Question-Why would someone just not buy a Porsche?
08-21-2018, 09:07 PM
#41
Drifting
The Fiero was a fun little car at its price point (I had used 86 6cyl 20ish years ago). Ever had 4 people in a Fiero driving back from Tiajuana? I'm just glad it was my car and I was driving.
Z
Last edited by Zealot; 08-21-2018 at 09:07 PM.
The following users liked this post:
CorvetteBrent (08-24-2018)
And not with the 981 Boxster/Caymans either. I have a 2013 Boxster, first year of the new design and I have had ZERO issues.
08-21-2018, 10:46 PM
#44
All I can say to you, is never drive a current generation 911 and you will always think your right! The Porsche is superior to the current C7 in about every way. I have had both and loved my Corvette, but the 911 is better. Perhaps the C8 will close the gap. If so, I will be back.
Last edited by Plexoer; 08-21-2018 at 10:47 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Apollo29 (08-22-2018)
The following users liked this post:
ByByBMW (08-22-2018)
08-22-2018, 06:40 AM
#48
ll I can say to you, is never drive a current generation 911 and you will always think your right! The Porsche is superior to the current C7 in about every way. I have had both and loved my Corvette, but the 911 is better. Perhaps the C8 will close the gap. If so, I will be back.
Last edited by PurpleLion; 08-22-2018 at 11:34 AM.
08-22-2018, 07:43 AM
#49
Le Mans Master
And I notice you were very careful to limit your reliability comment to the 718 cayman. You think they've fixed the cylinder scoring issues then?
The following 4 users liked this post by sstonebreaker:
08-22-2018, 08:12 AM
#50
Melting Slicks
my 2017 C2S is a 3.1 second car. Much quicker than my C7 Z51 and not much off the pace of a Z06. The new models with the turbos do a nice job of putting the additional torque to the pavement. It is also rated at 191 mph. Again, probably as good if not better than a aero restricted Z on speed. You would have to get to the track to beat the Porsche. The Corvette dosent touch the 911 for every day livability or fit and finish. I find the 911 to currently be a better all around car. I am hoping the ME will change that b
08-22-2018, 08:19 AM
#51
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 5,754
Received 536 Likes
on
279 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06-'08-'10-'11-'12-'13 '14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19
Edit: Never mind, I found some and they were for engines at least 3-4 generations ago. My question to you would be did GM ever fix the LS7 valve problems that lead to catastrophic engine failures? (Plenty of references in the C6 Z06 forums right here on CF).
Last edited by ByByBMW; 08-22-2018 at 08:52 AM. Reason: Added info/references
The following users liked this post:
Michael A (08-22-2018)
08-22-2018, 10:02 AM
#53
Banned Scam/Spammer
Member Since: Sep 2016
Location: Philadelphia PA (Birthplace of the USA, UNESCO World Heritage City)
Posts: 4,004
Received 3,916 Likes
on
1,616 Posts
Corvette has pioneered/invented many sports car technologies- magnetic suspension (starting with C5), hydroformed frame/chassis (starting with C5), balsa wood for floorboards (C5), Heads Up Display (starting with C5), magnesium roof (C6Z), etc. etc. Not to mention early adoption of rear-mounted transmission for near 50/50 weight distribution (starting with C5), exhaust butterfly valves, etc. They are used to developing new/forefront technologies for the Corvette.
Mid-Engine is not some huge challenge to design/reinvent the wheel- plenty of other existing ME cars to study from.
Fiero was a completely different design/engineering team from decades ago, and under a different brand. Not sure why you would bring this up. Porsche has it's fair share of crappy cars over the years- 914, 924, the 996 era 911s with their IMS issues/grenading engines, etc.
Mid-Engine is not some huge challenge to design/reinvent the wheel- plenty of other existing ME cars to study from.
Fiero was a completely different design/engineering team from decades ago, and under a different brand. Not sure why you would bring this up. Porsche has it's fair share of crappy cars over the years- 914, 924, the 996 era 911s with their IMS issues/grenading engines, etc.
Last edited by ArmchairArchitect; 08-22-2018 at 11:29 AM.
The following users liked this post:
CorvettoBrando (08-22-2018)
08-22-2018, 10:16 AM
#54
Team Owner
In 2017(calendar year) Porsche sold twice as many mid engine and rear engine sports cars worldwide(~57,000) than front engine Corvettes sold worldwide(~28,000).
