Car & Driver: Chevy Corvette Z06 vs. Dodge Viper SRT10 ACR, Nissan GT-R, Porsche 911

[ZvetteGuy]

Originally Posted by TJ95GAGT

I'd still choose the Vette over the rest of the group.

I think the previous GTR looks worlds better than this one and would rank higher on my gotta have it gauge.

That's the truth... the old GT-R was worlds better looking than the current offering... the performance might be better but, in the looks department...

[Darc Requiem]

I had a C & D subscription for over 10 years and this precisely the reason I canceled it. I got tired of their BS comparo's. I remember they chose the Mustang over the GTO despite the GTO winning all of the performance categories or how they had the best sports compact comparo and gave the Acura RSX the win despite being the worse performer in the entire group. The WRX, SRT4, and Cobalt SS all smoked the RSX but it was deemed the winner.

[the prix]

That has got to be the "slowest" Z06 I've ever seen.

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by big swede

While I'm glad the GT-R is available to the performance enthusiest I think the gotta have it factor is a huge opening for the bias claim in just about every comparison and it really needs to be done away with. I have always thought the gotta have it factor is purely up to the individual and is one of the reason you read and look at the other performance characteristics and then go for a test drive to build your own case for the car that YOU gotta have.

The 'Gotta Have It' factor does expose bias. This is a good point.
Like another poster brought up, the Supra, RX-7 and another car came and went, but the Corvette endured.
Which makes me wonder why the Vette loses on the Gotta Have It. The Porsche I can understand. But thinking the GT-R is more Gotta Have than the Corvette? A car that'll likely follow the grim lot of overrated Japanese sporty coupes that preceded it? I just don't get it.
But that's just me.
And that's just Car and Driver.

(Here's my thread at Car and Driver on the same subject. These goofs banned my username (Morpheus1) before I even got to the third page:
http://forums.caranddriver.com/auto/...read.id=173720 )

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66

And it's the only AWD car in the bunch. Too me, AWD is like comparing naturally-aspirated to turbo. No comparison.

You talk to any race car driver, they will say they prefer RWD over AWD. Just as they prefer real shifters, vs. paddle shifters. And as a race fan, I prefer more in common with the race cars to the cars you can buy at a dealership. Such as H-pattern shifters. I will say, AWD is probably safer on a track. It's probably far tougher to get in trouble.

But, be sure. Nissan fans are purusing this thread to see us diss on the GT-R.

I, however, am not going to diss on it. Be sure, all 4 of these cars would be welcome in any of our garages. I think all of this is fun. The GT-R is forcing the next gen Z06 be even better.

Although, I found the driver of the GT-R was getting allot of under-steer. Seems he was taking corners to hot. Slow in, fast out. And you can plainly see the throttle-off over-steer demonstrated in the Porsche.

I think you would need plenty of seat time in each of these cars to figure out their peculiarities. From what I understand about Vipers. You really don't take corners in a Viper, you more just connect a bunch of straightaways. You connect the dots in a Viper, you go from this dot, to this dot, to this dot.

All 4 of these cars are welcome in my garage.

I'll agree with alot of what's on this post.
Those who are posting on the First Page are underestimating the GT-R. Please keep in mind that Nissan lied about the GT-R's power output; they alledge 480 crank horsepower, but dyno results are suggesting that's rear-wheel horsepower, not crank horsepower.
And if the Nissan is generating like 480 RWHP, it'd make sense that it's doing so well in these comparison tests.

I would still buy a Corvette Z06 even if it is a little underpowered compared to its competitors. Why? 6-speed shifter, mainly. Looks, both inside and out is high on the list, too.
RWD secondly. The Porsche and Viper also has this. But, do any of the other alternatives have 3,100 pounds of aluminum, magnesium, titanium and carbon fiber? Nope! The rest except for Porsche is still steel, iron and plastic. The Vette is a lithe, lightweight triathalon by comparison.
The GT-R has little, tacky pieces of aluminum and carbon fiber here and there, but such is the car's gimmicky, 3,850-pound nature...

