The engine made it so expensive.

Discussion in '1993 Chevrolet Corvette Coupe ZR1' started by hondalover, Jun 16, 2003.

  1. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    And a vary light car that weighs lets say 2,300 pounds without ABS will stop faster then a 3,800 pound car with ABS. Its not becuase of the fact that those cars didnt have ABS its due to their lightness.
    ---

    But, as I pointed out, the Vauxhall VX-220 turbo weighs less than any of the non-ABS cars I listed apart from the two Caterhams and it STILL took longer to stop than any of the non-ABS cars.

    Weight isn't the issue. ABS is the issue. It takes longer to stop with it than without it.

    It is just easier for people who don't know how to drive.


    ---
    While the 2,700 pound none ABS Zonda was able to pull a 60-0: in 110feet the 3,118 pound Z06 Corvette with ABS did it in 103 feet. ANd even more impressive the the 3,380 pound Viper SRT-10 did it in 97 feet
    ---

    What is your source for those figures?
     
  2. #52 123435415412356, May 23, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Yes weight is the biggest issue with stopping and in the case of some companys they just do a bad job with their ABS program. The Mosler MT900S is a perfect example of a car with a poorly setup ABS system. But even that car still did 60-0: 100 feet

    Numbers for these come from various sources mainly car magazines such as Road and Track, Can and Driver, and Motor Trend.


    Motor TRend

    August 2000-106 feet
    November 2000-111 feet
    April 2001-103 feet
    November 2002-108 feet

    Car and Driver

    February 2002-104 feet

    Road & Track

    August 2000-123 feet
    Januarary 2001-123 feet
    June 2001-123 feet
    note that R&T just posted the same numbers over and oever, this usually means that they only tested the car once in August.
    March 2002-118 feet

    Also in Motor Trend 2003 speeding shoot out they again did it in 105 feet while the Viper SRT-10 did it in 97 feet and the Mosler MT900S did it in 100 feet.

    So far not a single car has come near the SRT-10s braking distance record for street cars.

    Porsche CGT ABS you bet

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=8101&page_number=3

    Ferrari Enzo ABS you bet

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=6734&page_number=3

    Lamborghini Murciélago ABS you bet

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=6736&page_number=3

    In fact the Lamborghini although being about 1000 pounds heavier then the Saleen S7 and producing no where near the down force and with inferior brakes was able to beat the Saleen S7 in braking.

    Point is that a 2,000 pound car without ABS will beat a 4,000 pound car with ABS. But it will loose to a 3,000 pound car with inferior brakes as well.
     
  3. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    So far not a single car has come near the SRT-10s braking distance record for street cars.
    ---

    Too bad the American car magazines measure their braking performance in different (and not easily convertible) units to the Brits.

    I'd love to see how it does against the "terror twins" of the British sports-car world: The Noble M12 and TVR Tuscan.

    At the end of the day, a set of brakes that are able to haul a car to a dead stop from 100mph in 4.11/4.15 seconds respectively and able to generate 1.44/1.11g stopping force respectively, have nothing for which they need to apologize.

    BTW, the Viper's braking performance is down to its gigantic and sticky tires. I wonder how much it has in common with the Acura NSX which was well-known for getting excellent grip and braking from its tires in exchage for absurdly-rapid wear.


    ---
    Porsche CGT ABS you bet
    ---

    Of course, Porsche are well-known gadget junkies. They know their cars are driven by as many clueless yuppies and hairdressers as actual sports-car devotees and have to make them idiot-proof.


    ---
    Ferrari Enzo ABS you bet... Lamborghini Murciélago ABS you bet
    ---

    Again, this is a no-brainer. The cars (like the CGT) are quite heavy. Also Ferrari is owned by Fiat and serves the same basic function for them that Aston-Martin serves for Ford or Lamborghini/Bugatti serves for Audi. The Enzo is partly a continuation of the Ferrari tradition of occasionally offering a limited-run supercar at a stratospheric price and part a rolling test-bed for various technological innovations that Fiat is considering for their mainstream cars. The Murcielago serves the same purpose for Audi.

    The upcoming Bugatti Veyron is allegedly going to be their first test of a revolutionary fuel-delivery system which should radically improve fuel economy for car engines assuming they can get it to work reliably and then figure out a way to reliably mass-produce it.

    We're told to expect around 20mpg from the Veyron in real-world driving which isn't bad considering it is an 8.0 liter, 16-cylinder engine with four turbos and nearly 1000bhp.


    ---
    Point is that a 2,000 pound car without ABS will beat a 4,000 pound car with ABS.
    ---

    That still doesn't explain why the 2,000lb Vauxhall with ABS couldn't stop as fast as other 2000lb cars without ABS. Both the VX220 and the Lotus Elise on which it is based (which didn't have ABS until Lotus went after the US market, because Lotus knew ABS would reduce the effectiveness of their brakes) are renowned for their braking ability.

    And surely you would agree that the true test of a car's braking ability is its actual braking ability and nothing to do with whether it has ABS or not. Cars should have set braking benchmarks they should have to meet for stopping in all conditions and on various surfaces. Providing a car can stop within the limits, it shouldn't matter whether the manufacturer chose to include ABS or not. Right?

    Also, wouldn't you agree that a car which can stop quickly and safely without ABS is inherenly safer than one that can't for the simple reason that the non-ABS car has one less system that can fail when you least afford for it to? BTW, how does the average person check the ABS while they're checking tire pressure/wear, oil/coolant levels and all the other things that responsible car-owners do on a regular basis to make sure their cars are safe for them and the other drivers on the road?

    Another question. Do car manufactures, knowing that some of their customers drive in snow/gravel etc, offer the option of switchable ABS? The answer is probably the same to the question of whather they offer switchable passenger-seat airbags for those drivers who need to seat children in the front of the car. The answer is "safety be damned, we're doing what our marketing people tell us the customers want instead of what the customers (or common-sense) say"

    Give me a car without ABS and without airbags. Let the marketing weasels crash their cars or risk their children's necks being snapped in an accident.

    ABS and airbags are, in reality, the car companies saying "our customers are stupid and care more about marketing hype than real safety". Airbags serve no purpose if someone is wearing their seat-belt. ABS serves no purpose on a properly-designed car.

    I used to think as you did - that ABS was a safety-feature and it was better to have it than not. Then I drove cars that were designed to brake properly without it and I discovered that the only purpose ABS serves is to allow companies to weasel out of doing a proper job of engineering.

    I don't dispute that many modern cars need ABS to stop properly as they are designed. I am challenging the notion that they couldn't be better designed without it to act as a crutch for bad engineering.
     
  4. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Like I said some cars ABs systems arent as good as others, and I really give up on you.

    But for thought

    60-0

    Noble M12 GTO :125 feet
    Pagani Zonda: 127 feet

    Lamborghini Murcielago: 122 feet
    BMW M3: 112 feet

    This is interesting, when I look up stopping distances for some of teh cars that you picked as proof that ABS isnt good I find that your data isnt even correct. Clearly from what Ive found shows that the ABS cars out perform the none ABS even though the ABS cars weigh more. So from what Ive found on the internet shows that you are completely full of it.

    And please show your sources, or accept the fact that ABS is superior to cars without it.
     
  5. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Like I said some cars ABD systems arent as good as others, and I really give up on you.
     
  6. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    So from what Ive found on the internet shows that you are completely full of it.
    ---

    Just goes to show you shouldn't have too much faith in some of the rubbish that can be found on the Internet.

    The stopping times I provided are from actual tests conducted by and published in Autocar magazine - the July 30th, 2003 issue to be exact. I believe I mentioned this when I originally cited them.

    You can get as bitchy as you like - if you like we can even have a discussion about the tendency of people to get hostile when their baseless but deeply-held beliefs are refuted by documentary evidence.

    But none of that changes the well-established fact that ABS blunts a car's brakes rather than enhancing them. Ask anyone who knows anything about cars if you don't believe me. I freely admit that somtimes ABS is a positive thing - as with flabby luxo-barges, moronic SUVs and the worst automotive sin of all, the giant pickup trucks affected by suburban, wanna-be rednecks. But, a properly-designed car will stop better and more safely without ABS.

    The idea that a Murcielago can brake faster than a Zonda is adequate proof that the numbers you posted are to be taken with a grain of salt. The fact of the matter is that the Noble, TVR, Pagani and others without ABS outbrake cars with ABS. This doesn't mean the Murc's brakes are bad, just that the other car's brakes are better.

    Of course, there is always the chance that person driving the Zonda in the test you describe (if one actually occurred) was so used to driving ABS-hampered stuff like Corvettes and Vipers that he forgot how to drive a proper sports car.

    Like I said in my previous post. ABS isn't about making cars safe but about making them idiot-proof. I for one would prefer that idiots didn't drive powerful cars and if they're scared off by a lack of electronic nannying then that's better for the rest of us.

    If it was up to me, any car with more than 200bhp would require a special license to drive which could only be had by completing a circuit on a wet test track (with random, dynamic obstacles) in a preset amount of time.

     
  7. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Immature people can easily know grammar, or in some cases be intelligent. Immature is how someone acts, as in not acting as mature as your age group is.

    So far there have been very few things that you have been right about, especially about american cars. Most are just very bad and bias assumptions, that are absurd.

    I got my Viper information from an interview on a website with Bob Sheaves.

    The Viper in numerous articles has taken the many cars around the track including the 911 turbo, and the NSX. And in the slalom (which i might add is alot about grip) the Viper shines high with a speed of 70.4 mph(which i might add is matched by the "bad handler" Z06), which many of your lightweight cars including the some Elise models.

    I never said perfomance is not all about weight, i said that weight does not make a sports car. Of course lighter is better, its common sence, but that doesnt mean that a car that weighs 3000lbs is not a sports car.

    My point on the Griffith 500 is low end torque is not bad. And even some TVRs have it.

    The 911 turbo, although more expencive, is in the Z06s class, its perfomace is matched to beaten by the vette. The Benz, and the BMW are both coupes, not sedans, and often compared the the vette being close in performance and in the M3s case, price.

    Ive read that TVR uses a superlight tubular frame, and you have to consider they dont come with power windows, power seats, ect ect. Also on the Tuscan I have read that "The composites body panels also enable a highly curvy styling that conventional glass-fiber or steel sheets cannot hope for." So that is not useing fiberglass, and can be easily lighter. Also the "great brakes" you claim that TVR does, EVO complained about. "The chassis is all over the place under bumpy braking. It doesn't put you at ease. There's lots of grip, and the steering is super-sharp but the rear end is rather wandery at the best of times, so going really fast takes a leap of faith and a belief in your ability to sort things out." "But tramlining and general unruliness under heavy braking remains a real problem, despite geometry changes and stiffer spring and damper rates aimed at quelling such behaviour." (Tuscan S)There is more i could post, but im not going to take up more space to get the point by. BTW in that same article they have a Z06 being compared, and it and the Tuscan tied.

    If youve ever read EVO magazine youd know their bias toward european cars, and dont favor american engineering. When EVO drove a Corvette Z06, they did nothing but praise it, and were astonished at the ride and handling of the car.

    Why the Corvette doesnt weight less is because GM, like any smart car company, changes cars to make a profit. If they put more money into the Corvette and develop a lighter one, and it doesnt sell any better than the heavier one, than it would be a waste to the company. The "heavy" Corvette is doing completely fine in sales anyway, and on the track. Like i said it doesnt have a problem with its competition.
     
  8. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Like i said it looks like some kid just learned HTML and went at it.

    The MSRP was already in pounds, it was the price of the Corvette in Europe.

    Crusing, like ive posted before the EVO gets less gas milage than the Corvette, like i said tested, proven, why do you argue with facts? Motor Trend has it, Car and Driver has it, and many others.

    Im not actually sure how the tire pressure system works, ive never looked into it. But i do know there are alot of vette owners that simply get new rims and tires, and it hasnt effected it. Ill ask over at a corvette forum just for you <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>

    No the Corvettes road maners are behaved because of engineering. They also have an optional suspension setup(magnetic selective ride control) that you can change from sport, tour, and another setting i cant remember. BTW look into the CTS-V, itll change your thinking of a caddies handling.

    Like i said before, my definition of a muscle car is solid rear axle (good for accel, bad for corners) 2+2 seating, and heritage of being a muscle car. I would call all mustangs, and all camaros muscle cars, because they fit perfectly into the category. The Corvette has never been a muscle car, it always been a sports car. Wouldnt you say the creator of something gets to say what it is? Gm made the vette to be a sports car, and it is. I would call a murcelago a exotic/sports car, not a GT. GTs arnt established by weight, more or less about seating (2+2). Like some porches, Supras, ect ect.
     
  9. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Dude I give up, well some people believe that drum brakes are better then disc brakes and I cant prove to them that they are wrong. So you are on that list of car guys that doesnt knoe what they are talking about. I am a little frustrated and thats why I went to name calling. But I cant find any evidence that cars without ABS perform better then cars with ABS. On the other hand Ive been able to find a ton of evidence of cars with ABS being better then cars without.

