http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=104144

 

I don't know about that. Porshces all look the same, they are much more expensive, don't sound near as good, the interiors are extremely plain, the back seat is pointless, and my boss knows what happens when you pick on a corvette.

 

Didn't look like it had the Z51 option, might have been a bit closer.

 

I agree greatly the Z51 has the supercars which when warm and on the track should perform much better. Also closer gears, stronger anti sways, stiffer shocks and better brakes, and a higher ratio rear end would have made it handle and perform much greater to the testers liking.

Also this was a $89,000 carerra S not just a carerra right? A car that is $34000 more than the C6 tested. SO considering that the Z06 is even a $15000 option, i would stick to the Vettes. Essentially the test is equivalent to pinning the C6 '06 Z06 against the plain carrera. So i think that this is a little skewed.

I am not trying to be biased being on the corvette forum and waiting for my 05 to get built but you guys agree with me right?

Flamesuit ready. lets rumble.

 

I hate it when they compare apples to oranges. How can they fairly compare a Porsche that is $34,000 more in price with a non Z-51 equipped car and expect a fair fight? And then complain about the mushy performance Corvette? If the criteria was performance, of course the Porsche won. If the criteria was touring comfort and bang for the buck, then its Corvette hands down.

If they wanted a fair comparison, they should have used a Z-51 equiped car. It may still have come in 2nd, but for $34,000 difference...... Wait til the Z-06 comes out! Still cheaper!

 

Porsche just cannot win the bang for the buck category. They fall into the same category as BMW. Those that buy are looking as much for "cache" as they are performance. I'm not a badge hound. If Hyundai built a car with equal performance and quality to the C6, I would have purchased from them as well.

Love the C6!

 

Incredible that they did not order the Z51 package for a comparison with the 997 S.

TEAShea
from Nebraska

 

Or do a base to base comparison.

 

FOUL!!!!!!!!

Porsche Carrera S tested against a NON Z51. Nothing against the F55 however it was a Carrera S.

Apples to apples, don't think so!

 

"Sport Auto" a famous german car mag recently did a supertest with a Carrera S. 0-100 km/h in 4,8 sec and 0-200 km/h in 16 sec. The car had around 16000 km on and was therefore in plain condition.

An other german sport car mag testet the Z51 C6.
0-100 in 4,5 sec and 0-200 km/h in 15,8 sec.

Those two cars are pretty close when it comes to raw performance. But than again, these performance figures are great, but defenetly not awesome. For a decent amount of money you can tune a C6 into a rocket (see what Cartek did to the C6 ). Try to do that to a 997 S and you will and up as a poor man or woman

 

bull crap, let me at em.....Z51 6 speed. Let's go!

 

He's just a guy who had trouble ordering a C6 (it got a Quality Control Hold in BG), so in a fit of immaturity, he bought a Porsche and is trying to justify spending all the extra bucks. Ignore him.

 

I have an '01 twin turbo Porsche and an '05 C6 with MTI heads and cam, and I think the two cars are not even comparable. Both shine in different ways. I always hate to see these comparison tests in magazines. They are nothing more than the opinions of a small fraction of a small fraction of people who drive cars. I could go right now and find just as many articles that put the Vette first, then I could turn around and find an equal number of articles that put the Porsche first.

I guess the truth depends on which forum you are reading at the time.

 

 

*yawn*

 

Road and track tested the C6 Z51 against the Carrera S amongst others, including the Viper and the C6 had the best time. Its probably a driver's race.

 

I keep wondering why I should care about this porche thing some folks seem to have. You want to compare you do so between two like things. Only when the difference in cost is so inconsoquential to its buyers as to be a non issue do you not. A good example would be your going through the checkout line, do you buy the 50 cent piece of candy or the 80 cent piece of candy? Answer, you get what you want. Even though the cost of one is much greater than the other the cost difference is insignificant to its buyers. These two could be rightly compared. On the other hand you begin to start comparing how much something costs, one to another, when the money matters. The 911s is going to run you 35k over what a vette is. For the majority of the buyers 35k matters. Their really isnt all that many people that find that sum of money so insignificant as to be of no importance when making a buying choice. You cant say cost is no object unless it is. You must compare prices if it matters. For most people 35k matters. This is why I dont care about the 911 comparisons. They are not comparable. If I do try and compare them the only thing that stands out in my mind is what a horrible value the porche is when I can get a car that performs on an equal basis for so much less.

 

I already owned a 996 for two years. I would rather have the C6.

EVEN at the same price. I would take the C6!

 

Just another superficial analysis

 

So when are you buying your 74 Vega with a big block under the hood? Looks don't matter, and cheap performance is the only reason to buy a corvette, right?

Bottom line: Porsche 997 wins vs. stock vette. The only question is why the hell is your vette stock?