I do believe the current C6 is as quick as an 05' Turbo unless you care to prove otherwise. We'll have to wait and see but it sounds like teh Z06 may well beat even the upcoming 997TT and will certainly clip the current 996TT.

You should change your sig to Own3dbyavette.

 

You're dreaming.......

 

I have no idea where you have come up with this conclusion. The 911 TT has pulled from 11.9 to 12.3 1/4 mile times. The best I have seen for a C6 Z51 is a 12.6, and some tests have gone to a 12.9. The X50 has been ripping high 11's on several tests. The 911 TT (especially the X50/S model) is clearly a faster car in all respects. The C6 is a great match for the Carrera S, but would get hammered by the 911 TT S. If you think it's just journalist bias against Chevy. Corvette Monthly did an article on the 911 X50 vs. the Z06 and the 911 TT X50 was faster through the 1/4 mi. 11.9 vs. 12.3. The Z06 has been shown faster than the new C6 in tests. Will the new Z07 be faster than the 997 TT, who knows ? Neither are out yet. You are basing your argument on pure speculation. Just looking at the #'s before the cars actually came out, many people thought the C6 was going to stomp the Carrera S, that obviously hasn't happened.

 

Fanman,

Well said......

 

So what you are saying is that the Turbo on a good day is 3/10ths faster in the 1/4 than a 45K Corvette? Thats assuming the respective pilots can properly manipulate the car down the track? Thats not saying much. Than you opt out the TT w/the marginally better X50 package and it still only beats the "old" ZO6 by 4/10ths? Sounds to me like the Corvette is quite a car! Nearly matching up with a factory tuned Porsche Turbo! I would be asking what exactly it is you get for that $150K.

Unless you were reading a different magazine, the Vette beat the 997. The point that I'm making is that you have to spend so much more money on a Porsche for a very and I do mean very small margin of performance, and at the point you are simply buying the badge. I don't blame you, thats a big reason I looked at it, not that many people have them, while everyone has a Vette.

 

05997S,

You are right! The Corvette IS the car for you,
.

Here are some sites that you may be interested in;

WWW.CORVETTEFORUM.COM
WWW>PROTEAM-CORVETTE.COM

 

Oh geez, here comes the $ argument. First you make a false statement that the C6 is as fast as the 911 Turbo model, then when the numbers prove you wrong all of a sudden it's the fact that the Vette is so much cheaper.

Way to twist the facts. You use the worse 911 TT times (12.3) to match the best C6 time (12.6), so the Vette is only a few tenths off. I stated the best times posted by the 911 TT was 11.9, the best posted by the C6 was 12.6. That is quite a bit more than 3/10ths. The worst TT times was 12.3, vs. the Vette 12.9. Again, 6/10 to 7/10 th slower. That difference is substantial.

If you look beyond the 1/2 finish in the magazine test, where the 911 Carrera S beats the Corvette both in performance & subjective categories, but lost out due to price. That is all.

I agree with you that Porsche is a bit overpriced, or at least should give us the S models as the "standard" cars (Carrare S should have been the Carrera, Turbo S, should have been the Turbo. But the performance of these models are superior to the Corvettes, price independent. If all you are doing is comparing performance to $ then you shouldn't get a Porsche. Then again you shouldn't really look at Ferraris because they look bad compared to Porsche or a Corvette Z06. But I'd take one anyday over a Vette. The money argument is all the Vette enthusiast has to argue over.

 

I think you missed the point where I said assuming the respective pilots can manipulate the cars down the track. Most guys I know, especially the ones who own expensive cars are average drivers. A 3/10 or a 7/10 or a 9/10 margin is a best case scenario. You could and would be beaten by a decent driver now and again. That is no exageration or misstatement. Secondly, I have seen car mags post 4.2 0-60 times for the Turbo. ALthough that is spectacular, both the Corvette and the Carrera S are now entering that territory. In R&T the S beat the Vette to 60 and in the 1/4 by 1/10. Car and driver apparently wrung a 4.1 out of the Vette but that was only good enough to beat the standard Carrea by 1/10 again statistically that is a wash. Even though the Corvette was slower in the slalom, it actually beats the S on the track, where it would be most important to me. I don't know about you but I don't talk to a lot of P-car owners who like to do drag launches in their 911's so in my world if it loses on the track its in second place wouldn't you agree?

I had the option to take the Carrera over another car and I declined. I could go just as fast in a Vette, arguably faster. There is no disputing the Vette is approaching the performance level of the Turbo and in a head to head drag race you better be on your toes if you want to beat one, and that an upcoming ZO6 will in all likelihood be on par with if not actually faster than the forthcoming 997TT. That is speculation but a comparo worth watching for in the coming years.

Oh yeah, there is that small 30K premium for the Porsche to be considered as well. I am sure at some point I will own a 911 as there are and I have mentioned them, some intangibles that are very appealing, but for straight up perfromance there are much better deals to be had.

 

That's always been true with respect to acceleration.

There are things that the 911 brings to the table that many people can't appreciate, or if they can appreciate them they don't care that they exist and/or don't want to pay for them. The Vette, SVT Cobra, or a modified "cheap" car are probably better choices for these people.

I didn't buy my Porsche JUST for what it brought to the performance side of the equation. How a sports car delivers the "driving experience" is just as important to me as the performance; I want BOTH to be great. The cost associated with getting the details right in the "delivery" of the driving experience costs money; worth it to me... and not worth it to others. Of course an owner has to like the way a car looks too, inside and out, and even if the Porsche and the Vette were exactly the same in both "delivery" and performance I still wouldn't buy the Vette because I personally don't like the way it looks.

 

Again, you are pulling #'s from all over the place. The 4.2 sec. time you quote for the Turbo is pedestrian, meanwhile you are quoting the fastest times for the C6. Why not quote the 3.9 sec. 0-60 time MT ripped off for the turbo, or the 3.7 sec. they did for the X50 ? In that case the FASTEST time for the 911 TT, vs. the FASTEST time for the C6 is still a substantial .4 sec. Compare apples to apples. In head to head comparos where cars are tested in similar conditions, with similar drivers the 911 TT is on par, if not slightly faster than the Z06 (which is slightly faster than the new C6 Z51), the X50 is substantially faster. Your statement was that the C6 was as quick as the 911 TT, that is not true. Funny how you say a few tenths of a sec. is a statistical wash when talking about 0-60 or 1/4 mi. times, but then when the 997 S is within a few tenths of a second on the track you state how the Vette is superior.

Of course different drivers, have different driving styles, and .3 or .4 might not sound like a lot, but faster is faster, and the difference between a 12 flat and a 12.6 sec. is huge. If you are expecting a 1 or 2 second advantage, that is not possible on any of these car these days. For example the Lambo Murcielago, one of the fastest cars on the road today, is not even 1 sec. faster than a C6 Z51 in the 1/4 mi..

Your notion that people who buy expensive cars/Porsches are average drivers, is pretty stereotypical. You have the 95% who bought a Porsche for looks, or occasional fast driving on the streets, but the 5% who track their cars are among some of the best/most skillful drivers of any cars. If you follow your logic, did you know from demographics that the average Vette driver is over 52 years old, around 6'2", and caucasian. Not exactly the pro drivers that you were thinking about that drive Vettes.

In the most recent Motor Trend they had a Vette Z51 vs. Carrera S :

Corvette Z51

0-60 : 4.4 sec.
1/4 mi. : 12.6 sec@113.2 mph
60-0 : 113 ft.
100-0 : 321 ft.
600 ft. slalom : 68.9 mph
skidpad : .96
Figure 8 : 25.2 sec.
Road Course Lap Time : 99.5 sec.

Porsche Carrera S

0-60 : 4.2 sec.
1/4 mile : 12.6 sec.@111.1 mph
60-0 : 106 ft.
100-0 : 299 ft.
600 ft. slalom : 70.1 mph
skidpad : .97
Figure 8 : 24.8 sec.
Road Course Lap Time : 100.1 sec.

The Vette is faster once you get to 80+ mph, and the engine has more flexible torque (faster 30-50, 50-70 times), but the Porsche has better brakes, handles better, and can match the Vette from 0-80, and through the 1/4 mi. because od superior traction. And read the article, they actually picked the Porsche. Their verdict. "The 911 Carrera S is simply the better sports car. At any price."

