Again, there are a few tech's - small ones for that matter - that can make those vehicles much better.

dsevo

I'm willing to bet most of you who say you don't want the flappy paddles have never driven a car with a true semi-manual gearbox. I'm not talking about the C6's automatic in disguise, but the real deal. I thought I would never want the F1 style trans until I gave it a chance in my 360 (and that was a crappy one comparatively). The one I really fell in love with was the Lambo Superlegerra's. Really amazing piece of equipment, and if I could have that trans in every car I own I would.

vette6799

You are so right...I had the chance to spend a few hours in an F430 with a paddle shifting F1 transmission. It was amazing. I have always had a manual transmission in my performance cars. Given the chance to have a real paddle shifter (not what GM sells currently), I would do so in a heartbeat.

Simply stated, you cannot match on either upshifts or downshifts, the speed and accuracy of a high performance sequential paddle shifting tranny.