    But of coarse you in some way are convinced that those cars have ABS becuase they are built with gadgets to sell better. Even though those cars while being haevy perform better, so I guess that they performed way way way better then those lighter cars without ABS in spite of ABS. Well hell then those auto makers just make crappy cars then.

    either that or ABS out performs none ABS.

    the funny thing is that I use to think that cars without ABS outperformed cars with them. I got tired of looking stupid though so I changed my opinion, but only after reading every ABS vs none ABS comparision and seeing how badly teh cars with ABS beat cars without ABS.

    And the fact that those none ABS cars cant even come close to the braking of the Z06 Corvette or the SRT-10 Viper doesnt mean anytihng to you. The fact that the best braking cars in the world use ABS doesnt mean anything to you. Thats becuase of that one road test that who knows how valid it was said otherwise.

    But thats like 1 road test vs 1,000,000 others. Most people would use I dont know maybe logic or commen since, but thats most people.
     
  10. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Immature people can easily know grammar, or in some cases be intelligent. Immature is how someone acts, as in not acting as mature as your age group is.
    ---

    I also notice that the people who use the word "immature" as a pejorative all seem to be 12-16 years old.

    ---
    So far there have been very few things that you have been right about
    ---

    So you say, and yet you aren't able to explain what it is I'm wrong about or how I'm wrong.


    ---
    I got my Viper information from an interview on a website with Bob Sheaves.
    ---

    Doesn't matter where you got it, it is wrong. As shown by the information I provided.


    ---
    And in the slalom (which i might add is alot about grip) the Viper shines high with a speed of 70.4 mph(which i might add is matched by the "bad handler" Z06), which many of your lightweight cars including the some Elise models.
    ---

    Again, slaloms are about grip, not handling.


    ---
    I never said perfomance is not all about weight, i said that weight does not make a sports car. Of course lighter is better, its common sence, but that doesnt mean that a car that weighs 3000lbs is not a sports car.
    ---

    Yes, actually, it does. A 3000lb car is too heavy to be a proper sports car. Cars that heavy are called GTs. To you, a GT is a heave sports car. You are right when you say that weight alone doesn't make a sports car. The Mazda Miata is light and is one of the best handling cars in the world but it isn't a sports car - it lacks the power. However, if Mazda supercharged it or dropped a small, lightweight V-8 into it, it would be a devastating sports car.


    ---
    My point on the Griffith 500 is low end torque is not bad. And even some TVRs have it.
    ---

    Actually, the massive low-end torque was generally considered one of the Griffith's weaknesses. That's one of the reasons why TVR developed their AJP6 engine. They wanted to move the torque peaker higher up the rev range so the car would be easier to drive in non-optimal conditions and less unforgiving of those with heavy right feet.


    ---
    The 911 turbo, although more expencive, is in the Z06s class, its perfomace is matched to beaten by the vette.
    ---

    In a straight line and around simple corners maybe. But on a real track, the 911 will eat the Corvette's lunch.


    ---
    Ive read that TVR uses a superlight tubular frame,
    ---

    It is still steel though - just like the Corvette. Tube steel is a great material to use for making car chassis, the real question is why isn't Chevrolet using it?


    ---
    and you have to consider they [TVRs] dont come with power windows
    ---

    Actually, they do.


    ---
    "The composites body panels also enable a highly curvy styling that conventional glass-fiber or steel sheets cannot hope for." So that is not useing fiberglass
    ---

    Actually, it is fiberglass. Fiberglass is referred to as a "composite" material because it is a combination of glass-fiber cloth and resin use to give strength/rigidity.


    ---
    Also the "great brakes" you claim that TVR does, EVO complained about. "The chassis is all over the place under bumpy braking. It doesn't put you at ease. There's lots of grip, and the steering is super-sharp but the rear end is rather wandery at the best of times, so going really fast takes a leap of faith and a belief in your ability to sort things out."
    ---

    They're talking about the early Tuscans. I've driven one myself. The basic Tuscan isn't the happiest of campers at over 100mph. But then that's ok for road use, isn't it? The S model with its aerodynamic tweaks and suspension mods carried over from the "Red Rose" model does better at high speeds but still requires a firm hand. This is due to the light weight of the car (people forget how much weight improves a car's ride and stability at speed. Cadillac, Mercedes, BMW, etc... don't make their cars heavy because they don't know any better. They make them heavy precisely because they DO know better.

    Also, the TVRs "pointy " steering (1.7 turns lock-to-lock) comes as a shock to many people and a good percentage of them just never adapt. Personlly I love it but I recognize that not everyone does.


    ---
    "But tramlining and general unruliness under heavy braking remains a real problem, despite geometry changes and stiffer spring and damper rates aimed at quelling such behaviour." (Tuscan S)
    ---

    Hmmm, maybe they had a car whose brakes needed some seeing-to. I've driven several different TVRs and never felt that the braking was anything but superb. However, if one wheel is out of adjustment, it can blow the whole experience in a way that comes as a surprise to people who are used to driving cars that need ABS to brake properly.

    BTW, you forget the earllier part of that quote : "it [The Tuscan S] is explosively quick, quicker even than the rocket-sled ZO6". Or this one: "And the TVR, dynamically flawed though it is, trips every irrational, emotion-led switch in your body with its irresistible combination of visual and aural drama and no-holds barred delivery. I know its shortcomings, but I still want one so much it hurts"

    You'll be glad to know that TVR's policy of "continuous development" means that every car they built is better than the last one. Braking, stability, etc... is better that it was when this article was written more than two years ago.


    ---
    When EVO drove a Corvette Z06, they did nothing but praise it, and were astonished at the ride and handling of the car.
    ---

    Yeah, compared to earlier Corvettes, the Z06 is undoubtedly good. But compared to other cars, it still has some way to go.


    ---
    Why the Corvette doesnt weight less is because GM, like any smart car company, changes cars to make a profit. If they put more money into the Corvette and develop a lighter one, and it doesnt sell any better than the heavier one, than it would be a waste to the company.
    ---

    Yes, it is no secret that Chevy is more concerned with their slavish devotion to the "bottom line" than they are with engineering excellence for its own sake. That's why their cars will always be second-rate.

    ---
    Corvette is doing completely fine in sales anyway, and on the track. Like i said it doesnt have a problem with its competition.
    ---

    Their main problem is that they don't really have any competition. People who buy Corvettes aren't really shopping for other cars. They buy Corvettes because that's what they want. They might like a Viper but for the price. These people aren't thinking about European cars.



     
  11. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Like i said it looks like some kid just learned HTML and went at it.
    ---

    What's your point? If you can do better, phone them up and sell them your services. While you're at it, maybe you can get them to explain to you why you're wrong about UK Corvette pricing.

