C&D slams Corvette vert, last place finish in comparison
05-29-2009, 10:27 PM
#121
I enjoy the magazine....and they put the '09 Corvette on their "Ten Best" list...so its not all bad.Depends on which way the wind is blowing, which phase the moon is in, which Vette they will trash in one of their "test" next.
Anyone in here who owns any model of Vette, your time is coming to see your car get trashed in Car and Driver. Depends on what mood they're in.
05-29-2009, 10:29 PM
#122
Any Corvette C6 Convertible is by far the #1 Convertible on the planet for the money. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out. I should start my own magazine.. I wonder if they even drove one?????
05-29-2009, 10:36 PM
#123
Melting Slicks
I'm not that upset about it.
If you are going to take this approach every time one of these car rags dumps on your car following some bogus "test" held out as "valid", well then you are going to be sending a lot of e mails.
This article's conclusions, just like the one back in December, are so ludicrous, that it doesn't even deserve any response other than that which you see going on right in here.
To send them an email in protest of it, would give the indication that you read it. Actually worse than that.....you bought it, ie paid to read it.
And anyone who voluntarily read it, bought it, paid to read it, in light of some of the other known gibberish they have published, is dumber for having taking the time to do so.
If you are going to take this approach every time one of these car rags dumps on your car following some bogus "test" held out as "valid", well then you are going to be sending a lot of e mails.
This article's conclusions, just like the one back in December, are so ludicrous, that it doesn't even deserve any response other than that which you see going on right in here.
To send them an email in protest of it, would give the indication that you read it. Actually worse than that.....you bought it, ie paid to read it.
And anyone who voluntarily read it, bought it, paid to read it, in light of some of the other known gibberish they have published, is dumber for having taking the time to do so.
Ted
05-29-2009, 10:48 PM
#124
3rd Gear
Member Since: May 2009
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car & Driver Has Always Been Biased Toward Porsche
Does it really matter what one car mag says given all the great press the C6 particularly the Z06 has gotten? Have a little more confidence in the car you know better than any journalist. You own the car, they drive one for 30 minutes and then form a stupid opinion. Get used to it, our cars will probably be trashed merely because GM is going into bankrupcy.
By the way, there is one BMW that is a great car. My son drives an
M6 w/ the 500 hp V10. You can't compare it to the Vette until you drive one. It is made to run the Autobahn at 100 mph all day long and I mean ALL day. It is one well built beautifully equipped car w/ an internationally award winning engine. Trust me, the Germans know how to make high performance luxury cars and they give you 4years free maintenance. The downside is the M6 costs $112K new. The Z06 will always be the best bang for the buck super car known to man, period. And who knows better than us-no one!
By the way, there is one BMW that is a great car. My son drives an
M6 w/ the 500 hp V10. You can't compare it to the Vette until you drive one. It is made to run the Autobahn at 100 mph all day long and I mean ALL day. It is one well built beautifully equipped car w/ an internationally award winning engine. Trust me, the Germans know how to make high performance luxury cars and they give you 4years free maintenance. The downside is the M6 costs $112K new. The Z06 will always be the best bang for the buck super car known to man, period. And who knows better than us-no one!
05-29-2009, 10:49 PM
#125
I'm not sure I agree with you as I subscribe to most of the main car mags and enjoy reading about all cars. In the past they've had their bmw slant but we're also pretty honest about vettes including their basically subpar interior. Not until their idiotic comment about the z06 and now this has their integrity gone out the window. In my e-mail I did ask them to cancel my subscription. I think they need to be called out when their "reporting' becomes anything but. Clearly they had a biased agenda which has never been so apparent as their last two corvette reviews. It's not that they have to love the cars I do but they need to conduct themselves with some integrity and when they clearly fail I think they need to be called on it.
Ted
Ted
If you absolutely feel that you had to say something, well then I'm glad that you said it.
I'll never fault a person for speaking out when they reach a point, a threshold, to where they have heard enough
from those who are ill informed, misinformed, or just plain have an axe to grind, for whatever reason.I'm with you. I do it myself when I feel that I have to "call" people on their
In some camps, its made me less than popular but I digress
. But what the hey. Sometimes you have to do just what you did, and speak up.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 05-29-2009 at 10:53 PM.
