Comparison: Stingray vs. 911 vs. Ferrari F12
 

Courtesy of Motor Trend:

"For the first time in my professional career, I can honestly say that a new Corvette is a complete package. There's nothing anywhere to betray America's favorite sports car. Stuff like crap seats, crappier interior, and an indismissible feeling of cheapness have been banished to the dustbin of automotive history. The new Corvette absolutely rocks. Around Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca, I found it nearly as planted as the 911. That said, I believe the 991 iteration of the 911 has the best suspension damping in the history of the production car. That's hard to beat. But more important, the RWD Corvette puts its power down to the ground as well as the AWD 911 does. Big props to the guys who perfected that trick sport differential -- it's close to magic."

And how about that...3.7 second 0-60 (although they list 3.9 in the data matrix...perhaps a typo as there are a few others) 12.0 at 118.4 mph through the quarter, over .7 faster than the Porsche around LS and .2 behind the F12.
Nice.
S.

I LOVED WATCHING THE VIDEO!

:party:

"...once we get our hands on the 991 GT3 and C7 Z06. Or should that be Porsche Turbo S and Corvette ZR1?" Johnny Lieberman, MT

Yes - these are the "comparos" we're all waiting for so when you compare "dollar for dollar," the Hi-Po versions of the C7 will trump the 911 C4S in SPADES! Now that GTR is going to be something to be reckoned with, but that's another story, I think. :D

How could it be a good drivers experience to come in 3rd out of 3?

Third place by the Ferrari in this group is no loss. None of these cars are anything but awesome. Take the 3 hottest girls at the beach and the third hottest is still damn fu@king hot!!!!

So the car ran a 1:38.28, does anyone know what the C6 GS ran? We all know the best ZO6 time was 1:34.43 which is almost 4 seconds faster, an eternity over a 2 mile track. I remember people saying the C7 was within a couple of seconds of the Z06 at VIR which is 3.2 miles long, what gives?

:flag:

What was motortrend's reason behind the 911 winning? Both the F12 and Stingray were quicker on the track. It looked like a track comparison to me. All three cars are sick though.

The MO of MT since it's inception is to accept large payments from Porsche. It is by far the worst car magazine.

Can. Not. Wait!!!!

The F12 sounds amazing!!!

Now only if my Vette would hurry up and get here...

BTW Anyone notice the tail light drip on the Vette? LMAO

I am sure it has nothing to do with them preferring the Car..........here we go again.

Did you read this part of the Article-

Remember, if you could boil down what we're looking for when it comes to a Best Driver's Car, confidence might be the ultimate factor. The 911 has it in spades. Explained Lago, "There always seems to be more grip in the front tires, and you can get away with utterly nonsensical speeds through corners. Never tells you anything's going to go wrong, only tells you to go faster." Evans said more or less the same thing. "After talking to Randy, I think the car is so good that it no longer really challenges you with its own flaws. Instead, it challenges you with your flaws." The 911 C4S proves you really and truly can drift an AWD car.

Did you skip these sentances-

The new Corvette absolutely rocks. Around Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca, I found it nearly as planted as the 911. That said, I believe the 991 iteration of the 911 has the best suspension damping in the history of the production car.

Why can't some of you just accept that they are all great cars and some people including Magazines professional drivers will prefer one over the other.

:iagree:

There is more to the driving experience than just lap times and 0-60 IMO.
I think the comments by both Lago and Pobst were fair.
I have had a 911C4S (2009) until a few weeks ago and currently have a 2007 GT3 for the track and occasional DD while I wait for the C7 Z51,MRC,NPP, manual I ordered in arctic white with a red interior 3LT as a new DD.. The fact that all here cars were close is amazing especially considering the range of prices involved. Later the Z06 or Z07 can be compared with the 991 GT3 or GT3RS but that is in the future.

Very cool!

Yes, the base C6 Z06. Not the C6 Z06/Z07 with Cup tires and CC brakes.

Seeing as how the Cup tires were worth 2 seconds from the '09 ZR1 to '13 ZR1, we can assume that combo is worth about 3 seconds on a Z06 as well(have to step down to the GY tires and GS brakes).

So a base Z06 would run about 1:37. With the Stingray at 1:38, GM is right on target.

