Notch

And I would be in full agreement with that.

arkus

I think the C7's biggest rival is the Aston Martin Vanquish.

Telepierre

Notch/Guibo or whatever split personality you decided to inherit today..

Guibo continues to spew rivers of well articulated untruths with some sprinkle of veracity here and there.

Obviously the guy is smart..so for all the times he got caught pants down with falsities and conjectures he has simply moved out and returned with more of the same and more...

The "tricky/subjective" pictures are amusing BTW...bravo!

I suppose he is of the school of BS repeated enough times...

anyway...rather than ask evidence of who kicks who's butt why don't you accept that many smart Corvette enthusiast just gave up on the guy and let him "wander" around like a drunken sailor just "to kick" him once in a while just to let him know that down deep we kind of still like him...

Cheers

Notch

I don't see it that way at all.

transce

Miata... xD

jackhall99

Well I guess you had to post something.

DaveFerrari458

They sure are the same person or twins separated at birth lol. Now he/she is being clever and agreeing with the other posts lol.

Either way they are delusional and like you said keep feeding us BS.

AORoads

did you say '' FALSIES '' ?

arkus

Telepierre

NO!! REALLY????

Good for you!

Aaron Keating

To an extent they don't matter. Not if what you're concerned about is wringing the max out on the car. If you have any kind of talent what so ever behind the wheel you're going to change how you drive to suit what you're driving. It doesn't matter if it's a Bimmer, a Porsche, a 69 Chevelle, or a Corvette. You chances are, unless you really do suck ***** aren't going to drive each of those cars the same way.

I've already posted some of my 1/4 mile times in a stock car. As far as road track times, at the local range in the short configuration I've nailed sub minute times (which ain't half bad), long configuration 2:30s, in my personal cars. There's a couple of variants between the long and shorts.

The C6 and C5s biggest down fall to me was the heavy steering and the poor side bolster support in the seats. It's the same flaw the V6 Birds and Camaros had.

No I'm not. But frankly, when it comes to what I am willing to spend the money on, I do know more than they do. The BMW though has a pretty terrible resale value once the miles pile on for a reason. All that ''precision engineering and great feeling!'' comes at a price in the drive train. Broke down, pile of junk that makes funny noises.

The C6 sold a pretty fair amount of units before the economy tanked. Not only that, but the C6 even after it's design upgrades is getting long in the tooth. The market of people that wanted one, had already hit Peak. It's not like the C6 was a non seller throughout it's entire life.

Yeah, you've been drinking that kool aid pretty hard core if you think any car with Drum brakes has better braking feel and consistency than a disc brake setup.

It's not like the Stang's interior is a frump either you know. Not only that you really really have no conception of what 26k can buy you in the aftermarket and it shows. Probably because you've been driving those crap BMWs that have nigh on zero aftermarket support beyond some incredibly basic upgrades. Not only this, but the friggin GT which is rather slow compared to a Camaro SS 1LE car is only .09 slower stock to stock that's a full on track packaged bimmer, against a track packaged GT. Not only that but the GT has flat out Sex appeal that the BMW has only wished it had, with only one car that they made in the last four decades. Do you really think for 26,000 dollars the Stang couldn't come up with better road feel, performance (at least .1 seconds better) and a blinged out interior?

Shocks? Done. Brakes? Done. Engine work? Oh my yes. Interior? done comfortably with plenty of room to spare, and that's assuming you decide to go Extra Pimp and put thin cut marble in over the plastics. Hell, the stang would whup up on the Bimmer if given a better set of rubber than what it came from the factory with, and that's pretty far below the 26k price difference between the two. Which would also improve ride quality, and feedback.

Hell for giggles, you could just buy a stock ZL1 cheaper than the Bimmer in that comparo. And unless you're completely delusional I'm pretty sure we both know which one would win. And which one rides better on highway cruising. I'll give you the hint, it's probably the one with the magnetophorical suspension and not struts.

You can talk about how that BMW is more ''refined'' all you want. But frankly, it's a load and one that smells pretty foul at that.

Not just a smooth track, but street courses as well. Literally every race 3 years running. Every Single one. In a league where half the tracks were Street Courses. So much for a "drivers car'' being superior, considering that the only answer the SCCA could come up with was Ban the car and force it into a class of it's own.

Put it this way, BMW is so lost as a manufacturer they attempted and failed miserably at re igniting the imagination of non BMW drivers everywhere. By making the Z3/Z4. They then failed at life so hard, because the conservative management at bmw didn't want it threatening the M3, and put a Gimp Power Train in the thing. It was by far the sexiest car they'd made since the M1, and they gimped it right out of the box. As a result of the car's utter crap performance it didn't sell well and the car got canned, in fairly short order. So yes, I think Performance must matter at least to the people not drinking the BMW kool aid. The Z3 and Z4 were consistently the worst performing cars in their market segment both in sales and at the track. Boxster? Slayed it. Z car? Slayed it. Even the Audi beat the tar out of it.
The Z3 had all that ''refinement and quality'' you tout so much, it had killer styling. But it was a Dog for the money involved, and the market responded appropriately. The BMW crowd didn't like it because it wasn't a Box on wheels, and the rest of us mocked it for being a Dog, or at best a Chick Car.

Lavender

I actually did.And so did my father....Hell my sister did too!

As for the part about "there being nothing incredible about 90k car being faster" Are you for real?Come on Notch..you really can't be that retarded?

As for the 458...I'll be damned if I spent that much money on something that cannot climb a hill or do a passing w/o being downshifted as **** and floored (hoping you will NOT blow the tranny to pieces) because it has absolutely no power down low.I mean NOTHING.As for the MP4-12C....do you really want to drive a GTR that actually cost as much as a 3 GTRs??!?!?

Please move back to whatever BMW/Porsche forum you came from and stay there.Don't forget to take your Notch personality with ya!

lt4obsesses

GM has clearly stated what their benchmark competition is for this car. Ferrari and McClaren were not mentioned. For someone looking to drop between a quarter million to half million on a sports car, face it, Corvette is not going to be on that radar. Without getting into reasons why, as each has their own, that is just a completely different side of the track.

The one thing that GM wants to do with this car is widen the market. One quote from the "Autoweek" vid posted in another thread, "We wanted to make sure that no matter what sports car you could afford, you would choose this Corvette Stingray." Now, the highend six figure cars ($250K+) are really more status symbols to many than "cars". So, let's forget about them. But the typical Porsche 911, Audi R8, and M3 buyer are the target here. Because these are the class of cars that one can drive everyday, and wring it out at the track once in a while.

Now, in reality, we have no idea how the C7 stacks up yet. They have to produce it first. We have a sense that the interior issues have been addressed, but we haven't actually sat in one yet, so we still don't know for sure. Now the Corvette has always been a good value in terms of performance/cost. The question however, is did GM achieve the desired result of making it a tremendous value. In other words, even if you could afford the Audi R8 or the Porsche 911 Carrera S, would you still buy the Corvette because it is simply a better car? That remains to be seen.

AirBusPilot

While I agree with some of what you say, the argument that you can dump "$26k into car "X" and make it as good or better than more expensive car "Y" mostly fails, because very few people have the means to dump that kind of cash into a car such as a mustang (yes, I know, there are hard core guys that, over time, end up wasting that kind of money on mods and a few broken engines). And you're lucky to get 10 cents on the dollar, if that, on resale.

BMW's are great cars, but so far haven't been very durable in the long haul. I've always wanted an E39 540, but after reading the horror stories I just can't afford to constantly rebuild a car. Prices are cheap, and it has great dynamics and looks, but they're just not worth it.

Props to you for racing that C4, I have owned 3 and always loved them, despite their issues.

Aaron Keating

If you're the kind of buyer though that wants bang for the buck and had the $ for either car and you picked the stang you'd certainly have the budget to swing the Stang with upgrades. I used the 26,000 difference in price tags to simply illustrate the point that the Stang has plenty of upgrade room before it even gets to the entry cost of that As Tested, BMW. More likely, to wring out a time that would have embarrassed the M3, the driver in that article would have simply down shifted instead of letting it carry third. Further embarrassment would be a simple tire upgrade (which as any of us that race, or even drive spiritedly know makes a world of difference in feel and grip level).

I think the 2011+ cars are going to have very good resale value over the years, it's the perfect blend of retrothrow back, and modern sex appeal for a car. They drive incredibly well, and their performance for the money (assuming you don't bling it out though it's still a great value if you do) is astonishing. Especially if that new rendering floating around the net is true where the stang looks like it was forced to mate with an Aston martin really is the coming re design. Modding one might not be as bad of an investment as you might think.

More than likely though they'd just pony up the cash and get a GT500 from Ford. Which is way way faster than the GT. Which has an incredible projected resale value.

But for relatively minor mods. At least one of them you'll end up doing anyway (better tires) down the road unless you totally cheap out, the Stang is going to make the Bimmer look bad.

As far as ''ride quality'' goes, the single biggest factor there just like handling characteristics, particularly at the limits come from the meats on the car, and the shock package. Both of which are fairly easily addressable. It's also worth noting they didn't use The Boss in that test which has a better performing shock package in it, and a little bit better rubber IIRC.

BMW makes a good throw it away once the miles pile on car. I won't knock their actual on the track performance, not until you factor in Price Tag anyway. For the money they're slow, and they aren't particularly durable. Like you the horror stories, from several BMW guys around here steered me away from even thinking about a BMW right along with the fugly styling, because I'm not the kind of person that trades in or sells a car off. The only time cars leave my possession is when they're on the wrecker. The cosmic irony is BMW did make a car in recent history that i looked at for more than a handful of seconds in the Z3/Z4. Then I saw it's performance capabilities, remembered it's still going to spend half it's life in the shop once I get my hands on it for more than a handful of weekends and I gave up on it again.

I do realize they are chasing two different markets (allegedly), but frankly there's a reason the Stang got that article in the first place. Because the Stang's really been taking it to pretty much everyone in production based road racing. And there's a reason for that. It really is a great car to work from.

Thanks yeah the C4 has some issues, a good host of them are work around able. (especially with as cheap as Entry into the car is right now, and the huge variety in aftermarket superior to stock parts are for this thing) the frame rails, not so much. But providing I don't end up going down while mountain biking too many more times, I think I can live with the old put one foot in, and swing in slowly entry to the car method.

Guibo

And how often do you drive like that? I'll bet it's less than .1% of the time you spend driving the car. Unless your car is a dedicated, trailered car. Bone stock, is it?
Which track is this? I originally asked for the name of this track for a good reason. I'm sure you have documented proof for this laptime, right?

But you are not the one deciding what a car is worth IN GENERAL. The market decides that. If you disagree, then you have a fundamental disagreement with the way a free market economy works.

So then the car mags aren't BSing after all.
That's the first time I've heard of overly heavy steering in any of these cars. The Camaro I drove not only suffered overly light steering but more importantly it lacked the ability to relay any information about the surface detail below.

"Magnetophorical"...is that like magnetorheological but not quite in a literal sense?
Magnetic suspension didn't give the Z06/ZR1 a better ride than competitors. The ZR1 was slagged for its ride quality not only in UK tests, but by a UK owner interviewed by a US magazine. In the C&D handling test, the M3 was rated higher for ride quality than the Z06 with magnetic dampers.
And how many ZL1s are produced each year?

So you're telling me all disc setups feel the same? I can assure you from having rented plenty of GM/Chrysler products that they most certainly are not. So will people who have driven good carbon ceramic setups (Porsche, Ferrari) and bad ones (Lambo).

Sorry, but a street circuit, where the driver has a good idea of what's around the corner thanks to dozens of laps, where corners are rarely off-camber, is really not quite like twisting, mountain roads with far more variable conditions. I think one can trust this guy to be a much more impartial commentator on C4 ride dynamics than some random forum guy obviously in love with his Corvette:
"The lower the aspect ratio of the tyre, the shallower the sidewall and the less cushioning effect it has - therefore more shock and road reaction can be transmitted through it. The most extreme example of this in OE terms was when the Chevrolet Corvette was marketed in the early 80s fitted with the low profile Goodyear Eagle tyre, dubbed the 'gator back.'
It's interesting to note that Chevrolet did in fact produce a car which surpassed even a Porsche 928 in terms of lateral G-force figures developed when cornering hard on a constant radius circle.
For me, this signalled the arrival of the American motor industry's first major attempt at making a car handle competitively with anything that the rest of the world could produce. But they went too far: too hard on the suspension - certainly for my taste - and the car was a bonecrusher. The car was far too harsh on those tyres for normal everyday road use. Similarly, you can see Mercedes-Benz 500SECs, VW GTIs and so on which have been modified by non-factory specialists, whose terribly low suspension and low aspect ratio tyres make the cars far too rigid, in my view."
--Jackie Stewart (3-time Formula One world champion), "Principles of Performance Driving"

So please show me this modified Mustang with $26k in mods that has better steering and overall handling precision than the M3. And on roads too, does it? "Blinged out interior" != high-quality, well-designed interior with all of the amenities available on the M3. Something tells me the M3 will outsell the GT500 by quite some margin. Even in the lower models (where the Mustang benefits from a much lower price), the 3-Series might still sell better. In 2009, BMW sold 92,652 coupes and cabriolets, compared to about 75k Mustangs. This will probably change when the new Mustang with IRS debuts, which begs the question: If the Mustang handled just so perfectly fine with the reliable live axle, why would Ford bother to replace it? Something tells me the 3-Series won't be moving to a live axle anytime soon. Or pushrods that the Mustang ditched long ago. And the new Mustang is said to look very much like an Aston Martin, sort of how the new Fusion already does. When it comes to influences, it seems that is mostly a one-way street across the Atlantic.