05-29-2009, 11:18 PM
#126
Guys these magazines get their money from the adverts inside. If all they are getting are ads from BMW and not Chevrolet, who do you think they are going to trash? Their greatest client or their non existent client?????
Come on, there are more important things to talk about,
Cedric
Come on, there are more important things to talk about,
Cedric
05-29-2009, 11:20 PM
#127
Safety Car
Member Since: Jan 2009
Location: Mooresville (Race City USA) NC
Posts: 4,681
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Again, this is not an issue about previously generally complimentary comparison of Corvettes where Car and Driver suggested the Z06 versions might have certain issues, this is a review that unfairly compared a used '08 rental Corvette with low octane gas and 15,000 miles of abuse, plus no proper options, to a brand new competitive '09s loaded with every advantage option wise. I would think even a Z06 owner could understand this inequity, but perhaps I expect too much.
05-30-2009, 12:08 AM
#128
Again, this is not an issue about previously generally complimentary comparison of Corvettes where Car and Driver suggested the Z06 versions might have certain issues, this is a review that unfairly compared a used '08 rental Corvette with low octane gas and 15,000 miles of abuse, plus no proper options, to a brand new competitive '09s loaded with every advantage option wise. I would think even a Z06 owner could understand this inequity, but perhaps I expect too much.
Or perhaps reading comprehension is not your long suit.
Go back and read the thread, and you will find out that it was myself, a Z06 owner, and the original poster, another Z06 owner, who initially pointed out this "inequity" of which you speak. And I was perhaps much more vocal about this inequity than even he was.
Both he and I spoke in here, more than one time, with regard to the 15,000 miles on the test car, and on the fact that the car was a rental.
Furthermore, two days ago, I had pointed out that the car was a well broken in rental, and had perhaps noted this before anyone else in here had, and posted a link to those remarks in post #6 of this thread.
So before you go and try and jump on Z06 owners for not recognizing and "understanding this inequity", do get your facts straight. It was a Z06 owner who initially pointed it out, and has been among the more vocal people in here with regard to this travesty.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 05-30-2009 at 07:25 PM.
05-30-2009, 12:14 AM
#129
6th Gear
Member Since: May 2009
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am interested in a new 2009 1LT with no options on it as the price is right. The only option I would really consider would be the Z-51. I have to say this article was a bit concerning as I figured a stock C6 should still perform at a high level with strong braking and a skid pad performance around .90 g's
I realize the vehicle was used but 15,000 miles shouldn't have worn out the suspension and even the tires should have had a fair amount of tread left. Does anyone expect any car to have such a drastic drop in performance with only 12,000 miles? Something about that article is fishy especially when they didn't test a vehicle provided by the manufacturer.
Hopefully I can swing that new C6 in a month or so.
NC
I realize the vehicle was used but 15,000 miles shouldn't have worn out the suspension and even the tires should have had a fair amount of tread left. Does anyone expect any car to have such a drastic drop in performance with only 12,000 miles? Something about that article is fishy especially when they didn't test a vehicle provided by the manufacturer.
Hopefully I can swing that new C6 in a month or so.
NC
Last edited by NumberCruncher88; 05-30-2009 at 12:24 AM.
05-30-2009, 12:18 AM
#130
Drifting
Member Since: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am interested in a new 2009 1LT with no options on it as the price is right. The only option I would really consider would be the Z-51. I have to say this article was a bit concerning as I figured a stock C6 should still perform at a high level with strong braking and a skid pad performance around .90 g's
The car can still perform at the level you expected it to. The test was clearly biased. Some people have replaced their bald tires at 20,000 miles. The car had 15,000 miles on it. The suspension so far is not the problem, the problem is the tire grip.
Good luck on your search for a Corvette, they are all great!
I guess it all depends on what road surface one drives on, and how heavy ones right foot is.
Last edited by 09C6VRGG; 05-30-2009 at 12:28 AM.
05-30-2009, 12:24 AM
#131
6th Gear
Member Since: May 2009
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The car can still perform at the level you expected it to. The test was clearly biased. Some people have replaced their bald tires at 20,000 miles. The car had 15,000 miles on it. The suspension so far is not the problem, the problem is the tire grip
Good luck on your search for a Corvette, they are all great!
Not all vette owners have changed them at 20k miles, but the majority of the people I have asked have. A big thank you to the owners that I have quoted.
Good luck on your search for a Corvette, they are all great!