Lets all remove our hats and bow down to the fabulous Porsche engineers who have to charge $151,000 for a car that can compete with a $55,000 C7. This is absolutely laughable.

But, but, but... German.

Okay that makes sense Kappa. thx...

I always find it hard to read/watch a comparo like this. When cost/horsepower/form factor are so different, it makes comparing them very difficult. Clearly, Ferrari is a sex machine in every sense but at the track at a price few can afford. The Porsche is a dominant car handling-wise but looks like every Porsche made in recent memory. The Stingray finally has the feel and speed to match the twice-as-expensive Porsche but you better have it set up right to do so.

Ultimately, my greatest takeaway from this comparo it is extremely impressive that the C7 stands with these other world-class contestants for the performance and feel, price be damned. A home run.

AND I am so FRICKING glad we don't have to hear any crap about the interior/seats!!!

I agree with you about the seat remarks but I would still like the phrase "great car for the price" to be banished from these magazines.

Gentlemen. I was there for this test. I talked to Jonny for a half hour on the 911 vs C7. He told me this was going to be very very close. So close in fact that it will be a personal preference call. When I posted the 911 vs C7 thread a while back I couldn't talk about it much as I told Jonny I wouldn't give out the results. That thread went ballistic with anticipation of this test. One thing that happened that they didn't report was a second run around the track by the engineers from Corvette that matched the F12 time. After the Motor Trend guys finished up and also Pobst, the Corvette engineers reset the computer handling parameters and went out and reset a time which was faster and also matched the Ferrari time. The engineers called out to see if they wanted to accept that time and the MT guys said no. They had already done their lap timing and that the new time by Corvette would not be used. That's probably fair since Porsche and Ferrari did not have their testing engineers there to extract a better time. Overall a great result for Corvette. Jonny didn't give out his final results to me but I think he was having a real time of it making a decision on this. All of the MT guys were there and I'm sure it was a consensus of all, but could be nothing more than 911 fanboys vs Corvette fanboys in the group. I know Angus is a Porsche guy. I forgot to mention that the Corvette was a pre-production car without the the latest handling parameters. The Corvette engineers indicated that and then changed it to their latest settings. Hence, the faster lap time!!!

They don't have to charge that amount. Rather they can and do.

It's the difference b/n being a price seeker and a price taker.


Excellent comparo. I think Ox sums it up nicely. Three outstanding machines of vastly different DNA and a group in which team vette should be justifiably proud to see their machine.

And, man oh man, how about the sound of the F car V12. I hope that's not the last V12 they're able to make. Would be a damned shame for the world to lose that mill.

Pobst turned a 140.92 in the 2006 Z06. No doubt the tires were inferior to the new C7, but it still shows how far we have come. I don't think Randy ever ran a Grand Sport around Laguna Seca to compare.

The 1:40 lap time for the '06 Z06 was not Pobst. It was Max Angelelli, so not a direct comparison.

For comparison the '09 ZR1, with Pobst driving, turned a 1:35.8.

Why did the tool drive the corvette and Probst showed what the other two could do? Very obvious he was going a lot slower than the pro. It is also obvious that stiffer stabilizer bars and better rubber will help the car a lot on the track.

The Ferrari is five times the cost of the C7, 102k in options alone. Throw another zero on my bank account though, I'll take one.

Even with the options the vette is 1/2 the price of the Porsche. If that's not value, I don't know what is.

This article just reinforces how complete the C7 is.

Great to watch and the Ferrari sounds like a 12 cylinder car should. But the Porsche is still ugly . Toad hall racing is what I call them. I was kind of let down when randy was not driving the C7 in the video . They used numb nuts and he look liked he was going to church . Slowest car around the track and 1/4 mile wins. WHAT

We all bitch about the c7's weight (me included) but look at the Ferrari's over 4,000 lbs. It needs 700hp and dct transmission.

If there is even a reason to do a compare between a $55k car and a $155k car, the $55k car has already won, IMHO. :cheers:

I would like to see a MANUAL porsche c2(RWD) vs the C7. That would properly show you the difference in performance.

:iagree: Exactly, I've been pointing that out since the Edmonds test... A manual car vs. The most advanced DCT's available and still held its own. VERY IMPRESSIVE:D

Great result for the Corvette and good writeup, though the road test portion was a bit skimpy on info.