Porsche has a large following. Porsche sports car's sales have been increasing while Corvette's sales have been decreasing.
Porsche has a large following. Porsche sports car's sales have been increasing while Corvette's sales have been decreasing.
Last edited by JoesC5; 08-22-2018 at 10:44 AM.
08-22-2018, 10:25 AM
#55
Team Owner
Corvette has pioneered/invented many sports car technologies- magnetic suspension (starting with C5), hydroformed frame/chassis (starting with C5), balsa wood for floorboards (C5), Heads Up Display (starting with C5), magnesium roof (C6Z), etc. etc. Not to mention early adoption of rear-mounted transmission for 50/50 weight distribution (starting with C5), exhaust butterfly valves, etc. They are used to developing new/forefront technologies for the Corvette.
Mid-Engine is not some huge challenge to design/reinvent the wheel- plenty of other existing ME cars to study from.
Fiero was a completely different design/engineering team from decades ago, and under a different brand. Not sure why you would bring this up. Porsche has it's fair share of crappy cars over the years- 914, 924, the 996 era 911s with their IMS issues/grenading engines, etc.
Mid-Engine is not some huge challenge to design/reinvent the wheel- plenty of other existing ME cars to study from.
Fiero was a completely different design/engineering team from decades ago, and under a different brand. Not sure why you would bring this up. Porsche has it's fair share of crappy cars over the years- 914, 924, the 996 era 911s with their IMS issues/grenading engines, etc.
While the C5 did have the rear mounted transmission(transaxle) for a 51/49(not 50/50) weight distribution(same weight distribution of the engine mounted transmission 1984 C4), the 1963 C2 used an engine mounted transmission for a 47/53 weight distribution. A transaxle for the 1963 Corvette was considered, but the idea was discarded due to high cost.
Last edited by JoesC5; 08-22-2018 at 10:37 AM.
08-22-2018, 10:33 AM
#56
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,657
Received 4,116 Likes
on
1,470 Posts
2020 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Yah don't think Chevy already asked itself this question?
08-22-2018, 10:54 AM
#58
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2005
Location: Think BEFORE hitting "Submit Reply"
Posts: 9,390
Received 708 Likes
on
391 Posts
My post was more from an engineering viewpoint than an experiential viewpoint. There are many ways to rates cars and, as you have said, you prefer your Porsche. OK, fine. But, when talking about SPORTS CARS that are designed to handle well and be fast at ten tenths on a track, struts and rear engines just don't get it.
Those cars flat GET IT.
It's foolhardy to dismiss the achievements Porsche has made with the rear engine design.
The following users liked this post:
ByByBMW (08-22-2018)
08-22-2018, 10:54 AM
#59
Banned Scam/Spammer
Member Since: Sep 2016
Location: Philadelphia PA (Birthplace of the USA, UNESCO World Heritage City)
Posts: 4,004
Received 3,916 Likes
on
1,616 Posts
Just to eliminate any confusion, the roof of the C6 Z06 was not magnesium. The C6 Z06's roof frame was made of magnesium and the roof panel was first made of polycarbonate, but the adhesive would not hold so a 4 pound heavier SMC roof panel was used after 2007. Then the C6 ZR1 had the same magnesium roof frame but with a carbon fiber roof panel.
While the C5 did have the rear mounted transmission(transaxle) for a 51/49(not 50/50) weight distribution(same weight distribution of the engine mounted transmission 1984 C4), the 1963 C2 used an engine mounted transmission for a 47/53 weight distribution. A transaxle for the 1963 Corvette was considered, but the idea was discarded due to high cost.
While the C5 did have the rear mounted transmission(transaxle) for a 51/49(not 50/50) weight distribution(same weight distribution of the engine mounted transmission 1984 C4), the 1963 C2 used an engine mounted transmission for a 47/53 weight distribution. A transaxle for the 1963 Corvette was considered, but the idea was discarded due to high cost.
The following users liked this post:
ByByBMW (08-22-2018)
08-22-2018, 11:04 AM
#60
The GM patented magnetic shocks are terrific. That’s why Ferrari and Lamborghini, and other sports cars, use them under license, and of course not saying in their marketing,....”spend $3-500,000 on our car and you will also get the Corvette mag shocks”.
The following 2 users liked this post by tobaccokid:
ArmchairArchitect (08-22-2018),
firstvettesoon (08-22-2018)