    ---
    The MSRP was already in pounds, it was the price of the Corvette in Europe.
    ---

    We're not talking about Europe, we're talking about the UK. I just read an article about the new Corvette being introduced. They expect the price to be about £45,000.

    ---
    Crusing, like ive posted before the EVO gets less gas milage than the Corvette
    ---

    The 2mpg difference you pointed out is irrelevant (to say nothing of trivial). You said the engine is less efficient. Just because a car gets better mileage doesn't mean the engine is more efficient. You don't think the Evo's different gearing and 4WD drivetrain don't account for the difference and then some? I wonder what kind of mileage you'd get if you ran both cars at the same number of revs on the engine rather than concentrating on speed.

    ---
    No the Corvettes road maners are behaved because of engineering.
    ---

    The Corvette's road matters have to do with (relatively) soft dampers and enormous tires.


    ---
    Like i said before, my definition of a muscle car is solid rear axle (good for accel, bad for corners) 2+2 seating, and heritage of being a muscle car. I would call all mustangs, and all camaros muscle cars, because they fit perfectly into the category.
    ---

    But don't Mustangs and Camaros have IRS now? I used to have a Gen-1 Mazda RX-7 that had a solid rear axle and 2+2 seating. Was that a muscle car?

    No, a "muscle car" needs the following attributes:

    1. An American badge. No one else makes muscle-cars
    2. A V-8 engine.
    3. Extensive use of low-tech components for easy/cheap service.

    Basically, they are crude, American GTs with a budget price tag.

    A "sports car" on the other hand has different attributes.

    1. Light weight (obviously the target changed with the forward march of technology, but nowadays, if it isn't under 1300kg (2800 lbs) then it probably isn't a sports-car).
    2. Powerful engine and good power:weight ratio. The number of cylinders and/or displacement is irrelevant.
    3. Excellent grip AND handling.


    A GT is basically a sports car without the weight restriction and usually with the added bonus of a long top gear and large fuel tank allowing for 400+ mile touring range without refueling.
     
  12. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    well some people believe that drum brakes are better then disc brakes and I cant prove to them that they are wrong.
    ---

    Really? I can. One word: "fade". That was easy.


    ---
    So you are on that list of car guys that doesnt knoe what they are talking about.
    ---

    Based on what? Because you think I'm wrong? I'm not. I'm right and I've proved it.

    ---
    But I cant find any evidence that cars without ABS perform better then cars with ABS.
    ---

    I've showed you evidence. You just choose not to believe it.


    ---
    On the other hand Ive been able to find a ton of evidence of cars with ABS being better then cars without.
    ---

    So why don't you post any of it?


    ---
    The fact that the best braking cars in the world use ABS doesnt mean anything to you.
    ---

    Except they don't. The "best braking cars in the world" are niche-market products like the Caterhams what will humble even star ABS performers like the Viper and Corvette. Does Caterham use ABS? Nope. Because their cars brake better without it.

    Here's a funny thing about ABS, when Lotus was forced to include it in the Federalized Elise (non Lotus-employees can only imagine the howls of protest from the engineers) they designed it so that it would only kick in after 3 seconds of lockup so that track-day users could still use the brakes to induce oversteer.

    Think about it, and ABS system that doesn't engage for three full seconds? It may as well not be there at all. Most real-world panic-stops don't last three seconds in their entirety and the ones that do are only a fraction longer with the lockup least likely to occur at the end. Yet Lotus can still claim that the Elise has ABS for those people sufficiently deluded they believe that an Elise needs ABS. I guess they figure those people won't read the fine-print.

    The thing that puzzles me is why they didn't just make it switchable. That way everyone could have what they wanted. But, I bet federal regs forbid ABS to be switchable now. Mercedes used to do it. Probably some yuppie muppet in DC switched it off in their Benz and then crashed the car anyway and demanded that the law forbid anyone else from exercising free choice. Washington hates freedom.
     
  13. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    On the subject of ABS, airbags and other alleged "safety" gear... here is an interview with TVR company owner Peter Wheeler which speaks direct to the issue.


    I like his statement about not adopting mainstream thinking just for the sake of doing it. That's an engineer for you.


    ***EXCLUSIVE: THE WHEELER INTERVIEW

    If you spend enough time around TVR owners you begin to appreciate simply from anecdotal evidence, just how safe their cars can be in the event of serious accidents. If however, you read the article in the Telegraph on Saturday about TVR’s T350T, you’d be forgiven for thinking that TVR were throwing cars together with little thought for safety.

    Journalist Andrew English obviously has a chip on his shoulder with regard to TVR, but his comments on safety issues will have left many with a highly innacurate perception of Blackpool engineering.

    It’s common practice these days for journalists to round off any review of a TVR by pointing out the lack of ‘active’ safety devices in TVRs. Invariably it’s portrayed as TVR’s desire to build red-blooded sportscars without any namby-pamby safety devices getting in the way of enjoyment.

    ***Looking Deeper

    I had the chance to quiz TVR's Chairman Peter Wheeler today about TVR’s attitude to safety. The reality is very much at odds with the lackadaisical attitude assumed by many.

    Wheeler has a passionate dislike for both airbags and antilock brakes. Not as I thought because they might interfere with the driving experience or present tedious packaging problems but because he believes his cars are safer without them.

    On anti-lock brakes Wheeler happily pointed out that a car with anti-lock brakes will always take longer to stop than a car without, as demonstrated by Autocar’s 0-100-0 challenge in previous years. “The only purpose of ABS is to allow steering in wet conditions ,” he maintained, adding that in extreme situations “most modern cars understeer anyway ”. The systems don’t help panicking drivers he claimed. What was interesting was that his views didn’t come across as bloody-mindedness, but very much a belief that to add ABS wouldn’t help drivers of his cars more seriously could worsen a critical situation.

    His attitude to airbags is driven by the same desire to engineer the safest car possible. It’s not driven by a hatred of new technology as has often been suggested. The latest range of TVRs are built with either full roll cages or in the case of the open top cars, a windscreen surround that is an integral part of the chassis and provides roll over protection.

    Despite all the legislation that manufacturers have to conform to these days, roll over protection remains a weak point in most saloons. Despite this Wheeler ensures his latest cars are designed to be “relatively safe upside down ” - “proven by customers, ” he quipped.

    The use of an airbag in a convertible fills him with horror. In the event of a roll or even the car simply tipping over slowly the driver can at least make some effort at self preservation – an airbag inflating simply pops the head up into the danger zone he told me.

    ***The Philosophy

    It was at this point that I began to understand where he was coming from. Being the owner and figurehead of TVR, Wheeler feels a unique sense of responsibility for the cars built by his company. He knows that his cars will be driven hard and fast and he has a conscience to wrestle with. “If someone crashes one of my cars and it’s their fault then I can live with myself. If we were to put an airbag in one of our cars and it ended up killing someone, I couldn’t live with that ”.

    It’s that attitude that drives his whole approach to safety these days. The backbone chassis and GRP body may seem like a simple – even cheap – way to engineer a car, but it’s a formula that Wheeler believes provides a perfect balance of strength and safety. He wants his cars to stay in one piece in the event of an accident rather than break in two – “it’s safer to be attached to the body of the car than to be flung off on a fragment,” he told me.

    The steel chassis have demonstrated their strength on many occasions but the lack of ‘crumple zones’ concerns many people. Where a monocoque car will compress its chassis and bodywork in the event of an impact - via its crumple zones – a TVR will absorb a huge amount of energy in the glass fibre before the chassis takes any impact.

    Take a look at any crashed TVR and you’ll often find relatively minor damage to the chassis yet many of the panels will be shredded, mashed or shattered - it’s that behaviour that Wheeler takes such comfort from.

    ***Stunning Curves

    Whilst some will joke about the plastic cars from Blackpool and assume that there’s no strength in the flexing bodywork, the opposite is in fact the case. TVR’s stunningly curvaceous bodies provide both good looks and strength. The engineer in Wheeler came out again at this point as he explained the construction methods. “A curved panel is stronger than a flat panel – that’s why our cars don’t have any flat panels ”, he told me.

    Whilst TVR don’t have to subject their range of cars to crash testing – due to the low volume of production – they did subject a Tuscan Speed 6 to an offset impact test. The car not only passed with flying colours but was fixed up with some new body panels and new wishbones and then crashed again! The car proved both its strength and its ability to absorb energy whilst leaving the passenger cell intact.

    Having spent half an hour with the Chairman I left buoyed by his positive attitude to the issue of safety. Contrary to what I’d been led to believe over the years, safety isn’t an option box they’re leaving unticked, but as ever TVR have found a different way of doing things which they’ve proved works extremely well – even some of us close to their products don’t always appreciate the logic, reason and above all belief that goes into the design decisions.

    Omitting active safety features on TVRs isn’t an omission by Wheeler, it’s a positive statement that he believes his cars are safer with his safety features than adopting mainstream thinking for the sake of it.

     
  14. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    And I like TVR, I think they make good cars. But notihng here is showing that they make poor cars, and if you didnt notice some of my statments were not to be taken seriously. And no Caterhams will not out brake the Z06, ART-10, Ford GT, Ferrari Enzo, CGT, etc. And you can not provide evidence that they can out brake those cars. Even if they did produce a lightly shorter stopping distance then lets say a Z06 Corvette they only weigh a little over 1,000 pounds. They should for a 3,118 pound car to out brake a 1,100 pound car is a joke. Those Caterham's have a huge advantage over the cars that I named and thats weight.

    And low and behold I found a road test on a Caterham Super Seven Roadsport SV.

    Caterham Super Seven Roadsport SV
    70-0: 174 feet
    Corvette Z06
    70-0: 152 feet
    Ferrari Enzo
    70-0: 151 feet
    Porsche Carrera GT
    70-0: 145 feet

    In fact I found that in order to get a car with ABS that this 1,400 pound car can beat I had to find a car that exceeded 4,000 pounds.

    Yes none ABS cars do require more skills and that is why in auto racing and others dont want it. It makes it easier for unslilled newer drivers to keep up. But then again look at the recent F1 race, Michael Schumacher which holds many F1 records on a cuation past lap locked up his tires and hit the wall taking him out the race. Now if he had ABS then that would have never happened.


     
  15. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    And I like TVR, I think they make good cars. But notihng here is showing that they make poor cars
    ---

    I didn't mean to suggest that they did make poor cars. I think they make great cars too. My point was to show that Peter Wheeler - who knows more about cars than both of us put together - knows that ABS impedes braking rather than improving it.

    "On anti-lock brakes Wheeler happily pointed out that a car with anti-lock brakes will always take longer to stop than a car without, as demonstrated by Autocar’s 0-100-0 challenge in previous years. “The only purpose of ABS is to allow steering in wet conditions ,” he maintained, adding that in extreme situations “most modern cars understeer anyway ”. The systems don’t help panicking drivers he claimed."

    The reason that ABS is championed is because it allegedly allows the driver to steer in panic-stop situations. This is a bogus argument since by the very definition of a panic-stop situation, people won't be able to steer since they'll be too busy panicking.


    ---
    behold I found a road test on a Caterham Super Seven Roadsport SV.
    ---

    The SV is, I believe, one of their low-end cars. Being a "budget model", it won't be fitted with their best brakes and I wouldn't expect stellar performance - just exceptional performance. Look at their high-performance versions like the R300 and R500. The R500 brakes from 100mph in 3.68 seconds. 0-60 in 3.47, 0-100 in 7.26. Total 0-100-0 time is 11.25 seconds. Not bad for something that cheap (£35k) with a 1.8 liter engine.


    ---
    But then again look at the recent F1 race, Michael Schumacher which holds many F1 records on a cuation past lap locked up his tires and hit the wall taking him out the race. Now if he had ABS then that would have never happened.
    ---

    Are you sure that was the reason? I suspect someone with Schuey's driving skills could handle a simple lockup. I wouldn't he surprised to learn that it was a problem with only one or two of the wheels locking - perhaps as the result of a brake malfunction. No guarantee that ABS would have helped with that.


    ---
    In fact I found that in order to get a car with ABS that this 1,400 pound car can beat I had to find a car that exceeded 4,000 pounds.
    ---

    I wish I could find that article that compared braking performance in a Mercedes (one of the early pioneers and champions of ABS) with switchable ABS. The tested the car with the ABS on and with it switched off. The results were incontrovertabe. With ABS, the car took longer to stop but was more maneuverable during the stop since the wheels didn't lock. However, as I pointed out before, the "stomp and steer" aspect of ABS is pointless anyway since someone with the presence of mind to steer would also have the presence of mind to cadence-brake.
     
  16. #66 DragStrip, May 25, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Again on the grammar, just drop it.

    Do you want me to list what you have been wrong about?
    Corvettes cant handle good - wrong
    weight defines a sports car - wrong
    traction control is a "band aid" fix - wrong
    viper sounds like a truck - wrong
    viper cant handle - wrong
    Im not going to bother reading through the rest of your bs to pick out everything your mistaken by.

    "Plus, through the slalom (an equally important test of a would-be sports car's aptitude) the Viper shows its shorcomings." Did not say that? Again, proven wrong.

    A "proper" sports car is a sports car that sells, and appeals to the public. You keep forgetting, companies are not tring to make perfect cars, there tring to make cars that sell. And BTW the miata is a sports car, not all sports cars have to meet the "perfect" criteria.

