Isn't that the truth!

 

Get that pathetic look out of my face.

 

 

LOL - now that one made me laugh. Where did you find it?

 

For all the "This wouldnt happen to a porsche driver" comments, I've owned 2 porsches, one was a 97' TT. I love them, but must we forget the CGT's who have landed in ditches and being banked on little road medians?

:O

 

The incidence where the CGT ended up in a ditch involved the mechanic not the owner. One can easily show a direct correlation between lack of experience (or intelligence), high levels of power, defective hardware and the likelihood of a crash. A flawed 400+hp vehicle (e.g. Z06) + an idiot driver is the receipt for disaster. Low power machinery built to perfection (e.g. any modern Porsche) with high IQ driver results fewer crashes. Anyone can see this .. I feel sorry for you if you don’t. For safety data on domestic vehicles look at the recall rates on GM products and assess the intelligence level of the typical Vette owners on a Chevy forum. None of this is substitute for experience of course .. something required to operate high powered vehicles.

 

Ouch, hopfully the driver is alright.

 

what are the main flaws in the design of the Z06?

leaf springs?
the FR layout being prone to tailhappiness?

(no sarcasm, legitimate question as i am infact interested in you opinion on this issue. I was under the impression that an FR car is more easy to recover when it lets go, as opposed to say an MR car, which spins around on itself quite fast. Then again the FR cars i've driven had 300HP and less.)

 

was doing 145 mph a few years back in my old 97 993 in in the left lane when a lady( in a boxter) for that matter- went 3 lane across into mine from a ramp. I hesitated for less then a split second... i did 3 180s on lake Shore drive in downtown chicago and managed to get the car under control without touching anything.
So yes... I do believe from first hand experience that our cars are great. I was with a professional rally driver from Europe.. he wanted to go for a ride in my car. My mistake was taht we didnt go on the usual route... and I didnt know the road that well- didnt anticipate the ramp and the lady to come 3 lanes into mine.

 

You sound really intelligent... the smartest of all dumbasses!

Flawed 400hp vehicle????
+Idiot driver???
Reciept for disaster? - I think you meant recipe, smart guy.

Get your head out of your *** and realize that lots of Porsche drivers destroy plenty of cars like the corvette Z06 guys do. Read the LA times someday and see how many barneys wreck their p-cars on the way out to malibu.

 

Let me first say that GM has top notch engineers no doubt (know a few) and the Vette does not really have any “design flaws”. It was designed “to spec” at a price point and intended for a certain crowd. It happens some of us don’t fit the target customer profile and willing to pay a premium for precision race motors, 200 way adjustable suspensions, Brembos and Le Mans endurance in our daily driver … tried, tested and true.

OK here we go .. I can imagine the design specs from marketing director to engineering director Dave Hill went something like this:

“As you well know the Vette primary target customer base is the 50 year old country boy in a state of delinquent mid life crisis. Forget the 1,800cc, 1000hp four cylinder twin turbo prototype you guys have in the lab. The Vette guy needs to feel toque in his gut following a 32Oz steak, and is has to sound like good’ol American iron. That 4 banger motor is for *****’s and plus Ferrari has the V8,. You know the mid-engine prototype failed the focus group and Vettes need to maintain the classic “*****” shape, hot rod motor upfront. We don’t have the 430 headlight spy shot yet, just use the old one and we’ll rip the wheel design off it. Mod the Caddy V8 some more and give it a fancy new name. Also lift the power steering and brakes of the CTS. Don’t worry about overheating problems and race car feel ,,, most GM customers are too dumb to tell the difference and accustomed to numb steering, dull brakes and quality issues. New customers will just learn the hard way.

Optimize for highway speeds cuz we have big roads in America (the only feasible geographic) and ain’t no tight courses or traffic out in the country. Make it track half a foot wider than 996 (looks good on paper) big imported rubber, stiff suspension (leaf springs+heavy roll bars) to blow away the press at the skid pad. What are the chances somebody is gonna drive this thing fast in the rain on bumpy roads (likely cause of both crashes above.) Dump the high speed aerodynamic stabilizer (AKA wing) cuz it screws up the quarter trap speed and make it look like a ricer. Toss the idea of a Porsche monocoque chassis with metal panels and keep the steel ladder frame construction (truck chassis to save tooling cost) and plastic body panels to get the weight down. Everyone seemed to caught on with weight savings, so some CF parts would make for good bragging rights. Use a loud exhaust to cover the squeaks, rattles and cracking sounds (likely with the C6Z Aluminum frame). Crash protection (in the form of crumble zones) and roll protection is of no concern. Look how many country boys we lost in the war and nobody cares about casualties. Let’s not forget the important thing is GM’s bottom line and we are bleeding money. BTW, before I forget, how about some free trips to Germany? We can play at the Ring and may be Jan can produce some decent times. We’ll cheat if we have to, it’s great marketing. Some guys are suckers for rings times and that means more sales.”


My heart actually goes to the Corvette design team after writing this, cuz I know their hands were tied … excellent job considering.

 

Quartermile, that was damn funny.

 

That was great!

 

How is it even possible to do 145 on lake shore drive in anything other than a bike?