Not all vette owners have changed them at 20k miles, but the majority of the people I have asked have. A big thank you to the owners that I have quoted.
There are two dealers in the Seattle area with C6's like I want. I just have to commit and work is a bit sketchy now. I'll know for sure in a month or so.
NC
05-30-2009, 12:41 AM
#133
Race Director
Thread Starter
I had 25K miles on the stock Z51 F1 Supercars with a couple thousand miles left to go before I hit the wear bars. I drove the car hard but didn't do smokey burnouts. Dealer was shocked when I went to trade it in and he saw the stock tires
05-30-2009, 01:19 AM
#134
Racer
Member Since: Aug 2000
Location: Fremont,CA
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone see this? Car & Drivers love of the C6 seems to have ended. In the comparison the C6 is faced off against a Porsche boxter, Audi TT, BMW Z4. Not many nice things were said about the vette other then the obvious straight line acceleration.
The most telling and interesting part of the comparison is that they tested a BASE suspension C6 automatic. Now I've been reading for years how the base suspension was "nearly" as good as the Z51 which recieved all the hype in reviews and comparisons. Many on this forum believed the stock brakes/suspension could just about match the Z51 if only someone would test it. Well folks, the vette did pathetically bad imo. GM was wise to opt to test the base with the Z51 all these years.
base suspension
Skidpad........0.83G
braking 70-0......171 feet
Compared with the last Z51 they tested...
skidpad.......0.99
braking 70-0....152 feet
C&D blasted the handling, other then saying the car soaked up bumps well.
This shows just how much of a performance option the Z51 has been since the 2005 C6 debuted. Independent test faired poorly for a base suspension car and in that comparison field it hurt the Corvette big time.
Couple disclaimers though......GM didn't have a vette to lend, thus C&D was only able to land an 08 base suspension auto with 15K miles on it.
The most telling and interesting part of the comparison is that they tested a BASE suspension C6 automatic. Now I've been reading for years how the base suspension was "nearly" as good as the Z51 which recieved all the hype in reviews and comparisons. Many on this forum believed the stock brakes/suspension could just about match the Z51 if only someone would test it. Well folks, the vette did pathetically bad imo. GM was wise to opt to test the base with the Z51 all these years.
base suspension
Skidpad........0.83G
braking 70-0......171 feet
Compared with the last Z51 they tested...
skidpad.......0.99
braking 70-0....152 feet
C&D blasted the handling, other then saying the car soaked up bumps well.
This shows just how much of a performance option the Z51 has been since the 2005 C6 debuted. Independent test faired poorly for a base suspension car and in that comparison field it hurt the Corvette big time.
Couple disclaimers though......GM didn't have a vette to lend, thus C&D was only able to land an 08 base suspension auto with 15K miles on it.
05-30-2009, 01:20 AM
#135
Race Director
I own a 2008 MN6 F55 convertible (and had a 2005 Z51 MN6 convertible before that) so here are an owners thoughts:
1. I agree with C&D on the chassis flex issue. My rear view mirrow is useless on anything but smooth roads, that is chassis flex!
2. Seriously, the interior is bad, why does everyone circle the wagons on this point everytime it is brought up.
Lastly, I disagree that C&D is anti-American or more precisely, anti-Corvette. The C6 has been a 10Best winner since it's into, the C5 made the C&D 10 best list a few times as well. I think they are very honest about the C6's shortcomings the WE (Corvette owners) talk about all the time.
That said, I found it SHOCKING that C&D would test a rental car, I also found it SHOCKING that GM couldn't find the magazine a properly equipped new car. The test numbers imply that something was not right with the car (as has been mentioned).
Jimmy
1. I agree with C&D on the chassis flex issue. My rear view mirrow is useless on anything but smooth roads, that is chassis flex!
2. Seriously, the interior is bad, why does everyone circle the wagons on this point everytime it is brought up.
Lastly, I disagree that C&D is anti-American or more precisely, anti-Corvette. The C6 has been a 10Best winner since it's into, the C5 made the C&D 10 best list a few times as well. I think they are very honest about the C6's shortcomings the WE (Corvette owners) talk about all the time.
That said, I found it SHOCKING that C&D would test a rental car, I also found it SHOCKING that GM couldn't find the magazine a properly equipped new car. The test numbers imply that something was not right with the car (as has been mentioned).
