|
Originally Posted by ChucksZ06
(Post 1585006512)
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.
|
Originally Posted by McGirk94LT1
(Post 1585007602)
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...?
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. |
Originally Posted by skank
(Post 1585005847)
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!!!
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. |
Originally Posted by vetteLT193
(Post 1585007813)
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.
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. |
Originally Posted by jimb100
(Post 1585007729)
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.
|
Originally Posted by Ching Ho
(Post 1585007961)
For the price of that Ferrari I can have one Stingray of each color for every day of the week.
|
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. |
Originally Posted by Guibo
(Post 1585008023)
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.
|
Originally Posted by Guibo
(Post 1585008023)
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.
|
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?
|
Originally Posted by CorvetteFerrariFTW
(Post 1585008034)
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. 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. |
Originally Posted by Philr56
(Post 1585008073)
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?
|
Originally Posted by gthal
(Post 1585008042)
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.
I think their comments about the F12 have merit and have been echoed elsewhere: Not enough chassis/tire for that level of power. |
Originally Posted by Ching Ho
(Post 1585008059)
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.
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. |
Originally Posted by Guibo
(Post 1585008138)
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. |
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.... |
Originally Posted by CorvetteFerrariFTW
(Post 1585008034)
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. 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. |
Originally Posted by Ching Ho
(Post 1585008093)
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
|
Originally Posted by Ching Ho
(Post 1585008165)
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.
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. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:11 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands