ditto

Alan

 

whether you believe it or not, engines have more than one metric for performance. Though definitely important, specific power output (bhp/L) is not the end all-be all of engines.

 

It is a great car, for sure. An ugly, oval turd looking one (imo), but a great one for sure. As far as performance, bottom line is that the Z06 is a lot faster in a stright line (which is where most races take place) and would be faster around a race track given the car has the same tires on as the RS (Meaning, things being equal, the Z06 is faster). Put them both on the same track as is from the factory with the factory tires, and it is a drivers race on the roadcourse.

Oh, and one is 40K less than the other..

 

and has as much orange peel as a $12,000 aveo, body gaps I could easily lose a finger in, and plastic from a malibu maxx 5 door

 

Orange peel? None on my car. Maybe others, but not mine.

Body gasps? Ok, if you say so.

Plastic? Sure, its got some, but if I wanted more luxury, I would have bought, well, a 911 Turbo..

 

As is the norm for these 911 vs. Corvette threads, this one too has sadly disintegrated into a meaningless war of words between the brand loyalists.

For the remaining few that love more than just one car or make and would like to engage in some technical discussion, here is the LINK to the track schematic (courtesy of the M5 forum) showing sector times for both cars. The Z06 has a slight edge on two of the sectors while the RS has a decisive lead through the Motordome. It appears that the chassis and tire combination on the RS is very much at home in the tighter sections and transient maneuvers while the Z06 holds its own on the sweepers (Parabolika sector) and exerts its might on the straights. Interestingly, the straightline acceleration performance of the two cars in this test was extremely close and the Corvette doesn't appear to have much of an advantage based on the times shown. Speculation over tire mismatch aside, a great track comparo between two fundamentally disparate yet very evenly matched machinery!

 

The 997 Turbo fitted with the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires it will lap the ring in an identical 7:42secs and is as fast as the 997GT3-RS. I'm not biased with 911T but I feel the turbo has more luxury and sport with AWD. The only problem is the weight.

The ZO6 is an awesome car and fastest for it's price. I would not be surprised if stock for stock the ZO6 is faster running the same tires as the GT3RS.

BTW: we all know if Porsche made a Caymen GT3 RS with a LSD it would be fastest .

 

I would hope that I am referring to grown men here but seriously 608TTS I think several of your comments are abrasive and uncalled for. Everyone can not buy a porsche or even wants a porsche and there is no reason to talk about cars that cost less money as if they are peices of trash.

I dont mind personal preference and debating on cars but for the owner of a more expensive car line to "look" down on other brands is not neccessary. In fact many of us have had to work mighty hard to own our porsche and owned chevies and civics and whatever else along the way.


Back to the topic.

I think it is highly admirable to have a 3.6 NA car that can keep up with a 7 liter NA car. American cars ahave always been known for large displacement, but now are starting to use it for something other than drag racing. Porsche just has a way of making the most out of the power it has. Both positive IMO. Lighten up fellers.

 

I agree. There is no need to bash or look down on what people own or what they drive. Hell some people don't want to own certain cars like a GT3, GT3RS,Turbo,Z06, etc. because maybe its a waste of money and they can't be used as they were built to be used. Just be happy that we are here living life and enjoying it.

Byron

 

Just because people love to throw around displacement figures arbitrarily, I thought this might interest you:

(from the 996 3.4 liter; tried and could not find weight figures for the 997 3.6): 420lbs
17/24 mpg --997 gt3

c6 z06 7.0: 450lbs (for reference BMW's 5.0 V10 weighs 529lbs)
16/26 mpg


My point is that it's not the behemoth it's made out to be, and displacement certainly does not dictate an engine's dimensions. Could they have made a 4.0-5.0 liter with 500hp? I'm sure. But it would rev to 9k and have a very peaky power band (ala Ferrari). As I'm sure you know, American car companies and consumers (generally speaking) like broad torque curves. That's why they favored a higher displacement motor, while not sacrificing much weight. Not a bad achievement if you ask me.

Jon

 

this clearly shows the GT3RS is faster through most of the corners (besides the fast sweepers)... and if it wasn't for the 90HP deficit of the GT3RS i am sure if both cars had the same tires the RS would still come out infront...

Alan

 

i am not even going to reply of some peoples posts... erase everything this Post has discussed and start from scatch... these two cars cannot even be compared since there is 90hp differences between them... and yes the corvette is faster on the staights and might be faster given same tires... but in the end there is always going to be that 90hp difference... so you guys tell me if its a fair race... and yes all you chevy lovers... THE Z06 IS FASTER given the RIGHT circumstands...

Alan

 

Are we still comparing d%$k sizes? So many cars are comparable but very different. Someone posted earlier that we are in a glorious time for car enthusiasts. I agree wholeheartedly and wish I had enough money/garage space/time to enjoy them more.

 

...The 997TT has a large power and torque advantage over the GT3 and RS, and no one takes shots at the Turbo. It's a different sports car that's geared toward a different use.

I'd say the Z06 lives somewhere between the Turbo and the GT3. More track orientated than the Turbo, but less so than the GT3. The outcome of this track test supports this. Cars perform as they were designed to - no more, no less. More motor, less tire, less suspension... Less motor, more suspension, less weight... etc, etc.

With regards to the 7 vs. 3.6 liter argument, it is harder to make high hp per liter with a large displacement motor than a smaller. Usually, a smaller motor has less friction, better combustion chamber performance and can much more easily turn higher rpm. Without the rpm, the 3.6 liter could not compete with a bigger motor of similar specification. So, while the Z06 has the C.I. advantage, the GT3 has an rpm advantage. Are they equal advantages? Probably not.

I'm sure the sport bike guys argue the same thing all the time, too. Smaller displacement, track biased bikes vs. the big liter bikes vs. the ones that are a cross between the two. They all have their advantages - performance, comfort, cost, etc. - just like the different sports cars have.

 

I'm sorry, but this is one of the funniest posts ever. "If it wasn't for the 90HP deficit..." Good grief. The Vette can slap on R compound tires for a grand or so, what would it cost to add 90 hp to an RS? When all is said and done, I'd rather have the RS, but let's face it, with equal tires, the Z06 is faster around the track.

Gary