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by Darc Requiem

I had a C & D subscription for over 10 years and this precisely the reason I canceled it. I got tired of their BS comparo's. I remember they chose the Mustang over the GTO despite the GTO winning all of the performance categories or how they had the best sports compact comparo and gave the Acura RSX the win despite being the worse performer in the entire group. The WRX, SRT4, and Cobalt SS all smoked the RSX but it was deemed the winner.

lol, I think Car and Driver tried to keep the "horsepower-per-liter" gimmick alive even longer than SportCompact magazine!

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

What's the problem with the results? You don't need a magazine to tell you how well suited the 'Vette is for its duties. 4th place finish or not, it's an amazing car with amazing lineage that has stood the test of time. While other names have come and gone-remember when the early 90's brought us "Corvette crushers" like Supra turbo, 300Z, and RX-7?-the Corvette remains an icon.

And honestly, I think GM needs cars like the Viper, the 911 in all its iterations, and the GT-R to keep GM's engineers' eyes on the prize. To be clear, the GT-R will make every Vette going forward that much better! Competition is a great thing for GM.

I suppose I should pay respect where respect is due.
Good post...

[JeffInDFW]

When the Corvette was overweight, the car mags RAVED about the Porsche 911 because it was so light. They went on and on about how much "engineering", and expert attention to detail it took to produce a light weight sports car. The 911 always won against the Vette. Now that the Vette is by far the lightest, that somehow does not matter anymore.

When the Honda S2000 is reviewed, they always rave on and on about how light weight it is. It weighs 2,800 pounds. When the Solstice came out, they ripped it to shreds for being "so overweight". It weighs 2,800 pounds.

I am looking forward to the GTR at the drag strip to proove that the early cars Nissan released to the car mags were ringers. Problem is, these are the numbers that will be quoted by all the 17 year olds from now on.

For me, it is all about how fun the car is to drive. A Winnebago with 7000hp and AWD will be fast, but who the hell wants to drive it? Not to mention, the GTR is uglier than a Winnebago Motorhome too.

[PMC the 1st]

Originally Posted by JeffInDFW

When the Corvette was overweight, the car mags RAVED about the Porsche 911 because it was so light. They went on and on about how much "engineering", and expert attention to detail it took to produce a light weight sports car. The 911 always won against the Vette. Now that the Vette is by far the lightest, that somehow does not matter anymore.

When the Honda S2000 is reviewed, they always rave on and on about how light weight it is. It weighs 2,800 pounds. When the Solstice came out, they ripped it to shreds for being "so overweight". It weighs 2,800 pounds.

I am looking forward to the GTR at the drag strip to proove that the early cars Nissan released to the car mags were ringers. Problem is, these are the numbers that will be quoted by all the 17 year olds from now on.

For me, it is all about how fun the car is to drive. A Winnebago with 7000hp and AWD will be fast, but who the hell wants to drive it? Not to mention, the GTR is uglier than a Winnebago Motorhome too.

Good post. Car and Driver may very well assume there aren't any readers of age to remember these tests they did. Because we still remember these tests, and still remember when C&D used to praise a sports cars' light weightedness, there will be even fewer people who will actually take Car and Driver seriously.
Also, let's not forget the CTS; they complained about its 4K curb weight.

[big swede]

Originally Posted by PMC the 1st

Also, let's not forget the CTS; they complained about its 4K curb weight.

Well honestly they should have. It has no turbo's, plumbing, intercooler, AWD, huge brakes/wheels and half the horsepower (at the time).

[CadiEldo67]

Originally Posted by heatroc

So the gt-r wins because if the fastest lap time?????? That's crazy! Those numbers for the gt-r seem more in tune with its power to weight ratio. GO CHEVY! Can't wait for the ZR1 to take over!!!

