Yes, you do, and no, you don't know enough about it to converse in knowledge on the subject, and you are in fact incorrect. Because there is a lot more to quality than just the feel - there is the durability and comfort aspect to be considered as well.

I, in fact do have both cars, and in fact, a 3er has always shared the garage with my vettes since 2000, because my wife refuses to drive anything else. And I can tell you without a doubt that, apart from better leather, the interior of the BMWs has not held up as well as that of the Corvettes - in fact, I have endured numerous repairs across the BMWs that have not happened on the Vettes. Typical failure points on the BMWs are: switchgear, LCD displays, trim pieces, and the dreaded window regulator. The reality is that electronics have been the bane of BMW owners for years. It is getting better.

I have had 4 Vettes since 2000 and they have overall been very reliable and trouble free cars. They also have excellent, simple ergonomics and they are outstanding long distance cars due to the seats and well engineered driving position. Yes the seats are crappy for performance work and the leather is cheaper than it should be. I solved that by setting up a pair of Sparcos that I swap in for the track or the summer driving season.

FWIW, the Vettes have been: 2000 Coupe, 2003 Z06, 2005 Coupe, 2006 Z06.
The BMWs: 2000 323i, 2002 325i, 2003 330i (don't ask), and currently a 2006 325i

 

"It's refreshing to not have to work so hard," says our handling sensei Kim Reynolds as he climbs out of the Guards Red GTS. By "work so hard," he's referring to the GT3 RS and GT2 RS we tested a couple of months back. Both of those are little more than thinly veiled race cars. Yes, those manly machines deliver astonishingly astonishing levels of performance und grip, but you have to man up to wring the great and mighty numbers out of 'em.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2Mcc2yPk4

Why? And the 911 turbo seems to be getting the new wheelbase. Are the GT2 and GT3 really so perfect that their wheelbase is staying the same? Are cars of any sort really supposed to be so demanding?

 

"It's refreshing to not have to work so hard," says our handling sensei Kim Reynolds as he climbs out of the Guards Red GTS. By "work so hard," he's referring to the GT3 RS and GT2 RS we tested a couple of months back. Both of those are little more than thinly veiled race cars. Yes, those manly machines deliver astonishingly astonishing levels of performance und grip, but you have to man up to wring the great and mighty numbers out of 'em.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2Mcc2yPk4

Sounds like a real good driving experience by an expert!

Lets see no good driving experience and NO LAP TIMES mattering! What's left?

 

First of all, get off of your high holy horse and realize I have only been talking about tactile quality of the materials, attention to design, the shoddiness/flimsiness of the Corvette seats, and the quality of the feedback. You seem to have fallen into the same pit as that other fellow telepierre who claimed I was talking about everything, when in fact I was not.

Thank you, that's what I'm getting at. Thanks for confirming my point. The rest of your post is just interesting anectodal stuff that can be countered very easily with:
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/1583264453-post105.html
Is that enough ownership experience for ya?

Again, I'm talking about materials and fit & finish. Anyone spending any time in the BMW should be able to spot noticeable improvements in materials and quality between that car and a Mustang or C6. How much ownership is necessary for you to spot the obvious differences in design details between these two interiors? One of these has an applique masquerading as carbon fiber (ie, it's fake), switchgear like it's from a $15k car, "cast-skin"-looking material with a grainy imprint that makes it look like cheap leather.



The GT is a "peer" to the BMW in terms of "objective performance on a smooth racetrack, while offering much less refinement and attention to detail." Of course it costs a whole hell of a lot less. It has to, or else Ford would never hit their sales targets! If you can name another 4-seater that delivers on all that the M3 delivers on (fit & finish quality, materials, design, road manners, balance, involvement and feedback, etc), I'd like to hear your answer.

 

That's not a comparison against a Corvette. That's a comparison against other performance-focused Porsches. Did you happen to catch the comparisons on British roads between the GT3 RS and the ZR1?

"Manning up" to wring numbers out of a car doesn't say anything about its lack of feedback, feeling of involvement, or poor lateral seat support. If it's the GTS that you're saying provides "no good driving experience," then you need to read that article again.