    Z06 vs 911 Turbo vs NSX, verdict? Z06
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=56&page_number=1
    Like Ive said before ive got more articles if you would like to see them.

    That "early" Tuscan is only from 2001, unless thats "early."

    Looks are an opinion, and of course EVO, like i previouly said is very biased for european cars. And it doesnt surprise me that its faster being lighter and just as powerful as the Z06.

    Again you judge the Corvette with out knowlede to back it up, and try and make your opinion sound like fact.

    There cars may be "second rate" in your opinion, but there the best selling cars in America at the moment, so your opinion doesnt really matter now does it? Like i said, selling cars are companies goals, and GM must be doing something right.

    The people arnt thinking about european cars because you get more perfomance for less money when you buy a vette. Everyone knows it why havent you figured it out?
     
  17. #67 DragStrip, May 25, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Dont tell me im wrong about the UK pricing, tell EVO, I got the price direclty from them. Id much rather believe a magazine over one dealership that looks anything but professional.

    When the word "gas efficient" is used it means gas consumtion, like MPG. The LS6/LS1 is more gas efficient than the EVOs 4, end of story.

    The Corvettes "enormous" 17" and 18" tires dont have to do with its behavior. http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette/images/dimensions.jpg sarcasm: Those tires are quite enormous arnt they.

    Mustangs and Camaros do not have IRS, with the exception of the 1999+ Cobra, which got IRS. The camaro and mustang didnt need IRS to sell, buyers were perfectly satisfied with the "old technology" solid rear. Not only that but they were made for accleration, and not so much handling, so a solid rear would be the way to go.

    If "extensive use of low-tech components" applies, than the Viper and Corvette are definetly not muscle cars. The Vette has always been on top of the game in technology.

    1. Weight ofcoure effects perfomance, but its only one contributer, saying a sports car must weight under X pounds to be a sports car is as stupid as saying a sports car must reach 200+mph to be a sports car.
    2. In this case then an elise is not a sports car, unless you consider 170-200hp alot.
    3. The Corvette and Viper both have excellant grip and handling, which is differnt from drifting.

    Sports cars have IRS, 2 seats, RWD or AWD and are made to be a sports car, its as simple as that.
     
  18. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Too bad you are wrong about that too, cars that do here is the biggest thing. 5 years ago this was 100% true, cars with ABS couldnt stop in shorter distances then cars with ABS. However on all new 0-100-0 test ABS cars win. For example you have the Lamborghini Murcielago against the Saleen S7. the Saleen is about 1,000 pounds lighter then the Murcielago, the Saleens beats the Murcielago to 100MPH by a huge margin. But then when it came to braking the Murcielago stopped so fast that it won the 0-100-0.

    Oh and when I looked the brakes on the caterham that I found for comparison were the same with the others.

    And wow you really dont know what you are talking about.
     
  19. #69 Jon Gwynne, May 26, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Again on the grammar, just drop it.
    ---

    I wasn't talking about grammar, I was talking about people who use the term "immature" as a put-down.


    ---
    Corvettes cant handle good - wrong
    ---

    But Corvettes don't handle well compared to European cars in their price range. They handle well compared to older Corvettes but that isn't exactly high praise.

    See I didn't mention your grammatical mistake once! (oops...)


    ---
    weight defines a sports car - wrong
    ---

    Weight DOES define a sports car. I didn't make the rule. If you want to complain then go see Colin Chapman or Carroll Shelby.


    ---
    traction control is a "band aid" fix - wrong
    ---

    Did I say traction-control is a band-aid fix? I mean that about ABS. Traction control isn't a band-aid fix, it is just a stupid and pointless gimmick. One of the few things that I do like about the Viper is that is they designers were sensible and left off the traction-control (although they wimped out on the ABS). Traction control on road cars is for 17 year-old girls, hairdressers or middle-aged stockbrokers... People who either lack the experience to drive properly or else refuse to learn.


    ---
    viper sounds like a truck - wrong
    ---

    It does sound like a truck. It has a truck engine. It sounds like a truck.


    ---
    viper cant handle - wrong
    ---

    It can handle, just not well. It grips like a damn barnacle - a shame it doesn't handle as well as it grips.


    ---
    That "early" Tuscan is only from 2001, unless thats "early."
    ---

    The car was introduced in 2000 and I don't think they began full-scale production until later in that year. Typically TVR introduces the new models at the Birmingham motor show in late spring, they take a few hundred initial orders and start filling them in late summer or early fall with production ramping up from there.

    So, to answer your question, yes, that's an early car.


    ---
    You keep forgetting, companies are not tring to make perfect cars, there tring to make cars that sell
    ---

    I'm not forgetting it, I'm pointing out this is the wrong attitude. People who think you have to choose between making profitable cars and making excellent ones are idiots. Unfortunately, too many of them are employed in management positions at the Big Three.

    Anyone who thinks engineering excellence can't also be profitable should look at companies like Mercedes or Toyota to name just two.


    ---
    And BTW the miata is a sports car
    ---

    No, it is a roadster.



    ---
    The people arnt thinking about european cars because you get more perfomance for less money when you buy a vette. Everyone knows it why havent you figured it out?
    ---

    Because people with a wider experience of cars and more discerning tastes realize that there is more to a performance car than straight-line performance.


    ---
    Z06 vs 911 Turbo vs NSX, verdict? Z06
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=56&page_number=1
    ---

    Did you actually read this article? Of the three drivers who took the three cars in question out, only one of them voted for the Corvette as their overall choice - and the guy who did was a self-confessed "fan of American muscle cars" and also had previous experience racing them so was pre-disposed to judge them favorably.

    Yes, the Vette did have a faster lap time than the the other two but only because it has so much more power. Like I keep saying, it is the "brute force and ignorance" approach. Sometimes it works.

    Yeah, if you live in the US and want a 400bhp car and price is your main (or only) consideration then there really isn't any choice other than the Corvette if you insist on buying a new car.

    Lots of people buy Corvettes because they simply can't afford anything else. But just because something is popular because it is cheap doesn't mean it is a great example of the form.
     
  20. #70 Jon Gwynne, May 26, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Again on the grammar, just drop it.
    ---

    I wasn't talking about grammar, I was talking about people who use the term "immature" as a put-down.


    ---
    Corvettes cant handle good - wrong
    ---

    But Corvettes don't handle well compared to European cars in their price range. They handle well compared to older Corvettes but that isn't exactly high praise.

    See I didn't mention your grammatical mistake once! (oops...)


    ---
    weight defines a sports car - wrong
    ---

    Weight DOES define a sports car. I didn't make the rule. If you want to complain then go see Colin Chapman or Carroll Shelby.


