911Hunter

Well I like Porsches ( and I have owned a 911 Carrera now a C7 Z51) and consider that the Corvette Grand Sport is a very balanced sport car that would go head to head easily VS a 911Carrera S.

UnhandledException

Palantirion

- It was 10-15 years ago, so no I'm not sure. I'm old. I do remember not seeing brake lights before his turn-in at 1, and I remember seeing brake lights tapped in the omega section.

heavychevy

The ZR1 literally has more than double the torque. You can't really make a valid comparison of stability while putting power down especially when comparing the precise throttle respone of an NA motor to an FI motor. Not to mention the ZR1 is much faster, when you are going faster, you break loose quicker which requires quicker responses. I've watched poorsha's videos, car seems very manageable. I've also driven C7Z's on track and they are smoother and more confidence inspiring that any GT3. The wheelbase advantage of the C7 can be felt easily. If anything, heavier makes inputs and reactions slower and easier to react to. It's harder on tires, brakes, equipment and causes heat build up, but the weight isn't making the car unstable, if the car is unstable now, it will be worse at a lighter weight. Putting down 700 ft lbs on corner exit is no small feat on street tires. If it were lighter it would be worse.

UnhandledException

Robert R1

A fair argument can be made that all that HP and TQ isn't necessary if there isn't additional weight (and drag) to deal with. We also don't know where the weight is located on the vehicle and thus it's impact on handling.

There are no pros to having additional weight only to be countered by more HP and TQ. As you stated, this accelerate wear on tires, brakes and other equipment that is now stressed to a higher degree with additional weight.

The Camaro ZL1/1LE is a perfect example. The car has a lot more HP and TQ than a C6Z Z07. It also has stickier tires, way better suspension, aero but carrys a lot more weight (500lbs+). Yet the C6Z Z07 is there with it and I bet the C6Z is a lot easier on it's consumables and components. http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna-seca-post-1988

As other manufacturers are reducing weight for their track models, Chevy is going in the opposite direction by continuously adding more weight to their cars. As the Corvette keeps going up in price, the bang for buck argument also starts to fade.

Team Corvette needs to go back in time and remember what made the C5Z/C6Z great in the first place. It wasn't the gimmicks. It was a well executed balance of weight and power available at a reasonable price.

UnhandledException

Palantirion

- There is one pro: cost.

Before we lose sight of the origin of the arguments let's try to remember that we are all here on this forum section because the C7 ZR1 is (relatively) AFFORDABLE. GM could have made a lighter, faster ZR1. It would have cost more. They prioritized a budget far out of step with exotic cars and did a commendable job of building a car that is not quite as quick as the some costing 3-10x as much, but is more accessible (production time) and more practical.

UnhandledException

johnglenntwo

That makes sense now. After I wrote that I found a Camaro site comparing some stuff to the Grand Sport's. The stuff you are referring to. The stuff I didn't quite get.
Anyway, I was and with your info still I am guessing the unit itself just works better.
After all, the Corvette unit originated GM's eLSD usage as I understand it.
Another reason for the C8's Planned release.

truth.b

I would like to know the math you're using to support this statement. Secondly, I would like to understand what type of tracks you assume the ZR1 is guaranteed to be slower than the other cars you've mentioned. Personally, I've yet to see a 720s, but I've witness all kinds of 911 (except Turbos, GT2s) getting walked in the corners and straights at VIR Full Course by supposedly much "less" precise/inferior vehicles. More times than not the 911s & Corvettes are significantly being under driven (my personal car included). Lastly, hero laps are bad barometers of how good/bad/twitchy/awesome a car behaves a the limit. Also my opinion is that any magazine or manufacture test should be taken with a grain of salt unless there is a +3-5 second difference between test vehicles; because there are too many variables in hot lap driving to argue over a couple secs.

heavychevy

Key words - AT THE LIMIT. Higher Limit, twice the torque, FI is going to be harder to control. This is a matter of fact. I didn't miss any points. Your argument simply is not plausible. The Corvette demographic does not support a more barebones, exotic material lightweight frame while still maintaining a bigger wheelbase vehicle. The average age of the Corvette buyer is fairly high, most want a weekend cruiser to drive slower than the speed limit. Not to be dicing it up on the track. That is a relatively small percentage of those who will be owning a Corvette. Even for the ZR1, more will be garaged and babied than driven any where near the limit on a track. GM knows this, really anyone who pays attention and goes to the track knows this.

So now knowing this, why would GM invest what would amount to many more billions using exotic materials and pushing the price of the base vette into the stratosphere? The Corvette is a budget minded supercar. Maybe less so than before, but still budget minded, with all the new gadgets and required safety gear that are driving the weight of all cars up. It's not worthwhile to please a few guys on the internet, while the ZR1 does 1:26's at Road Atlanta and 1:51 at VIR. If you had any idea how fast those times are, you wouldn't be spending so much time complaining. You would have a hard time finding fully race prepped C6Z's that can do those times. The C6Z was relatively light at 3200 lbs.

Evolution is evolution, GM is catering to it's primary audience and making a car that produces staggering times for a cost that's beneficial to them. There have always been compromises, in every generation. This one is no different.


False, the additional weight serves to keep the price down. If you have ever tried to lighten a vehicle, you realize that once you get past the obvious stuff, it gets REALLY expensive. Factory cars are no exception to this rule. Once you start using lightweight materials, price goes up real quick. The ZR1 still has all of the amenities. They don't seem to have wanted to make a barebones ACR clone.

I'm just going to sit here and wait for one of you guys to run faster times in your previous generation Corvette's so we can see how backwards GM has gone.

herohaki

Open your eyes lol, "the ZR1 and equally optioned GT3 are virtually same price" you are joking right, just tells me you never bought a porsche, almost no porsche buyer buys the car without any options, the options make the porsche much more expensive let alone in the GT3 and RS ones there are significant markup, that's just how these cars work.. considering the hp and tq plus other performance figures the ZR1 offers, the ZR1 is a bargain because its rivals are expensive high hp cars, also you should start comparing cars at the same price level and you would notice how much the ZR1 offers. Porsche is a car of balance, many more expensive/high powerful cars are slower than the GT3RS, so pointless on just taking it on the ZR1 and unfair as well since the key point of focus in building these cars are different, one is aiming more in power and one has a history of focusing on balance and aero. Plus there is no clear winner in cars nowadays or how one car is just 'better' than the other, performance cars these days are engineered very well, each have their uniqueness to offer, buyers of the ZR1 are those who can appreciate the ZR1 and corvette's heritage, 911s have their own charm, lamborghini gives you that violent kick in the back, ferrari is about the feeling, etc... each of the cars have their differences in engineering that also offers world class performance, that's what makes up our car culture and what makes it so fun and addicting. How you judge and compare cars is ridiculous, shows how you don't understand cars, like why would you even compare a M5 to a ZR1, cars are not just about numbers and how fast they go in a straight line unless ur a 12 year old kid that thinks straight line speed means everything.

UnhandledException

herohaki

you're missing the point... both cars even at base price without adding anything are in two different tiers and are engineered in different approaches... just because a car faster than another doesn't make it just 'better', plus there is no substantial evidence to prove that point, times can be affected by so many factors just comparing lap times is meaningless. the thing is you won't get a porsche gt3 or rs series straight from the factory, those cars are very hard to get, the allocations are often small at each dealer and fill up before they are even released, especially if you're just a normal consumer, even if you get one without any options, the porsche's base price is still more expensive than the most expensive corvette at base price... the porsche will have better balance of course because they mastered the 911 around the track, but the corvette's focus is not the same as porsche's, the Z06 an ZR1 offers performance numbers in alignment with the world's top supercars, is the aventador or 812 faster than the 911 around the track? Of course not, but they are god damn amazing, driving one is like heaven... these cars are not better than the 911 just because they have more power, same with 911 is not better than them just because it has better balance and may be faster around the track. The definition of 'worth it' and value is based on what the owner prefers, they are all amazing cars, to me, the ZR1 is amazing in terms of what it offers at its price, I love it but so is my 911.

heavychevy

Being that 991.2 cup cars do 1:23 at Road Atlanta and the zR1 did 1:26 while the cups do 1:48 while the ZR1 did 1:51 you are smoking crack to even think the RS has a chance on most tracks vs a ZR1. Maybe small track where the wheelbase is a disadvantage or willow, which all GM vehicles seem not to perform like they do elsewhere. Show some GT3's doing anywhere near 1:51 at VIR or 1:26 at Road Atlanta before making false claims. Yes, most Corvettes are underdrove, but so are most GT3's. It takes ***** to go 170 mph on a track.

village idiot

I was thinking the same thing.
The SC2-R on the GT2 seem to hold up fine.

My SC2 on my Grand Sport had the same exact issue at 50 degrees.

meadowz06

village idiot

People seem to miss the fact that faster doesn't necessarily mean more fun. Most of the time it means less fun. It's why people love Caymans and Miatas and S2000s.

heavychevy

That does not work for a car homologated for racing. Corvette racing needs the big wheelbase. And corvettes need them too. I bet you a stock c5 is still faster than your frs at Barber if it's stock. Same tires. And even if it weren't corvettes aren't built just for tight handling courses, they are built for all of them. Small wheelbase can't compete with the big boys.

Edit: are people in here seriously making the argument that the corvette needs to be more like slow, light weight cars? You must have forgotten the heritage of the Corvette..or that the same chassis races on the weekends. Lol.

GM may never built a track monster like this again if thi is the response they get. Waxers complaining about the wings, and now wanted something more like a miata. You guys can't be serious.