I never said the 911 was perfect. I've said that it's engine is in the wrong place (Notch will disagree, but that is and has been for another thread). And that should put things in perspective: a car on a very short wheelbase combined with a relatively small-displacement engine mounted in the wrong place should be a recipe for tricky handling and turbo lag that sees it off in the first corner of any "competition" with a more powerful car, with more progressive power delivery, a longer wheelbase (more stable on fast tracks)...yet the GT2 RS is as fast as it is. The confidence it imparts to the driver is surely at play here (and yes, it's a little ballistic in a straight line too). And that is one of the things Tadge has been trying to incorporate into the C7. The C6 in '08 had improvements in its steering and shifting mechanism to try to acheive the same ends.

 

Engine must not be in the wrong place...

 

I stand corrected, AC Cobra did not debue until 1961.

 

The bottom line is that you don't know what you are talking about and you are not qualified to discuss it. Case in point: "Quality of the feedback" Another comment you are mindlesssly regurgitating from magazine reading. How would you have a clue. BMW steering is overboosted, as are most cars today. Something you'd know if you actually drove one. And Porsche steering is no longer what it was. The 997 bobs all over the place in transitions, due partly to the steering and partly to the McPherson struts, which no self -respecting sportscar should have anyway. The fine tactile feel remains in the Cayman, but it is long gone in the 911 cars. Again, you only know that if you have driven one. This is a marked difference from the blind mantra the magazines keep repeating when it comes to German cars. The C5 and C6 Corvettes are in fact very easy to drive fast compared to performance equivalents and are a lot less work to drive fast. The chassis is flat brilliant. AGain, I know this because I have had the privilege of lapping the 996, 997 and the Viper at track events. There is a reason the C6 Z Carbon is the fastest production car on a track...

Suggest you spend a lot less time on making endless posts and spend that time actually driving the cars you apparently dream about all day long. Take some Kart and lapping classes, get out a little. I don't know what you actually drive (I'll guess a Honda Civic, Scion or similar), but take that out and wring it on some country roads. Assuming, that is, that you are not a 14-year old who is an avid reader of all things aautomotive, but actually has no driver's license yet...

 

I think there are sufficient tests out there by independent drivers without a bone to pick (or a horse in the race) to get an idea of whether an M3 has better steering, feedback, etc, than a Mustang or Corvette. You would be not among this group of people, and to be fair, nor would a group of people from the M3 forums (which is why I do not use them as a reference).
You claim steering feel is long gone in the 911 cars, yet GM bought a 997 to benchmark, and Tadge Juechter admits it has superior steering to the Corvette. It's quite telling when an engineer, who is on GM's payroll, would admit this. If there is no difference between them, why would they bother to buy a 911 to benchmark?

 

I think if the Corvette was seriously benchmarking the Porsche or Audi, we'd see more actual or copied design influences than simply homage to tactile feedback or interior. The cars could hardly be more different.

 

Guibo and Notch, You two have been babbling throughout this whole thread about Porsche not being concerned about ring times. Myself and many others have argued the opposite since thats all Porsche has done throughout it's history. Once again here is proof of their Nurburgring mantra in the first paragraph of the new GT3 release on the official Porsche web site.
http://drive.porsche.com/us/articles...ration-911-gt3

 

Wow. Has this thing gone on and on. Interesting and entertaining nonetheless.

As with the most recent posts, this whole thing comes down to passion. And once it rises to the surface, no amount of logic can or will prevail. And to me, that's what makes all of these cars great. Very few arouse passion like the C cars, P cars, and B cars. All the rest (F cars, L cars, etc) are so stratospheric in their prices and performance that most of us mere mortals don't really consider them, much less do the latter lend themselves to daily drivers as the former do.

I've owned C cars. I've owned P cars. I've owned B cars. Loved them all. And I/we still own one of each. Plus a Silverado and a Jeep Grand Cherokee.

God Bless America. We can make choices.

Keep it up guys. I find it informative and entertaining. But I doubt the nitpicking about the feel of the leather and the type of stitching and the location of the engine will influence me much. I'm focusing more on enjoying each of them.

Once the snow stops.

 

And let's remember that the Corvette was completely designed, engineered and mass produced in America by GM vs the Cobra which was basically a British car body fitted with a custom race frame and a big Ford engine that never had to go through the gauntlet of mass production and sales. They are completely different animals.

 

Well stated TT! And if you read Glibo's response quoted below, we all will note he does not refute one thing you stated. In fact, he continues to babble again about "sufficient tests out there". What a troll he is.

 

This one was funny. I doubt texvette2 has any experience with any of these cars let along the Italian and British models, both of which are some of the most unreliable cars ever made! Yes i have experience in both of those.