    ---
    traction control is a "band aid" fix - wrong
    ---

    Did I say traction-control is a band-aid fix? I mean that about ABS. Traction control isn't a band-aid fix, it is just a stupid and pointless gimmick. One of the few things that I do like about the Viper is that is they designers were sensible and left off the traction-control (although they wimped out on the ABS). Traction control on road cars is for 17 year-old girls, hairdressers or middle-aged stockbrokers... People who either lack the experience to drive properly or else refuse to learn.


    ---
    viper sounds like a truck - wrong
    ---

    It does sound like a truck. It has a truck engine. It sounds like a truck.


    ---
    viper cant handle - wrong
    ---

    It can handle, just not well. It grips like a damn barnacle - a shame it doesn't handle as well as it grips.


    ---
    That "early" Tuscan is only from 2001, unless thats "early."
    ---

    The car was introduced in 2000 and I don't think they began full-scale production until later in that year. Typically TVR introduces the new models at the Birmingham motor show in late spring, they take a few hundred initial orders and start filling them in late summer or early fall with production ramping up from there.

    So, to answer your question, yes, that's an early car.


    ---
    You keep forgetting, companies are not tring to make perfect cars, there tring to make cars that sell
    ---

    I'm not forgetting it, I'm pointing out this is the wrong attitude. People who think you have to choose between making profitable cars and making excellent ones are idiots. Unfortunately, too many of them are employed in management positions at the Big Three.

    Anyone who thinks engineering excellence can't also be profitable should look at companies like Mercedes or Toyota to name just two.


    ---
    And BTW the miata is a sports car
    ---

    No, it is a roadster.



    ---
    The people arnt thinking about european cars because you get more perfomance for less money when you buy a vette. Everyone knows it why havent you figured it out?
    ---

    Because people with a wider experience of cars and more discerning tastes realize that there is more to a performance car than straight-line performance.


    ---
    Z06 vs 911 Turbo vs NSX, verdict? Z06
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=56&page_number=1
    ---

    Did you actually read this article? Of the three drivers who took the three cars in question out, only one of them voted for the Corvette as their overall choice - and the guy who did was a self-confessed "fan of American muscle cars" and also had previous experience racing them so was pre-disposed to judge them favorably.

    Yes, the Vette did have a faster lap time than the the other two but only because it has so much more power. Like I keep saying, it is the "brute force and ignorance" approach. Sometimes it works.

    Yeah, if you live in the US and want a 400bhp car and price is your main (or only) consideration then there really isn't any choice other than the Corvette if you insist on buying a new car.

    Lots of people buy Corvettes because they simply can't afford anything else. But just because something is popular because it is cheap doesn't mean it is a great example of the form.
     
  21. #71 Jon Gwynne, May 26, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Again on the grammar, just drop it.
    ---

    I wasn't talking about grammar, I was talking about people who use the term "immature" as a put-down.


    ---
    Corvettes cant handle good - wrong
    ---

    But Corvettes don't handle well compared to European cars in their price range. They handle well compared to older Corvettes but that isn't exactly high praise.

    See I didn't mention your grammatical mistake once! (oops...)


    ---
    weight defines a sports car - wrong
    ---

    Weight DOES define a sports car. I didn't make the rule. If you want to complain then go see Colin Chapman or Carroll Shelby.


    ---
    traction control is a "band aid" fix - wrong
    ---

    Did I say traction-control is a band-aid fix? I mean that about ABS. Traction control isn't a band-aid fix, it is just a stupid and pointless gimmick. One of the few things that I do like about the Viper is that is they designers were sensible and left off the traction-control (although they wimped out on the ABS). Traction control on road cars is for 17 year-old girls, hairdressers or middle-aged stockbrokers... People who either lack the experience to drive properly or else refuse to learn.


    ---
    viper sounds like a truck - wrong
    ---

    It does sound like a truck. It has a truck engine. It sounds like a truck.


    ---
    viper cant handle - wrong
    ---

    It can handle, just not well. It grips like a damn barnacle - a shame it doesn't handle as well as it grips.


    ---
    That "early" Tuscan is only from 2001, unless thats "early."
    ---

    The car was introduced in 2000 and I don't think they began full-scale production until later in that year. Typically TVR introduces the new models at the Birmingham motor show in late spring, they take a few hundred initial orders and start filling them in late summer or early fall with production ramping up from there.

    So, to answer your question, yes, that's an early car.


    ---
    You keep forgetting, companies are not tring to make perfect cars, there tring to make cars that sell
    ---

    I'm not forgetting it, I'm pointing out this is the wrong attitude. People who think you have to choose between making profitable cars and making excellent ones are idiots. Unfortunately, too many of them are employed in management positions at the Big Three.

    Anyone who thinks engineering excellence can't also be profitable should look at companies like Mercedes or Toyota to name just two.


    ---
    And BTW the miata is a sports car
    ---

    No, it is a roadster.



    ---
    The people arnt thinking about european cars because you get more perfomance for less money when you buy a vette. Everyone knows it why havent you figured it out?
    ---

    Because people with a wider experience of cars and more discerning tastes realize that there is more to a performance car than straight-line performance.


    ---
    Z06 vs 911 Turbo vs NSX, verdict? Z06
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=56&page_number=1
    ---

    Did you actually read this article? Of the three drivers who took the three cars in question out, only one of them voted for the Corvette as their overall choice - and the guy who did was a self-confessed "fan of American muscle cars" and also had previous experience racing them so was pre-disposed to judge them favorably.

    Yes, the Vette did have a faster lap time than the the other two but only because it has so much more power. Like I keep saying, it is the "brute force and ignorance" approach. Sometimes it works.

    Yeah, if you live in the US and want a 400bhp car and price is your main (or only) consideration then there really isn't any choice other than the Corvette if you insist on buying a new car.

    Lots of people buy Corvettes because they simply can't afford anything else. But just because something is popular because it is cheap doesn't mean it is a great example of the form.
     
  22. #72 Jon Gwynne, May 26, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Again on the grammar, just drop it.
    ---

    I wasn't talking about grammar, I was talking about people who use the term "immature" as a put-down.


    ---
    Corvettes cant handle good - wrong
    ---

    But Corvettes don't handle well compared to European cars in their price range. They handle well compared to older Corvettes but that isn't exactly high praise.

    See I didn't mention your grammatical mistake once! (oops...)


    ---
    weight defines a sports car - wrong
    ---

    Weight DOES define a sports car. I didn't make the rule. If you want to complain then go see Colin Chapman or Carroll Shelby.