Its like the G8 vs. the Dodge Charger SRT-8. The GT wastes that car and I hate to tell the boys at Dodge, but the GXP is coming soon.

[stevecmh]

i would still take the vette

[eurohazard]

Originally Posted by vanshmack

I agree with your sentiment that C/D has generally taken a positive attitude with the Corvette. And as a 20-year reader of that rag (despite the annual urge to cancel their often-pompous asses), I have noted their sometimes odd comparo winners, however, if I were you, Mr. Eurohazard, I would watch the name calling. You have a 1-month history here, and you're asking for nothing but grief by calling people here "screaming babies", while displaying a Nissan Armada (which is, in my opinion, an automotive monstrosity) in your avatar (vintage Caddie photo notwithstanding). Dissent is okay here, however, there are a lot of us who are sensitive to the MSM's bias against all vehicles American, and we do often react when we continue to see examples of this bias.

Name-calling will only ensure that your stay here is neither extended or pleasant. Please argue thoughtfully.

I call it like I see it. There are a few outstanding arguments in here....but I didn't see any when I wrote my statement. You can go through all of my posts in the last month...."name-calling" is not my forte! My insight/opinions are just as valuable as yours or anyone else's.......the fact I've been here for just a month has nothing to do with it. I will be changing my signature pic soon! lol

Sorry to those posters ahead of my 1st post on the first page.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Darc Requiem

I had a C & D subscription for over 10 years and this precisely the reason I canceled it. I got tired of their BS comparo's. I remember they chose the Mustang over the GTO despite the GTO winning all of the performance categories......

Really? It won all of the performance categories? IIRC, and I do, the Mustang won every objective handling test they listed for the two cars. And yet, despite this C&D gave the GTO more points for handling in the objective rankings, a disparity which is unforgivable by your standards....and one which you conveniently didn't notice. Arguments like this make it sound more like you are just ticked off because your side lost than any actual problem with the system used

Also worth mentioning....Magazine comparos would be completely pointless without a 'gotta have it' factor thrown in. Goofy tag-line aside the premise is simply that each staffer is asked, objective performance parameters aside and without dissecting the issue, if you had to pick one of these cars for yourself which one would it be? The truth of the matter is that simple performance numbers, and even individual reviews of the cars characteristics and components, cannot tell you how the car as a whole works when driven. Given this the opinion of more learned individuals who drive phenomenal cars regularly might be considered helpful.

That said, I think it was ridiculous that the comparo was presented as a race track runoff only to have race track performance ultimately take a backseat to issues like the inclusion of a back seat. Even worse, the C6 Z06 has been lambasted in the press for being too harsh since it's inception, an issue which has sent GM scurrying to resolve NVH and comfort issues. Now that they get the suspension setup pretty much 'right' the pendulum swings the other direction and the Z06 is being lambasted by C&D for being 'too soft' while the GT-R is practically getting a pat on the back for daily livability? A little consistency might be nice.

I am seldom a defender of the Vette since, in many respects, I think GM could do better here and I can cite many reasons why the Vette could end up on the short end of the stick in a comparo like this. That said, the Vette has obvious advantages and C&D didn't do a very good job of maintaining consistency in this article often praising one car for a a personality trait they brow beat another model for.

I don't mind the subjective categories, and I don't them not picking the fastest car since fastest and best are two distinctly different issues. I do take issue with inconsistency and a bait and switch premises for an article. In the end I think they picked the GT-R because they thought it to be the best car for the money. And while I likely wouldn't agree with that summation were I thrown the keys to the same array of models, I don't take issue with their choice or why they made it...but as I said above I do take issue with the fact that the criteria used wasn't in keeping with the impression given by the article's title or the setting provided.

[jameskz28]

Originally Posted by 91 s-10baja

I too am fond of this color, anyone know the name of it?

Jetstream Blue Metallic; a $750 option