So they had the production handling parameters all loaded up and ready to go...yet decided not to use it. Is Ralph working for GM now? You were hyping everything up with your "sworn to secrecy" and "It will certainly be a one way street towards the C7 and not the other way around." While I think some people will be moved toward the C7, it's not necessarily a one-way street as those who have aspired to own a 911 will continue to do so. Those with crazy money will pick one of each. Funny how it's a one-way street to Corvette, but no one here wants to acknowledge that the Porsche, costing only slightly more than 1/3rd of the Ferrari's price, lapped in a very similar time. It's not the "dominating" figure you were claiming and Motor Trend spells this out:
"However, it's not radically ahead of the 140-lb-ft-torque-deficient AWD 911."


Claims by others of "5 seconds faster at VIR or Laguna Seca" now rest entirely on VIR, as the difference at LS was only 0.72s.

It's best vs best(relatively speaking).

Notice Chevy isn't throwing auto-Z51's around to all the mags? They sure could if they wanted to.

No excuses in real life folks, life is all about run what ya brung.

Something's still fishy about this f12 though. It just doesn't add up that the 599gtb is nearly its match. The 300-400lbs over the 599, where did it appear from?!? Isn't the AWD 4 seat FF 4200lbs? Isn't the aventador 3900lbs? How could Ferrari release such an underachieving car go from development to production? No one stopped and said wait a minute...?

And we all know that the Corvette will not win that comparo, either. If only predicting the stock market was this easy.

:flaghalfmast:

What I learned from this comparo.

1) I cannot afford the Ferrari. It is simply not going to happen.

2) I can uncomfortably afford the 911S Carrera, but think its silly to pay $155K for car that is so common in the DC area. I imagine pulling up beside a soccer mom who has her kids in the back of her 911 and wondering why I spent that much money on a 911. At that point, I would probably kick myself in the nuts as I could have bought a condo in Miami with $155K and never had to worry about seeing a soccer mom next door.

3) I can very comfortably afford the C7. It looks as good as any sports car on the market and performs as well as cars that cost 3x its price.

I'm tired of hearing about "value".

If I have $150k to spend on a car the value proposition means nothing to me. If I have $70k to spend on a car it still means nothing because I can't afford the Porsche so its the Corvette for me.

Why would anyone be surprised that the Porsche, with its more expensive suspension set up, PDK trans and all wheel drive has a better track "feel" than the Corvette?

That Corvette delivers 99% of the Porsche for half the price is a testament to GM and the engineering team. For us working stiffs for whom there is no other option, we need to give thanks.

the manufacturers put parameters on who drives the cars they test. i can tell you if I'm Ferrari or Porsche that dude didn't make the drivers list. GM though... sure, why not. It's not like the Stingray is a 200,000 dollar masterpiece. it's a 50,000 dollar masterpiece.

Because they know their customers generally won't care what it does on a track. The 575M, for example, was blasted for its track manners in UK press tests. Did that bother customers? Not the ones who had already deposited their money and don't care for mag tests. Once those customers are satisfied, the HGTE-type packs are available for those who want a more sporting character.
Also, I mentioned in the other thread that the 599 never weighed 300-400 lbs less than the F12. The weights of 599s tested full of fluids (not dry like Ferrari claims) and typical options have been in the 3900 lb region.

What a silly standard neglecting price in the comparison. Conclusion neglects the #1 consideration and is consistent with kids spending other people's money. Or a better analogy - me with a six inch penis standing next to someone's twice-as-long foot long and claiming the motion of my ocean is better so I win... when everyone not delusional knows that's not true.

For the price of that 911 I can buy two (2) fully optioned Stingrays. AND be better than the Porsche in acceleration, braking, and track time. Additional marginal "confidence" does not make up that $75K gap. For the price of that Ferrari I can have one Stingray of each color for every day of the week.

Thanks for the followup. It's amazing that the C7 was able to come within .2 of the Ferrari and was .7 quicker than the Porsche around the track. Even more impressive when you can see the advancements made in the suspension software. It's to bad they didn't allow it to be used, but it's understandable. Run the car as it was given to you. I'm wondering if the software the C7 was using contributed to their preference of the Sport setting over the Track setting. That seems contrary to what we've been seeing in other articles.