Jimmy
Last edited by jimmyb; 05-30-2009 at 02:05 PM.
05-30-2009, 05:38 AM
#136
I realize the vehicle was used but 15,000 miles shouldn't have worn out the suspension and even the tires should have had a fair amount of tread left. Does anyone expect any car to have such a drastic drop in performance with only 12,000 miles? Something about that article is fishy especially when they didn't test a vehicle provided by the manufacturer.
NC
NC
Now it is true that the car tested was a convertible. We all know convertibles don't perform all that well. They flex. They're heavy. Z06s have fixed roofs because convertibles aren't competitive on a race track. But a C6 convertible isn't that bad. It still has a considerable amount of power. It still has a low center of gravity. Etc. It shouldn't do quite as bad as the numbers C&D posted unless they were deliberately sandbagging.
05-30-2009, 07:11 AM
#137
Team Owner
I also find it a little amazing that posters are claiming a C6 is shot, worn out, spent, done, after only 15,000 miles. I'm also a little surprised that they think a car will perform best with zero miles, before it has had a chance to break in. That certainly hasn't been my experience with the car. If anything, it is stronger now after 70,000 miles than it was the day I bought it. No one seems to be considering that the person driving the car in that test might just be a poor driver. No one seems to be considering, despite all the bad mouthing about C&D bias, that maybe they threw the contest.
Now it is true that the car tested was a convertible. We all know convertibles don't perform all that well. They flex. They're heavy. Z06s have fixed roofs because convertibles aren't competitive on a race track. But a C6 convertible isn't that bad. It still has a considerable amount of power. It still has a low center of gravity. Etc. It shouldn't do quite as bad as the numbers C&D posted unless they were deliberately sandbagging.
Now it is true that the car tested was a convertible. We all know convertibles don't perform all that well. They flex. They're heavy. Z06s have fixed roofs because convertibles aren't competitive on a race track. But a C6 convertible isn't that bad. It still has a considerable amount of power. It still has a low center of gravity. Etc. It shouldn't do quite as bad as the numbers C&D posted unless they were deliberately sandbagging.
1) Nobody complained about the engines performance, so the miles on it were not related to that.
2) I haven't looked it up lately, but the convertible hardly weights any more than the coupe - it's not enough to have any effect on the performance.
3) Nobody is saying that a 15,000 mile car is "shot". What they are saying is that the tires are likely worn to the extent of effecting handling, and that 15,000 miles of rental car miles likely effects the overall condition of the car. I've rented many cars and there is no question that they have more squeaks and rattles than non rentals.
4) I for one don't think it's a matter of them not knowing how to drive, or even that they have anything against the Corvette. I'll bet that if anyone on this forum drove those four cars on a race track we would agree that it's handling and overall solidness are the worst. Simply put, they screwed up by using a poor example to test against the other cars latest greatest with the most sporting equipment.
05-30-2009, 07:59 AM
#138
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 46,111
Received 2,485 Likes
on
1,947 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
"In honor of jpee"
I own a 2008 MN6 F55 convertible (and had a 2005 Z51 MN6 convertible before that) so here are an owners thoughts:
1. I agree with C&D on the chassis flex issue. My rear view mirrow is useless on anything but smooth roads, that is chassis flex!
2. Seriously, the interior is bad, why does everyone circle the wagons on this point everytime it is brought up.
Lastly, I disagree that C&D is anti-American or more precisely, anti-Corvette. The C6 has been a 10Best winner since it's into, the C5 make the C&D 10 best list a few times as well. I think they are very honest about the C6's shortcomings the WE (Corvette owners) talk about all the time.
That said, I found it SHOCKING that C&D would test a rental car, I also found it SHOCKING that GM couldn't find the magazine a properly equipped new car. The test numbers imply that something was not right with the car (as has been mentioned).
Jimmy
1. I agree with C&D on the chassis flex issue. My rear view mirrow is useless on anything but smooth roads, that is chassis flex!
2. Seriously, the interior is bad, why does everyone circle the wagons on this point everytime it is brought up.
Lastly, I disagree that C&D is anti-American or more precisely, anti-Corvette. The C6 has been a 10Best winner since it's into, the C5 make the C&D 10 best list a few times as well. I think they are very honest about the C6's shortcomings the WE (Corvette owners) talk about all the time.
That said, I found it SHOCKING that C&D would test a rental car, I also found it SHOCKING that GM couldn't find the magazine a properly equipped new car. The test numbers imply that something was not right with the car (as has been mentioned).
Jimmy
I've sat in, rode and owned Luxo-barges. I find no problems with the interior. Could it be different materials, more posh, more leather, more burled wood (huh?), "Corinthian Ledder"
----sure. But I don't NEED it. So, no, I don't agree my interior is lousy. It isn't a Luxo-barge. But that IS just my opinion.I also find it a little amazing that posters are claiming a C6 is shot, worn out, spent, done, after only 15,000 miles. I'm also a little surprised that they think a car will perform best with zero miles, before it has had a chance to break in. That certainly hasn't been my experience with the car. If anything, it is stronger now after 70,000 miles than it was the day I bought it. No one seems to be considering that the person driving the car in that test might just be a poor driver. No one seems to be considering, despite all the bad mouthing about C&D bias, that maybe they threw the contest.
Now it is true that the car tested was a convertible. We all know convertibles don't perform all that well. They flex. They're heavy. Z06s have fixed roofs because convertibles aren't competitive on a race track. But a C6 convertible isn't that bad. It still has a considerable amount of power. It still has a low center of gravity. Etc. It shouldn't do quite as bad as the numbers C&D posted unless they were deliberately sandbagging.
Now it is true that the car tested was a convertible. We all know convertibles don't perform all that well. They flex. They're heavy. Z06s have fixed roofs because convertibles aren't competitive on a race track. But a C6 convertible isn't that bad. It still has a considerable amount of power. It still has a low center of gravity. Etc. It shouldn't do quite as bad as the numbers C&D posted unless they were deliberately sandbagging.
[partial quote] "...Let it be. So maybe a base suspension isn't the end all, or maybe it had worn tires, or maybe the test driver was a rookie but great at writing car mag articles. Who cares?"Considering that many convertibles, aka roadsters, are purpose built, I'm quite surprised that finally, the Corvette is, too. I guess its structural rigidity could be improved by a coupe body, but then a coupe body's integrity can be improved by a full-race rollbar setup.
And finally, to answer Jim S.'s point: the convertible weighs 26 pounds more than a comparable coupe.
There, I feel better now. And still like my car and those who posted here.
05-30-2009, 11:20 AM
#139
Le Mans Master
Again, this is not an issue about previously generally complimentary comparison of Corvettes where Car and Driver suggested the Z06 versions might have certain issues, this is a review that unfairly compared a used '08 rental Corvette with low octane gas and 15,000 miles of abuse, plus no proper options, to a brand new competitive '09s loaded with every advantage option wise. I would think even a Z06 owner could understand this inequity, but perhaps I expect too much.
The issue is this. When conducting a comparison test of anything you want your sample to be reliable and representative of that group. In this case, C&D chose a sample that has questionable issues with that reliability. If they had prefaced their test of this car by saying that they had installed new tires and done a factory alignment, then the test would be more valid. They apparently didn't and therefore the results are suspect.
05-30-2009, 11:26 AM
#140
Your reading comprehension if fine.
The issue is this. When conducting a comparison test of anything you want your sample to be reliable and representative of that group. In this case, C&D chose a sample that has questionable issues with that reliability. If they had prefaced their test of this car by saying that they had installed new tires and done a factory alignment, then the test would be more valid. They apparently didn't and therefore the results are suspect.
The issue is this. When conducting a comparison test of anything you want your sample to be reliable and representative of that group. In this case, C&D chose a sample that has questionable issues with that reliability. If they had prefaced their test of this car by saying that they had installed new tires and done a factory alignment, then the test would be more valid. They apparently didn't and therefore the results are suspect.
You broke that down for him quite well I might add though.
The guy came from an aggressive and condescending position,...really just a flat out rip, apparently not knowing that a Z06 owner, or Z06 owners, which he was attempting to indict in his post, when he says:
they wrote about the Z06 back in their December issue, thus there is a pattern, right counselor?I think part of his issue, and perhaps even yours, is a willingness to accept the
they wrote about the Z06, because it serves an agenda. But a rejection of the they write a few months later, about the base car, because that doesn't serve the same agenda.
Last edited by '06 Quicksilver Z06; 05-30-2009 at 07:26 PM.