The C6's sales suffered more than most other premium sports cars.
Z3 most definitely did not have all of the high quality and refinement of any BMW. It retained the archaic semi-trailing arms that BMW had been using since the 1960s. Most people who have driven both will tell you an E36 sedan of the same time was the better handling car.
I don't have total 2012 sales, but through Q3 of 2012, the Z4 had sold more units than the Corvette. The Boxster sold 9,253 in all of 2012, which is some 3k less than the Z4 had sold through Q3. The 370Z should sell better, considering it starts at a much lower price point. But that is in the US. In Europe, the Z4 clobbers the 370Z with 7,568 units vs 1,029. The Boxster/Cayman sold 5,369. The SLK, perhaps the slowest of them all, sold 17,764 units.
Hell, considering the much higher price, the Z4 did pretty well against the 370Z in the Nissan's home market of Germany: 683 units vs 1,342. Boxster/Cayman sold a combined 584 units in Japan, where the slow-*** SLK beats the 370Z on it own home turf with 1,435 units.
Make fun of female-friendly hairdresser cars all you want, but despite what some knuckledraggers might think, women are becoming ever more powerful buyers (which sort of makes sense considering they constitute half the population).
BTW, the Euro frou-frou 911 has a higher percentage of male buyers than the mighty red-blooded hi-po Corvette, with the touchy-feely M3 not far off:
http://blog.truecar.com/2012/04/23/m...car-com-study/
Another study had the M3 over the Corvette:
"The M3, which has the highest percentage of male buyers in the first 11 months of 2011, has been called an “authentic performance car” by enthusiast magazines. Among the three sporty models with the highest percentages of male buyers, the M3 also has the largest percentage of transactions by young buyers (16 to 35 years old). According to PIN data, more than one-third (36.9%) of M3 buyers are young buyers, up from 32% a year ago."
http://www.jdpowercontent.com/global...et/2011/12/21/

GM could have made the Corvette an even stronger bang/buck proposition, by keeping the interior the same, or going to a stripped out, Gen1-4 Viper-style interior. Ask yourself why they didn't do that. Jeez, tell me why not even Viper is using that formula. Worked so wonderfully well, did it? All this talk about winged beasts destroying records on the Nordschleife, yet you can still buy brand new ACR's off of dealer's lots:
http://www.viperexchange.com/7-12-13...ition-sale.php
And only about 10% of ACR owners ordered their cars with the Nurburgring-spec "Hardcore" package. Seems that even Viper ACR buyers care about comfort after all...

Guibo

So 3 people (even if true, which remains to be seen) = "average"?

Yes, there is nothing "incredible" about the car costing 90k being faster. Why is it so incredible? Do you think those other car companies used basically an engine that will be amortized over hundreds of thousands of sedans and trucks per year into their cars? The volumes alone will tell you almost everything, if the much better interior and customer service of McLaren don't. And where did the frame, transmission, and engine of the C6 come from, if not the C5? The McLaren was built from the ground up, all new: totally new engine, new transmission, CF monotub developed and manufactured in-house, a radically different suspension system not seen on modern cars, and even the infotainment system was purpose-built for the car.
Yes, I wouldn't mind driving a car that cost as much as 3 GTRs. You could buy 3 GTRs and if you love cars beyond stat-sheet numbers, you'd still be left with a problem: You don't have an MP4-12C. You and your type seem to think that buying $20 worth of McDonald's meals gives you the same thing as a $20 burger in a nice restaurant. It most assuredly does not. But frankly, I'd rather have the 458 even if it's slower than the McLaren.

SEVETGO

No matter what Corvette does, most automotive writers will favor a foreign car, it's the Cutsie thing to do. There will allway be complaints of the interior, poor paint quality, or it can't take a curve. Meanwhile they pump this junk abut the superiority of foreign cars into those mushy brains and way too many people believe that junk. The Corvette is awesome and will continue to kick butt and not get the accolades it deserves, just my two cents worth.

Guibo

So what you're saying is that people do judge a car on how good or bad it is, without ultimate deference to the badge. That's what I've been saying. Thanks for playing.

petermj

Mini Cooper S