4-Sho

I have fully understood the point you and others have been making on this subject for years. It's just that I've found it to be extremly petty for years! The ACR is a 100% road legal vehicle. If you take it to a track, FMVSS does not apply and it's 100% legal to install the splitter and lower it to the track setting. You are arguing about the car was not street legal when it was used on a private road course at speeds that are not legal on any public road in the U.S.

Again, I understand the point you're making that the configuration the ACR was in during the record run wasn't street legal. My point is, it really didn't have to be. There were no aftermarket modifications made to the car and it could be registered in any of the 50 states.

jvp

Good.

Why not? If we're going to reach into the "non-street-legal" bag 'o cars, I have a few I could come up with. How about the Ferrari 599XX? Think the Viper would have a chance against that at the 'Ring? (answer: no.) Before you say it's not a fair comparison: our only restriction here is US street legal. The Viper isn't. The 599XX isn't. So... ?

Not with said extensions attached. As long as you acknowledge that, then we no longer need to debate this.

jas

4-Sho

Jas, try to register a 599XX and get back to us! That's the difference! You can't register that car for use on a public road, and you would very likely to run into problems with law enforcement driving it on the road. That is not the case with an ACR.

And again, yes you can register the ACR with the splitter attached! It's not technically legal, but it's not enforced! Fortunately the only people that have a problem with it are here on the Corvette Forum.

Bwright

Do yourself a big favor man, when you choose to lie, pick an easier target. My still unedited post from 2008 defending the ACR’s tires when someone questioned their use:

“The Viper ACR's tires are completely street legal. They wear faster than a Corvette's 220 treadwear tires but that was a compromise both companies made. So there was nothing at all invalid about their use. Now the splitter and ride height...”

Post 57: http://forums.corvetteforum.com/othe...post1566885106

You take bizarre to whole new level. Let me see if I follow this. D…O…D…G…E…’S aerodynamic designer in a public interview says the use of the splitter is material but the car cannot legally be delivered to a buyer with said splitter attached because it is not in fact street-legal. This fact is repeated by other magazines such as Car and Driver which can print that with no question from Dodge/SRT which informed them of said facts in the first place. Your problem is not with DODGE for establishing these facts in public commentary or even Car and Driver for repeating what Dodge said but with me for observing them? Um…OK.

Sigh, if GM offered a track-only, i.e. not street-legal, splitter I would have enough sense not to compare any time a car so equipped set to a car that was fully street-legal because I understand that there is a material difference. That’s the point. Not the existence of something that is not street-legal but the desperate attempt to compare cars that are street-legal and not. Those are two wholly different standards and no valid comparison can be made between the two.

The ZR1’s splitter is put in the trunk for safety in shipping. But it can and must be installed for delivery. For the ACR, the same is not in fact true. Legally you cannot actually deliver an ACR with the splitter attached. Again, the reason for this key difference was clearly explained by the SRT ACR’s aerodynamic engineer. Car and Driver, thus informed by DODGE, repeated his information and backed it up with the specific law that mandated this.

What SRT did was the functional equivalent of say Corvette offering a rebate, included in the glovebox. Said rebate is only good for a set of clearly not street-legal race slicks, redeemable at Tire Rack. Do you think comparing a Corvette so equipped to say the standard Gen V Viper would be valid? If so, you are one of the very few who would think so. Most people would understand that a material performance difference which is billed as not street-legal should not be compared to a vehicle that is.

No one is saying SRT cannot install track options and modify their car from stock. In fact, go all the way. Include a roll cage, use race gas, put slicks on it. Don’t stop down the slope until you get to the version they field at Lemans. The point is, if as DODGE’s own ACR engineers point out a performance modification is significant but not street-legal when so equipped then just as you would not logically compare the performance envelope of an ALMS SRT to a street car, an intelligent comparison between a fully street-legal car and one that even the car’s designers say is materially not in a street-legal configuration cannot logically be made.

4-Sho

A Dodge represative has to say the splitter is not technically legal. Why does your functional equivalent have to be GM offering a rebate for slicks? It could be apples to apples and GM ships the ZR1 with a street splitter and a track splitter in the trunk.

Running an ACR at high speed without the front splitter would likely cause a dangerous imbalance.

Edit: Is the MAIN reason you and others here have a problem with the ACR's splitter the legality of it or the performance advantage? If it's the performance advantage, do you believe it's a greater advantage than the ZR1's carbon brakes?

OnPoint

Kudos to team vette for setting a new LS record with the current ZR. It's a testament to just how good the current ZR is.

That record will get beat, tho. Between team Viper and team Corvette they will each likely bring forth machines to assault that number.

I hope they do. Fact of the matter is the rivalry b/n the two machines has improved them. Both of them.

Thumbs up to the C6 ZR. Look forward to seeing what the C7 brings, and what the SRT fellas have up there sleeves.

The longer we can keep this going the better - before we're all driving some variation of golf carts (no, strike that, before some variation of golf carts are driving us).

3LZZ06

Bingo!!!