 

Willow springs isn't smooth by any means. Sebring isn't smooth either, infact most roads I've driven hard on are smoother than Sebring is on a good day. Ever driven there? Or are you going to give us some nonsense again about "well that's a closed course and you'll know the layout. The BMW is superior on unknown roads while driving hard!" again? To which I'll just go ahead and say, if you're driving anycar hard on unknown roads. You deserve to get wrapped around a tree. That being said, you act like some how hell freezes over and the laws of physics magically change from going from a fairly rough road course to the street, while on factory or aftermarket rubber or that some how no one has ever driven a rear axled car successfully ever on uneven roads quickly.


The Stang doesn't have to cost a hell of alot less. Given the 302 Laguna, and GT500s price and mutual success. I think someone's been sipping the bavarian kool aide a little too hard there.

Also I've driven a M3 in the last week. And it's hardly the rock star you think it is. It's balance is off, it's steering is definitely vague and definitely out of proportion in wheel effort to how much the wheels actually turn. A C5 Z51 blows it out of the water in terms of how it feels at the limits, hell my 89 C4 gives better feedback than the BMW. It's brakes are a joke coming down fast twisty mountain roads. Do you actually own a BMW? Have you actually driven a GT?
There's a reason BMW has gotten their *** kicked up one side and down the other in road racing from everything from Caddies, to Camaros, to Stang GTs, Porsche Boxster/Caymans, 911s and Base Vettes. It's because the car's all hype. It feels faster than it actually is, by a pretty comfortable margin. The chassis, has alot less room left on the table and it shows, in three direct arenas. 1 lack of aftermarket support, 2 lack of long term reliability and long term fit and finish, and 3 the lack of Ws at the race track when against actual performance makers.


I also, happen to like the Stang GT's interior over the BMW. Particularly over long term ownership. The amount of broken buttons alone on a BMW after a few years of ownership has been staggering and I was certainly glad that I never bought into the Bavarian PR Machine, unlike my poor poor friend. The Stang's exterior styling and paint quality are also higher regarded. The Stang will get women's panties to drop on sight and sound with just a little blip of the throttle. The BMW on the other hand looks and sounds like a douche nozzle would drive it, it's bland and dull. A box on wheels with no soul, traded away for those pop out cup holders, and alleged ''high quality'' (yeah right) interior.

For every little thing the BMW supposedly has over the GT, it get's it's *** kicked even harder in two other areas. And no I don't own a current Stang GT, so I don't have a horse in this debate as far as Stang vs BMW. But I've had the luxury of driving them too and riding in them for quite a while. There's no comparison between the cars. the Stang is a much more visceral, adrenaline giving experience. From it's drop dead sexy styling, to the engine, from the engine to how the car gives it's feedback, to even the throw of the shifter after the owner has had it more than a year and a half. The BMW on the other hand... has fancy pop out cup holders, and prettier buttons... both of which break if the car's actually been driven more than just as a city driver, by a rich yupeee trying to impress his boss and friends. (and failing. Rolling up in a BMW is like rolling up in a Camry for all the impact it has)


Sure. CTSV Coupe. Or how about a 3LT Corvette... oh wait you said ''four seats!'' to disqualify the 3LT.

 

Have I ever posted here that Porsche doesn't publish Ring times for their cars?? How in the world do you take Porsche publishing Ring times and run that up to some lofty summit of "Porsche buyers worship Ring times", or stretch the publication of times to a concept that Porsche is chasing 1st place in some kind of unofficial Ring lap time competition???

And BTW, Porsche's GT3 time of "under 7:30" certainly shows that they are concerned with tenths of a second.

Porsche publishing Ring times in no way invalidates anything I've posted here.

 

For street driving, the BMW offers a far better driving experience.

 

2014 Viper

 

Um no it doesn't. the BMW might as well be a Toyota Camry daily driving.
You press the pedal and it's total lack of low end torque makes it move like a V6.

It's a deluded yupee car. And it becomes all too apparent if you've actually driven a car outside of city limits where there are actual corners. Some of us don't drive like putzes, and some of us actually like it when the car is willing to get it there with you. You can proclaim your box car as a great driver all you want... but the only metrics you have you could also apply to a Camry and spend a hell of alot less money in the process.

You press the pedal in a C6 like you would a BMW and you will get knocked into the seat.

Same deal with a Stang GT.