 

I tried to buy a vette when I was younger and one of the requirements was to see how close too the urinal I had to stand. They told me I had to stand too far back, so I was not qualified to be a vette owner.

I have no idea why you guys are comparing a vette to a Porsche, That's like comparing a 4 bedroom home with a mobile home.

 

 

Yes... if you read the article you would have seen all the lefthanded compliments the corvette was getting...

one section reads:
"Here, both of these cars are fantastic curve carvers. On the street, though, the nod goes to the 911.

We never found a patch of road that gave us even a whiff of that "Oh, %#$@!" feeling that precedes some type of midcorner correction or wheel sawing. Editor-at-large Pat Bedard calls this "path accuracy." At speed, how accurately can you place the car? With the 911, the answer is in fractions of an inch; with the Vette, it's in inches. This feeling likely is why the 911 went through the cones of our lane-change test 1.1 mph faster than the Vette. You can plant this car anywhere."

so your paying for the precise handling... so you don't DIE in a corvette... in case your wondering why the corvette has been #1 on the accident list?

also quoted from the article:

"The 911 doesn't throw you around nearly as much as the Vette over bumpy curves, and it's noticeably more stable." And this: "With the Vette, you have to tell yourself it's going to stay glued to the road, but in the 911, there's no need to wonder."

you have to "tell yourself" its going to stay glued!!!

alright... just keeping "telling yourself" its a better car.... roflmao

Hey 05997S ... above you say: "The point that I'm making is that you have to spend so much more money on a Porsche for a very and I do mean very small margin of performance, and at the point you are simply buying the badge."

it's that small margin of performance that i've detailed above in this post the wins races; that makes the difference between a good handling car and an exceptional handling car; that makes the difference whether you blow your brains out in a high speed corner or experience motoring nirvana while making it out and live to talk about it....! it's not a "small margin of performance" between the 2 cars...

the new z06 will certainly be an awesome value buy... but IMO porsche is still in a different league.

cheers
Peter

 

I read the entire article in R&T, did any of you?, you seem to be purposefully leaving out the most damning evidence against the 997 found in the "On Track" which states the Corvette is faster "by barely more than a half second over the course of a 2-minute lap." Lets say for the sake of the argument that "barely more than a half second is 6/10ths and the race is only ten laps. The lowly Corvette based on that small margin is now 6 seconds ahead of you. Are you still winning then? or is that enough of a margin for you to clearly see that you are now in second place. Apparently MT came up with the same conclusion. So for all that grace and precision of the 997 it still can't get around a track faster????? Hmmmm.

If you take the best time of the Turbo at 3.9 and the best time in the Vette of 4.1, you will still lose to the Vette now and again in a drag race, particularly since the drag racing/NASCAR fan Corvette demographic can surely holeshot better than any F1/Speedvision challenge Porsche owner.

I understand exactly what they are talking about in terms of car placement and I understand that you guys enjoy that swiss watch like precision and the exclusivity of the brand. I like them too. But based on real world driving conditions and amateur drivers operating the two cars, the Vette can beat the 997 and 997S, and I stand by my statement that the new C6 Corvette, not the old Z06 is now nearly as quick as the current Turbo.

Like I said, I agree that there are intangibles that the Porsche offers, including the humble attitude some of you are displaying, but for the money and the hype, I think Porsche falls short. I think it should fairly trounce a Corvette, but thats just me.

 

So the Porsche "falls a little short" but you think it should "trounce" the Vette? Seems to be a semantic gap there.

Is there some sort of "performance to cost" formula that you use to compute how much performance advantage the 911 should have over the Vette?

Do you buy sports cars based on potential street racing results? If so then you must know the outcomes of such encounters are not scitentific at all and depend mainly on the driver and not the car.

If you buy sports cars based on how they do at the track you have to know the results depend very much on the driver's abilities.

And I'm sure you know there are plenty of sports car owners who neither street race or track their cars. So the "who's faster" didn't factor into their buying decision at all. Lots of these owners care very much about performance though...just not against another car that might be on the road.