Not really surprised that the 911 was able to eek out a victory due to its subjective merits. The fact that the Corvette is so very close even in those categories is quite a feat. Those folks that are willing to cross shop will have a much tougher time choosing than ever before. With it that close, the better performance numbers of the Corvette may be enough to sway them.

Not true. Carlos drove the Ferrari and Porsche in other videos.

You guys are looking wayyyyyyyy too hard into this. Both people drove all the cars and then they talk about them in the car during the video. They just showed a different driver between the first and last just to mix it up, so not to have the same guy driving all the time.

The lap times were done by the Randy, the racing driver.

:iagree:

You could, but would any of those Stingrays replicate the experience of driving the Ferrari? It's true that you could have 20 McDonald's Happy Meals for the price of a $50 steak dinner at a nice restaurant with a view of the city. But the experience is not the same.

I gotta say, since I heard about this test last month in a thread, I was anticipating it. And based on that thread, it sure sounded like the C7 would finally a win a comparison, and not because it costs less.

(The OP in that thread also stated the V12 car, the Ferrari, wouldn't be directly tested against the 911 and Corvette. Well, maybe MT didn't test all three the same day or or at the same time, but they did compare all three.)

I have to say, I am crushed, though. I really thought that, this time, finally, the Corvette would edge out the 911. I wish I can be at the test track or on these back roads and ask them if they pick these cars based on their bias for Porsches, Ferraris, Corvettes, Lambos, Vipers, or any other car or manufacturer. It's just so hard for me to believe that a car the Corvette team benched against still beat it, straight-up. What exactly is the reason why they feel the 911 inspires immediate confidence and continues throughout the track run, yet the Corvette takes a little time to build up to it?

I just don't get it. I have a feeling if this Corvette was in their last driver's car series, it would've landed 4th, behind the SLS AMG Black Series and Audi V8 10 Plus.

Seems to me they were articulating that the driving experience was pretty similar. The mystique of a $400,000 Ferrari can't be overcome but the actual driving experience seemed to be as good in the C7... hence why the F12 was third.

Guibo, you can't compare 20 McDonald's versus steak dinner - that's a luxury affordable to anyone. At considerations of $75K versus $150K... that's more than the annual income of 90% of the American population.

Regardless of the outcome, that Ferrari was damn sexy. I wonder how a Torch Red C7 with Kalahari interior and yellow calipers would look? Can you say . . . . wait for it . . . Cherrari?

I think this is a overreaction. If you listen to their words, the cars were incredibly close. The C6 would not have been as incredibly close. That is the win. When the cars are so close, another magazine, say C&D, could easily have gone the other way.

Put another way... think of the company the car is being compared with and the comments that were made... HUGELY positive IMO because the final "win" was subjective and very close.

Hm, I would argue that if you removed the badge, made them both red, and rounded up 100 women - they couldn't tell the difference. An interesting Youtube experiment = P

Similar, yes. On a racetrack. Audibly, one can tell the soundtrack and snaps of the gearchange were something else. Pobst and the MT editor were giddy just listening to it, and for those who can afford it, the track manners of the Corvette is not likely to be a consideration. Nor is the Porsche's superior manners likely to sway someone who has a deposit on an F12.
I think their comments about the F12 have merit and have been echoed elsewhere: Not enough chassis/tire for that level of power.

You mean a $50 steak dinner is a luxury affordable to anyone? Tell that to the homeless folks in this country, or those who have been laid off and working multiple part-time jobs just to make ends meet.
A $70k Corvette is already beyond the means of much of the American population (whose average income is closer to the $50k mark). We are just debating one luxury item over another. But my point still stands: Yes, you can buy all of those Stingrays, but none of them give you the same experience. Yes, the Corvette has its own qualities too. But a person who can afford both isn't likely to make it an either/or proposition.

I can afford all three and I am making it an either/or proposition. The other two cars, in the presence of the Stingray, make no financial sense.

Awesome video

Thanks for posting

Good to see the new c7 is so capable nearly lapping as quickly as the Ferrari F12 which is stunning and is faster than the cool Porsche 911s....