I really hate to waste my time with writing a paragraph or two to no avail with this silly argument, with a silly person/troll...

Reading comprehension and common sense is obviously not his or her strong point.

kverges

FMVSS. FMVSS. FMVSS. FMVSS. FMVSS. FMVSS. FMVSS.

All that matters.

I actually went to read it

http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/Vehic.../TP-581-01.pdf

And had to give up. It does not seem to speak directly to splitters projecting past the front of the car and has anyone confirmed the ZR1 passes?

racerns

This argument over the ACR's splitter and ride height really stems from the fact that there is no official definition or governing body for production car lap times. Corvette has decided this to mean the car will run as it is legally delivered to the customer with factory settings (exception being driver safety equipment) while SRT has decided this will mean the car is fully equipped from the factory in a street legal configuration but can be reconfigured for the track in non street legal manner but still utilizing factory provided equipment. This means the ACR lap times are done in a non street legal configuration but it can be returned to legal configuration for driving on the street.

So the question is should "stock production car laps times" be defined as run in factory street legal configuration or just run with all delivered factory equipment? Since there is no official definition each auto manufacture can do as they please. The problem is when SRT uses quotes like this its press release:
Is that statement really true? When it ran the lap time it was not technically streel legal (US) but when driven on the street it can be configured street legal. The ZR1 on the other hand, is in full street legal and factory settings when it runs its laps.

SRT is also much more aggressive about going out and trying to get lap records. The last time Corvette was at the Ring with the ZR1, Jim Mero got exactly 2 full timed laps (not even on the same day) to run his best time. When SRT went back out to the Ring (because of the new time) they brought 2 stock ACRs, had them set up at a local race shop, and spent multiple days lapping to get their time. When people compare the lap times they don't take these type of factors into consideration. Now that the ZR1 is available with similar MPSC tires it is starting to beat some of the ACR lap times. It now has a faster time on 2 of the 3 track that both cars have been tested on. I think this is really ruffling the Viper guy's feathers.

Andi

All cars today are required to be delivered with stability control. Does that mean that, like bolting on a splitter, we are making them non street legal by turning off the stability control?

QUIKAG

Nice try, Andi, but the law requires a stability control system on new cars, but it isn't illegal to have an off switch. Otherwise, manufacturers would not be able to allow the consumer to turn it off with a button or ****.

4-Sho

I believe GM has invested far more time at the Ring producing lap times than SRT. SRT never got multiple days of testing, they only got a half day.

Big Dan 427

I have been on the C7 forum talking about this subject and have not read every post here but: The ACR is a totally street legal car, the center section of the splitter comes in the trunk with the car. I never put mine on and had the car to 160 mph on the back straight at MMC and the car could not have been more stable. Here is a photo of the nose, not the greatest but you can see how the splitter kind of stops and curves under the car in the middle.

Big Dan 427

Agreed! And don't forget if you have race credentials you can buy an ACR-X just like a Comp Coupe which I use to own! The XX has 740hp and would cost an insane amount of money if you could even get one, the ACR-X can be had for similar money to a new ZR1. Apples and oranges, and btw the ACR-X was only less than 5 seconds slower at the ring than the XX, not bad for all those less ponies.

The old C/C.

4-Sho

I also went to read it during this debate yesterday and I coulldn't find anything about splitters either.

ZR1Gerhardt

I think we are getting carried away with this legal vs. non-legal splitter discussion.

The ACR was designed to be their track car option and the GTS their grand tourer.

Yes the splitter may not be legal on the street, but it is their track car, and the splitter is perfectly fine on the track. It is best to leave off, and not really that necessary until you get to the track (remember we don't race on the streets). Not to mention, if I owned an ACR I would probably not want it on when on the street anyway as the entry to my driveway would probably rip it off anyway. Good reasons to leave it in the trunk.

The beauty of the ZR1 is that it is a combination of the GTS and ACR. You can drive it anywhere, go straight to the track, put up lap times that are in the stratosphere, and then drive straight off the track onto the highway, up your driveway and into your garage in relative comfort (assuming you are not looking at the color crayon nav unit).

I will tell you what concerns me the most about the review. Dodge spent a lot of time updating the interior. It was suppose to be extremely high end in quality and comfort. The comments made by MT really show that Dodge missed the mark. With Corvette "upgrading" its interior for the C7, I sure hope the Chevy guys don't make the same mistake. Especially for their 100K plus ZR1.

Scott

tom46818

Both are great cars! One car will always be a little faster than another one! Just depends on the driver and the day! I own a 2011 Z6 Carbon Edition, 2010 Viper ACR Vooodoo Edition and I'm purchasing a 2013 ZR1 today.I love each for different reasons! So, basically just enjoy the car or cars you have!

Racer

What the hell is that on the back? Graffiti ?

Racer

All the excuses in the world, isn't going to change what thousands or car enthusiasts have read in the last couple of weeks. New Viper got owned by old Vette.

Big Dan 427

It's a snakeskin chameleon decal, glad you like it!!