    ---
    traction control is a "band aid" fix - wrong
    ---

    Did I say traction-control is a band-aid fix? I mean that about ABS. Traction control isn't a band-aid fix, it is just a stupid and pointless gimmick. One of the few things that I do like about the Viper is that is they designers were sensible and left off the traction-control (although they wimped out on the ABS). Traction control on road cars is for 17 year-old girls, hairdressers or middle-aged stockbrokers... People who either lack the experience to drive properly or else refuse to learn.


    ---
    viper sounds like a truck - wrong
    ---

    It does sound like a truck. It has a truck engine. It sounds like a truck.


    ---
    viper cant handle - wrong
    ---

    It can handle, just not well. It grips like a damn barnacle - a shame it doesn't handle as well as it grips.


    ---
    That "early" Tuscan is only from 2001, unless thats "early."
    ---

    The car was introduced in 2000 and I don't think they began full-scale production until later in that year. Typically TVR introduces the new models at the Birmingham motor show in late spring, they take a few hundred initial orders and start filling them in late summer or early fall with production ramping up from there.

    So, to answer your question, yes, that's an early car.


    ---
    You keep forgetting, companies are not tring to make perfect cars, there tring to make cars that sell
    ---

    I'm not forgetting it, I'm pointing out this is the wrong attitude. People who think you have to choose between making profitable cars and making excellent ones are idiots. Unfortunately, too many of them are employed in management positions at the Big Three.

    Anyone who thinks engineering excellence can't also be profitable should look at companies like Mercedes or Toyota to name just two.


    ---
    And BTW the miata is a sports car
    ---

    No, it is a roadster.



    ---
    The people arnt thinking about european cars because you get more perfomance for less money when you buy a vette. Everyone knows it why havent you figured it out?
    ---

    Because people with a wider experience of cars and more discerning tastes realize that there is more to a performance car than straight-line performance.


    ---
    Z06 vs 911 Turbo vs NSX, verdict? Z06
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=56&page_number=1
    ---

    Did you actually read this article? Of the three drivers who took the three cars in question out, only one of them voted for the Corvette as their overall choice - and the guy who did was a self-confessed "fan of American muscle cars" and also had previous experience racing them so was pre-disposed to judge them favorably.

    Yes, the Vette did have a faster lap time than the the other two but only because it has so much more power. Like I keep saying, it is the "brute force and ignorance" approach. Sometimes it works.

    Yeah, if you live in the US and want a 400bhp car and price is your main (or only) consideration then there really isn't any choice other than the Corvette if you insist on buying a new car.

    Lots of people buy Corvettes because they simply can't afford anything else. But just because something is popular because it is cheap doesn't mean it is a great example of the form.
     
  23. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    ---
    Dont tell me im wrong about the UK pricing, tell EVO, I got the price direclty from them
    ---

    EVO doesn't sell cars. Dealerships do.

    ---
    Id much rather believe a magazine over one dealership that looks anything but professional.
    ---

    Have you ever been to Bauer Millet? Didn't think so. What you mean is you don't think their website looks professional but you can't seem to say exactly why or what your qualifications are for making that judgement.


    ---
    When the word "gas efficient" is used it means gas consumtion, like MPG. The LS6/LS1 is more gas efficient than the EVOs 4, end of story
    ---

    You're comparing apples and oranges (again). Do you mean the engine is more efficient or the car as a total package is more efficient?


    ---
    If "extensive use of low-tech components" applies, than the Viper and Corvette are definetly not muscle cars. The Vette has always been on top of the game in technology
    ---

    Hahahahah! That's pretty funny. What's funnier is I think you were actually serious. Or maybe that's more sad that funny.


    ---
    saying a sports car must weight under X pounds to be a sports car is as stupid as saying a sports car must reach 200+mph to be a sports car... In this case then an elise is not a sports car, unless you consider 170-200hp alot.
    ---

    Considering the Elise weighs about as much as the doors on a Corvette, that 190bhp is a lot. But the Elise probably wouldn't qualify as a sports-car in the literal sense but rather as a roadster.


    ---
    The Corvette and Viper both have excellant grip and handling
    ---

    No, they have excellent grip and handling than ranges from poor to mediocre depending on the model.



    ---
    Sports cars have IRS, 2 seats, RWD or AWD and are made to be a sports car, its as simple as that.
    ---

    You're wrong. It is as simple as that. Like I said before, don't complain to me, talk to Colin or Carroll.

    BTW, if you want to see Lotus founder Colin Chapman, you'll have to use a medium. He died about 20 years ago but not before setting the bar for sports-car development with iconic sports cars like the Lotus Elan and Esprit.
     
  24. Re: The engine made it so expensive.

    Well if you enjoy being immature more power to you.

    How many times do we have to go over this, the cars in the Corvettes class are outhandled by the vette(that includes all european cars in its class). I would expect cars that weigh 500+lbs less and made specifically for handling would out handle it, but than again there not in the corvettes class.

    I dont know how much more clearly i can put this, weight is bad, but does not make a sports car not a sports car.

    Traction controll will save your ass in the rain and snow, its there for a reason. The Viper doesnt have it because Dodge doesnt expect any Viper owners to be driving in the rain or snow...

    What makes a truck engine sound like a truck engine? The exhaust, and the compression ratio. Both have been changed, and when you do hear a Viper in real life you will now it does sound like a sports car.

    Grip is a major factor in handling, drifting is not handling...

    Why do you think car companies exsist? To sell cars...
    Why do you think the civic and other economy cars sell so well? Its not quality, ill tell you that, its because thats what the people want, a car to get them from a to b, and save on gas. Not everyone wants a fast car, or a car that handles really well, alot of people just want an affodable car with A/C, CD player, and good gas economy. You cant make your own perfect car and expect everyone to like it, it must appeal to the buyers. If toyota is so "excellent" than why are there performance cars gone? Because they were not so "excellent", no one wanted to pay that much for a toyota that is beaten by an american car.

    "Because people with a wider experience of cars and more discerning tastes realize that there is more to a performance car than straight-line performance."
    Which is exacly why theey buy a Corvette, it gives you best of both worlds, hanling and speed. BTW where are most americans going to use a great handling street car? I dont know if you have noticed but most of our roads are all strait...

    Well the pro NSX guy, voted NSX on all, and admitted his judgement was biased, although the Corvette was the fastest. The professional racer chose the Z06, saying it was the easiest to go fast in, and the older guy, still managed the fastest times in the Z06, so theres his choise.

    Face it, the accleration times were all very close, the Z06 handles great, and you cannot say it doesnt without being totally biased, every article on the Z06 praises its handling.

    Gm made the Corvette to make a profit, like all car companies, and priced it in the lower regen for a reason, it sells...
     
  25. Re: The engine made it so expensive.
     

Share This Page