Perhaps the 911's steel structure is more rigid. It is narrower and the sightline out the front gives a better view of the road, so that could give better awareness of actual speed and placement options within the track width.
Finishing 4th behind those cars would not be a bad result by any means. That's better than the GT-R, Cayman, M6 (BMW's marketplace competitor to the 911), Aston Vanquish, and 8 spots in front of the Viper.

Would love to be in the "test group." :cheers:

Yes, but you're not the only one. ;) That's why $50 steak dinners and Ferraris continue to exist.
Financial sense? None of these cars makes any financial sense. You're losing money on all of them. But do luxury sports cars have to make financial sense? What about emotional sense? I have yet to find anyone here who would pay $70k for a car that looks like a Kia hatchback (and not a Corvette) and sounds like a Prius (rather than a roaring V8), even if it was much faster than the Vette.

Here's one part where the F12 could make financial sense: If you're fortunate to get an F12 at MSRP, that could get you a prime spot on the list for Ferrari's ultra-limited exotics. If I'm not mistaken, the Enzo still sells for far above its original MSRP, and that's for a used car, someone's sloppy seconds. See? Value is relative.

It is fascinating that Porsche still uses a steel structure and their cars are so light, yet Corvette has switched to an all aluminum one and it's still not lighter than the Porsche. The field vision is a similar argument brought up between the Mclaren 12C and the Ferrari 458. The former permits the driver to sit better on the road, reportedly, but the 458 is the more visceral experience, nonetheless.

Here, apparently, the more visceral experience was the 911. Again.

You're right, none of them make financial sense. It's ultimately a value argument - I can get approximately the same car for 1/8 - 1/2 the price. In real life, price is everything. People don't wake up and say I need a new car - let's shop and see which one is best regardless of price, a Ferrari or a Honda?

Well put.

They clearly say they based their ranking on handling: Porsches really ARE sweet driving cars. The Ferrari came in third because of handling, even at a third of a million dollars and a mesmerizing zillion RPM V12!

NOTE: There is GM engineering in all three cars: ALL have GM-patented "rheological" shocks

The GM engineers are have done a fantastic job and it shows: my C7 is 4B00 and I going nuts waiting for it. But if the 2016 C7 gets a double clutch tranny and AWD I will buy one in a heartbeat. I'm hoping GM gives them the freedom to continue to develop an ever-better car.

Billsee

He does not get it...some people have money to burn. He is not one of them.

Approximately by numbers, yes. But numbers are not the only things that make up a car. Nor does the car itself only define the ownership experience. The Porsche and Ferrari are in a different league in terms of customizing it to exactly the way you want it. The Porsche has safety and convenience features not found on the Corvette at any price. And while 911 and Corvette guys are smug in the knowledge that they bought the "better" car, the F12 buyer is stepping into an F12XX Evo at Spa Francorchamps or Monza, as part of Ferrari's client program in helping to formulate what its successor might be like.
As I say, the F12 might make financial sense in that it is a gateway to Ferraris that don't lose value and can even make money.

Example:
Enzo
2003 MSRP: $643,330
2013 Auction result: $1,320,000
http://www.rmauctions.com/lots/lot.cfm?lot_id=1057513

Buying a Corvette or Porsche 911 won't do anything for you in that regard.

:iagree:

These 3 posts absolutely nailed it!:yesnod:

Price is not everything to everyone. A buyer contemplating a Ferrari doesn't wake up and say I need a new car - let's choose the Honda because it's 70% as fast around a track for only 5% of the price. Meanwhile, for some Lambo buyers, they don't give a rat's a$$ that a 458 is faster on a track; they prefer the Lambo ethos and don't like the hoops that some Ferrari dealers make their customers jump through.
It doesn't have to be daily, but some people do buy cars more often than some people buy $50 steak dinners (which for some people never even happens once).

Except to those who do not want a dime a dozen car! Having something not everyone else does and the prestige is worth a lot of coin to some.

I have zero problems with the article and zero problems with Randy Pobst.

There are rumors that after the results of the last few such showdowns, Ferrari has indicated that they will never again lend anyone a new super car to go up against the Corvette ZR-1 type cars.

Everyone has forgotten that GM said that their target was the 911/991. I think this review clearly shows they have hit their target dead center. Once the new ZO7 hits the track, I believe it will reign supreme over any street car under $400,000 and will likely knock off most of those cars too.

