That's the problem. You don't care, so of course, you don't know. You don't know why the Viper even exists, that much is clear. Live rear axles? What does that have to do with the Viper and Corvette? Anything? Nothing. Thanks for bringing up yet another lame remark. "Your cars are cheap because your government taxes imports so much, its not our fault." And yet even in the UK, a Z06 isn't far off the price (and pace) of a Tuscan S. Care to guess which one will make it to 100K without a major rebuild? "let me guess, a Viper can beat an F355 around a track because its got 9% more hp/ton, 68% more lbft/ton and 26% wider tires, is that why its faster?" And where do you suppose this advantage in power to weight and torque to weight comes from? Could it be that tank-sized pushrod 2 valve per cylinder engine? LOL. Uh, what about mid-engine dynamics? What about ABS brakes? What about decades of Formula One know-how? Sure the Viper's tires are large, but that's because it was designed with them in mind in the first place. Care to discuss power to weight of that Diablo VT against the Viper? BFD. Ferrari had every opportunity to outfit their car with huge tires, but aha!...the Viper wasn't even their performance target in the first place now was it. Deja vu? "A Z06 has 5% more hp/ton, 6% more lbft/ton than a 996t, is that partly the reason for anything do u think?" And it gets better fuel economy to boot. Hahaha. Seriously. The Z06 has worse weight distribution, whereas Porsche's is nearly IDEAL. All that weight in the back for awesome launches w/o wheelspin, all that weight in back for phenomenal braking. AWD, so you can lay down the throttle in mid-term without fear of the back end coming round, as you would on a powerful RWD car. Hundreds of development laps on the famed Nurburgring circuit. 5 and 6 %? Ha. "Anyway, check this out, R&T slalom results: 996t 67.8mph, Z06 67.5mph, 360M 67.4mph, Murcielago 65.7mph, Cobra R 63.8mph, GTS 63.6mph. Oh Dear." Was that a head to head slalom comparison? Were all cars on hand at the same time? I've a slalom test of a Viper ACR against the 996TT, Z06, and 360 Modena. It beat them all. It also beat all except the Cobra R on the skidpad. Do you doubt me? Go ahead. Say it. Besides, you're comparing cars that are newer, considering the GTS came out around '96. What's this? R&T tests the new SRT-10 and gets...68.6 mph. Oh dear. In a convertible, no less. "A Viper beat an NSX, holy shit what a shocker, nothing to do with 2.5 TIMES bigger engine i take it." Thank you for acknowledging the effectiveness of a huge, crude engine mounted in the nose. It can cancel out ABS, mid-engine placement, years of Formula One experience, and hundreds of laps at the 'Ring. Yes, the NSX tested there too. "Check out BrownDoggie's list of the Speed GT challenge thing this year, 996ts 1st & 2nd, followed by an M3 and an NSX. Put that in your pipe and smoke it." Check out the results of Open Track Challenge. Put that in your crack pipe and smoke it. LOL, I suppose a mid-engine SUPERCHARGED NSX should at least be as quick around a track as a Corvette. Show me proof 350 was the target, as you specifically stated it was. "Ruf IS a manufacturer in its own right, sorry about that." By legal technicality, yes. By common sense (sorry if you feel deficient in this category), no. If you really think it's a manufacturer, you can take it up with Jim Wald in this discussion. I'm sure he'd be thrilled to discuss it with you: http://www.bmwm5.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=505461cf8d792b65801de8d84fbdd40f&threadid=12116&perpage=35&highlight=ruf%20renntech&pagenumber=3 Cd of a Corvette Coupe is 0.29. That should get you started. "So the Zak did 277kph? seems the page that says 270 is wrong then, hmmm could the same go for the wild-guess time of 3.0?" What is that, 2.6% difference? 4 mph, big whoop. Anyway, you said the time of 3.0 was impossible. You provided no proof to refute it. 277 kmh is quite a bit different from 339 kmh, wouldn't you say? You claimed 339 kmh. Contrary to what's going on inside your noggin, the 277 kmh figure backs up my theory that that Viper was FAR from 800 horses, as you claimed (and which I refuted via at least 2 websites). "I searched around a bit and found a site saying the 1000TT had 1175hp, and yet u show me a chart peaking at 900?...neither prove its existence." This proves its existence: http://www.vipernation.com/viewtopic.php?t=1922 The fact that the car showed up for the largest gathering of Viper owners in the States (Viper Owners Invitational) proves its existence. The fact that you so vehemently DENY its existence with absolute SHIT to support it proves your ignorance. And to guess that a Supra made those dyno #'s? Did you not freakin' LOOK at the comparison of peak power numbers in that other thread? 900 is RWHP. Not net/crank. Factor in 13% driveline loss, and you'll have the figure. Strain gauges. You're the engineering student. Why don't you tell us how they work and why they're not used in most car testing, aside from the fact that standard dyno's are plentiful and fully sufficient for most production cars? I thought you were going to tell us why they don't work. Duration on the dyno doesn't mean squat. We were comparing given peak power numbers. Bringing durability into the equation only admits your defeat. "What issue/page is that dragster article on?..."about 7000hp" isnt quite 9300, which u so eagerly used to calculate 1144hp/litre in order to beat my BMW. Seems like dragsters lose yet ANOTHER comparo." June, 2000. I eagerly use 9300 because 9300 is printed in the magazine. You do have it don't you? It's amazing what pops up when I expand the boundary of the scanned image. 9300, right there. 8.1 liters, right there. Your figure of 9 liters? Curiously AWOL and wrong, in the context of this comparo. Hmmm...right, but where are the mechanical failures exhibited by the Murcielago, the Porsches, the Ferraris, the TVR's, etc? Funny thing about Lambo. They weren't too happy that the world's motoring press wasn't getting the best acceleration times out of the Diablo. So they flew journalists to Italy to demonstrate the then-new VT's true capabilities. Yup, at the hands of Lambo's test driver, it was devastatingly quick. Yup, it went through plenty of clutches. Is that the European quality you're referring to?