Props to the GM teams!

And, for heavens sake, would everyone quit erupting in defensive acrimony anytime some guy says the C7 isn't the greatest thing on earth? It shows a lack of class and a lack of confidence in the C7. It simply says that maybe the nay sayers are right.

Another thing I forgot to mention that could add to the confidence is the AWD. Past Porsches have been noted for confidence-sapping rear-engined antics and power-on understeer (which should be worse with AWD), yet the 991 C4S seems very well balanced. With this added traction and lower power, it could mean that the driver is able to (or needs to) call upon more of the engine's rev range more of the time. This is also partly why the 458 offers the more visceral experience. It's naturally aspirated motor needs to be wound out more than the comparatively muffled and effortlessly torquey McLaren, but that adds to the fun factor. Which I'd argue is a huge part of the sports car buying decision in the first place.

The C7 is now 0-2 in comparos against the 911. I think the first one was Edmunds. I thought the ****** C6 seats and interior were the only things holding it back.

It's not a 911, it's a 4S. The ZO7 will handle the 4S quite nicely and still run $30k-40k less. Just as the C7 Z51 handles any 911 quite well.

MT's online editor:

"The type of person who buys a supercar isn’t always the same type of person who lusts over its specs and attempts to wring out every ounce of performance at the track. Ferrari should hope the latter group of enthusiasts aren’t clamoring for its new F12 Berlinetta, as we found in our First Test that the prancing horse’s latest flagship has more bark than bite — though its bite is probably more than enough for the average buyer’s needs. For today’s Thread of the Day, we want to know if you think F12 buyers should care that it’s not the fastest thing on earth.

In all fairness, the 2014 Ferrari F12 Berlinetta was never pushed as an all-out sports car, rather a very capable grand tourer. But considering it has 731 hp and 508 lb-ft of torque from a 6.3-liter V-12 and initial claims that the car could keep up in a straight line with an Enzo, we expected better than its 3.6-second 0-60 mph result. The culprits here are the F12′s curb weight of 4003 pounds and a lack of grip. The stock Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires couldn’t put the power down during hard launches, but once they gain traction, the F12 accelerates with the rapidity you’d expect from 700-plus-hp.

But how many Ferrari owners will go out to a track and explore the F12′s performance at the limit? In many ways, the F12′s specs and $322,638 starting price ($434,144 as tested) serve only as bragging rights for the uber-rich — a bonus to go along with its stunning exterior. Odds are many who can afford an F12 will spend most of their time driving on public roads. As we noted, though, even driving the front-engine coupe on the road can be a hair-raising experience, as the car constantly feels like it’s at the edge of its grip, which doesn’t enhance driver confidence.

What do you think? Should Ferrari F12 owners care about the car’s performance? Tell us in the comments below."

http://wot.motortrend.com/totd-shoul...ce-409917.html

I think those are all fair points. But what is puzzling to me, even more so, is their comment that the Corvette has the best steering of the three, and the Porsche, as we know, has tremendous steering. Here, I presume they mean steering feel, how much the car communicates to the driver. One would think the more communication, the better driver experience, at least that's how I interpret it. Therefore, it's even more surprising that the 911 won the comparison, regardless of price.

I would agree that that holds true, but within that regard and assuming all else is the same. What the C4S trades in steering feel, it could more than make up for in traction. Then there are the things we haven't touched on yet, like how the brakes feel (easy to modulate, descriptive of the surface, fade resistance). Is the car stable under braking? In the video, they commented that the C7 was great in the corners and on exits, but felt less stable than the C6 under braking.

I don't think they are picking cars for the performance....maybe the P car is just the better car in their eyes?

It was more than that. However, this is NOT the 997 Porsche that the C6 would have been most compared to. This is the 991 which is a major improvement over the 997. The fact that the 991 and C7 are so close now, even on the subjective areas where the C6 fell down vs. the 997, speaks volumes about how far the C7 has come.

Yeah, that's a gut-wrenching comment, IMO, that it's less stable than the C6. It's tail-happy, pitches, maybe has a little more body roll. They used the word "fear", that the car has to be respected, whereas the 911 there is no fear -- that's where the confidence comes into play. I have to say, again, I'm a bit surprised by the MT commentary.

I take the exact opposite from their comments. I think they were hugely positive.

A 465 ft.lb torque RWD car will ALWAYS be more tail happy and induce more fear than the low torque AWD car. It is part of the DNA. I have had track time in both types of cars and the difference in RWD vs. AWD on a track is meaningful. having said that, RWD cars are also WAY more fun IMO.

The fact that GM has tamed it to the extent it has (and MANY reviews have commented on how the C7 has made the performance so accessible to everyone vs. the C6) speaks volumes!!

I don't understand why the Stingray did not beat the P car in this competition?
The C7 cost less.
The C7 was faster 0 to 60
The C7 was faster around the track.
The C7 stopped shorter.
I did not read the entire article but what was the kicker as to why it did not score higher? Still love all three cars.

Why is it NOT a 911? I have owned a couple and am curious why you say it is not a 911? even Porsche list the 4S under 911?
http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-carrera-4s/

Well, you should've read it because it was a continuation of the driver's car competition and price and track numbers were not critical or even considered in choosing the ranking order. I'm still torn that the Porsche won. I will not buy a Porsche. I respect them, though. And I want the Corvette to slay the Porsche once and for all, but they are always playing catch up. So is everyone else (with the unanimous exception of the Ferrari 458). Ugh.

They did not say the 911 was more visceral. If that's what they were looking for, I think it's clear the F12 would have won. They said the 911 was slightly more confidence inspiring on the track and never inspires fear, never makes a mistake, always perfectly sorted, etc. I think you could argue that's almost the opposite of visceral, and that the 991 is so close to perfect that it takes the fun out of it.

I haven't been able to watch the video, but the written comparison was great. I think when you consider the parameters of the comparison (i.e. best subjective driver's car regardless of any other factors) and the extremely capable and desirable competition, this is about as close to a win for the C7 as you're going to get. And even considering those things, it sounds like the C7 was judged to be very very nearly as good as the 911.

Well now we know how the C7 performs compared to a Porsche that costs three times as much. Maybe sometime one of the car magazines could compare a C7 and Porsche of equal price or would that be just to painfull for the Porsche boys.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0901_chevrolet_corvette_ferrari_599_ gtb_comparison/specs.html

It would appear you are correct, with the 599GTO "roughly 220lbs lighter" according to motortrend.

Still, for all the weight saving measures, and for a car that's slightly smaller then the 599, that's a pretty poor end weight. Sounds familiar to a certain other car, only the ferrari didn't receive a huge interior upgrade.

?
 

How could a Vette with iron brakes out run and stop a 4-wheel drive Porsche?:willy:

But, if GM really had something extra they didn't get out there The Ring would be the place!:toetap:

But, Heh they probably just want to save that to show off the high priced TECH!:thumbs: (and we aren't stupid!)

CC Brakes$
DCT$
-100lb(fiber)$
Wider & stronger wheels and tires$
Titanium engine parts$
Heavy duty this and that$
Supercharger$
Aero$

Ka-ching$ Ka-ching$:rofl:

If the little Vette did too much....:D

:rock:

The results of this review are good to know cause I was really considering picking up a Ferrari on my salesguy salary. But now I can be content w/ just the Corvette!

I know you guys are all hung up on MT picking the beetle over the Vette, but you do realize it beat the almost half mill Ferrari, right???

So, why measure lap times or 0-60 or 1/4 mile or braking, if it's all about how the car "feels"?
But you can see if PERFORMANCE is what you're looking for, the Corvette owns the $150,000 Porsche C4S. Too funny!
"I'm the slowest guy on the track but the car "feels" great"!! :willy:

BB

Wow this C7 is sensational on the same level with a Ferrari and a Porsche.

It finished second in a close call despite the 911 having some technology that should give it a clear edge: Ceramic brakes, PDCC, PDK and AWD.

I would have like more a apples with apples comparison with a Manual trasnmission and a RWD 911.

AWD cars will always feel more confidence inspiring than RWD so in that regard is not surprising that the 911 felt better than both the C7 and the F12.

The same reason why a BRZ is so much fun to drive. None of us do laps for money and championships, we do them for fun. And most don't spend much time even doing that.

So really feel is more important than the stopwatch in this case.

Beat? In what way?

They picked the Porsche because it was 1) slowest around the track 2) slowest in the drag race and 3) had the least drama when driving because it make people seem better than they are.

And you take them seriously?

What I think is interesting is that the Vette does well when judged with others of a contemporary era. It speaks well for the car.

For the record, I don't want an easy to drive car. I want drama and excitement. If I wanted something easy, I'd hire a chauffeur.

In drama and excitement it comes in the same order as who did better with the numbers: F12 followed closely by C7 with the 911 bringing up the rear.

If you want drama buy an 84 and stuff a 460 hp 400 CI small block in there :D

Ask me why I know...

Just shows how irrelevant their judging criteria is to many of us. Oh well, people who value performance over status will still buy the corvette despite a rag giving it 2nd.

That is crazy, if they perform these various test but don't count them why bother? Oh well.

Yes, and even under those unfavorable comparison parameters (for the Corvette), it came in at a very close 2nd against two of the best performance cars you can buy right now. That's not really a loss in my book.

He's saying it's not a base 911. Whereas the Stingray is the base Corvette.

They measure those things to give a fuller picture of the car's performance.

Personally, I don't care which of the three is a tiny bit better than the other on the track. These mostly meaningless measurements (within a range, of course) are only designed to sell magazines and get the fanboys all atwitter.

How the car "feels" in normal driving and when pushed to 8/10 and beyond are more important because I don't race Porsches at Laguna Seca, but I do drive on the street and I want to know how comfortable I'll be if I push the car hard.

Beyond that, a Ferrari is something the Corvette and 911 will never be, regardless of track numbers.

(Assuming people to any large degree even track their cars)...there can only be one fastest guy at the track. Does that mean everyone feels like crap? If you value performance above all else, that's the natural conclusion. Yet, people still buy Ferraris, Maseratis, Lambos, Merc AMGs, BMW Ms, R8s, and Astons in numbers that GM and Viper would die for.
The numbers are there primarily for bragging rights (the aforementioned d*ck measuring contest), benchmarking progress against prior models within the same company, or to give an idea of relative performance. Obviously, a Miata is slower than a ZR1 and the stat sheet figures show that. Whether a car is 0.72s faster on a racetrack is not a serious consideration to most buyers in the 911's segment. And I would argue the same could be true for a lot of Corvette buyers as well: Notice how many automatics and convertibles are sold. Grand Sports optioned up into Z06 territory. 427s that are already in Z06 territory.

So, by that metric the Viper ACR was much better than the ZR1.

Seems to me MT and Randy felt there was still considerable drama and excitement to be had in wringing out the Porsche. Just that it didn't threaten to bite like the others. And it still offered a challenge to the driver: "After talking to Randy, I think the car is so good that it no longer really challenges you with its own flaws. Instead, it challenges you with your flaws*."

Compared with the Ferrari:
"The F12 was a literal handful almost everywhere on the track, and I nearly spun off the track in turn 2. While I'm no Randy Pobst, I've never nearly stuffed a car in 2."

And bear in mind Johnny O'Connell's words on the ATS:
"Cadillac factory racer Johnny O'Connell didn't mince words when he told journalists at the launch of the 2013 Cadillac ATS: 'This is the best car I've driven around the proving grounds in my 12 years at General Motors.'
Say what? Perhaps he already forgot a certain famous sports car. You know, the [C6] Corvette? Or the CTS-V?
O'Connell elaborated further while he gave us hot laps in an ATS: 'Oh sure, the Corvette has higher limits,' he explained, 'but the ATS is more forgiving when it reaches the limit.' In other words, when the Corvette begins to oversteer, it happens very quickly and it isn't easy to save, whereas the ATS can be driven up to and beyond its limits all day. Even by us average folk."

Sure, someone's going to say how a 1980s Lincoln is easy to control at the limit. The difference, with respect to the context, is that that Lincoln isn't going to be easy to control with the high limits of an ATS (nevermind a car that laps Laguna Seca in under 1:40).

*Who here among us can honestly say he is a perfect driver? Even F1 drivers stuff their cars into walls and into other drivers, through no fault of the car.

:iagree:

The Gen V Viper awaits you. :thumbs: