Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: mondego on August 31, 2009, 03:09:56 AM
-
I haven't been on AH quite so much because I've been workin' like a dog! The benefit of which is I'm looking to buy a 'new' car. I can't decide between a C6 corvette Z06 or a 997 Carrera S, so I've decided to ask the opinions of my fellow aces. I figure since we all can agree the BF109 K4 is the best plane in the game, we can all just as easily come to a conclusion as to which car would be better. ;)
Below are the pros to each car that I can think of:
Porsche Pros:
1. I prefer the exterior and especially the interior of this car over the corvette
2. Slightly more utility, as I can (uncomfortably albeit) carry more than 1 person short distances if I need to (this may be crucial when denizens of women throw themselves at me uncontrollably)
3. Likely a more distinguished and better overall impression, particularly with respect to meeting business clients (I live in Orange County, California and unfortunately corvettes are looked down upon by the majority of people). While I hate this fact, it is undeniable!
4. I don't think I would really ever want to go faster than what the Z06 allows. I could always add an after market supercharger to the 911 and have similar performance. While this isn't necessarily a pro, it does potentially negate one of the corvette's benefits
Corvette Z06 Pros
1. Supercar performance, faster than a 911
2. Less expensive to maintain (and purchase)
3. Likely more fun to drive with the added power (I've driven the 911 and will drive the corvette this week)
4. Whenever I leave orange county, I will likely be heralded as opposed to despised ;)
Any opinions are appreciated!
-
Im very biased. Id take the 911 ;)
-
911 for point 3 alone is way out in front coming from a country where corvettes are rare it is still way superior.
-
I'm thinking Corvette will depreciate faster, so cost of maintenance will even out.
-
No brainer for me, Z06. Then again I'm highly biased. If the 911 is a 109K4, the Z06 is an F-86. :cool:
<--- 550+ hp 1999 Vette :t
I could care less about perception. I look down on people who look down on people because of their choice of automobile.
The 911 is highly refined, for sure. Performance-wise, it's nowhere near a match for the Z06. The Vette does have an available interior trim package available that rivals the materials and textures found in the 911 and other "high-brow" performance cars, but that's frivolity to me and not worth the additional couple grand. Others may beg to differ. I'd spend the extra $$$ on performance, but this is coming from a guy who's last vette was daily driven on a full SCCA World Challenge suspension package from DRM.
Basically it comes down to: Are you more about "show" or more about "go?"
-
Don't buy a freacking car to impress others :rolleyes:
Buy the car you like the most ... you ... not a "statement of middle life crisys where u think you look cool ... again ... like when ur gut wasn't that big". It seems to me u want the 911, get it. Trade it for something else if u don't like it. Remember, there's always going to be someone faster and/or cooler at the red light next to u anyway.
This appart, the Vette has way way more potential than the 997 ... and is much easier to drive. I don't know for the 997, but the Vette is one of the only car I know where u can almost double the power without having to change brakes/bottom end/transmission/driveshaft.
I would not buy a Z06 out of the showroom floor, let someone else take a $30K+ depreciation the first 2 year.
-
DOH!!! LMAO, it pays to read the heading AFTER the first pot of coffee.
You're looking at a 2006 model...forget what I said then. Go for the Porsche...it won't depreciate as bad as the Vette and it's fairly easy to maintain.
-
The Z06. One of the guys I fly with is a Corvette aficionado, drag races and loves the things. It's worn off on me and what you get for what you pay is a very capable automobile.
-
Don't buy a freacking car to impress others :rolleyes:
Buy the car you like the most ... you ... not a "statement of middle life crisys where u think you look cool ... again ... like when ur gut wasn't that big". It seems to me u want the 911, get it. Trade it for something else if u don't like it. Remember, there's always going to be someone faster and/or cooler at the red light next to u anyway.
This appart, the Vette has way way more potential than the 997 ... and is much easier to drive. I don't know for the 997, but the Vette is one of the only car I know where u can almost double the power without having to change brakes/bottom end/transmission/driveshaft.
I would not buy a Z06 out of the showroom floor, let someone else take a $30K+ depreciation the first 2 year.
Narcissism is a powerful thing. The fact some people revolve their lives over "what other people think" is sad. Buy ANY car for the simple fact that, it is what YOU want, not to "impress others" by being a money spiller.
-
I haven't been on AH quite so much because I've been workin' like a dog! The benefit of which is I'm looking to buy a 'new' car. I can't decide between a C6 corvette Z06 or a 997 Carrera S, so I've decided to ask the opinions of my fellow aces. I figure since we all can agree the BF109 K4 is the best plane in the game, we can all just as easily come to a conclusion as to which car would be better. ;)
Below are the pros to each car that I can think of:
Porsche Pros:
1. I prefer the exterior and especially the interior of this car over the corvette
2. Slightly more utility, as I can (uncomfortably albeit) carry more than 1 person short distances if I need to (this may be crucial when denizens of women throw themselves at me uncontrollably)
3. Likely a more distinguished and better overall impression, particularly with respect to meeting business clients (I live in Orange County, California and unfortunately corvettes are looked down upon by the majority of people). While I hate this fact, it is undeniable!
4. I don't think I would really ever want to go faster than what the Z06 allows. I could always add an after market supercharger to the 911 and have similar performance. While this isn't necessarily a pro, it does potentially negate one of the corvette's benefits
Corvette Z06 Pros
1. Supercar performance, faster than a 911
2. Less expensive to maintain (and purchase)
3. Likely more fun to drive with the added power (I've driven the 911 and will drive the corvette this week)
4. Whenever I leave orange county, I will likely be heralded as opposed to despised ;)
Any opinions are appreciated!
can't go wrong with the vette.
it's better looking than any Porsche, if it's not quicker, it's close enough that it'll come down to the driver......and lower maintenance cost.
besides...a porshe is nothing more than an overpriced volkswagen.
-
Corvette Z06 all the way.
Why worry about if the Vette is "looked down on"? It's your money, spend on the car you like. If you let yourself worry about what others think of your car, you will never be happy, you'll be a slave to their opinions.
That being said......in my neck of the woods, the maintenance costs wouldn't even bear comparison. There are Chevrolet dealers everywhere, closest Porsche dealer would be in Dallas, OKC (dunno if they have one there honestly), or even further away. The Vette could be repaired at nearly any dealership or even local repair shop......most places won't even look at a Porsche, and the ones that will let you know rather quickly that "it's not gonna be cheap, it's a Porsche".
-
Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche
Get it? :D
One more time for the road... Porsche!
-
and when the porshe is broken down, the vette will continue on. :aok :noid :D
-
Porsche is one of the most reliable and easy to maintain car brands out there :)
The leaf spring suspension on the vette will rust before the Porsche is out of gas ;)
-
Porsche is one of the most reliable and easy to maintain car brands out there :)
The leaf spring suspension on the vette will rust before the Porsche is out of gas ;)
If you can find me a form of rust that eats composite material (not metal), you're a smarter man than I.....
that being said.....
:uhoh
-
Porsche is one of the most reliable and easy to maintain car brands out there :)
The leaf spring suspension on the vette will rust before the Porsche is out of gas ;)
since when does fiberglass rust?
and i do believe that the water cooled 911's had/have pretty common waterpump/thermostat/head gasket problems?
the only problem the vette has, is that it's still a chevy.... :noid :noid
and finally, while the vette looks like the race car it is, a porshe looks like a cockroach with wheels. :D :noid
-
You should just buy my wifes 03 vette convertable. She wanted that car and has put a grand total of about 5000 miles on it. :rolleyes:
I tried to trade it about a month ago and I almost punched the dealer when he told me what it's worth now. Most expensive 5000 miles EVER! :furious
-
You should just buy my wifes 03 vette convertable. She wanted that car and has put a grand total of about 5000 miles on it. :rolleyes:
I tried to trade it about a month ago and I almost punched the dealer when he told me what it's worth now. Most expensive 5000 miles EVER! :furious
Hapless Penguins fans. :uhoh
-
You should just buy my wifes 03 vette convertable. She wanted that car and has put a grand total of about 5000 miles on it. :rolleyes:
I tried to trade it about a month ago and I almost punched the dealer when he told me what it's worth now. Most expensive 5000 miles EVER! :furious
03 should still be pretty valuable.........
-
03 should still be pretty valuable.........
Not the trade-in value vs the original sticker price.
Cap1...they don't use fiberglass for the suspension parts on the Vette which is what Nilsen referred to...nor do they use steel. It's mostly aluminum...which I think Nilsen also forgot a few things as well...no leaf springs on a Vette since the 70s.
And this sir looks nothing like a "cockroach with wheels":
(http://www.carwallpapers4you.com/wallpapers/450x328/2007Porsche911GT3RS-1365.jpg)
Whereas this looks like a Lamborghini wannabe:
(http://www.dragtimes.com/images/13982-2006-Chevrolet-Corvette.jpg)
-
You should just buy my wifes 03 vette convertable. She wanted that car and has put a grand total of about 5000 miles on it. :rolleyes:
I tried to trade it about a month ago and I almost punched the dealer when he told me what it's worth now. Most expensive 5000 miles EVER! :furious
lol.......I'm taking it you didn't research your wife's Vette before you tried to trade it in? Kelly Blue Book, NADA.com, Edmonds, etc., would have given you an idea of the value of your wife's car. NO dealer is gonna quote you a good trade in price. They are in it to get your trade as cheap as possible and then turn around and sell your former car at a premium price.
Don't take the dealer's word...the salesman's job is to convince you that you got a fair price for your car and steer you into buying a new car, so expect him to shoot you a lowball price.
What figure were you quoted, just out of curiousity?
-
Not the trade-in value vs the original sticker price.
Cap1...they don't use fiberglass for the suspension parts on the Vette which is what Nilsen referred to...nor do they use steel. It's mostly aluminum...which I think Nilsen also forgot a few things as well...no leaf springs on a Vette since the 70s.
And this sir looks nothing like a "cockroach with wheels":
(http://www.carwallpapers4you.com/wallpapers/450x328/2007Porsche911GT3RS-1365.jpg)
Whereas this looks like a Lamborghini wannabe:
(http://www.dragtimes.com/images/13982-2006-Chevrolet-Corvette.jpg)
lol....ya, i was thinking of the corvettes with the transverse leaf...i thought they were fiberglass.
i think that the vette actually look a thousand times better than the lambo. given the choice, if you offered to give me the top of the line lambo, or top of the line vette.........i'd either take the lambo, and sell it for a vette, or i'd just do it the easy and take the vette.
-
2. Slightly more utility, as I can (uncomfortably albeit) carry more than 1 person short distances if I need to (this may be crucial when denizens of women throw themselves at me uncontrollably)
3. Likely a more distinguished and better overall impression, particularly with respect to meeting business clients (I live in Orange County, California and unfortunately corvettes are looked down upon by the majority of people). While I hate this fact, it is undeniable!
If these are important considerations, get yourself a luxury sedan. You won't have "rocket ship" performance, but:
- You'll still have a very, very fast car
- You'll actually be able to entertain more than one business client at a time
- You'll be able to fit four women comfortably, and they will all still like your car
- You could probably get a 2008 or even 2009 for the same price, if not less, than the 2006 Corvette.
Even so, you have to drive a car you like, so get what you want. I just don't see why you would want something so ridiculously impractical, unless you have a second car.
-
If I had the money...and this was the criteria:
2. Slightly more utility, as I can (uncomfortably albeit) carry more than 1 person short distances if I need to (this may be crucial when denizens of women throw themselves at me uncontrollably)
3. Likely a more distinguished and better overall impression, particularly with respect to meeting business clients (I live in Orange County, California and unfortunately corvettes are looked down upon by the majority of people). While I hate this fact, it is undeniable!
I'd buy this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2005-AUDI-A8-L-W12-QUATTRO-RARE-1-OWNER-ONLY-8K-WOW_W0QQitemZ290344447475QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item4399e0adf3&_trksid=p4506.c0.m245 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2005-AUDI-A8-L-W12-QUATTRO-RARE-1-OWNER-ONLY-8K-WOW_W0QQitemZ290344447475QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item4399e0adf3&_trksid=p4506.c0.m245)
-
Considering the "dealer" is a life long family friend that I have bought every vehicle I have ever owned from I didn't feel i needed to do research. He's a straight shooter with me and my family. My Lincoln pickup had a "sticker" that was 49 and I took it home for 9 less than that. No dealer within 3 States was even close to him. He just makes up for it with other schmucks I'm sure. :D :rofl
Cap...trust me it's not :(
-
Oh.. that vette was 56 new in '03 and is worth around the low to MAYBE mid 20's now. He said the vette market is baaad right now though :(
-
Save some money:
http://www.huntingridgemotors.com/cars.php?cat=bmw&carid=2312&subcat= (http://www.huntingridgemotors.com/cars.php?cat=bmw&carid=2312&subcat=)
-
as the porsche is only a 911S I would say a corvette, unless it was the GT4 or GT3, I dont really see how you can fully appreciate the handling and driving experience a Porsche can give you, in American, where, most of the roads are long,wide and straight. on the typical american roads a Porsche is quite wasted. On typical European roads the Porsche would be able to go faster around the country lanes.
this is Porsche territory
(http://www.transportcafe.co.uk/image15/a9_causwaymuir_flow_country_caithness.jpg)
(http://www.malcs-drivingschool.co.uk/admin/assets/country%20road%201.JPG)
Corvette territory
(http://www.freefoto.com/images/41/18/41_18_9---American-highway-road_web.jpg)
buy a car you like, not your neighbour, at the end of the day he will not be the one paying and driving it.
-
yet the vette is quicker on the ring........ :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times
which if i'm not mistaken, is twisty/curvy like the typical european roads?
-
as the porsche is only a 911S I would say a corvette, unless it was the GT4 or GT3, I dont really see how you can fully appreciate the handling and driving experience a Porsche can give you, in American, where, most of the roads are long,wide and straight. on the typical american roads a Porsche is quite wasted. On typical European roads the Porsche would be able to go faster around the country lanes.
I'd still take that W12 Audi over the Porsche on those twisty roads any day of the week...even though I love the 911S.
You haven't been to Western Colorado or the Southern California area much have you?
-
I'd still take that W12 Audi over the Porsche on those twisty roads any day of the week...even though I love the 911S.
You haven't been to Western Colorado or the Southern California area much have you?
i'd take a hyundai over an audi. hate audis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzPv9lUXpoI
it amazes me how these guys can manage to find SOMETHING wrong with virtually any american car they drive.
look at the end. 911gt3 is .1 faster on their track. which means if ya run them side by side....better driver wins. vette prettier and cheaper too. :D
-
yet the vette is quicker on the ring........ :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times
which if i'm not mistaken, is twisty/curvy like the typical european roads?
its also faster around the topgear test track, but the 911S is nothing special, its just one above the base model, The GT2,3,4 is the porsche to get.
7:42.99 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06
7:59 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z51
7:59 Porsche 911 Carrera S
The other porsche Times,
7:42 Porsche 911 GT3
7:40 Porsche 911 GT3 997MkII
7:38 Porsche 911 Turbo
7:35 Ruf Rt 12
7:34 Porsche 911 GT2
7:32.02 2008 Porsche 911 GT2
7:28.71 Porsche Carrera GT
although the new Corvette has done an impressive time off
7:26.4 2009 Chevrolet Corvette C6 ZR1
be good to see what the new model porsches will do,
heres the spec list of the USDM Porsches, not sure if they differ from the UK, or german markets.
http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/
I imagine it would be more expensive to own a porsche in America than a corvette also? plus with how cheap your gas prices are..it would be rude not to own a vette :D
This is the only type of corvette I would own :D
(http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs31/f/2008/235/f/d/black_Corvette_Stingray_427_by_Partywave.jpg)
(http://www.digitalcorvettes.com/corvette-photos/data/508/1969-corvette-4.jpg)
-
:aok
-
isnt GT4 a racecar? I really like the look of the Z06 - best looking vette so far (esp in yellow) :aok
havent driven either, but one thing I can tell you about is build quality. porsches are built like a Rolex, sry to say vettes are built like a fake thai Rolex ...
-
Stingrays were nice but this is classy style:
(http://www.vintagecarconnection.com/1957_Chevrolet_Corvette.jpg)
-
:aok
I'd love a '54 vette, and a XK120 to race it against :D
edit: actually that looks like a '58 to me, nice if u want the extra 2 cylinders ;)
-
Cap1...they don't use fiberglass for the suspension parts on the Vette which is what Nilsen referred to...nor do they use steel. It's mostly aluminum...which I think Nilsen also forgot a few things as well...no leaf springs on a Vette since the 70s.
Nope. Aluminum components mostly, but still has traverse leaf springs made of "fiberglass" composite material. My '90 had em, my '99 has 'em, and the '09's have 'em. Now, my old '68 Corvette 427? That had steel leaf springs.
And this sir looks nothing like a "cockroach with wheels":
(http://www.carwallpapers4you.com/wallpapers/450x328/2007Porsche911GT3RS-1365.jpg)
Lol, OK, it looks like a "cockroach with wheels and a big ricer wing!"
Whereas this looks like a Lamborghini wannabe:
(http://www.dragtimes.com/images/13982-2006-Chevrolet-Corvette.jpg)
At least get it right... if it were a "wanna be" at all it would "wanna be" a Ferrari.
Except the Corvettes kicked Ferrari's arrse yesterday at Mosport. And Porsche's. And BMW's. And Ford's.
Looks like they don't have to wanna be anybody. They're already beating everybody else at the track. :cool:
-
as the porsche is only a 911S I would say a corvette, unless it was the GT4 or GT3, I dont really see how you can fully appreciate the handling and driving experience a Porsche can give you, in American, where, most of the roads are long,wide and straight. on the typical american roads a Porsche is quite wasted. On typical European roads the Porsche would be able to go faster around the country lanes.
this is Porsche territory
(http://www.transportcafe.co.uk/image15/a9_causwaymuir_flow_country_caithness.jpg)
(http://www.malcs-drivingschool.co.uk/admin/assets/country%20road%201.JPG)
Corvette territory
(http://www.freefoto.com/images/41/18/41_18_9---American-highway-road_web.jpg)
Nope, no curvy roads in the US. I drive perfectly straight lines everywhere I go. :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh
:noid
-
Nope, no curvy roads in the US. I drive perfectly straight lines everywhere I go. :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh
:noid
:huh, :confused: Obviously.
(http://nickmilne.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/facepalm2sn8.jpg)
I did not mean it literally, However, you do not typicaly have the same kind of country lanes like we do in the UK. Infact your generaly lucky to find a road that is stright for longer than a mile.
-
:huh, :confused: Obviously.
(http://nickmilne.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/facepalm2sn8.jpg)
I did not mean it literally
I know, I was just being sarcastic. :)
However, you do not typicaly have the same kind of country lanes like we do in the UK. Infact your generaly lucky to find a road that is stright for longer than a mile.
Other than our major highways, what you describe sounds like 95% of our roads where I live. "Twisty, turny" two-lanes than wind around the countryside. And if you want a lot of fun, just a few hours from here we have the mountains, and the "dragon" (http://www.tailofthedragon.com) - 318 turns in 11 miles.
-
:huh, :confused: Obviously.
(http://nickmilne.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/facepalm2sn8.jpg)
I did not mean it literally, However, you do not typicaly have the same kind of country lanes like we do in the UK. Infact your generaly lucky to find a road that is stright for longer than a mile.
that's true......we don't.
what we DO however have, is many many more performance cars on the road. of some sort. most of what you see on the road over there is econoboxes. the performance cars you see on the roads over there are the stupidly expensive ones, and are the exception, not the rule.
i can sit here looking out the window of my shop for a 1/2 hour, and there'll be no less than a half dozen mustangs, a couple vettes, lately there's been 2 brand new camaros, and quite a few hotrod rice burners. hell, people over here even hotrod their trucks. :aok :D
-
as the porsche is only a 911S I would say a corvette, unless it was the GT4 or GT3, I dont really see how you can fully appreciate the handling and driving experience a Porsche can give you, in American, where, most of the roads are long,wide and straight. on the typical american roads a Porsche is quite wasted. On typical European roads the Porsche would be able to go faster around the country lanes....
What you can't see in JDBeck's pictures are all the Gatso's, Truvelos and other assorted automated speed enforcement (aka revenue collection and/or piggy bank) devices infesting British roads which makes ownership of anything faster than Honda Jazz / Fit a liability.
-
its also faster around the topgear test track, but the 911S is nothing special, its just one above the base model, The GT2,3,4 is the porsche to get.
7:42.99 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06
7:59 Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z51
7:59 Porsche 911 Carrera S
The other porsche Times,
7:42 Porsche 911 GT3
7:40 Porsche 911 GT3 997MkII
7:38 Porsche 911 Turbo
7:35 Ruf Rt 12
7:34 Porsche 911 GT2
7:32.02 2008 Porsche 911 GT2
7:28.71 Porsche Carrera GT
although the new Corvette has done an impressive time off
7:26.4 2009 Chevrolet Corvette C6 ZR1
be good to see what the new model porsches will do,
heres the spec list of the USDM Porsches, not sure if they differ from the UK, or german markets.
http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/
I imagine it would be more expensive to own a porsche in America than a corvette also? plus with how cheap your gas prices are..it would be rude not to own a vette :D
Track times are irrelevant. There are speed limits and if you live the city, well, it'll suck that much more. Of course you could be like the BMW I saw get pulled over after flying by me at 100+ Sat. night.
Screw the Porsche and go BMW, if not, get a non-Z06 C5 or C6. Me personally when it comes to vettes, these will always be my favorite:
http://www.cnv-corvettes.com/cardisplay.php?id=554 (http://www.cnv-corvettes.com/cardisplay.php?id=554) THIS won't "depreciate". Plus, it has "class" all it's own.
-
Track times are irrelevant. There are speed limits and if you live the city, well, it'll suck that much more. Of course you could be like the BMW I saw get pulled over after flying by me at 100+ Sat. night.
Screw the Porsche and go BMW, if not, get a non-Z06 C5 or C6. Me personally when it comes to vettes, these will always be my favorite:
http://www.cnv-corvettes.com/cardisplay.php?id=554 (http://www.cnv-corvettes.com/cardisplay.php?id=554) THIS won't "depreciate". Plus, it has "class" all it's own.
track times are far from irrelevant. I particapte in track racing and my car is still road legal as I enjoy to drive it as a weekend car when the weather is nice. Its about having a great driving experience when you drive a car. I bet you could have a great time in a lotus exige/ elise without going over the speed limit, in a car, that is fantastic on the track.
-
Stingrays were nice but this is classy style:
When I was in Jr. high one of my best friends older brother convinced his Dad to let him drive his classic 'vette to his Senior Prom.
On the way home, and around a block from his house, he took one of these...
(http://europeanmotorcarworks.com/images/V3.jpg)
and wrapped it around one of these...
(http://www.nhm.ac.uk/resources-rx/images/tree-forest-slide_29233_1.jpg)
Nobody was hurt but that gorgeous '63 split window was "gone".
(had less than 10k miles on it too)
(Edit: buy the Porsche)
(Edit: Edit: Karaya, my uncle had a '69 JUST like that but was a light blue <ugh> GREAT car!)
-
track times are far from irrelevant. I particapte in track racing and my car is still road legal as I enjoy to drive it as a weekend car when the weather is nice. Its about having a great driving experience when you drive a car. I bet you could have a great time in a lotus exige/ elise without going over the speed limit, in a car, that is fantastic on the track.
You're ASSUMING he'll take it on a track. He's buying this car to impress other people.
-
I love Corvettes , but they are not a very practical car.
Imho, porche makes a very very ugly and overpriced car.
You want muscle AND comfort??
3 words: Get a Caddy.
Worlds quickest production sedan.
(http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/1976/09caddy.png)
-
WELL, till it got totaled, i used to drive this on the street.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/ippie1.jpg)
she was my everyday driver, and was driven, just as she is pictured here.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/89GTA.jpg)
she was fun on the street. the problem was, that with the majority of mustangs being driven by kids now a days, she was also a magnet for our fine young men in blue.
unfortunately, that power didn't help me dodge the old bat in the saturn. :cry :cry
and yes, track times were relevant in this case. :D
-
I love Corvettes , but they are not a very practical car.
Imho, porche makes a very very ugly and overpriced car.
You want muscle AND comfort??
3 words: Get a Caddy.
Worlds quickest production sedan.
(http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/1976/09caddy.png)
i saw one of these on fire on rt 676 in Gloucester nj. he was supposedly doing a little over 100mph when he clipped the malibu that was laying on its roof about 100 yards away. the cadi was burning something fierce./.......
-
You're ASSUMING he'll take it on a track. He's buying this car to impress other people.
no tracks and track times are used by manufactures to test the performance of the car, hence why almost every single performance car is takern to nurburgring.
Cap..thats great..and thats a great photo of the car launching.
heres my track car, 1996 mr2 turbo - Just in the middle of rebuilding her, Im aiming for around 400bhp.. mainly a track car, and when the sun comes on that one day of the year in England,
My friend in the pic owns that Mini Cooper, hes restoring it..infact its almost on the road
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/jdbecks/Picture029-1.jpg)
PS..dont let Health and saftey see the emergency exit :noid
engine just out
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/jdbecks/DSC00441.jpg)
-
WELL, till it got totaled, i used to drive this on the street.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/ippie1.jpg)
she was my everyday driver, and was driven, just as she is pictured here.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/89GTA.jpg)
she was fun on the street. the problem was, that with the majority of mustangs being driven by kids now a days, she was also a magnet for our fine young men in blue.
unfortunately, that power didn't help me dodge the old bat in the saturn. :cry :cry
and yes, track times were relevant in this case. :D
Cap, I knew I liked you for a reason....
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z235/nathanyoung1980/Mustang-1.jpg)
-
I, myself would consider on of these before the Vette or Porsche..
(http://www.2009shelby.com/08ShelbyGT500KR_2763L.jpg)
-
I love Corvettes , but they are not a very practical car.
Imho, porche makes a very very ugly and overpriced car.
You want muscle AND comfort??
3 words: Get a Caddy.
Worlds quickest production sedan.
(http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/1976/09caddy.png)
is that faster than a BMW M5?
-
I, myself would consider on of these before the Vette or Porsche..
(http://www.2009shelby.com/08ShelbyGT500KR_2763L.jpg)
it's not a KR, but there's a silver/blue gt500 sitting at echelon ford in stratford.
-
is that faster than a BMW M5?
Yes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times
Not much out there for around 65k that will touch this 4 door.
Accelleration, handling and breaking, this car has it all.
-
03 should still be pretty valuable.........
Z06 Resale 14k to 23k depending on condition.
The mustang GT has almost as much horsepower as the six in the camaro.
-
Worlds quickest production sedan.
(http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/1976/09caddy.png)
smurfy :eek:
-
as the porsche is only a 911S I would say a corvette, unless it was the GT4 or GT3, I dont really see how you can fully appreciate the handling and driving experience a Porsche can give you, in American, where, most of the roads are long,wide and straight. on the typical american roads a Porsche is quite wasted. On typical European roads the Porsche would be able to go faster around the country lanes.
this is Porsche territory
(http://www.transportcafe.co.uk/image15/a9_causwaymuir_flow_country_caithness.jpg)
(http://www.malcs-drivingschool.co.uk/admin/assets/country%20road%201.JPG)
Corvette territory
(http://www.freefoto.com/images/41/18/41_18_9---American-highway-road_web.jpg)
buy a car you like, not your neighbour, at the end of the day he will not be the one paying and driving it.
Nice pics! Yeah porsche if you want handling and cornering. Corvette for acceleration and american horsepower.
I've seen some crazy aftermarket parts for both cars. All personal preference. Cali has nice weather you looking a convertible?
-
I appreciate all the feedback, thanks all. I didn't expect so many responses!
To clarify the "image" aspect, it's not necessarily that I care what other people think, it's more that I care about the ramifications of what other people think. There's a slight but important difference. It's not a huge issue, just one I'm taking into consideration.
As someone mentioned earlier, I think it does boil down to what I like more - what will be more fun/enjoyable. I think once I drive the corvette it will make my decision easier. If that doesn't I'm in big trouble. I don't plan on ever going to the track, nor driving like a maniac on public roads, so I'm not sure the performance difference between the two is too important.
I've considered getting a sports sedan like several have mentioned, but I just prefer the look of a coupe. The Cadillac is an amazing car for the value (I'm just not a fan of it's exterior). However if the corvette had the caddy's interior, I wouldn't have any problem deciding. That's what boggles my mind about the corvette... GM clearly has the ability to put quality plastics and finishing materials into a car, if they want to. A new Chevy Malibu has a better interior than the current corvettes - it doesn't make sense.
I've considered BMW's and have been in a couple M6s. They are great cars, but for some reason I just don't find them as appealing.
I'm 29 now and it's interesting how your tastes change over time. If you asked me back when I had a camaro what to get, I would have said corvette in a second.
(looking at a hardtop jdbecks)
-
Sharkwerks North Cal. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oghZBJl1jjA
-
Z06 Resale 14k to 23k depending on condition.
The mustang GT has almost as much horsepower as the six in the camaro.
and it'll still hammer the camaro....even with a solid axle, and less power. :D
-
I appreciate all the feedback, thanks all. I didn't expect so many responses!
To clarify the "image" aspect, it's not necessarily that I care what other people think, it's more that I care about the ramifications of what other people think. There's a slight but important difference. It's not a huge issue, just one I'm taking into consideration.
As someone mentioned earlier, I think it does boil down to what I like more - what will be more fun/enjoyable. I think once I drive the corvette it will make my decision easier. If that doesn't I'm in big trouble. I don't plan on ever going to the track, nor driving like a maniac on public roads, so I'm not sure the performance difference between the two is too important.
I've considered getting a sports sedan like several have mentioned, but I just prefer the look of a coupe. The Cadillac is an amazing car for the value (I'm just not a fan of it's exterior). However if the corvette had the caddy's interior, I wouldn't have any problem deciding. That's what boggles my mind about the corvette... GM clearly has the ability to put quality plastics and finishing materials into a car, if they want to. A new Chevy Malibu has a better interior than the current corvettes - it doesn't make sense.
I've considered BMW's and have been in a couple M6s. They are great cars, but for some reason I just don't find them as appealing.
I'm 29 now and it's interesting how your tastes change over time. If you asked me back when I had a camaro what to get, I would have said corvette in a second.
(looking at a hardtop jdbecks)
a buddy of mine has a bmw z4. it's only a 2 seater. he bought it 2 years ago for just under 25k. i'ts got a straight 6 in it with a 5 speed manual.
the frakkin thing is a rocket ship. it(i think) will out accelerate pretty much anything on the street....and it handles like a slot car.
he drives a LOT. he's averaging 33 miles/gallon at 90mph.
-
My next ride :rock
(http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll280/bucky626/Ford-GT.jpg?t=1251761982)
I just need a few more dollars but I've got it figured out....I'm gonna be my wife's pimp and hook her out. I may not be able to get $500,000 for her in one shot but I think I can get $20 for her 25000 times. :devil
-
My next ride :rock
(http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll280/bucky626/Ford-GT.jpg?t=1251761982)
I just need a few more dollars but I've got it figured out....I'm gonna be my wife's pimp and hook her out. I may not be able to get $500,000 for her in one shot but I think I can get $20 for her 25000 times. :devil
or ya could build one of these. :D(insert multiple drooly icons here)
-
I would get a TVR Tuscan Speed 6, although not sure how much they cost over there,
or I would build a AC Cobra replica, over here they are made by a company called DAX
(http://images.autoexposure.co.uk/AETA92813/AETV39972168_1b.jpg)
-
Buy a mini van or a light pickup truck. Either way you'll get about 1000 times more utility out of one of those.
-
Buy a mini van or a light pickup truck. Either way you'll get about 1000 times more utility out of one of those.
what if you own more than one car? I own 3 cars :P
-
Go for the middle ground....Get a Ducati....style, flare and grunt all rolled into one. Plus you have the added bonus of only replacing 2 tyres, and 1/3 of the fuel costs....ok maybe half.
-
I can't decide between a C6 corvette Z06 or a 997 Carrera S.
Drive both. The decision will be easy.
There is no substitute.
-
Mondego,
If your seriously considering the Porsche you might want to read some of the forums on the net.
If it was my money,given your first 2 choices I'd take the vette,on the other hand if I want a real Porsche I'd get an older aircooled 911 or better yet a 930.
check out the cost of a new remanufactured 911 motor because if you buy a watercooled 1 and keep it you'll be purchasing a rebuild for sure!
The Vette is well except for little things pretty much bulletproof.
:salute
-
I, myself would consider on of these before the Vette or Porsche..
[image of overweight Rustang]
That would be a snack for a Z06.
But they sound nice, it you're just into sounds. :)
-
and it'll still hammer the camaro....even with a solid axle, and less power. :D
Barely. And that's the GT, heads-up against the base Camaro.
Wait for the SS. NOTHING Ford makes will keep up.
FWIW, they haven't made but one decent sports car in the last 40+ years, and that was the GT (Ford GT, not Mustang GT).... and they killed it off a few years ago.
-
what if you own more than one car? I own 3 cars :P
May your good fortune continue.
-
Barely. And that's the GT, heads-up against the base Camaro.
Wait for the SS. NOTHING Ford makes will keep up.
FWIW, they haven't made but one decent sports car in the last 40+ years, and that was the GT (Ford GT, not Mustang GT).... and they killed it off a few years ago.
You sure about the 40+ years? If I remember correctly in 1969 and 70 Ford sold a production muscle car that ate up any production Camaro built from 1967 until the 2009 SS. If someone were to "modernize" it with an electronic ignition and a 6 speed transmission...
(http://www.geocities.com/fordmustangpics4/1969_Ford_Mustang_Boss_429_black.jpg)
But I still like the new Dodge Challengers...just the body style is attention grabbing...reminds me of high school and light to light draggin.
-
911
-
it's not a KR, but there's a silver/blue gt500 sitting at echelon ford in stratford.
That IS the new KR.
-
I love Corvettes , but they are not a very practical car.
Imho, porche makes a very very ugly and overpriced car.
You want muscle AND comfort??
3 words: Get a Caddy.
Worlds quickest production sedan.
(http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/1976/09caddy.png)
This is: http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2008/12/g-power-bmw-m5-hurricane-rs-fastest.html (http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2008/12/g-power-bmw-m5-hurricane-rs-fastest.html) :salute
-
I appreciate all the feedback, thanks all. I didn't expect so many responses!
To clarify the "image" aspect, it's not necessarily that I care what other people think, it's more that I care about the ramifications of what other people think. There's a slight but important difference. It's not a huge issue, just one I'm taking into consideration.
As someone mentioned earlier, I think it does boil down to what I like more - what will be more fun/enjoyable. I think once I drive the corvette it will make my decision easier. If that doesn't I'm in big trouble. I don't plan on ever going to the track, nor driving like a maniac on public roads, so I'm not sure the performance difference between the two is too important.
I've considered getting a sports sedan like several have mentioned, but I just prefer the look of a coupe. The Cadillac is an amazing car for the value (I'm just not a fan of it's exterior). However if the corvette had the caddy's interior, I wouldn't have any problem deciding. That's what boggles my mind about the corvette... GM clearly has the ability to put quality plastics and finishing materials into a car, if they want to. A new Chevy Malibu has a better interior than the current corvettes - it doesn't make sense.
I've considered BMW's and have been in a couple M6s. They are great cars, but for some reason I just don't find them as appealing.
I'm 29 now and it's interesting how your tastes change over time. If you asked me back when I had a camaro what to get, I would have said corvette in a second.
(looking at a hardtop jdbecks)
I'm just saying, APPRECIATE the car you get, for YOU, who gives a **** what "they" think. Buy it because it fits all of your needs, without having you go "outside of your needs". I'm just thinking on this one with common sense, please do not read anything deliberate into it.
-
Barely. And that's the GT, heads-up against the base Camaro.
Wait for the SS. NOTHING Ford makes will keep up.
FWIW, they haven't made but one decent sports car in the last 40+ years, and that was the GT (Ford GT, not Mustang GT).... and they killed it off a few years ago.
um, the Camaro's are still gaudy as sh*t. They aren't worth the "mark up", nor is the "redesigned POS Charger". Keep reading Car and Driver though. Only a fool would spend "more" for "marginal performance increases". Actually, C/D's latest issue had the Mustang as their pick because of the interior. Not to mention for being way underpowered SS and R/T, they BARELY beat it.
Here, read up and re-think what you are trying to "foist off". http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q3/2010_chevy_camaro_ss_vs._2010_ford_mustang_gt_2009_dodge_challenger_r_t-comparison_tests (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q3/2010_chevy_camaro_ss_vs._2010_ford_mustang_gt_2009_dodge_challenger_r_t-comparison_tests)
Nevermind Ford did one thing NO other Manufacturer was able to accomplish in the Racing World....unseat Ferrari.
As for your ignorant "40+ years" I give you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boss_429 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boss_429) From the Factory, not aftermarket like a Yenko. :devil
http://k43.pbase.com/o6/09/553709/1/79071425.nOh40xUm.IMG_9864.JPG (http://k43.pbase.com/o6/09/553709/1/79071425.nOh40xUm.IMG_9864.JPG)
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times
Read this link and click on the M5 and read the article on the newest M5.
Cadillac Cts V, is the fastest production sedan on the market.
The new generation CTS V and the Audi R6 have caused BMW to go back to the drawing board.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times
Read this link and click on the M5 and read the article on the newest M5.
Cadillac Cts V, is the fastest production sedan on the market.
The new generation CTS V and the Audi R6 have caused BMW to go back to the drawing board.
That was the 2005 M5. This is new. :rock
-
um, the Camaro's are still gaudy as sh*t. They aren't worth the "mark up", nor is the "redesigned POS Charger". Keep reading Car and Driver though. Only a fool would spend "more" for "marginal performance increases". Actually, C/D's latest issue had the Mustang as their pick because of the interior. Not to mention for being way underpowered SS and R/T, they BARELY beat it.
Here, read up and re-think what you are trying to "foist off". http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q3/2010_chevy_camaro_ss_vs._2010_ford_mustang_gt_2009_dodge_challenger_r_t-comparison_tests (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q3/2010_chevy_camaro_ss_vs._2010_ford_mustang_gt_2009_dodge_challenger_r_t-comparison_tests)
Nevermind Ford did one thing NO other Manufacturer was able to accomplish in the Racing World....unseat Ferrari.
As for your ignorant "40+ years" I give you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boss_429 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boss_429) From the Factory, not aftermarket like a Yenko. :devil
http://k43.pbase.com/o6/09/553709/1/79071425.nOh40xUm.IMG_9864.JPG (http://k43.pbase.com/o6/09/553709/1/79071425.nOh40xUm.IMG_9864.JPG)
LOL, m'kay.
First, I'm not a huge fan of the Camaro, and actually like the mustang, so pull your thong back out before it gets ya too much more irritated.
And for your credibility's sake, don't rely on subjective evaluations from a second-rate automotive rag where the reviewers freely pick a "winner" based on their feelings and toss actual performance numbers to the side. C&D has been doing that hokie crap for years. The put on an "Ultimate Performance Showdown" and then pick as the winner the car that was mid-pack, but they liked the seats and air conditioner the best. Whatever.
As far as your "ignorant" quote, you need to go read up on the definition of "sports car" as opposed to "pony car" or "muscle car" and hopefully you can dislodge your head from your 6-o'clock position. :)
If you'll see your quote concerning unseating Ferrari, you'll see that car 40+ years ago I referred to, that they recreated a few years back. The GT. By the purist definition, the only true "sports car" Ford has made.
-
My buddy bought a new Shelby last May and I was thoroughly impressed with it's power. He kicked my butt in the 1/4 when I raced him with my wifes vette. Top end it was fairly close. Fastest I've had my wifes is 154. He claims to have burried his at 160+. However my wifes is a sh@tin automatic and his is a stick. :furious
Also, they never planned to keep making the GT. It was always just a 2 or 3 year production plan. They just wanted to prove they could still make the "supercar". I believe they only built around 3800 of them and they were IMPOSSIBLE to get. They also went for WAY over the MSRP.
Man, I want one :cry
-
That IS the new KR.
i know the one you pictured is.
i meant that the one at echelon ford isn't a kr. it's just a plain gt500. :aok
-
http://www.motortrend.com/av/roadtests/112_0905_ctsv_m5_road_course_video/index.html
2009--Caddy won in the straight line test also! :rock
-
http://www.motortrend.com/av/roadtests/112_0905_ctsv_m5_road_course_video/index.html
2009--Caddy won in the straight line test also! :rock
That isn't the M5 I linked.
-
so.......did gm hire drunken chimpanzees on crack or something to design that car?
it has to be one of the most godawful ugly cars ever to grace the roads.
-
That isn't the M5 I linked.
How many different type of M-5s do they make at the factory??
If there are more than one, which one are you talking about?
I believe the production model is the one I linked to and has 580 HP.
-
How many different type of M-5s do they make at the factory??
If there are more than one, which one are you talking about?
This is the G-Power Hurricane M5. It is the World's Fastest, Street Legal, Production Sedan as of December. 0-100k/hr in 4.1 seconds and a Top Speed of 211 mph. They're still not done with this engine either. They're up to 730hp, they want close to 800.
The Lotus Carlton will always be my favorite Sedan though.
-
This is the G-Power Hurricane M5. It is the World's Fastest, Street Legal, Production Sedan as of December. 0-100k/hr in 4.1 seconds and a Top Speed of 211 mph. They're still not done with this engine either. They're up to 730hp, they want close to 800.
The Lotus Carlton will always be my favorite Sedan though.
Ya may have me there.
But I'm still not sure that taking their stock V-10 and tweeking the hell out of it and adding twin turbos to a Bmw is really playing fair. LOL
Even with all that, they,re running pretty damn close, the "stock" $65k Caddy V8 does 0-60mph in 3.9 seconds----the steroided V-10 $350k Beamer does 0-62mph in 4.1
So, I will concede to the fact that the German car is a little faster. :cry Gonna do a little more research into this version of the M-5.
I'm not done with this yet!!
Not by a long shot!! :lol
-
Just found this.
http://www.g-power.de/275.html?L=1
The reason its called the"G power" m5 hurricane, is that they add G power aftermarket parts to the car.
-
Just found this.
http://www.g-power.de/275.html?L=1
The reason its called the"G power" m5 hurricane, is that they add G power aftermarket parts to the car.
and it is the Fastest Production Sedan in the World.
-
That "may" be true,but is very very lame claim on BMWs or anyones part.
Its like strapping a 45 to a bic pen and calling it the worlds deadliest pen.
I think calling it a "production" car is a real stretch. :O
-
http://www.2sportscars.com/shelby-supercars-ultimate-aero-fastest-car.shtml (http://www.2sportscars.com/shelby-supercars-ultimate-aero-fastest-car.shtml)
Need to define just what a "production" car should be.
http://www.ridelust.com/guinness-makes-it-official-ssc-ultimate-aero-is-the-worlds-fastest-production-car/ (http://www.ridelust.com/guinness-makes-it-official-ssc-ultimate-aero-is-the-worlds-fastest-production-car/)
This is too funny:
According to test driver Chuck Bigelow the potential for a greater top speed is there, but do to having to maneuver the Aero TT through an S-turn at 210 mph some of the momentum was lost on highway.
-
can't go wrong with the vette.
it's better looking than any Porsche, if it's not quicker, it's close enough that it'll come down to the driver......and lower maintenance cost.
besides...a porshe is nothing more than an overpriced volkswagen.
I don't know about looks the Porsche GT along with the GT2 and 3 are imo are far better looking then any vette. To me the Vette although a very fast car now still has that redheaded step child persona to it. Kinda a poor mans sport car. I realize that some are in the $100,000 range but how quickly does the resale drop compared to a Porsche.Here In so cal more women drive Vettes then men I seriously doubt that any Corvette will approach the stigma that a Porsche , Ferrari or any other luxury sports car would bring. I also have never met a Porsche owner that didn't absolutely love his car, I can't say that about every Vette owner. It all boils down to what you want out of the car.
Be careful with impressing clients with any car, the first thing their going to think about is how much money is this guy going to make off of me. I am a contractor and have purchased trucks in the middle of jobs only to have the customer make a comment about how I must be making a lot of money off of them because I bought a new truck.
Oh yeh Cap Volkswahon has really done well at LeMans over the years haven't they.
-
I don't know about looks the Porsche GT along with the GT2 and 3 are imo are far better looking then any vette. To me the Vette although a very fast car now still has that redheaded step child persona to it. Kinda a poor mans sport car. I realize that some are in the $100,000 range but how quickly does the resale drop compared to a Porsche.Here In so cal more women drive Vettes then men I seriously doubt that any Corvette will approach the stigma that a Porsche , Ferrari or any other luxury sports car would bring. I also have never met a Porsche owner that didn't absolutely love his car, I can't say that about every Vette owner. It all boils down to what you want out of the car.
Be careful with impressing clients with any car, the first thing their going to think about is how much money is this guy going to make off of me. I am a contractor and have purchased trucks in the middle of jobs only to have the customer make a comment about how I must be making a lot of money off of them because I bought a new truck.
Oh yeh Cap Volkswahon has really done well at LeMans over the years haven't they.
corvette isn't a poor mans sports car. it's the only truly affordable sports car out there with usable v-8 power.
i don't see too many races anymore........but i was watching one the other night. corvettes were all the front runners. in front of ferreri, porshe, audi, bmw.............all of em.
i likes my fords........but with the choices given, i'll take the vette.
give me an audi, and i'll sell it for a vette or a shelby gt500kr. same with a porshe. i might keep a bmw. i've liked all the beemrs i've driven....can't say that for the porshes, audis, vw's mercedes, etc.
out here, i've never met a person with a corvette that doesn't like it. love it actually.
as for impressing customers? never EVER try to do that with a car. you're right on that. there's only one true way to impress a customer..........deliver on your promises. excellent service, and/or product. if you need anything else to impress em with, then you're doing something wrong.
:aok
o yea..........i find it pretty amusing that the vette is less then 1/2 the price of the stuff it's compared to, and it'll eat em all for lunch. :D
-
The Corvette Z06 are around $107,000 Porsche turbo are about $130,000 and the GT3 around 107,000 so where is the price double over the Vette? The Porsche GT is around $500,000 and any corvette doesnt even compare to it.
Really the only Vette that can compete with Porsche is the Z06.
-
The Corvette Z06 are around $107,000 Porsche turbo are about $130,000 and the GT3 around 107,000 so where is the price double over the Vette? The Porsche GT is around $500,000 and any corvette doesnt even compare to it.
Really the only Vette that can compete with Porsche is the Z06.
http://www.automobilemag.com/am/99/2009/chevrolet/corvette/z06_coupe/1799/prices.html
looks more like 73k to me.
http://www.rsportscars.com/chevrolet/2007-chevrolet-corvette-z06/
look all the way to the right on this last link. you're probably thinking of the zr1.
http://www.chevrolet.com/pages/open/default/family/corvette.do
-
sorry I was refering to the ZR1.
-
sorry I was refering to the ZR1.
i know.....so if the z06 owns the porshes, then the zr1 flat out embarrasses em. :rofl :aok :rofl
still for less.
-
http://www.2sportscars.com/shelby-supercars-ultimate-aero-fastest-car.shtml (http://www.2sportscars.com/shelby-supercars-ultimate-aero-fastest-car.shtml)
Need to define just what a "production" car should be.
http://www.ridelust.com/guinness-makes-it-official-ssc-ultimate-aero-is-the-worlds-fastest-production-car/ (http://www.ridelust.com/guinness-makes-it-official-ssc-ultimate-aero-is-the-worlds-fastest-production-car/)
I guess one definition is as good as another.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=production+car+definition&fr=yfp-t-501&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8
Haven't found the production #s yet for the G Force" Factory."
Would be interesting to see how many M-5s are converted by G force though.
Seems like an awful lot of trouble for BMW , G Force and ASA to go through to best a stock "factory" V8 by only fractions of a second. :rofl
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times
Ahhh hemmm.
3rd on the list. :aok
-
The Corvette Z06 are around $107,000 Porsche turbo are about $130,000 and the GT3 around 107,000 so where is the price double over the Vette? The Porsche GT is around $500,000 and any corvette doesnt even compare to it.
Really the only Vette that can compete with Porsche is the Z06.
Dodge Viper ACR.... There's one sitting in the showroom of our local Dodge dealer available for immediate delivery. Fast? Read this....
http://www.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0808_2009_dodge_viper_acr_nurburgring_record/index.html (http://www.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0808_2009_dodge_viper_acr_nurburgring_record/index.html)
My regards,
Widewing
-
I am a Ford man and I like German cars.... But I'd have to really consider the 'Vette.
V8 power is always more fun under the speed limit.
Have a look at the top gear review of it. (or perhaps it was the ZR1) I can't remember.
Clarkson loved it.... But the built quality was rubbish. The interior was falling apart and the keyless entry worked only when it felt it.
For the money, I'd buy a Mustang. (one of the Mustangs with a proper suspension system, not the SUV spec, ocean feel nonsense). The Corvette is as ugly as a bucket of bums.
Having said that "There's no replacement for displacement".
-
Over the years, I've had my share of quick cars. Shelby GLHS, Regal Turbo, Honda S2000, WRX and the like. At this stage in my life, this is simply more fun...
(http://my.project-jk.com/data/519/snow1.JPG)
My regards,
Widewing
-
corvette isn't a poor mans sports car. it's the only truly affordable sports car out there with usable v-8 power.
as for impressing customers? never EVER try to do that with a car. you're right on that. there's only one true way to impress a customer..........deliver on your promises. excellent service, and/or product. if you need anything else to impress em with, then you're doing something wrong.
:aok
I agree, although it's not that I'm trying to impress clients with a car. I'm just after a good middle ground. Just as you can have too gaudy a car, you can have too 'inferior' a car as well. When a client with a $50 million net worth comes to meet the guy who is going to handle his $5 million mortgage, he'd be a little concerned giving all his financials and personal information to someone in a beat up '85 Camry... he'd probably think, "does he really know what he's doing?"
I've seen that kind of reaction when I was younger and just starting the business out of college. I met a couple clients in my regular cab Ford Ranger and there'd often be that initial look of concern. It's not a terrible thing to deal with, and if you're honest, knowledgeable and provide good service like you and some previous posters mentioned, then it will still work out in the end. My point is that if I'm going to spend $50,000 on something, why would I want it to be a potential handicap or make my life more difficult? It's not the most important aspect of buying a car, but it's one of them.
What's interesting about this thread is that I find the attitudes of the people in the central states towards cars to be refreshing... there's such a vitriolic reaction to the "image" of the car being important. Whereas if you look at the locations of the guys that are in coastal areas (or foreign countries), they seem to understand the reasoning behind it. I've always thought about moving from California and seeing what life was like outside of it... this little discussion definitely makes a case for it
Also, I really like the exterior of the Dodge Viper - it's a great looking car and would be a blast to own. It falls into the same category as the Z06 - power and performance but an overall lack of interior build quality and creature comforts (much more so than the Corvette). Not that it matters so much on the Viper... it's not after the daily driver customer base. It's more of a weekend/2nd car. I definitely have a soft spot for the Viper. It's in the price range of the Porsche and Z06, but like I mentioned earlier it's just not functional enough to be a daily driver (which is what this car will be).
-
Why not get a Viper or Vette and do the interior yourself? Nothing forces you to keep everything stock.. I don't expect those clients would look down on tastefully done custom interior.
-
Why not get a Viper or Vette and do the interior yourself? Nothing forces you to keep everything stock.. I don't expect those clients would look down on tastefully done custom interior.
That's a good question. I'm not the biggest fan of aftermarket interiors, which likely stems from the fact I've never really seen a good one. I suppose the exception would be classic cars. Some of those look amazing when done right. I'll have to search around and see how much that costs with respect to the results I could expect to get from it. If you have any pictures of modern cars that have had their interiors redone, please post them!
-
Sorry but German engineering wins over muscle car girth............Porsche all the way, much more refined car.
As fart as speed you'll be on the six O'clock news before you even come close to eithers top speed............then you can choose the drivng option of the prison bus or your cellmate........hehehe Good Luck in whatever you get....KEEP THE RUBBER DOWN! :salute
Mondego- F.Y.I. check out some of the work that West Coast Customs does.......I think they are by far the industry leader (in my opinion) of aftermarket interior work..........
-
I agree, although it's not that I'm trying to impress clients with a car. I'm just after a good middle ground. Just as you can have too gaudy a car, you can have too 'inferior' a car as well. When a client with a $50 million net worth comes to meet the guy who is going to handle his $5 million mortgage, he'd be a little concerned giving all his financials and personal information to someone in a beat up '85 Camry... he'd probably think, "does he really know what he's doing?"
I've seen that kind of reaction when I was younger and just starting the business out of college. I met a couple clients in my regular cab Ford Ranger and there'd often be that initial look of concern. It's not a terrible thing to deal with, and if you're honest, knowledgeable and provide good service like you and some previous posters mentioned, then it will still work out in the end. My point is that if I'm going to spend $50,000 on something, why would I want it to be a potential handicap or make my life more difficult? It's not the most important aspect of buying a car, but it's one of them.
What's interesting about this thread is that I find the attitudes of the people in the central states towards cars to be refreshing... there's such a vitriolic reaction to the "image" of the car being important. Whereas if you look at the locations of the guys that are in coastal areas (or foreign countries), they seem to understand the reasoning behind it. I've always thought about moving from California and seeing what life was like outside of it... this little discussion definitely makes a case for it
Also, I really like the exterior of the Dodge Viper - it's a great looking car and would be a blast to own. It falls into the same category as the Z06 - power and performance but an overall lack of interior build quality and creature comforts (much more so than the Corvette). Not that it matters so much on the Viper... it's not after the daily driver customer base. It's more of a weekend/2nd car. I definitely have a soft spot for the Viper. It's in the price range of the Porsche and Z06, but like I mentioned earlier it's just not functional enough to be a daily driver (which is what this car will be).
if it helps ya any.....a buddy of mine owns a viper. he pulled the engine 2 years ago, sent it to the company that builds em for dodge(these are true race cars), had em rebuild it, and add a supercharger while they were at it. he puts around 780 hp to the back tires.
he's owned late 90's corvettes, and this viper. he likes the viper more.
funny thing you mention about regions. i had to call yellowbook today. each and every person i dealt with was so nice, it was almost disgusting(in a good way :aok). i asked one of them where in the country they are. she said they were in iowa. my reaction? "oooooo THAT'S why you're all so nice!!"
turns out she hears that at least a dozen times a day.....and mostly from us on one of the coasts.
i'd still take the vette. v-8 rumble, crazy fast(if you want it)
that's something people that've never owned a fast car don't understand. it's not that we need that extra power. it's not that we need that extra speed. it's just knowing it's there.
plus, it adds to the fun getting to the speed limit. :D
it's been sooooooo long since i've had a fast car on the street......(insert the drooly thingies here again)
-
That's a good question. I'm not the biggest fan of aftermarket interiors, which likely stems from the fact I've never really seen a good one. I suppose the exception would be classic cars. Some of those look amazing when done right. I'll have to search around and see how much that costs with respect to the results I could expect to get from it. If you have any pictures of modern cars that have had their interiors redone, please post them!
I don't know any such links, and I do know that pretty much any custom interior I've seen didn't do the car justice.. But given the latter, there's got to be a big demand for tasteful interior craftsmanship..
-
Sorry but German engineering wins over muscle car girth............Porsche all the way, much more refined car.
As fart as speed you'll be on the six O'clock news before you even come close to eithers top speed............then you can choose the drivng option of the prison bus or your cellmate........hehehe Good Luck in whatever you get....KEEP THE RUBBER DOWN! :salute
Mondego- F.Y.I. check out some of the work that West Coast Customs does.......I think they are by far the industry leader (in my opinion) of aftermarket interior work..........
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< has worked on enough of that "superior" :rolleyes: german engineering, that i'd never own one. ever.
well.......a beemer if it had a good portion of the FULL warranty left. :aok
a porshe only before an audi or saab though.......
-
That's a good question. I'm not the biggest fan of aftermarket interiors, which likely stems from the fact I've never really seen a good one. I suppose the exception would be classic cars. Some of those look amazing when done right. I'll have to search around and see how much that costs with respect to the results I could expect to get from it. If you have any pictures of modern cars that have had their interiors redone, please post them!
i'd be willing to bet that if you took a new car like that vette to a custom interior shop(one that does excellent jobs on 50's or 60's cars) they'd be able to do some REALLY impressive things to it. tastefully too.
-
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< has worked on enough of that "superior" :rolleyes: german engineering, that i'd never own one. ever.
well.......a beemer if it had a good portion of the FULL warranty left. :aok
a porshe only before an audi or saab though.......
So is there a car that ya don't have to work on..........have yet to see a maintanance free car being sold. I feel it has ALOT to do with the owner. If something is taken care of the way it is suppose to be it should last longer..........
-
So is there a car that ya don't have to work on..........have yet to see a maintanance free car being sold. I feel it has ALOT to do with the owner. If something is taken care of the way it is suppose to be it should last longer..........
you missed my point.
i've been fixing cars for nearly 30 years. i work on everything....'cept jags.....effin HATE them.......
but i digress.
fords, chevys, dodges.......some engineering nightmares from each, but nothing compared to mercedes, porshe, audi, saab.
the watercooled 911(i think it's a 996 or something like that) i've been lucky enough to not see.....but they have cooling system problems that seemingly will cost you an engine. all of the porsches i've worked on were rattle-traps. things rattled. they weren't comfortable to sit in. they didn't feel as if they accelerated, turned, or stopped any better than "lower" cars.
audis, and volkswagens,,,,,,,,"superior" engineering at work in the cooling system(again). some german engineer(rocket scientist?) saw fit to place a PLASTIC impeller onto a knurled steel shaft on the water pump. wanna guess what goes bad n em?
yep!! you got it!! the water pump! the thermostats go bad too. usually before 50k miles. i've replaced sooooooo many of them, i can do it in my friggin sleep.
bmw(and i LIKE beemrs) has over-engineered the thermostat(funny....cooling system AGAIN). they use what's called a MAP controlled thermostat. what this does, is add an electric heating element to the stat. it's computer controlled.
i've replaced THREE of them this year alone. o yea.....they trip a computer code, which if one isn't careful, can lead to an incorrect diagnosis.
haven't had too many common problems with mercedes...although i just replaced a catalytic converter assembly in a c240.....it was only 3 years old, and the dealer told him it was out of warranty. that cat. cost just over $800, plus labor. that's about 3 times the cost of a cat in almost any american car.
my only gripe with benze in general, is that they're not comfortable to drive(to me). i don't like the handling, acceleration, stopping,.,.....and they ALL smell funny inside.
so now......lets look at chevy. cooling system problems? nope. i think i've replace a half dozen thermostats that were bad since i started working on cars. usually just do them as maintenance if the cooling system is opened for something else.
water pumps? yep...don plenty of bad water pumps in chevys. usually with well over 100 k on the clock.
head gaskets? i don't think i've EVER seen a chevy v8 lose a head gasket.
with the exception of the head gasket, the same is true for fords and chryslers.
someone mentioned cadallics..........northstar engine(in my opinion) is pure junk. i'd almost take a german car over that engine.
bunches of customers with major problems with their aluminmum cadi engines.
you do, however make a good point about how well a customer does or doesn't maintain their car. i've seen a wide range of this. in the above mentioned cooling system problems, it seem irrelevent, although it does affect other things.
BTW........the corvette.........i believe still uses a good ole pushrod v8. :aok
-
Why not get a Viper or Vette and do the interior yourself? Nothing forces you to keep everything stock.. I don't expect those clients would look down on tastefully done custom interior.
lol I would. What would you do to the interior other then the manufacture has already done? Change seats to a respected seat manufacture is all I would even attempt, maybe a steering wheel but much more would devalue any of the mentioned cars.
-
i know.....so if the z06 owns the porshes, then the zr1 flat out embarrasses em. :rofl :aok :rofl
still for less.
Cap the ZR1 is the only Vette that even comes close to the GT2 and 3 or turbo. The GT is by far a more sophisticated and expensive car then the ZR1 and if I was able to afford a GT then it would be a no brainer. The standard 911 is in the $70,000 range like the Z06 so I can't see where you price difference is.
-
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< has worked on enough of that "superior" :rolleyes: german engineering, that i'd never own one. ever.
well.......a beemer if it had a good portion of the FULL warranty left. :aok
a porshe only before an audi or saab though.......
Are you factory trained to work on said German cars cause if you not then your really imo are not able to make a realistic comment. Just from a safety standpoint the German side of car building wins hands down, my guess is you never been on the Autobahn either so getting a car up to it's true potential is something that is difficult if not impossible on the standard hwy here in the states. So knowing that you have 600 horses means little unless you want to just spin the tires.
-
this is what car I would buy, it costs $50,000 its Powered by a Chevrolet 5.7 litre V8, I bet not a single one of your clients will look down on you. Yes its a replcia, but as long as you dont put AC Cobra badges on it, and pass it off as one who cares. Or you could pretend it is one, if I owned her...I would not have any cobra badges or anything.
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-1.jpg)
that car is so damn sexy, I would turn down any women for a drive in that!
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-2.jpg)
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-3.jpg)
-
Don't confuse advanced engineering with reliability. German cars are advanced and highly refined, but not more reliable than most other cars. Japanese engineering is reliable (for the most part). I prefer the German.
-
So is there a car that ya don't have to work on..........have yet to see a maintanance free car being sold. I feel it has ALOT to do with the owner. If something is taken care of the way it is suppose to be it should last longer..........
no...as i said, i work on just about anyting that can fit in my bays.
my point was that the so-called superior german engineering isn't.
there's nothing a customer can do to prevent those water pumps or t-stats from going bad like that. that's just poop quality.
i think i forgot to mention earlier too........i haven't seen any serious issues with volvos.
-
Are you factory trained to work on said German cars cause if you not then your really imo are not able to make a realistic comment. Just from a safety standpoint the German side of car building wins hands down, my guess is you never been on the Autobahn either so getting a car up to it's true potential is something that is difficult if not impossible on the standard hwy here in the states. So knowing that you have 600 horses means little unless you want to just spin the tires.
yea......'cause i've never had my mustang above 150mph. ooo....wait......yes i did. easily.
and factory training means poop. that's like being book smart, compared to street smart. i can, and do fix anything in my bays. and i do it well. real world is what's formed my opinions, and nothing else.
-
Don't confuse advanced engineering with reliability. German cars are advanced and highly refined, but not more reliable than most other cars. Japanese engineering is reliable (for the most part). I prefer the German.
Many of the reliability depends on the quality of the parts in it. I have 2 Toyota's and other then scheduled maintenance nothing ever breaks. Now I make sure that Toyota parts are installed not after market ones. I have found that after market parts fail more often then the factory parts. Most Japanese technolgy and design is based off of German car makers anyway. I just saw a new Lexas with the same type taillights as the BMW 5 series, headlight design always seems to be a German copy as well.
-
yea......'cause i've never had my mustang above 150mph. ooo....wait......yes i did. easily.
and factory training means poop. that's like being book smart, compared to street smart. i can, and do fix anything in my bays. and i do it well. real world is what's formed my opinions, and nothing else.
Well if I ever owned a Porsche again a factory trained (PORSCHE) mechanic is the only one that would touch my car. It's like having a handyman build you a house, yeah he may get it built but will it be built as well as a contractor. I would never have a general mechanic work on anything that expensive . Also getting a mustang to 150 is rather misleading. I know you drag race so I am guessing that's where it happened. Driving 150-180 along a stretch of hwy for an extended period of time is what I'm referring to. Last time I checked there were no dragstrips on the Autobahn. Just because I can get my crotch rocket to 180 in a straight line is not the same as driving it that fast on a windy road . Porsche is a high performance touring car not meant to make a lot of noise or cover the 1/4 mile in 9 seconds. It's meant to handle well with good performance and reasonable fuel economy all the time providing comfort for the driver and passengers for an extended period of time. I would not want to travel across the country in a Viper, Corvette of Cobra.
-
Many of the reliability depends on the quality of the parts in it. I have 2 Toyota's and other then scheduled maintenance nothing ever breaks. Now I make sure that Toyota parts are installed not after market ones. I have found that after market parts fail more often then the factory parts. Most Japanese technolgy and design is based off of German car makers anyway. I just saw a new Lexas with the same type taillights as the BMW 5 series, headlight design always seems to be a German copy as well.
Yes, what the Americans and Euros introduced last year the Japanese have copied and made more reliable and sell this year. Old, old story.
-
Yes, what the Americans and Euros introduced last year the Japanese have copied and made more reliable and sell this year. Old, old story.
agreed !
-
Many of the reliability depends on the quality of the parts in it. I have 2 Toyota's and other then scheduled maintenance nothing ever breaks. Now I make sure that Toyota parts are installed not after market ones. I have found that after market parts fail more often then the factory parts. Most Japanese technolgy and design is based off of German car makers anyway. I just saw a new Lexas with the same type taillights as the BMW 5 series, headlight design always seems to be a German copy as well.
YOU DO realize that the same companies that make the parts for toyota, make them for the aftermarket, right?
and for the record, toyotas had those headlight designs, and taillight designs before bmw did. i actually don't like them on the beemrs...........
-
Well if I ever owned a Porsche again a factory trained (PORSCHE) mechanic is the only one that would touch my car. It's like having a handyman build you a house, yeah he may get it built but will it be built as well as a contractor. I would never have a general mechanic work on anything that expensive . Also getting a mustang to 150 is rather misleading. I know you drag race so I am guessing that's where it happened. Driving 150-180 along a stretch of hwy for an extended period of time is what I'm referring to. Last time I checked there were no dragstrips on the Autobahn. Just because I can get my crotch rocket to 180 in a straight line is not the same as driving it that fast on a windy road . Porsche is a high performance touring car not meant to make a lot of noise or cover the 1/4 mile in 9 seconds. It's meant to handle well with good performance and reasonable fuel economy all the time providing comfort for the driver and passengers for an extended period of time. I would not want to travel across the country in a Viper, Corvette of Cobra.
230am, coming home from mcguire afb. took the on-ramp at about 45(it was a decreasing radius), as i exited the radius, i firewalled it. the needle passed 140 about midway through 4th gear. by 5th, it was up against the back of the zero rest. i still had plenty to go, but didn't, as i only wanted to see that she could do it. i wasn't out to kill myself, or anyone else. she handled the speed very nicely.....she bit down, and didn't get "floaty" like the crown vics do. she felt stable, was no problem lane changing.
140 is at 5 clock, 0 is at 7 oclock on the 89 mustangs.
o yea.........i'll never ever do that again on a public road....looking back, i realize how incredibly stupid that was of me.
when i drag race, she's only doing 117 through the traps. my camaro race car does 131 through the traps.
my buddy drives his viper all over the place.....and he loves it.
i personally don't like the vipers only because i can't stand the "buzzy" noise those v-10's make. i've never worked on a viper either btw........
-
YOU DO realize that the same companies that make the parts for toyota, make them for the aftermarket, right?
and for the record, toyotas had those headlight designs, and taillight designs before bmw did. i actually don't like them on the beemrs...........
I have first hand at aftermarket radiators. I had a Toyota in my work fleet with 300,000 miles and was putting a new radiators in every year. I asked the mechanic why and he said because it was after market. I put a Toyota radiator in and it lasted until I sold the truck and that was 2 years later. I sold it to a painter I use and he has had the truck for the last 2 years and the radaiator is still working fine. Now the Toyota raditor was twice the cost then the aftermarket one was but it did last over twice as long. Oh the Lexas I saw was brand new, the BMW was from the last body style they had so how did they come up with the design after?
-
Nothing to add to the argument, but while looking around I found this picture and figured I'd share it.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/2_Apollos_(Prototype)_with_F-4_Phantom.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/2_Apollos_(Prototype)_with_F-4_Phantom.jpg)
Makes a wicked cool desktop background. :aok
-
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/GT3RS-VS-Z06-on-the-HD_640529.htm
yep. this video shows 9 minutes of a gt3 owning a z06. :rolleyes: :rofl
a very poorly driven z06 at that.
-
I have first hand at aftermarket radiators. I had a Toyota in my work fleet with 300,000 miles and was putting a new radiators in every year. I asked the mechanic why and he said because it was after market. I put a Toyota radiator in and it lasted until I sold the truck and that was 2 years later. I sold it to a painter I use and he has had the truck for the last 2 years and the radaiator is still working fine. Now the Toyota raditor was twice the cost then the aftermarket one was but it did last over twice as long. Oh the Lexas I saw was brand new, the BMW was from the last body style they had so how did they come up with the design after?
you were getting screwed then. i've never had to replace a radiator that i've already replaced.
because the camry had those styled lights before the beemr.
and be careful....there's a difference between mechanics and technicians.
-
because the camry had those styled lights before the beemr.
Could you provide pictures? (google images is your friend)
-
Could you provide pictures? (google images is your friend)
2000 beemr
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/2000beemr.jpg)
2001 camry
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/904_2001_Toyota_CamrySolara_1.jpg)
2003 toyota
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/2003toyo.jpg)
2004 beemr
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/2004bmw.jpg)
-
them BMW lights go back as far as 1996 on the 2000 5 series photo
-
them BMW lights go back as far as 1996 on the 2000 5 series photo
exactly .......Don't blame Cap though, 1996 is considered a new Bmer where he lives. And Cap the mechanic I use has 2 sides to his operation, Porsche, BMW and Mercedes on one and Volkswagon and Japanese on the other. He has been my mechinic for 20 years and has been in business for 37. I have to make appointments at least 1 week in advance to get anything done so he's busy year round . But what do stupid people from California know. We can't even tell when were being ripped off.
-
them BMW lights go back as far as 1996 on the 2000 5 series photo
really?
96 5 series/
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/96beemr.jpg)
toota was using them first......bmw copied this time. :aok
-
exactly .......Don't blame Cap though, 1996 is considered a new Bmer where he lives. And Cap the mechanic I use has 2 sides to his operation, Porsche, BMW and Mercedes on one and Volkswagon and Japanese on the other. He has been my mechinic for 20 years and has been in business for 37. I have to make appointments at least 1 week in advance to get anything done so he's busy year round . But what do stupid people from California know. We can't even tell when were being ripped off.
not trying to put your TECH. down......b ut if you were going through a radiator a year, someone was putting cheap watermelon in your truck dude.
-
yeah, I agree...its very strange to be going through that many radiators.
-
this is what car I would buy, it costs $50,000 its Powered by a Chevrolet 5.7 litre V8, I bet not a single one of your clients will look down on you. Yes its a replcia, but as long as you dont put AC Cobra badges on it, and pass it off as one who cares. Or you could pretend it is one, if I owned her...I would not have any cobra badges or anything.
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-1.jpg)
that car is so damn sexy, I would turn down any women for a drive in that!
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-2.jpg)
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-3.jpg)
Anyone who does that to a cobra replica should have his arse removed. That car is ruined.
-
Anyone who does that to a cobra replica should have his arse removed. That car is ruined.
:aok
you seen the factory five kits? they're designed to take the drivetrain from a 5 liter mustang
-
Cap the ZR1 is the only Vette that even comes close to the GT2 and 3 or turbo. The GT is by far a more sophisticated and expensive car then the ZR1 and if I was able to afford a GT then it would be a no brainer. The standard 911 is in the $70,000 range like the Z06 so I can't see where you price difference is.
Not. Really.
The 911S and the base Corvette w/ the Z51 handling package are about equal performance-wise. Vette wins on $20K lower price tag. 911S has snob-factor advantage, but not worth $20K extra IMHO.
Z06 and 911S are about the same price range, but Z06 KILLS the 911S in all areas.
Z06 Vette and GT3 are pretty much dead-nuts equal and a race on a road course would come down to the driver. GT2 and Turbo will walk the Z06, but they should. That extra $30K has to buy you something.
Now, the ZR1? Its performance MURDERIZES the GT2 and Turbo, and even bested the Carerra GT at the 'Ring by over 2 seconds.
Lap times and performance figures are facts. Subjective opinions are entirely different. You can like the Porsche's build, fit & finish, etc. You can be in love with the 911 styling. You can hate the Vette "image" and "look" if you want to be a sucker for stereotypes. It doesn't matter. It's all your opinion.
The FACT is for the money the Vette, from base, Z51, Z06 up to ZR1, is the best buy anywhere. Period.
-
:aok
you seen the factory five kits? they're designed to take the drivetrain from a 5 liter mustang
Funny you mention Factory Five..... cause if I had the money and time right now, it wouldn't be a Cobra replica, but a GTM.......
(http://www.factoryfive.com/gtm/gallery/shanev/images/1.jpg)
(http://www.factoryfive.com/gtm/gallery/shanev/images/2.jpg)
(http://www.factoryfive.com/gtm/gallery/track/images/B2-2.jpg)
Approx 2350lbs, powerplants ranging from LS1 up to 427 cu in LS7, Porsche transaxle, Corvette suspension.
Road & Track and C&D tested an LS7 powered version. Track and drag strip times beat everything. Everything. Outperformed Ferrari Enzo, Saleen S7, Ford GT and Carrera GT, and Lambo Murcielago.
0-60 in 3.0 sec, 0-100 in 6.6 sec.
:rolleyes:
-
this is what car I would buy, it costs $50,000 its Powered by a Chevrolet 5.7 litre V8, I bet not a single one of your clients will look down on you. Yes its a replcia, but as long as you dont put AC Cobra badges on it, and pass it off as one who cares. Or you could pretend it is one, if I owned her...I would not have any cobra badges or anything.
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-1.jpg)
that car is so damn sexy, I would turn down any women for a drive in that!
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-2.jpg)
(http://images.pistonheads.com/aimg/944/944030-3.jpg)
That's just wrong an efin small block chebby in a cobra replica. Why even bother.
-
lol I would. What would you do to the interior other then the manufacture has already done? Change seats to a respected seat manufacture is all I would even attempt, maybe a steering wheel but much more would devalue any of the mentioned cars.
No.. Not if you do it right. Give me a ton of money and I would do it.. The real scarcity is design savvy, not technical (production) limitations.
-
:rofl you guys.
you got to remember, Im from England.. a 2.0 litre 4 clyinder engine is considered big, 5.7 V8..its huge :lol. It might be small, compared to American standards, but its quite the norm in replicas here.
-
That's just wrong an efin small block chebby in a cobra replica. Why even bother.
Spend a little time around the hotrod scene. Tons of old cars with Blue ovals on the grill and SBC's under the hood.
Personally, if I were to do a Cobra replica, it would be Ford powered. But it's not unusual to see otherwise. If you're not going for the old tech (carb and that '60's look) and making it "retro-rod" then a modern LS-series Chevy beats anything Ford every day of the week. The Ford Modular V8 heads up against an LS Chevy? LS every day of the week.
My Cobra would have a 427 CobraJet.
Bah. I'd build a Grand Sport replica and eat Cobras for din-din.
<--- goes to buy Powerball tickets......
-
:rofl you guys.
you got to remember, Im from England.. a 2.0 litre 4 clyinder engine is considered big, 5.7 V8..its huge :lol. It might be small, compared to American standards, but its quite the norm in replicas here.
Yeh, you tell yourself "this really is big" long enough, you'll even start to believe it! :rofl
Now a 2.0L 4-banger in a Lotus 7 clone? I'd hit that... :rock
<---- closet Lotus fan
-
Not. Really.
The 911S and the base Corvette w/ the Z51 handling package are about equal performance-wise. Vette wins on $20K lower price tag. 911S has snob-factor advantage, but not worth $20K extra IMHO.
Z06 and 911S are about the same price range, but Z06 KILLS the 911S in all areas.
Z06 Vette and GT3 are pretty much dead-nuts equal and a race on a road course would come down to the driver. GT2 and Turbo will walk the Z06, but they should. That extra $30K has to buy you something.
Now, the ZR1? Its performance MURDERIZES the GT2 and Turbo, and even bested the Carerra GT at the 'Ring by over 2 seconds.
Lap times and performance figures are facts. Subjective opinions are entirely different. You can like the Porsche's build, fit & finish, etc. You can be in love with the 911 styling. You can hate the Vette "image" and "look" if you want to be a sucker for stereotypes. It doesn't matter. It's all your opinion.
The FACT is for the money the Vette, from base, Z51, Z06 up to ZR1, is the best buy anywhere. Period.
where's this info from because I read an artical in I think road and track while in the doctors where they were comparing the GT a Ferrari, Lambo and the ZR1 and although the ZR1 was competive performance wise (not the front runner) it got last place in everything else.
maybe a little more but I'm sure resale plus life of car is worth the extra price.
2010 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Coupe Coupes (7.0L V8 505HP) $74,285
2010 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 Coupe Coupes (6.2L V8 638HP) $106,880
2010 Chevrolet Corvette Base Coupe Coupes (6.2L V8 430HP) $48,930
2010 Chevrolet Corvette Base Convertible Convertibles (6.2L V8 430HP) $53,580
2009 Chevrolet Corvette Base Convertible Convertibles (6.2L V8 430HP) $53,220
2009 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Coupe Coupes (7.0L V8 505HP) $73,925
2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 Coupe Coupes (6.2L V8 638HP) $103,970
2010 prices
Porsche's mid-engine roadster $46,600 - $56,700
Cayman Porsche's mid-engine coupe $50,300 - $60,200
911 Porsche's sports car icon $76,300 - $140,700
Cayenne Porsche's sporty SUV $45,000 - $124,800
-
yea......'cause i've never had my mustang above 150mph. ooo....wait......yes i did. easily.
and factory training means poop. that's like being book smart, compared to street smart. i can, and do fix anything in my bays. and i do it well. real world is what's formed my opinions, and nothing else.
I hope you will agree with me that some high end cars you wont know what to do with without factory training. And vise versa, for example, i cant possibly compete with your general car knowledge, welding skills .....list goes on. It comes with experience.
-
I hope you will agree with me that some high end cars you wont know what to do with without factory training. And vise versa, for example, i cant possibly compete with your general car knowledge, welding skills .....list goes on. It comes with experience.
I ABSOLUTLEY DO AGREE WITH THAT.
pardon caps.........
in all honesty, although i've worked on Porsche, i've never touched the top end ones we're talking about. i would suffer immensely, i think trying to work on vipers, or top end beemrs or mercedes.
it's actually getting MUCH more difficult to get good information even on basic cars. the manufacturers call it "proprietary" information, and the govt. usually has to force them to release it to us.
on the other hand too, i'm alwas open to learning more. i kinda like to learn something every day if i can.
crappy filming, but this is my buddy's viper.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhOcRp1L688
i'm surprised he launched it so crappy, as he has a 10 second 68 goat.
-
Yeh, you tell yourself "this really is big" long enough, you'll even start to believe it! :rofl
Now a 2.0L 4-banger in a Lotus 7 clone? I'd hit that... :rock
<---- closet Lotus fan
Me too, I love lotus, when my current toy breaks or I decide to sell her..this is my following wishlist
Lotus Esprit, the last shape , I think its 1998 plus
Lotus Exige S, with the toyota celica engine thats been supercharged
TVR Tuscan speed 6
AC Cobra replica, If I go this route, I might look at putting the 4.0 V8 from a BMW 5 series in it, although its something Ive not looked into, and not compared it to the other v8s I can get.
I change my mind each week :uhoh
-
I ABSOLUTLEY DO AGREE WITH THAT.
pardon caps.........
in all honesty, although i've worked on Porsche, i've never touched the top end ones we're talking about. i would suffer immensely, i think trying to work on vipers, or top end beemrs or mercedes.
it's actually getting MUCH more difficult to get good information even on basic cars. the manufacturers call it "proprietary" information, and the govt. usually has to force them to release it to us.
Yep.I remember when we first got BMW gt1 scanner it was priced out for $200 000! Go ahead and try to buy one if your own small shop.Oh they made it available all right,lol
-
Spend a little time around the hotrod scene. Tons of old cars with Blue ovals on the grill and SBC's under the hood.
Personally, if I were to do a Cobra replica, it would be Ford powered. But it's not unusual to see otherwise. If you're not going for the old tech (carb and that '60's look) and making it "retro-rod" then a modern LS-series Chevy beats anything Ford every day of the week. The Ford Modular V8 heads up against an LS Chevy? LS every day of the week.
My Cobra would have a 427 CobraJet.
Bah. I'd build a Grand Sport replica and eat Cobras for din-din.
<--- goes to buy Powerball tickets......
I've been in the hotrod scene for more than thirty years. I built my first v8 when I was 16 an Olds 215 (talk about a learning experience) and did my first engine swap at 17 a 390 in place of a 292 in a 1960 F100. My latest was a 6bta Cummins in my '91 F350. So yeah I've been around the hotrod scene for a little while.
You just don't get it. A Cobra doesn't have a blue oval on the grill. It has Shelby there. The original was powered by a 260 (same family as the 302/5.0 I might add) because Carroll Shelby made a deal with ford for the engines. Putting a bow tie under the hood just ruins the whole illusion that a replicar like the Cobra is trying to project.
So you know, one of the main reasons that many hotrods have 350's in them is up until the 5.0L Mustangs it was much cheaper to build a hotrod chebby than it was to build a hotrod Ford. There just wasn't that many affordable speed parts available for the Fords. As that has changed so too has the sight of Ford engines in old hotrods.
Just an fyi the 427 cobrajet would not be the correct engine for the Cobra either they used the 427 side oiler. Roush makes a real nice Aluminum version that will help take some of that weight off the front end.
-
You just don't get it. A Cobra doesn't have a blue oval on the grill. It has Shelby there. The original was powered by a 260 (same family as the 302/5.0 I might add) because Carroll Shelby made a deal with ford for the engines. Putting a bow tie under the hood just ruins the whole illusion that a replicar like the Cobra is trying to project.
No, I do get it, 100%. Your point of fact about Shelby is irrelevant to my point that it is not uncommon in hotrods to see Ford engines replaced with Chevies, regarless of whether the car the Ford engine was taken out of was made by Ford, or in this case AC, or Shelby.
I agree, with a replica you're trying to create an illusion of the car being the real thing. But the reality is it is not, and in many cases the owner wants to make a statement that in fact NO this is not a car he is trying to pass off as the real thing but instead a new creation in the spirit of the original but improved /altered to fit the tastes of the builder/owner. Its their car and I respect that. I wouldn't turn my nose up at an LS powered Cobra any more than I'd turn my nose up at a Chevy powered Porsche 928 or 5.0L Ford powered Volvo or Mazda rotory powered Triumph. Each creation is an expression of its builder.
So you know, one of the main reasons that many hotrods have 350's in them is up until the 5.0L Mustangs it was much cheaper to build a hotrod chebby than it was to build a hotrod Ford. There just wasn't that many affordable speed parts available for the Fords.
and BINGO, you just restated my point exactly.
Just an fyi the 427 cobrajet would not be the correct engine for the Cobra either they used the 427 side oiler.
please pardon the Chevy guy. :)
(actually, once you corrected me I remember now that it was the side-oiler. A little rusty on my Ford motors..... spend most of my time reading up on new hardware)
-
where's this info from because I read an artical in I think road and track while in the doctors where they were comparing the GT a Ferrari, Lambo and the ZR1 and although the ZR1 was competive performance wise (not the front runner) it got last place in everything else.
I don't know about R&T's test, but I for sure don't trust their editors and staff to get 10/10th out of any car on a test track.
Being a recovering roadcourse racecar driver (one NASA National Championship and one SCCA Regional championship) I put a lot more stock in actual roadcourse lap times run under controlled conditions, monitored and sanctioned by a sanctioning body, as a true test and demonstration of a sportscar's performance potential. Great 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times don't make a great sports car. Great lateral grip by itself doesn't make a great sports car. Excellent braking by itself... blah blah blah.
Put all of those together and put it on a racetrack.... the natural home of a sports car. That is the test of whether the particular car in question is the "total package."
And this is the point in the post where I point you to the official lap times from the Nurbergring, where the Corvette owned its competition from Stuttgart.
Car magazine reviews where they (as I mentioned previously) conduct a performance test and then pick a winner based on one car having nicer seats and a neater stereo instead of which one performs better? No thanks. I want a sports car for performance. If I wanted luxury I'd buy a Caddy or BMW.
2010 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Coupe Coupes (7.0L V8 505HP) $74,285
2010 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 Coupe Coupes (6.2L V8 638HP) $106,880
2010 Chevrolet Corvette Base Coupe Coupes (6.2L V8 430HP) $48,930
2010 Chevrolet Corvette Base Convertible Convertibles (6.2L V8 430HP) $53,580
2009 Chevrolet Corvette Base Convertible Convertibles (6.2L V8 430HP) $53,220
2009 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Coupe Coupes (7.0L V8 505HP) $73,925
2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 Coupe Coupes (6.2L V8 638HP) $103,970
2010 prices
Porsche's mid-engine roadster $46,600 - $56,700
Cayman Porsche's mid-engine coupe $50,300 - $60,200
911 Porsche's sports car icon $76,300 - $140,700
Cayenne Porsche's sporty SUV $45,000 - $124,800
[/quote]
-
official lap times from the Nurbergring, where the Corvette owned its competition from Stuttgart.
thing is they're not really competition as they are built for different markets. someone who comes from driving BMWs will baulk at the vettes build quality, someone coming from a V8 saloon wont be impressed with the 911s hp output. comes down to which one you like for the kind of driving you do. personally if I wanted a big V8 for that money and wasnt too bothered by plastic panels I'd get an Ultima GTR, which would beast the vette in all areas (apart from stuff like interior trim and luggage space :))
-
Wiesmann makes some nice cars too, near that price range. Tasteful esthetics and a choice of meaty engines.
-
Im not sure about prices in the states...My fav car in the world that I would love to own tomorrow is a Ferrari 355 GTS in black, yumm..what a driving experience they are :x :x :x :x
just a shame I cant afford to run one :D
-
2000 beemr
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/2000beemr.jpg)
2001 camry
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/904_2001_Toyota_CamrySolara_1.jpg)
2003 toyota
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/2003toyo.jpg)
2004 beemr
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/2004bmw.jpg)
2001 BMW 7 series E65 (launched first in Europe then in the States in 2002).
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/BMW_E65_front_20070609.jpg)
I guess we can blame Chris Bangle for the Toyota too. ;)
-
Btw. that's the car that made be switch to Audi. Can't stand the look of that 7 series. The new models are starting to look good again.
-
thing is they're not really competition as they are built for different markets. someone who comes from driving BMWs will baulk at the vettes build quality, someone coming from a V8 saloon wont be impressed with the 911s hp output. comes down to which one you like for the kind of driving you do.
Good point, although I would argue that their target markets do overlap to a certain extent... thus the point of this thread - a potential buyer trying to choose between one of these two....
personally if I wanted a big V8 for that money and wasnt too bothered by plastic panels I'd get an Ultima GTR, which would beast the vette in all areas (apart from stuff like interior trim and luggage space :))
Ultima GTR? We certainly do need a :drool: emoticon!
I love love love love love the Ultima GTR and Can Am. Trust me, when I win the lottery there will be one of each in my hanger, right beside the GTM and the P-40. :cool:
Interior trim and luggage space? Bah. I'll get a sedan if I want that.
-
Oh almost forgot...
1996 BMW Z3
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/BMW_Z3_black_vl.jpg)
-
Good point, although I would argue that their target markets do overlap to a certain extent... thus the point of this thread - a potential buyer trying to choose between one of these two....
Ummm I really don't see that much overlap, maybe between Porsche and Ferrari or Ferrari and Lambos. You either like or want European engineering and quality or you don't . I know a handful of guys with Ferrari's and a bunch with Porsche's and not many are interested in American V-8 powered cars say with exception of the GT40.
-
Mmm...
(http://www.tuninglinx.com/tuning-wallpapers/dodge-wallpapers/startech-tuning/dodge-st-ram-01-1680x1050w.jpg)
-
Mmm...
(http://www.tuninglinx.com/tuning-wallpapers/dodge-wallpapers/startech-tuning/dodge-st-ram-01-1680x1050w.jpg)
my friend has one....... worst interior of all the trucks.
-
Good point, although I would argue that their target markets do overlap to a certain extent... thus the point of this thread - a potential buyer trying to choose between one of these two....
Ummm I really don't see that much overlap, maybe between Porsche and Ferrari or Ferrari and Lambos. You either like or want European engineering and quality or you don't . I know a handful of guys with Ferrari's and a bunch with Porsche's and not many are interested in American V-8 powered cars say with exception of the GT40.
True, not many "hardcore fans" of a particular marque are gonna be willing to go outside of their area of interest and buy something that doesn't fit their formula. The "overlap" of their target markets is certainly small, but it does exist (hence this entire thread), otherwise all the magazine comparisons would be pointless. The difference in price between Ferrari and Porsche / Corvette is enough that I would say that, just based on $$$, the Porsche is a lot more likely to be balanced a Vette than it is against a Ferrari, at least when it comes to cars like the Boxster, Cayman, and base 911. Now, if someone is looking at a GT3, then yeh, they're not a typical Corvette buyer.... that car is gonna be a heads-up "nail biter" decision versus a Ferrari....although they'd be a fool to not at least look at a ZR1.
You'll also see that GM is really pushing to expand their market appeal for the Vette in Europe, hence the involvement in Le Mans and factory support for the ELMS and European GT1 teams running the C6R GT1 racecar. Their efforts haven't gone unnoticed as there is quite a Corvette following in Europe (at least compared to years ago)... ironically probably a lot moreso than there is in the People's Republic of California.... :)
-
Mmm...
(http://www.tuninglinx.com/tuning-wallpapers/dodge-wallpapers/startech-tuning/dodge-st-ram-01-1680x1050w.jpg)
If you just want a big engine and to go fast in a straight line, you might as well save your money and buy one of these....
(http://www.dragtimes.com/images/5234-1986-Chevrolet-Chevette.jpg)
I've never understood the "hotrod pickup" idea....
-
my friend has one....... worst interior of all the trucks.
:aok
Just want to get the stuff I buy from Home Depot back home in under a minute :P
-
my friend has one....... worst interior of all the trucks.
nothing wrong with the interior of my dakota.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/statepolicesouthstar0611.jpg)
-
nothing wrong with the interior of my dakota.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/statepolicesouthstar0611.jpg)
The panels actually fit together and no rattles?
-
The panels actually fit together and no rattles?
yep. the only thing that makes noise in there, is the controller for my emergency strobes. ...and that's because i didn't tighten it properly.....yet. :aok
-
nothing wrong with the interior of my dakota.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/statepolicesouthstar0611.jpg)
compared to what? both Chevy and Ford have much more appointed interiors as well as the Japanese. I do not like Dodge trucks at all. Their looks ,interior of their powertrains. Sorry Cap to constantly disagree with you but I disagree with my wife as well.
-
compared to what? both Chevy and Ford have much more appointed interiors as well as the Japanese. I do not like Dodge trucks at all. Their looks ,interior of their powertrains. Sorry Cap to constantly disagree with you but I disagree with my wife as well.
well...i'm not ur wife. :D
guess compared to the average american car. nothing rubs, creaks, groans, moans, rattles, is falling off or out, or cracked, or broken.
i did have to replace the door speakers just the other day though.
no holes in the carpet, no sagging headliner, no tears in the seats, or shifter boot, no rust anywhere. there's really nothing to be unhappy about with this truck....even though it's only a dodge.
it's not as fast as my mustang, and it gets "floaty"above 90, but she averaged decent mileage for a 318 with a 5 speed and 106k miles on her.
o yea...no oil leaks, taps, knocks, etc either. :aok
it runs so well, that if it didn't say dodge everywhere, i'd think it was a ford. :D
-
Just an fyi the 427 cobrajet would not be the correct engine for the Cobra either they used the 427 side oiler. Roush makes a real nice Aluminum version that will help take some of that weight off the front end.
Actually .. Mr. Shelby went to the Chrysler-Dodge-Plymouth guys first, he wanted to put a Hemi into the AC car.
Unfortunately they turned him down, so he ended up at Ford. A Hemi AC Cobra would be Shelby's ideal, not what he had to settle for.
The original post:
Porsche is a nice car.
The Beach Boys didn't write any songs about them, though.
You can get a Z06 a couple years old out of http://www.corvetteforum.com/ for a reasonable price that has been well taken care of and has some of the toys you want on it already :)
I'm 6'2 and a Porsche is too small .. it feels like a phone booth on wheels (yes I drove a '67 911 Carrera years ago to see what they were like) .. I owned a vee-dub beetle years ago . . cant see ownin another fancier one.
People can rehash opinions all day long .. some informed, some ignorant .. but when you see it, drive it .. you'll know.
The right car will sing to you :) It wont matter what other people say or think .. you like it, you drive it.
-Frank aka GE (nothin sexier than a Z06 or ZR1 ..but .. that's just me)
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-corvettes-for-sale/2392042-fs-08-jsb-z06-w-2lz-nav-hp-wheels-excellent-condition.html
-
You'll also see that GM is really pushing to expand their market appeal for the Vette in Europe, hence the involvement in Le Mans and factory support for the ELMS and European GT1 teams running the C6R GT1 racecar. Their efforts haven't gone unnoticed as there is quite a Corvette following in Europe (at least compared to years ago)... ironically probably a lot moreso than there is in the People's Republic of California.... :)
The interesting thing about GT1 is .. vette spanked em all so hard they stopped racing against them. So ..chevy decided to move their vettes into GT2 (smaller engine, pretty much same car) .. now they are in deep against ferrari-beemer-ford GT territory and the racing is close and well fought. Anyone who saw the last few laps at Mosport would have loved it .. the Ferrari-Vette battle was hard core racing, swappin paint and just flat out goin for it. They both wanted the win badly .. vette got by the Ferrari though and the Ferrari didn't have enough .. was an awesome duel.
Got a huge kick out of the Ferrari drivers comments afterward .. apparantly 'he' never has swapped paint on a pass deep into a corner
(ch'ya, right, sell it to the cheap seats bubi .. then he says next time he will push harder . . umm .. so you were slackin? :)
Welcome to Vette Racing in GT2 :)
-Frank aka GE
-
compared to what? both Chevy and Ford have much more appointed interiors as well as the Japanese. I do not like Dodge trucks at all. Their looks ,interior of their powertrains. Sorry Cap to constantly disagree with you but I disagree with my wife as well.
Only thing wrong with the dodge powertrain is the slushbox Mercedes trans. Some valvebody modification fixes that.
Only other pickup that give an R/T Dakota a run is the lightning.. and that needed a supercharger to do it.
-
Only thing wrong with the dodge powertrain is the slushbox Mercedes trans. Some valvebody modification fixes that.
Only other pickup that give an R/T Dakota a run is the lightning.. and that needed a supercharger to do it.
mine's a sport. it only has the 318. the r/t i think didn't start till 98? and that one was the 360........i think. .....
-
mine's a sport. it only has the 318. the r/t i think didn't start till 98? and that one was the 360........i think. .....
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/DSCF0351.jpg)
My dak is an r/t and yes 360 is the way to go. :aok
-
The interesting thing about GT1 is .. vette spanked em all so hard they stopped racing against them. So ..chevy decided to move their vettes into GT2 (smaller engine, pretty much same car) .. now they are in deep against ferrari-beemer-ford GT territory and the racing is close and well fought. Anyone who saw the last few laps at Mosport would have loved it .. the Ferrari-Vette battle was hard core racing, swappin paint and just flat out goin for it. They both wanted the win badly .. vette got by the Ferrari though and the Ferrari didn't have enough .. was an awesome duel.
Got a huge kick out of the Ferrari drivers comments afterward .. apparantly 'he' never has swapped paint on a pass deep into a corner
(ch'ya, right, sell it to the cheap seats bubi .. then he says next time he will push harder . . umm .. so you were slackin? :)
Welcome to Vette Racing in GT2 :)
-Frank aka GE
Yep, Corvettes have spanked every form of competition they have had in pretty much every form of sports car racing for the last 25 years, starting with the C4 Corvette in the Playboy Cup series that evolved into the Escort Endurance Series that evolved into World Challenge. Corvettes won every race for several years and when Porsche, Lotus and Nissan threatened to withdraw from the series altogether they ended up kicking thed Corvettes out, thus the creation of the Corvette Challenge series in '88 and '89. In '90 they let the Vettes back into World Challenge and they went right back to kicking everyone's tails so badly that they had to add a truckload of weight to the Vettes to slow them down.
When GM got into the ALMS and Le Mans racing in GT1 you're right, they pretty much ran everyone off. Prodrive witht he Ferraris won a few races, and Aston did reasonably well, but they lacked the relaibility to push 11/10th most of the time.
I'm glad Corvette is now in GT2, I've wanted them to make that move for the last 2-3 years since Aston quit contesting anything beyond the 24 heurs du Mans. GT2 is where the real fight is, and it's been nice to see the GT2 right out of the box sit on a podium spot every race so far this season, finally taking P1 at Mosport. As far as I'm concerned ALMS GT2 is the ultimate form of racing in the US right now...I'm not into open wheel and GT racing appeals to me far more than the roundy-round template cars NASCAR uses now. I'm just still really sad I'm gonna miss the Petit Le Mans at Road Atlanta for the first time in years due to another commitment.....I was really looking forward to Corvette handing Porsche, Ferrari, and BMW their arses again.....
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3497/3885698928_364dc0d613.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2634/3884901519_9cdb522059.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2518/3884901495_11f9b703ef.jpg)
140k$ or so.
-
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/DSCF0351.jpg)
My dak is an r/t and yes 360 is the way to go. :aok
It has leaf springs! :uhoh
-
It has leaf springs! :uhoh
of course it does. :D
-
It has leaf springs! :uhoh
Point?
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3497/3885698928_364dc0d613.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2634/3884901519_9cdb522059.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2518/3884901495_11f9b703ef.jpg)
140k$ or so.
$140K for that POS? :huh
-
You've driven one?
Overpriced maybe, but POS?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2gF4Q7HrUw
-
You've driven one?
Overpriced maybe, but POS?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2gF4Q7HrUw
Yes, POS.
-
You've driven one?
Overpriced maybe, but POS?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2gF4Q7HrUw
as soon as i heard "it has rear wheel drive at the back"
WTF?? where ELSE would rear wheel drive be????????????
-
The right car will sing to you :) It wont matter what other people say or think .. you like it, you drive it.
I just drove the Z06 this evening... I can say it's going to be a tough decision. Both cars sang to me!
The Corvette feels monstrously more powerful than the Porsche. I didn't even floor it and the torque just grabbed at me. The interior isn't great, but I wouldn't say it's horrible either. The Porsche definitely felt more refined with its steering and ride quality. I'm 6'2" like you Grayeagle, but both cars were equally spacious.
It's really going to be a difficult decision... dangit!
-
Yes, POS.
What's it drive like?
-
-grin- ..
If there is no clear decision, I always flip a coin :)
It's how I decided USAF > Navy
.. they both offered all of what I wanted way back when I had decided to enlist instead of wait for the draft :)
(got my draft notice two weeks into basic :)
-GE aka Frank
-
What's it drive like?
I'm willing to go out on a limb here and guess that his answer will be a three-letter acronym. ;)
-
I just drove the Z06 this evening... I can say it's going to be a tough decision. Both cars sang to me!
The Corvette feels monstrously more powerful than the Porsche. I didn't even floor it and the torque just grabbed at me. The interior isn't great, but I wouldn't say it's horrible either. The Porsche definitely felt more refined with its steering and ride quality. I'm 6'2" like you Grayeagle, but both cars were equally spacious.
It's really going to be a difficult decision... dangit!
Just another thing to add to the decision making.
I'm quite sure it will be less expensive to get MORE power out of the ZO6... if desired.
-
POS, IOW "IDK".
-
Just another thing to add to the decision making.
I'm quite sure it will be less expensive to get MORE power out of the ZO6... if desired.
and better styling.
corvette=racecar/supercar looks
porsche= pregnant rollerskate.
-
You've driven one?
Overpriced maybe, but POS?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2gF4Q7HrUw
What's it drive like?
Yes, POS.
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3497/3885698928_364dc0d613.jpg)
(http://images21.fotki.com/v577/photos/1/127099/4701406/barf-vi.jpg)
-
Hehe
-
So it looks odd.. That's how you know it's a POS?
-
So it looks odd.. That's how you know it's a POS?
Not just odd, butt-friggin ugly comes to mind...
-
You know how it works. Every single poster in this thread could pick 5 cars they think represent the pinnacle of auto design... And there'll be at least two others who'll find em all ugly as sin. I reckon the Wiesmann is a damn good driving machine, and the looks might appeal to Mondego.. If he can handle the expense.
If it were up to me, I'd get one of the simple headlight Cerberas... The Alfa 8C is another great roadster, but it handles like crap... Even with the odd front end and tail lights, the curves everywhere else and esp. at the back of the Wiesmann are just dead sexy. The excellent performance makes the bodywork ok, I think.
-
You know how it works. Every single poster in this thread could pick 5 cars they think represent the pinnacle of auto design... And there'll be at least two others who'll find em all ugly as sin. I reckon the Wiesmann is a damn good driving machine, and the looks might appeal to Mondego.. If he can handle the expense.
If it were up to me, I'd get one of the simple headlight Cerberas... The Alfa 8C is another great roadster, but it handles like crap... Even with the odd front end and tail lights, the curves everywhere else and esp. at the back of the Wiesmann are just dead sexy. The excellent performance makes the bodywork ok, I think.
$140K and it's almost the same as a BMW Z4 which is half the price and not quite as ugly...
-
You know how it works. Every single poster in this thread could pick 5 cars they think represent the pinnacle of auto design... And there'll be at least two others who'll find em all ugly as sin.
True, true.... to each his own.
-
$140K and it's almost the same as a BMW Z4 which is half the price and not quite as ugly...
No use arguing taste.. I think the Z4 is easily uglier and nowhere near as exclusive, which is what those clients of Mondego would dig. It also looks like the Wiesmann is a better driver's car. Less luxury.. Just you, the chassis, and the road.
-
...and a $140K hole in your pocket.
-
No use arguing taste.. I think the Z4 is easily uglier and nowhere near as exclusive, which is what those clients of Mondego would dig. It also looks like the Wiesmann is a better driver's car. Less luxury.. Just you, the chassis, and the road.
I'm not a BMW fanboi, and the Z4 roadster, well, meh. But the Z4-based M Coupe....... SEXXAY.
-
Alfa Romeo 8c and 8c Spider, simply two of the most beautiful cars to appear in many years...
(http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2006/09/14-alfa-romeo-8c-competizione/Alfa-Romeo-8C-Competizione-9-lg.jpg)
(http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2006/09/14-alfa-romeo-8c-competizione/_Alfa-Romeo-8C-Competizione-1-lg.jpg)
(http://onthesocialside.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/alfa-romeo-8c-spider-3.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
-
It just boggles the mind that Alfa Romeo bungled the 8C's handling; if the top gear review is accurate..
-
and better styling.
corvette=racecar/supercar looks
porsche= pregnant rollerskate.
Cap you own a Dodge truck . I suppose you think that styling is cutting edge as well.
-
It just boggles the mind that Alfa Romeo bungled the 8C's handling; if the top gear review is accurate..
the top gear dudes are the middle aged british three stooges of the automotive world.
-
See Rule #4
-
Cap you own a Dodge truck . I suppose you think that styling is cutting edge as well.
Could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure 99% of the truck buyers out there were less concerned about styling than they were a few other things....
-
(http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/05/cars_for_grads/image/mazda3.jpg)
Perfect handling for segment, enough power, does not break. Sexy. Why would you drive anything else? :P
Yes I own one.
-
There is NO SUCH THING as "enough power!"
My wife asked me after I got the Vette back from the shop having the engine work done (stage II 243 CNC heads, custom cam, long tubes, LS6 intake manifold, Ford Racing injectors, VaraRam intake, Z06 magnesium mufflers, underdrive pullies, custom ECU tune..... 455hp and 454lb-ft tq @ rear wheels)....."Exactly how much horsepower do you think you need??"
My response: "ALL of it!!!"
-
(http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/05/cars_for_grads/image/mazda3.jpg)
Perfect handling for segment, enough power, does not break. Sexy. Why would you drive anything else? :P
Yes I own one.
dunno bout where you are.....but the local mazda dealers here suck.
i have to deal with a dealer in deleware.
-
See Rule #4
and not everybody can live in that state of yours so what's your point? Just because I have an opinion as well as you do mine for some reason labels me as stuck up, you don't even know me yet you make that comment. I would suggest you read back and review what I said. Because I don't fancy Dodge trucks or feel that the Corvette is in the same league as European sports cars you see me as being stuck up.
I also don't like women that weight 150-200 pounds either ! Because your choice of women is low and mine is high that makes me stuck up as well. I guess I would rather be stuck up then choose something that I really don't like but what the heck.... it's better then nothing.
I choose nothing then.
-
and not everybody can live in that state of yours so what's your point? Just because I have an opinion as well as you do mine for some reason labels me as stuck up, you don't even know me yet you make that comment. I would suggest you read back and review what I said. Because I don't fancy Dodge trucks or feel that the Corvette is in the same league as European sports cars you see me as being stuck up.
I also don't like women that weight 150-200 pounds either ! Because your choice of women is low and mine is high that makes me stuck up as well. I guess I would rather be stuck up then choose something that I really don't like but what the heck.... it's better then nothing.
I choose nothing then.
Please, you present yours like it's amazing someone likes a Dodge truck, and they are below you because of that.
'My choice of women'?... Wow, way to prove my point.
-
Could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure 99% of the truck buyers out there were less concerned about styling than they were a few other things....
actually many things have influenced my decisions for buying a truck......
Cost, what your getting for your money, Dodge Dakota lists the same as a Toyota Tacoma dbl cab. Has a little more power and towing capscity. The Dakota is not in the same class a the Tacoma as far anything else is concerned and that's not just my opinion
Value, what your getting for the money, operating costs over the life of the truck, resale, cost of maintaining the truck over life of vehicle. Dodge losses that one again. When I see Dodge offering $9000 off on their full size trucks that means something to me.
Overall appearance inside and out
There are many other small factors that I consider when purchasing a new truck and my feeling is Dodge products are Rather sub par, once again not only my opinion.
-
Please, you present yours like it's amazing someone likes a Dodge truck, and they are below you because of that.
'My choice of women'?... Wow, way to prove my point.
I noticed you didn't mention your state. I stated my opinions that are for now still legal.
-
actually many things have influenced my decisions for buying a truck......
Cost, what your getting for your money, Dodge Dakota lists the same as a Toyota Tacoma dbl cab. Has a little more power and towing capscity. The Dakota is not in the same class a the Tacoma as far anything else is concerned and that's not just my opinion
Value, what your getting for the money, operating costs over the life of the truck, resale, cost of maintaining the truck over life of vehicle. Dodge losses that one again. When I see Dodge offering $9000 off on their full size trucks that means something to me.
Overall appearance inside and out
There are many other small factors that I consider when purchasing a new truck and my feeling is Dodge products are Rather sub par, once again not only my opinion.
as much as i like my dakota....they suck for towing. at least mine does.
i put my cat trailer on it(empty) and it sagged worse than an old ford or chevy.
i use my85 ford E-350 to pull that trailer now.
-
There is NO SUCH THING as "enough power!"
My wife asked me after I got the Vette back from the shop having the engine work done (stage II 243 CNC heads, custom cam, long tubes, LS6 intake manifold, Ford Racing injectors, VaraRam intake, Z06 magnesium mufflers, underdrive pullies, custom ECU tune..... 455hp and 454lb-ft tq @ rear wheels)....."Exactly how much horsepower do you think you need??"
My response: "ALL of it!!!"
I'd say 600-800 is the top end of usable power, nowadays.
-
as much as i like my dakota....they suck for towing. at least mine does.
i put my cat trailer on it(empty) and it sagged worse than an old ford or chevy.
i use my85 ford E-350 to pull that trailer now.
Towing rating is around 7000 lbs that's pretty good for a midsize truck.
-
I noticed you didn't mention your state. I stated my opinions that are for now still legal.
And my opinion is slowly wandering into fact. Thank you :aok
-
Towing rating is around 7000 lbs that's pretty good for a midsize truck.
hook a car trailer to a 97, then come back and talk to me about towing with a dakota.
mine's 2 wheel drive btw......i only wanted the looks, and somewhat fast.
-
I'd say 600-800 is the top end of usable power, nowadays.
Possibly, but I guess it would depend on 1)what you're doing, and 2)how much rear tire can you fit.
I figure with driveline losses I'm probably about 530 or so hp at the crank, and truthfully have no plans of looking for more.
Next mods are new rear gear and L5 Motorsports rear qtr panels with the ZR-1 rear flares, in order to fit Z06/ZR1 rear wheels and 345-wide rear tires. I'm on 295's now and it will smoke them at the gear change at 60mph... :confused: Definitely needs more grip... I learned one thing... don't take off traction control and give it full throttle unless you're prepared to hang on for dear life...
edit - added pic of C5 w/ L5 Flares and Z06 wheels.....
(http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m132/NemesisC5/DSCN1241.jpg)
-
Cap you own a Dodge truck . I suppose you think that styling is cutting edge as well.
NO, AS A MATTER OF FACT, I DON'T
sorry bout caps locks...
i like the way it looks, just like i like the 60's mustangs and camaros, and chargers.
it has some style and lines to it....it's not just a "normal" looking pickup like the fords and toyotas.
-
Yassir Bigplay .. Vette is definitely not in the same league as Yer-a-peon sports cars.
Looked to be about 2-3 cars ahead of that Ferrari 430 at Mosport at the checker, where it counted.
In GT-1 .. umm .. alla Yer-a-peein sports cars gave up.
Couldnt catch a Vette, why race 'em.
But hey .. go right on about how good the leather is by all means.
I know a good seat to fart in is worth at least 40k more.
At least .. to you and some others.
-LOL
-
actually many things have influenced my decisions for buying a truck......
Cost, what your getting for your money, Dodge Dakota lists the same as a Toyota Tacoma dbl cab. Has a little more power and towing capscity. The Dakota is not in the same class a the Tacoma as far anything else is concerned and that's not just my opinion
Value, what your getting for the money, operating costs over the life of the truck, resale, cost of maintaining the truck over life of vehicle. Dodge losses that one again. When I see Dodge offering $9000 off on their full size trucks that means something to me.
Overall appearance inside and out
There are many other small factors that I consider when purchasing a new truck and my feeling is Dodge products are Rather sub par, once again not only my opinion.
I don't disagree. I was just commenting since it seemed you took a shot at Cap, basically implying that since he had a Dodge truck he maybe wasn't qualified somehow to comment on the styling of the Corvette and Porsche..... which seems to be the reason someone else called you what they called you.
<---owns GM trucks (actually a Suburban Z71 and a Yukon Denali, but they're truck based so close enuff)
-
Yassir Bigplay .. Vette is definitely not in the same league as Yer-a-peon sports cars.
Looked to be about 2-3 cars ahead of that Ferrari 430 at Mosport at the checker, where it counted.
In GT-1 .. umm .. alla Yer-a-peein sports cars gave up.
Couldnt catch a Vette, why race 'em.
But hey .. go right on about how good the leather is by all means.
I know a good seat to fart in is worth at least 40k more.
At least .. to you and some others.
:rofl
You're absolutely right, GE.
But at least after you get spanked by a Vette while driving your Boxster or Cayman you can hold your head up high and say "well, at least mine's a Porsche!" And then you can go look for a Miata or a Civic to pick on!
-
:rofl
You're absolutely right, GE.
But at least after you get spanked by a Vette while driving your Boxster or Cayman you can hold your head up high and say "well, at least mine's a Porsche!" And then you can go look for a Miata or a Civic to pick on!
"I paid $40K more and the interior is better! So HA Mr. Vette-man!"...
-
Yassir Bigplay .. Vette is definitely not in the same league as Yer-a-peon sports cars.
Looked to be about 2-3 cars ahead of that Ferrari 430 at Mosport at the checker, where it counted.
In GT-1 .. umm .. alla Yer-a-peein sports cars gave up.
Couldnt catch a Vette, why race 'em.
But hey .. go right on about how good the leather is by all means.
I know a good seat to fart in is worth at least 40k more.
At least .. to you and some others.
-LOL
THAt would be due to the fact that if the european companies are producing cars that outperform american cars, then american companies simply are choosing to not compete with their performance.
ford, and gm have both shown that when they choose to do so, they not only will outperform euro cars.....they will do it in spades. :aok
-
:rofl
You're absolutely right, GE.
But at least after you get spanked by a Vette while driving your Boxster or Cayman you can hold your head up high and say "well, at least mine's a Porsche!" And then you can go look for a Miata or a Civic to pick on!
we had a guy that used to bring his miata in here.
i'd be willing to bet that his would have no problems with porsches. :aok
-
(http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q260/1grayeagle/misc/2010_GSVette.jpg)
Definitely not in the same league.
And .. Kerbecks has 'em for ~50k for the coupe, a bit more for the vert shown here ..new.
-very evil grin-
-GE aka Frank
-
Fancy cars are good eye candy and fun for awhile but I'll take my truck ANYDAY! :rock
(http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll280/bucky626/pickup1.jpg?t=1252094212)
cell phone pic...forgive me :frown:
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyQYoxEv-0Y
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyQYoxEv-0Y
No duh.
For the same $$ as a Z06 you're buying a base 911, not a turbo. Z06 mops the floor with a base 911.
For less money than a turbo 911, you can get a ZR1. ZR1 mops the floor with, well, pretty much all of them from Porsche.
Next!
-
Shame that guy wasn't at Mosport in his Porsche eh?
He should have a chat with the Flying Lizard folks, he obviously has the Vette handled, those Flyin Lizard guys could use his expertise!
He would have won GT2 .. LOL.
-GE aka Frank
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyQYoxEv-0Y
sounded like he was WAY short shifting the vette/.
-
sounded like he was WAY short shifting the vette/.
I doubt it. Those two are professional GT racing drivers.
-
I doubt it. Those two are professional GT racing drivers.
I'm still trying to figure out why the race was between the turbo and a Z06 instead of a turbo vs a ZR1....
Oh yeh... I forgot... when you want to have something end a certain way (Porsche win), you stack the odds in their favor (run a $130K turbo against the $70K Vette you know you'll barely beat, instead of againt the $107K ZR1 that will murder the Porsche) and then act surprised.
:furious
-
No duh.
For the same $$ as a Z06 you're buying a base 911, not a turbo. Z06 mops the floor with a base 911.
For less money than a turbo 911, you can get a ZR1. ZR1 mops the floor with, well, pretty much all of them from Porsche.
Next!
Sure, but the Vette ZR1 is mostly a street legal track car. The 911 turbo is a comfortable family sports car that you can drive the children to school with.
If we're going to compare street legal track cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD9AW-EB3vo
As close as makes no difference.
-
I doubt it. Those two are professional GT racing drivers.
i could be wrong......but did you listen to the engine in the vette? it sounded like he wasn't taking it over about 4500 to 5000 rpm. again i could be wrong........and it did look like he messed up at least one shift.
now......the turbo toy.......top end porsche against the z06? the mid range vette? talk about a stacked deck....
:aok
-
Sure, but the Vette ZR1 is mostly a street legal track car. The 911 turbo is a comfortable family sports car that you can drive the children to school with.
If we're going to compare street legal track cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD9AW-EB3vo
As close as makes no difference.
scroll back some. i posted a video link of a z06 against a gt3rs. the vette owned him the entire 9 minutes.
here'''''''i'll do ya a favor.
the vette driver should be shot for the half arsed driving btw.........
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/GT3RS-VS-Z06-on-the-HD_640529.htm
-
Sure, but the Vette ZR1 is mostly a street legal track car.
Nope. Having been in both, I can tell you first hand the ZR1 is much smoother, more comfortable, and more refined, with better street manners, than the Z06. Driven hard the ZR1's suspension is much easier on the driver than the Z06, which feels like you're fighting the car at the edge and always balancing on the edge of loosing it. The magnetorheologic (sp?) damping shocks are a big part of the improvement in the ZR1's handling and ride over any other Vette.
The Porsche does have a back seat, tho. I give you that. I guess I'll have to keep my Suburban for hauling kids and just drive the Vette when I wanna embarass Porsches!
-
scroll back some. i posted a video link of a z06 against a gt3rs. the vette owned him the entire 9 minutes.
here'''''''i'll do ya a favor.
the vette driver should be shot for the half arsed driving btw.........
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/GT3RS-VS-Z06-on-the-HD_640529.htm
GT3 is a non-turbo version of the GT2. GT3=381 hp - GT2=450 hp.
-
If we're going to compare street legal track cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD9AW-EB3vo
LOL! Did you watch that?? Quite possibly the WORST launch imaginable for the guy driving that Vette! That was a pitiful representation of that car's ability for sure.
The vid shows the Porsche doing the 1/4 mile in 11.83 @ 123.9 mph and the ZR-1 doing a 12.06 @ 125.35 mph. If that guy in the Vette didn't completely suck, he may have been able to replicate what everyone else who has tested the ZR1 has gotten out of it, which is around 11.2 @ 130 mph.
But, whatever. Like has already been posted, put them on a roadcourse (with lots of left and right turns, where the Porsche fanbois claim the Porsche is king) and the ZR1 destoys the Porsche.
-
GT3 is a non-turbo version of the GT2. GT3=381 hp - GT2=450 hp.
aahh......i actually thought the 3 would've been higher perf..........still cheaper priced car outperforming higher priced car. :D
-
I don't disagree. I was just commenting since it seemed you took a shot at Cap, basically implying that since he had a Dodge truck he maybe wasn't qualified somehow to comment on the styling of the Corvette and Porsche..... which seems to be the reason someone else called you what they called you.
<---owns GM trucks (actually a Suburban Z71 and a Yukon Denali, but they're truck based so close enuff)
Cappy and I use to be squaddies, I just like busting his stones from time to time that's all, he's a good guy.
I just don't like Dodge products. Many like Chevy, many Ford many ,Toyota. Being a contractor I have subcontractors and friends that have all types of trucks. The generally consciences with the crowd that I run with is that the Dodge trucks seem to be at the bottom of the line as far as overall considerations went. Most that had diesel powered trucks liked the Ford's and Chevy especially the new Chevy's . The Allison tranny seemed to be the main reason for the Chevy's popularity. That being said it seemed that the Ford was the most popular and the most praise. With standard trucks it seemed to go to Chevy more then Ford for the big trucks go although the new Tundra has some liking it better then their old standard Ford or Chevy trucks. It's just a matter of opinion and like I said I do not like Dodge products.
-
aahh......i actually thought the 3 would've been higher perf..........still cheaper priced car outperforming higher priced car. :D
No question... However performance is not the end all in sports cars. The 911 is a luxury sports car. The Vette is a workingman's sports car (or at least used to be). When you buy a Porsche you do pay a lot for the badge.
-
Cappy and I use to be squaddies, I just like busting his stones from time to time that's all, he's a good guy.
Gotcha. :aok
-
No question... However performance is not the end all in sports cars. The 911 is a luxury sports car. The Vette is a workingman's sports car (or at least used to be). When you buy a Porsche you do pay a lot for the badge.
a customer of mine has a z06, as does my last boss before i bought this shop. their interiors are(in my opinion anyway) VERY nice. very comfortable...and i'm 6'2.
on that note, another customer/friend has owned standard vettes, and a z06. he has a viper now. he says the vette is a piece of watermelon compared to the viper....including comfort.
while i like the styling of the viper, i'd never own one......can't stand the sound they make. bbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzz...........
i've been in a few porsches, and never could get comfy in em. it all comes to personal preference though.,.........and ya hafta bear in mine, that when gm or ford REALLY want to, they WILL easily chew up any of that euro stuff, and hand it back to em in little tiny pieces. it's already been done. :aok
-
GT3 is a non-turbo version of the GT2. GT3=381 hp - GT2=450 hp.
And the GT3 is pretty much the same price as a ZR1, even though it's not quite half the car. Hence the comparison - kind of a "what does the same amount of money buy me" kind of thing. The GT2 and turbo even more expensive, and still can't stack up to the ZR1.
But at least people will be impressed with the badge on the front of the car..... :uhoh
-
And the quality. But there can be no doubt the Vette is a lot of car for the money.
-
when gm or ford REALLY want to, they WILL easily chew up any of that euro stuff, and hand it back to em in little tiny pieces. it's already been done. :aok
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you, the "Chewer of all things European!"TM
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2624/3792985248_25da282fbb.jpg)
-
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you, the "Chewer of all things European!"TM
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2624/3792985248_25da282fbb.jpg)
I bet this crappy eurobox beats it on the school run... Or at the shops.
(http://static.blogo.it/autoblog/vw_lupo_ii_az.jpg)
-
And the quality.
Having owned 3 Vettes ('68 427 convertible, '90 6-spd Z51 coupe, and now '99 Coupe) and having numerous friends and a few family members with many different varieties of Porsches, street cars as well as race cars......
I'll file that one away as "urban legend."
Just never have seen anything to make me feel like (other than perhaps a little nicer grade of leather on the interior than GM is willing to provide) that there is a significantly higher level of quality anywhere in the Porsche than there is in the Vette.
Not reliability, ease of maintenance (the Vette CLEARLY wins in that department), build quality, durability, etc.
The problem with the average non-Vette enthusiast is they are somehow unable to realize that the Vette is like nothing else that GM makes...... it really and truly should be it's own brand and get the Chevy name off of it. It's no more like anything else Chevy makes than a BMW M5 is like a SmartCar.
-
I bet this crappy eurobox beats it on the school run... Or at the shops.
(http://static.blogo.it/autoblog/vw_lupo_ii_az.jpg)
I would hang my head in shame if I had paid money for that ugly monstrosity.....
:rofl
-
Indeed!
-
Having owned 3 Vettes ('68 427 convertible, '90 6-spd Z51 coupe, and now '99 Coupe) and having numerous friends and a few family members with many different varieties of Porsches, street cars as well as race cars......
I'll file that one away as "urban legend."
Just never have seen anything to make me feel like (other than perhaps a little nicer grade of leather on the interior than GM is willing to provide) that there is a significantly higher level of quality anywhere in the Porsche than there is in the Vette.
Not reliability, ease of maintenance (the Vette CLEARLY wins in that department), build quality, durability, etc.
The problem with the average non-Vette enthusiast is they are somehow unable to realize that the Vette is like nothing else that GM makes...... it really and truly should be it's own brand and get the Chevy name off of it. It's no more like anything else Chevy makes than a BMW M5 is like a SmartCar.
The leather is good, but the plastics are atrocious.
-
Cappy and I use to be squaddies, I just like busting his stones from time to time that's all, he's a good guy.
I just don't like Dodge products. Many like Chevy, many Ford many ,Toyota. Being a contractor I have subcontractors and friends that have all types of trucks. The generally consciences with the crowd that I run with is that the Dodge trucks seem to be at the bottom of the line as far as overall considerations went. Most that had diesel powered trucks liked the Ford's and Chevy especially the new Chevy's . The Allison tranny seemed to be the main reason for the Chevy's popularity. That being said it seemed that the Ford was the most popular and the most praise. With standard trucks it seemed to go to Chevy more then Ford for the big trucks go although the new Tundra has some liking it better then their old standard Ford or Chevy trucks. It's just a matter of opinion and like I said I do not like Dodge products.
for heavy duty work trucks....like contractors......around here, fords. e and f series 250 and 350's. the only common problem they have is bvalljoints. if they have over 60k on em than the balljoints are bad. period. it's a poor design. ford simply kept things close to when they used kingpins, and stuck balljoints in there.......this overstresses em, and they go bad.
no problems with the ford deisels, although the turbo-deisels are over complicated.
the gm 6.5 deisel tends to have injector pump problems.
not very many people around here use dodge trucks for any contractor type of work. that all seems to be ford and gm.
most dodges around here seem to be the dakotas and durangos......almost always modified in some way.
for towtrucks(i worked for a company with 7 of em) based on personal experience, and that of other local companies.......
my old boss had 7. 3 fords, and 4 gm's. they had cat(i think) engines in the fords, and duramax engines(i dunno who makes them) in the gm's. they ALL had allison trannies.
the gm's never gave any engine problems, although the 07 ford, and the 05 ford had injector problems. the fords never had any other issues. the gm's used to eat up rear brakes a LOT. they all averaged 8 to 12 miles a gallon.
the fords were f650's, and the gm's were 6500's. all gvwr'd at 26,500.
most companies locally with this size truck use fords.
a lot of companies that choose to use smaller trucks, mostly use ford f-450 superdutys. they're usually powered by the 7.3 powerstroke turbo-deisel. haven't seen any major problems with them.
i've not seen too many toyotas used for contractor type work yet.(newer ones that is.) the older ones that i do see in use as work trucks, are lookin like old fords and chevys.......mostly rusted away.
the tacomas and titans i see, look like they're just there to be "pretty". there's a guy that gases up out front, and feels the need to rev his engine, like he thinks it impresses people. kinda funny in a sad way.
like i've said before, i base my opinions on real world experience. i work on em all. idler arms on the gm's, balljoints on the fords.......not much on the dodges. usually water pumps, or the like. they just don't get heavy duty use around here.
i still favor fords for performance. i had a 12 second mustang(passed nj state insp with flying colors too). that got totaled. now it's drivetrain is in a 78 futura.
i have a 68 camaro. it used to run 9.9's. with the new engine, once i can afford to run it, she should dip into the high 8's.
i've never had my dakota on the strip, but i think specs were somewhere in the mid 14's....and that's about what she feels like on the street.
-
Reason why the F-350 is the best? Dana 60 front + 10.25" Sterling in the rear = Simplicity and true "Heavy-Duty". Yes, aside from the ball joints, you have no issues other than maintaining the fluid in the Diff.
Dodge Ram "solid front axles" are weaker than a Dana 44 (which is mid-duty, but a reliable axle).
Understand I am looking at this from my perspective of someone with quite a bit of Four Wheeling experience throughout the Great Lakes region. I took my 96 F-150 to Moab and didn't get to crazy, but scraped the frame at times. I don't buy "Mallcrawlers". I don't tow my Grand Cherokee with a 3.5" lift and 31" tires to events. When I had my 83 CJ-7 with a 304, 4.27 gearing, Detroit Locked f/r, 33" BFG muds, I drove it 250 miles to the event. Nothing better than a 304 at around 2500rpm @ 60mph with the true dual exhaust I had on it. If I break on the trail, I fix it and drive it 250 miles home.
Personally, if you're buying a truck and find yourself "lowering it" or "adding 20's", buy a car. I laugh at "20" laden "trucks" spin out on the freeway because the dolts think that a "street tire in 4wd Hi" will actually do something. This isn't a beach state, but most want a car for a different environment. Michigan isn't Miami, Cali, etc.
-
Reason why the F-350 is the best? Dana 60 front + 10.25" Sterling in the rear = Simplicity and true "Heavy-Duty". Yes, aside from the ball joints, you have no issues other than maintaining the fluid in the Diff.
Dodge Ram "solid front axles" are weaker than a Dana 44 (which is mid-duty, but a reliable axle).
Understand I am looking at this from my perspective of someone with quite a bit of Four Wheeling experience throughout the Great Lakes region. I took my 96 F-150 to Moab and didn't get to crazy, but scraped the frame at times. I don't buy "Mallcrawlers". I don't tow my Grand Cherokee with a 3.5" lift and 31" tires to events. When I had my 83 CJ-7 with a 304, 4.27 gearing, Detroit Locked f/r, 33" BFG muds, I drove it 250 miles to the event. Nothing better than a 304 at around 2500rpm @ 60mph with the true dual exhaust I had on it. If I break on the trail, I fix it and drive it 250 miles home.
Personally, if you're buying a truck and find yourself "lowering it" or "adding 20's", buy a car. I laugh at "20" laden "trucks" spin out on the freeway because the dolts think that a "street tire in 4wd Hi" will actually do something. This isn't a beach state, but most want a car for a different environment. Michigan isn't Miami, Cali, etc.
shop i used to work at.......kid brought us his jeep cj(that's what the wrangler used to be called, right?) and a 340, with a 4 speed.
we advised him against it(he was way young) but he had us install it anyway. we test drove it......many many times. it was fun. it would lift the left front wheel. we warned the kid.
he had it for 3 days, then came back asking if he could put it out front for sale. he scared the poop outta himself in it. :rofl
my dakota's no trailer queen.....nor is it modified...with the excption of a decent sounding muffler. not even duals for now.
i just like the looks, the growl, and the 5 speed. i can fit 3 disassembled r/c models in the bed too.
i do tend to beat on it like i did my mustang....it's just not as fast, and is different as there's not many of the older dakotas around here.
-
aahh......i actually thought the 3 would've been higher perf..........still cheaper priced car outperforming higher priced car. :D
own the Vette and drive it everyday for 5 years and then the true difference between the two will come into play as will the difference in price. 70K is alot to spend on a car that has a 200,000 mile shelf life. Now maybe, maybe not the engine will still be fine but the surrounding components wont .Try as you might the MADE IN THE USA means nothing in today's world with exception of military hardware. Longevity isn't a US automakers desire if it were then all would be outta business by now. I still think that the longer you own a Porsche vs a Corvette the more the cost difference gap will close. Long term resale alone is worth the difference in price . That's my opinion
-
That is just way wrong. I have too many friends who own both Porsche and Corvette and the one thing they will all agree on is the long term cost of ownership is significantly higher for the Porsche.
You do not have to believe anyone on this. Call the Porsche dealer and ask what a brake job costs. Then call a GM dealer and ask what it costs for a Corvette. Both have to be done at pretty much the same intervals. Except the ceramic rotors have to be replaced more often than the cast iron rotors. Ask about those too.
That is just normal wear and tear maintenance.
-
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you, the "Chewer of all things European!"TM
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2624/3792985248_25da282fbb.jpg)
No where near the history in racing at least real racing. LeMans is where Porsche poured out it's resources in the 70's, 80's and 90's and have won LeMans some 15 times from 1970 to present day, nobody is even close. Heck they won it 7 straight years. Chevy has no winners in the big boy class. I believe Ford won it 5 or 6 times in a row with the GT 40. Chevy set out to purposely beat the likes of Ferrari and Porsche regarding performance. I'm sure that if either wanted to focus on surpassing the Corvettes performance envelope they could. How many people can or would drive any of those cars on streets and hwys to their full performance potential? So that much performance from any of the contenders is pointless.
-
own the Vette and drive it everyday for 5 years and then the true difference between the two will come into play as will the difference in price. 70K is alot to spend on a car that has a 200,000 mile shelf life. Now maybe, maybe not the engine will still be fine but the surrounding components wont .Try as you might the MADE IN THE USA means nothing in today's world with exception of military hardware. Longevity isn't a US automakers desire if it were then all would be outta business by now. I still think that the longer you own a Porsche vs a Corvette the more the cost difference gap will close. Long term resale alone is worth the difference in price . That's my opinion
actually, you're pretty wrong dude. you're falling into the "hype" of american cars being poop. they're not. they had a REALLY bad stint in the 70's, and some into the 80's......but the 90's were the beginning of the comback for american quality.
buick's, oldsmobiles, fords, chevies, and even some dodges. ALL will easily last over 150k miles with no serious maintenance issues. ESPECAILLY the v-8 fords and chevies.
my 74 c-10 pickup with a 350. had in the 280k range when i bought it. had just over 300k when i sold it 7 years ago. the dude that bought it, just drove by the shop the other day, realized i had bought this place.....and stopped in. his dad drives it now. it STILL has the original engine in it.
got customers with 5.0L mustangs, well over 120k miles. a friends 96 vette......just hit 150k.
seeing as poesche is the same company as volkswagen(i think) i'll remind ya of the constant 40k mile water pumps i replace here. no reason or excuse for a water pump to go bad that early.
every porsche i've been in has "flexi" seats. they're not comfortable. the corvettes seats "hug" ya when ya get in, and you sink nice and comfortably into em.
as for the surrounding components? i've seen no problems long term in corvettes. none. the rtransmissions seem bulletproof. the rears too. and we all know the smallblock chevie..........it's take a nuclear explosion to kill one.
the porsche air coold engines.......not so much. the porsche water cooled engines? i've been reading a lot about head gasket problems....which according to what i read, requires engine replacement.
on non-hotrod.....my caravan......168k miles.....runing strong and quiet. my dodge dakota has 111k.....running strong. my 85 e350 has 143k on it. runs strong.
-
No where near the history in racing at least real racing. LeMans is where Porsche poured out it's resources in the 70's, 80's and 90's and have won LeMans some 15 times from 1970 to present day, nobody is even close. Heck they won it 7 straight years. Chevy has no winners in the big boy class. I believe Ford won it 5 or 6 times in a row with the GT 40. Chevy set out to purposely beat the likes of Ferrari and Porsche regarding performance. I'm sure that if either wanted to focus on surpassing the Corvettes performance envelope they could. How many people can or would drive any of those cars on streets and hwys to their full performance potential? So that much performance from any of the contenders is pointless.
dude!!
the corvette's been running road courses since 1956!! c'mon dude.....it's the reason ford jumped onboard with shelby for the cobra......they needed/wanted something to compete with the vette, seeing as the thunderbird couldn't.
-
I believe Ford won it 5 or 6 times in a row with the GT 40.
and this car is the 60's version of the "chewer of all things euro"
-
That is just way wrong. I have too many friends who own both Porsche and Corvette and the one thing they will all agree on is the long term cost of ownership is significantly higher for the Porsche.
You do not have to believe anyone on this. Call the Porsche dealer and ask what a brake job costs. Then call a GM dealer and ask what it costs for a Corvette. Both have to be done at pretty much the same intervals. Except the ceramic rotors have to be replaced more often than the cast iron rotors. Ask about those too.
That is just normal wear and tear maintenance.
True but nobody denies that all German and Italian cars are expensive to work on. I owned a VW 2 liter bus about 10 years ago just for my surf mobile. The starter went out and I bought a new one to replace it, $200 IS WHAT IT COST !!! That was just for the starter, it was a true pain to get it in. I owned a 914/6 that was a very reliable car with very little maintenance needed.
Here is a brief explaination on advantages and disavantages of the ceramic rotors :
Benefits:
There are several benefits to PCCB. Primarily, this system is said to brake more consistently and remain more resistant to fade than the standard brakes when used for repetitive hard stops, like those called for during track events.
Another major benefit is the fact that the PCCB rotors weigh approximately half as much as conventional cast iron rotors of the same size, significantly reducing the unsprung weight of each wheel which should improve a cars ability to maintain grip over rough pavement. The rotors are also said to be much more resistant to wear and are expected to last much longer than cast iron rotors (see drawbacks for more on this).
PCCB has been observed to create less brake dust than conventional brakes.
Drawbacks:
Price...! At $8,150, this is the most expensive option available and increases the cost of a Cayman / Cayman S by 16% / 13.5% respectively.
Because the standard brakes are very good, most experts will tell you that you will only truly benefit from PCCB on a race track. However, there have been reports of Porsche denying warranty claims pertaining to premature PCCB rotor wear on cars that have been tracked. There are also reports of rotor destruction in as little as one or two track events.
Replacement rotors can cost $5,000 - $6,000 per wheel......! That means that when your rotors do need replacement, as all rotors will, you may be looking at a very costly brake job or forced to convert back to cast iron rotors. Ceramic rotors are also more fragile and there is a chance of chipping one when changing wheels, which would require replacement.
-
actually, you're pretty wrong dude. you're falling into the "hype" of american cars being poop. they're not. they had a REALLY bad stint in the 70's, and some into the 80's......but the 90's were the beginning of the comback for american quality.
buick's, oldsmobiles, fords, chevies, and even some dodges. ALL will easily last over 150k miles with no serious maintenance issues. ESPECAILLY the v-8 fords and chevies.
my 74 c-10 pickup with a 350. had in the 280k range when i bought it. had just over 300k when i sold it 7 years ago. the dude that bought it, just drove by the shop the other day, realized i had bought this place.....and stopped in. his dad drives it now. it STILL has the original engine in it.
got customers with 5.0L mustangs, well over 120k miles. a friends 96 vette......just hit 150k.
seeing as poesche is the same company as volkswagen(i think) i'll remind ya of the constant 40k mile water pumps i replace here. no reason or excuse for a water pump to go bad that early.
every porsche i've been in has "flexi" seats. they're not comfortable. the corvettes seats "hug" ya when ya get in, and you sink nice and comfortably into em.
as for the surrounding components? i've seen no problems long term in corvettes. none. the rtransmissions seem bulletproof. the rears too. and we all know the smallblock chevie..........it's take a nuclear explosion to kill one.
the porsche air coold engines.......not so much. the porsche water cooled engines? i've been reading a lot about head gasket problems....which according to what i read, requires engine replacement.
on non-hotrod.....my caravan......168k miles.....runing strong and quiet. my dodge dakota has 111k.....running strong. my 85 e350 has 143k on it. runs strong.
actually read consumer product reports and most car mags they don't exactly agree with you. I also have had many US made trucks and I have never owned one past 200k. They started becomming maintance hogs after that. US cars have come along way since the 70's which were an all time low for US autos but no amount of convincing on your part will change my mind on that. I warned my daughter not to buy american and she was very sorry she did . She finally bought Japanese .
-
a buddy of mine races his viper at pocono. he runs it there when the viper club goes.....and he knows some porsche owners, so he takes it there when the local porsche club rents it.
the only thing to touch him is other vipers.
he does nothing to it, except to drive it there, register it, and race it.
one of the porsche dudes, brings his 911 here, and has me swap his racing brakes, and racing tires onto it. then he goes up there, and gets beaten by vipers that race in the same form they're driven on the street.
me.....i'll never own one of these, as when i DO get to the point that i could afford one should i want it, i'll more than likely by myself an airplane. :D
-
dude!!
the corvette's been running road courses since 1956!! c'mon dude.....it's the reason ford jumped onboard with shelby for the cobra......they needed/wanted something to compete with the vette, seeing as the thunderbird couldn't.
Cap were talking Lemans not stupid road course racing, few european manufactures are interested in that level of racing.
-
a buddy of mine races his viper at pocono. he runs it there when the viper club goes.....and he knows some porsche owners, so he takes it there when the local porsche club rents it.
the only thing to touch him is other vipers.
he does nothing to it, except to drive it there, register it, and race it.
one of the porsche dudes, brings his 911 here, and has me swap his racing brakes, and racing tires onto it. then he goes up there, and gets beaten by vipers that race in the same form they're driven on the street.
me.....i'll never own one of these, as when i DO get to the point that i could afford one should i want it, i'll more than likely by myself an airplane. :D
Dont think Porsche is too worried if you will or will not be a customer. Look how much horsepower the viper has compared to the 911 , V-10 vs 6 cyl. Lets compare a US 6 cyl powered car to the 911.
-
I'm still trying to figure out why the race was between the turbo and a Z06 instead of a turbo vs a ZR1....
Oh yeh... I forgot... when you want to have something end a certain way (Porsche win), you stack the odds in their favor (run a $130K turbo against the $70K Vette you know you'll barely beat, instead of againt the $107K ZR1 that will murder the Porsche) and then act surprised.
:furious
Check the time stamp on that clip. ZR1 didn't exist at the time. Of course... Don't let that get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-
actually read consumer product reports and most car mags they don't exactly agree with you. I also have had many US made trucks and I have never owned one past 200k. They started becomming maintance hogs after that. US cars have come along way since the 70's which were an all time low for US autos but no amount of convincing on your part will change my mind on that. I warned my daughter not to buy american and she was very sorry she did . She finally bought Japanese .
i forgot to mention my taurus with 135k on it.
all of those "reports" can be "steered" to say what the publisher wants them to say.
you and i could both go to the same mall, and ask the same question.....which is better, corvette, or porsche?
simply by "picking" who we each choose to ask, we can "make" the results look the way we each want them to look.
these consumer reports do the same thing.
don't forget....i fix em too. i work on more imports than anything.
as much as i like honda, i've had 3 of em in here with pretty hefty probelms in the last month......kinda weird really.
i don't see any relaibility problems with american cars. i don't hear customers anymore saying "i shoulda bought a honda", although i have a customer that bought his wife a 740il, telling me he wishes he'd have bought another grand cherokee. :aok
and don't forget......my opinions are formed on almost 30 years of working on these heaps. :D
-
Cap were talking Lemans not stupid road course racing, few european manufactures are interested in that level of racing.
and yet the road courses are over-populate dwith them. :D
-
Dont think Porsche is too worried if you will or will not be a customer. Look how much horsepower the viper has compared to the 911 , V-10 vs 6 cyl. Lets compare a US 6 cyl powered car to the 911.
think that'll go to the camaro.
besides....when you make power with little engines, you eff up reliability.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyQYoxEv-0Y
LMAO a decent supercharger kit and the zo6 vette will stomp it. The rest of the price diff will pay for maintenance cost, insurance cost, and fuel for the life of the car.
-
Check the time stamp on that clip. ZR1 didn't exist at the time. Of course... Don't let that get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
OK, so half of my "conspiracy theory" is not plausible, but that still doesn't explain why the $70K Vette is being compared against the $130K Porsche and not the $70K Porsche. But it's a European car show doing the test, and they just hate the thought of an American :gasp: car beating up on their precious icons....
-
Cap were talking Lemans not stupid road course racing, few european manufactures are interested in that level of racing.
Did you just seriously say that???
<--- beginning to wonder if someone has been drinking early on Friday....
-
Don't think Porsche is too worried if you will or will not be a customer. Look how much horsepower the viper has compared to the 911 , V-10 vs 6 cyl. Lets compare a US 6 cyl powered car to the 911.
Food for Thought:
The European roads are like night and day compared to U.S. roads. Living in Germany for five years and driving not just the autoban but Southern France, Spain, Switzerland, etc. The Viper first and foremost would be idle at gas station after gas station in many European countries while in the mean time the Porsche would be damn near to Russia :O. Another problem the Viper would have is just staying on the roads. Being that it is wider than most and tractions due to over abundance of Hp at the rear wheels driving the Viper on a daily basis would be much more of a job than a dream. European cars are engineered to handle the European roads, which can be plopped down in the U.S. and have relatively no problems acclimating. Unfortunately the same is not said about taking Vipers, Shelby'z, etc. to European Countries.
I am sure the muscle car diehards will probably put a price on my head, but having a 5.0 in Germany in the late '80s proved that trading in that Mustang for a Porsche was a smart move..
-
OK, so half of my "conspiracy theory" is not plausible, but that still doesn't explain why the $70K Vette is being compared against the $130K Porsche and not the $70K Porsche. But it's a European car show doing the test, and they just hate the thought of an American :gasp: car beating up on their precious icons....
It's a Japanese car show and both the German and American cars beat their own Evo and Acura. Will you please get something right.
-
actually read consumer product reports and most car mags they don't exactly agree with you. I also have had many US made trucks and I have never owned one past 200k. They started becomming maintance hogs after that. US cars have come along way since the 70's which were an all time low for US autos but no amount of convincing on your part will change my mind on that. I warned my daughter not to buy american and she was very sorry she did . She finally bought Japanese .
The Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan/Lincoln MkZ have the Japanese Automakers worried right now. Not even GM has a "counter" for them. In their segment, they are untouchable in Reliability. In Safety, they are near the top of the class.
-
BigPlay, since you're leaning towards European cars. Nix the Porsche and get a BMW Z4 and grab the Dinan Upgrade to a Z8. It'll cost you $20,000ish for the "upgrade", but 461bhp on a Z4 platform is fun and I've been behind the wheel of one.
-
Not the best looking car I've seen though...
(http://hybridlane.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/2008_ford_fusion_sport_appearance_package.jpg)
-
Not the best looking car I've seen though...
(http://hybridlane.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/2008_ford_fusion_sport_appearance_package.jpg)
I never mentioned "looks". But again, narcissists will ALWAYS find a way to distort facts already presented.
-
Yes, because looks play no part what so ever in people's decision to buy a car. I don't think the Japanese have much to be worried about.
-
Yes, because looks play no part what so ever in people's decision to buy a car. I don't think the Japanese have much to be worried about.
:rofl
-
I was also in the position a couple of years ago, trying to decide whether to get a Z06 or a used porsche. I know guys at work who have those cars (some have vettes, some porsches) and I was seriously considering looking for a slightly used '07 Z06 or a 3 year old carerra 4...
Instead I got a baby boy, and recently bought a nice sensible 4-door sedan to replace my firebird. I couldn't resist though, so instead of a sensible chebby malibu or something like that, I got a pontiac G8 GT. 361hp on 87 octane. People are getting 290-300hp at the wheels bone stock on 87 octane, and over 340 with nothing but a cold air intake and ECM tune for 93 octane gas. And that's just the 6.0L GT... The GXP model is running a full-up LS3 motor putting out well north of 400hp, still on 87 octane.
Yea it's a 4-door sedan but it's nearly as quick as my firebird and it handles better, even considering that it weighs almost 800 pounds more. My first mod will be a trailer hitch :) I'm going to hold off on the airbox and ECM/TCM tune until I'm positive I'm not going to need powertrain warranty work, maybe in a couple of years.
-
One of my good friends had a 06 Fusion and he fell asleep coming home from work 2 weeks ago to the day. He took out a bridge rail and flipped and rolled every way you can think of before launching across a 30 foot wide creek and smacking the other side. That car is MANGLED and he walked out of it with a TON of stitches and a broken collar bone. I will post picks when I get them off of his facebook tomorrow. That car saved his butt!
-
One of my good friends had a 06 Fusion and he fell asleep coming home from work 2 weeks ago to the day. He took out a bridge rail and flipped and rolled every way you can think of before launching across a 30 foot wide creek and smacking the other side. That car is MANGLED and he walked out of it with a TON of stitches and a broken collar bone. I will post picks when I get them off of his facebook tomorrow. That car saved his butt!
But...it's not the best looking car some people have seen though...
-
See Rule #4
-
OK, so half of my "conspiracy theory" is not plausible, but that still doesn't explain why the $70K Vette is being compared against the $130K Porsche and not the $70K Porsche. But it's a European car show doing the test, and they just hate the thought of an American :gasp: car beating up on their precious icons....
you need to bear in mind price differences too, in UK:
Z06 £60k
911 £60k
911S £70K
911GT3 £80K
911T £100K
ZR1 £110K
911GT2 £130K
resale on 911s is very strong, vettes drop like a stone over here so for us 911s are much better value. cheaper servicing doesnt come close to negating the depreciation. in fact when the economy is strong you can drive a new 911 for next to nothing.
Food for Thought:
The European roads are like night and day compared to U.S. roads. Living in Germany for five years and driving not just the autoban but Southern France, Spain, Switzerland, etc. The Viper first and foremost would be idle at gas station after gas station in many European countries while in the mean time the Porsche would be damn near to Russia :O. Another problem the Viper would have is just staying on the roads. Being that it is wider than most and tractions due to over abundance of Hp at the rear wheels driving the Viper on a daily basis would be much more of a job than a dream. European cars are engineered to handle the European roads, which can be plopped down in the U.S. and have relatively no problems acclimating. Unfortunately the same is not said about taking Vipers, Shelby'z, etc. to European Countries.
I am sure the muscle car diehards will probably put a price on my head, but having a 5.0 in Germany in the late '80s proved that trading in that Mustang for a Porsche was a smart move..
:aok
-
True but nobody denies that all German and Italian cars are expensive to work on. <snip>
You are the one that said long term cost of ownership of a Porsche would be less than a Corvette. I was giving a simple example of why that cannot be true. Brake job intervals for a Porsche almost mirror those of the Corvette.
While talking to Porsche, ask them about the engine rebuild schedule for any of their air cooled engines. Yes, they do have to be rebuilt at specific mileage intervals or you risk destroying them. Then ask how much that costs. The Corvette will easily go passed about 2 air cooled Porsche engine rebuilds.
-
Yea it's a 4-door sedan but it's nearly as quick as my firebird and it handles better, even considering that it weighs almost 800 pounds more. My first mod will be a trailer hitch :) I'm going to hold off on the airbox and ECM/TCM tune until I'm positive I'm not going to need powertrain warranty work, maybe in a couple of years.
we have a couple guys running round here in mercury marauders here. one's stock. it's suprisingly fast. the other dude took his out to Michigan, to a place that speciliazes in these cars. they added a supercharger, took out the highway gear(2.78) and put in a 3.73. re-flashed the EEC for the supercharger..........THAT one is stupidly fast. i got to drive that one, and it was beyond impressive for a sedan that weighs 4k.
his mileage didn't go down with this work, he could haul his family in it easily and safely(he left the child seat in the back when he took it to the track).
they're actually good looking cars too.
-
I'd just buy a truck :cool:
-
we have a couple guys running round here in mercury marauders here. one's stock. it's suprisingly fast. the other dude took his out to Michigan, to a place that speciliazes in these cars. they added a supercharger, took out the highway gear(2.78) and put in a 3.73. re-flashed the EEC for the supercharger..........THAT one is stupidly fast. i got to drive that one, and it was beyond impressive for a sedan that weighs 4k.
his mileage didn't go down with this work, he could haul his family in it easily and safely(he left the child seat in the back when he took it to the track).
they're actually good looking cars too.
My guess would be either Roush here in Livonia or Livernois Motorsports. :devil
I've always liked the Marauders.
-
:rofl
Excellent rebuttal! Sure won me over with that one. :aok
-
Excellent rebuttal! Sure won me over with that one. :aok
want something to impress your clients/customers?
the merc dude!!
fast(for a 4k pound car), good looking, decent handling, and not stupidly expensive. it won't even come close to comparing to the vette, or the porsche in performance.......but it'll handle more than what you'll ever ask it to do in the real world of street driving. :aok
-
Excellent rebuttal! Sure won me over with that one. :aok
You aren't worth the time and effort. You're still wrong though, just live with it.
-
Bottom line: If you want performance and money is an issue buy American, but be mindful that the car will be built down to a price (and the interior will be the most evident place they've saved on). If you want performance and luxury with money being no issue buy high-end European; they're very good at that. If you want reliability and longevity buy Japanese (they can throw in some performance and/or luxury too, but usually not at US/Euro level).
Masherbrum, thanks for yielding.
-
CLASSIC ORIGINAL MARAUDER
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/0901phr_01_z1964_mercury_marauderbu.jpg)
newer marauder
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/mercury.jpg)
newer one at the track.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/3212-2003-Mercury-Marauder.jpg)
-
(http://www.automotoportal.com/media/images/vijesti/070821004.8.jpg)
1958 Ferrari 250 Testa Rossa please....
-
It's a Japanese car show and both the German and American cars beat their own Evo and Acura. Will you please get something right.
Sorry, I was confusing your two clips you posted. But that's irrelevant, though... my point still stands. To be completely honest, the test would have needed to have been done of two cars that are actually price competitors, not a $30K more expensive model.
If you want to test the 911T or the GT2, do it against the ZR1 (and get someone to drive it who actually knows what they're doing). If you want to compare the Z06 against something, the 911S or GT3 are a heck of a lot closer in price.
What's your explanation as to why they purposefully did a lopsided test? Since you apparently have it all figured out?
-
(http://www.automotoportal.com/media/images/vijesti/070821004.8.jpg)
1958 Ferrari 250 Testa Rossa please....
Did someone win the Powerball?
-
you need to bear in mind price differences too, in UK:
Z06 £60k
911 £60k
911S £70K
911GT3 £80K
911T £100K
ZR1 £110K
911GT2 £130K
resale on 911s is very strong, vettes drop like a stone over here so for us 911s are much better value. cheaper servicing doesnt come close to negating the depreciation. in fact when the economy is strong you can drive a new 911 for next to nothing.
:aok
Excellent point, over there the numbers work out quite differently.
I'd say the fact that the Vette depreciates more rapidly makes it even that much better of a buy over there, once its a year or so old. Let someone else take the financial hit of buying it new, you get it a year later at a discount and pocket the extra!
<----never buys new
-
Sorry, I was confusing your two clips you posted. But that's irrelevant, though... my point still stands. To be completely honest, the test would have needed to have been done of two cars that are actually price competitors, not a $30K more expensive model.
If you want to test the 911T or the GT2, do it against the ZR1 (and get someone to drive it who actually knows what they're doing). If you want to compare the Z06 against something, the 911S or GT3 are a heck of a lot closer in price.
What's your explanation as to why they purposefully did a lopsided test? Since you apparently have it all figured out?
Personally, the Cayman S is a better bargain than any 911.
-
What's your explanation as to why they purposefully did a lopsided test? Since you apparently have it all figured out?
Without knowing the actual price difference in Japan I'll venture a guess that they took the best sports cars from around the world, but excluded the super cars (Carrera GT, Veyron etc.). The Corvette Z06 probably costs the same if not more than the 911 Turbo in Japan since engine displacement is heavily taxed there (engines larger than 2.5 liters are actually illegal except with special dispensations).
-
(engines larger than 2.5 liters are actually illegal except with special dispensations).
really??????
:huh
-
Without knowing the actual price difference in Japan I'll venture a guess that they took the best sports cars from around the world, but excluded the super cars (Carrera GT, Veyron etc.). The Corvette Z06 probably costs the same if not more than the 911 Turbo in Japan since engine displacement is heavily taxed there (engines larger than 2.5 liters are actually illegal except with special dispensations).
Fair enough, I can see that. Chalk that up as another reason not to move to Japan! Prejudice against cubic inches is a vile and evil policy. I say load up another B-29!
j/k of course. :)
-
really??????
:huh
They had enormous problems with pollution in the big cities. I'm not sure they still have that ban btw, but they did have it back in the 80s and 90s. They had oxygen booths on street corners so that people could get a shot of fresh air if they felt sick.
(http://www.8thfire.net/images/smog-tokyo.jpg)
Addendum: So it's not a coincidence that most if not all their performance cars like the Nissan Skylines and Mitsubishi EVOs have small 2-2.5 liter engines with huge turbos. It's government intervention.
-
Addendum: So it's not a coincidence that most if not all their performance cars like the Nissan Skylines and Mitsubishi EVOs have small 2-2.5 liter engines with huge turbos. It's government intervention.
Yea that's why the Nissan gt-r has a 3.8 . :rolleyes:
The 2.0 has more to do with rally race restrictions, I think.
-
You are the one that said long term cost of ownership of a Porsche would be less than a Corvette. I was giving a simple example of why that cannot be true. Brake job intervals for a Porsche almost mirror those of the Corvette.
While talking to Porsche, ask them about the engine rebuild schedule for any of their air cooled engines. Yes, they do have to be rebuilt at specific mileage intervals or you risk destroying them. Then ask how much that costs. The Corvette will easily go passed about 2 air cooled Porsche engine rebuilds.
I couldnt agree more,add to that the water cooled engines that implode and the fact the newer porsche's depreciate at a much higher rate than the older air cooled and I'd say the Vette is the better buy.
But hey what do I know I drive a 98 accord :aok
It seems porsche thinks valves hittting pistons is normal wear and tear so be sure to include the cost of a new rebuild engine before you can unload your now used and depreciated car.
ps: I'm a porsche fan and would love to have a mid 80's 911 but I cant get the boss to ok a car that old when you can by a mid 90's 911 for less....Hmmm I wonder why!!
:salute
-
Yea that's why the Nissan gt-r has a 3.8 . :rolleyes:
Special dispensations, like I said. After all you can own a Corvette in Japan.
-
ps: I'm a porsche fan and would love to have a mid 80's 911 but I cant get the boss to ok a car that old when you can by a mid 90's 911 for less....Hmmm I wonder why!!
Why does your boss need to OK it?
-
Why does your boss need to OK it?
Well as "she" says"you have to sleep sometime". :lol
-
So, she's the boss eh? ;)
Tell you the truth I wouldn't buy either the Porsche or the Vette. I'm more into big sedans. Currently drive an Audi A8. Last car was a BMW 740. Would have stuck to BM's if I could stand the new styling, but I don't.
-
My guess would be either Roush here in Livonia or Livernois Motorsports. :devil
I've always liked the Marauders.
Livernois has a good reputation on the G8 boards. All of their customers seem happy with their dyno tunes and they invite owners back for re-tunes if they're even slightly dissatisfied or want something tweaked (like transmission tune tweaks).
If I was in that area I'd be strongly considering having Livernois install a supercharger...
-
Went with the Porsche... it's amazing! It's such an engaging car to drive. The car is on rails. The sports chrono plus package is amazing also, probably my favorite characteristic about the car. I have a lot of respect for the Corvette, but I just think the Porsche sang to me more in the end.
Got a great deal, under $50,000! Certified pre-owned with a factory bumper to bumper warranty for 2 years or $100,000 miles (whichever comes first). Car only has 20,000 miles on it. Financed a portion of it as they offered 4.99% for 60 months, that's too cheap to pass up. If any one is ever going to buy a Porsche, I'd highly recommend Pioneer Porsche in San Diego... up front and no pressure atmosphere. Very knowledgeable about their products too.
I'm a happy camper! I appreciate everybody's feedback, it definitely helped me mull it over and come to a decision which I'm absolutely happy with. Hopefully everyone in the Corvette/Other camp will still be my friend. :)
-
Livernois has a good reputation on the G8 boards. All of their customers seem happy with their dyno tunes and they invite owners back for re-tunes if they're even slightly dissatisfied or want something tweaked (like transmission tune tweaks).
If I was in that area I'd be strongly considering having Livernois install a supercharger...
I know people at both, they are both EXCELLENT shops. If you're ever considering it, let me know, I'll get the first round. :rock
-
Went with the Porsche... it's amazing! It's such an engaging car to drive. The car is on rails. The sports chrono plus package is amazing also, probably my favorite characteristic about the car. I have a lot of respect for the Corvette, but I just think the Porsche sang to me more in the end.
Got a great deal, under $50,000! Certified pre-owned with a factory bumper to bumper warranty for 2 years or $100,000 miles (whichever comes first). Car only has 20,000 miles on it. Financed a portion of it as they offered 4.99% for 60 months, that's too cheap to pass up. If any one is ever going to buy a Porsche, I'd highly recommend Pioneer Porsche in San Diego... up front and no pressure atmosphere. Very knowledgeable about their products too.
I'm a happy camper! I appreciate everybody's feedback, it definitely helped me mull it over and come to a decision which I'm absolutely happy with. Hopefully everyone in the Corvette/Other camp will still be my friend. :)
Good for you! Have fun with it. :)
-
post up some pics :aok
-
:aok
Hey, at least you bought a sports car.
I mean, we could be having a discussion about which is better: boxy Scion or Nissan Cube?
:vomit:
-
Congrats! It's YOUR car, enjoy it to the fullest!
-
Buy a Dodge Viper, then have the engine customized for performance. I've seen a few of the mod'ed vipers and they are stunning. Yea the unbelievers will scoff and look down there noses at you, take em for a ride in one of these beasts and they'd get out crying for there mommies.
If i would have wanted a matchbox for a car i'd have stayed 3 years old and in the sandbox.
-
Buy a Dodge Viper, then have the engine customized for performance. I've seen a few of the mod'ed vipers and they are stunning. Yea the unbelievers will scoff and look down there noses at you, take em for a ride in one of these beasts and they'd get out crying for there mommies.
If i would have wanted a matchbox for a car i'd have stayed 3 years old and in the sandbox.
Viper's are dogs. I scoff at them, because I've driven a hopped up RT/10 a few times.
-
Went with the Porsche... it's amazing! It's such an engaging car to drive. The car is on rails. The sports chrono plus package is amazing also, probably my favorite characteristic about the car. I have a lot of respect for the Corvette, but I just think the Porsche sang to me more in the end.
Got a great deal, under $50,000! Certified pre-owned with a factory bumper to bumper warranty for 2 years or $100,000 miles (whichever comes first). Car only has 20,000 miles on it. Financed a portion of it as they offered 4.99% for 60 months, that's too cheap to pass up. If any one is ever going to buy a Porsche, I'd highly recommend Pioneer Porsche in San Diego... up front and no pressure atmosphere. Very knowledgeable about their products too.
I'm a happy camper! I appreciate everybody's feedback, it definitely helped me mull it over and come to a decision which I'm absolutely happy with. Hopefully everyone in the Corvette/Other camp will still be my friend. :)
Congrats,it is a fine car so enjoy!
:salute
-
WTG.
regardless, of what any of us here say, or show you, the fact is, that it is YOU and only you that has to like and enjoy the car you decide on.
i'm going to night to look at a rollback....an old one, being an 85, but it;s something i hope to be able to use to expand my business.
<<S>> :aok
-
and yet the road courses are over-populate dwith them. :D
Most are small teams not factory sponsored.
-
Did you just seriously say that???
<--- beginning to wonder if someone has been drinking early on Friday....
Oh really..... is Ferrari interested in anything but F-1? Hell NO ! Is Porsche interested in American LeMans series, NO ! Not too many of the racing community is. CanAm road racing was the last true road racing venue that was worth a hill of beans. Not that being said the American LeMans series is growing but we will see just how big it gets.
-
Oh really.....is Ferrari interested in anything but F-1? Hell NO ! Is Porsche interested in American LeMans series, NO ! Not too many of the racing community is. CanAm road racing was the last true road racing venue that was worth a hill of beans. Not that being said the American LeMans series is growing but we will see just how big it gets.
F-1 and WRC is great to watch. Nascar puts me to sleep,
-
Oh really..... is Ferrari interested in anything but F-1? Hell NO ! Is Porsche interested in American LeMans series, NO ! Not too many of the racing community is. CanAm road racing was the last true road racing venue that was worth a hill of beans. Not that being said the American LeMans series is growing but we will see just how big it gets.
of COURSE porsche isn't interested in something that they couldn't win..........if they seriously thought they could dominate there, then they'd be running.
-
BigPlay, since you're leaning towards European cars. Nix the Porsche and get a BMW Z4 and grab the Dinan Upgrade to a Z8. It'll cost you $20,000ish for the "upgrade", but 461bhp on a Z4 platform is fun and I've been behind the wheel of one.
Having owned a BMW I'll pass. I like US cars but have not been impressed with the reliability that I have gotten from them. Plus US cars and trucks are not cheap. The last time I went shopping for a truck I was going for the F-250 crew cab diesel. When I realized that this thing was approaching $50,000 I had to come back to earth and ask myself if I really wanted to pay 50K for a truck. I then looked at the F-150 crew cab.$35,000 was the sticker price for the stupid thing and
they wouldn't budge. I then went to the Toyota dealership and left the place 1 hour latter with a Tacoma crew cab out the door for $24,000. That truck is about 10 hp shy of the v-8 F-150 and is one of the best all around trucks I have owned. I would love to buy American but have never really been satisfied with the product.
-
of COURSE porsche isn't interested in something that they couldn't win..........if they seriously thought they could dominate there, then they'd be running.
Cap...... They are the LeMans king, can't you read? Other then the GT40 winning spree back in the late 60's there hasen't bee a US built car anywhere in sight. Why would Porsche put their effort in a small niche racing market. Non of the European manufactures even bother. That form of racing venue is mainly had BMW focusing on it not Porsche. Yes there are Porsche's racing there but it isn't where Porsche focuses it's development on.
-
Having owned a BMW I'll pass. I like US cars but have not been impressed with the reliability that I have gotten from them. Plus US cars and trucks are not cheap. The last time I went shopping for a truck I was going for the F-250 crew cab diesel. When I realized that this thing was approaching $50,000 I had to come back to earth and ask myself if I really wanted to pay 50K for a truck. I then looked at the F-150 crew cab.$35,000 was the sticker price for the stupid thing and
they wouldn't budge. I then went to the Toyota dealership and left the place 1 hour latter with a Tacoma crew cab out the door for $24,000. That truck is about 10 hp shy of the v-8 F-150 and is one of the best all around trucks I have owned. I would love to buy American but have never really been satisfied with the product.
if you go with a ford deisel, be careful with the 7.3 turbodeisel. it tended to have some problems with wiring going through the valve cover gaskets to the injectors. they also had problems with the injector driver modules.
other than that, incredible trucks.
-
You are the one that said long term cost of ownership of a Porsche would be less than a Corvette. I was giving a simple example of why that cannot be true. Brake job intervals for a Porsche almost mirror those of the Corvette.
While talking to Porsche, ask them about the engine rebuild schedule for any of their air cooled engines. Yes, they do have to be rebuilt at specific mileage intervals or you risk destroying them. Then ask how much that costs. The Corvette will easily go passed about 2 air cooled Porsche engine rebuilds.
Scuzzy there not complete rebuilds and there are plenty of small shops that are much cheaper then the dealership. Long term ownership would include car depreciation and car longevity, that would include all the things around the powertrain . Suspension, cosmetics, seats gages and so on. These little things can and do add up on older US built cars or Cappy wouldn't have a busy shop.
-
of COURSE porsche isn't interested in something that they couldn't win..........if they seriously thought they could dominate there, then they'd be running.
Why enter the American Le Mans when they're already in the real thing, in Le Mans, France. And the hottest car to ever race at Le Mans was the Porsche 917. It was so awesome that it changed the rules of the race.
Porsche 917, 1970, 1,100 hp. 1,580 hp in qualifying tune. The 917 still holds the speed record on the Mulsanne straight.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/2006FOS_1970Porsche917KGulf.jpg)
-
^^^
Nice Die hard,that was 1 incredible car.I remember watching the 917's dominate everything back in the day,made my Dad get me a slot car set with the 917 in it.My uncle was none to happy tho,he was a bigwig at FoMoCo back then and was always trying to get me to use the GT40 instead of the 917...... :rofl :rofl :rofl
thx for the memories... :aok
:salute
-
My pleasure :)
-
Why enter the American Le Mans when they're already in the real thing, in Le Mans, France. And the hottest car to ever race at Le Mans was the Porsche 917. It was so awesome that it changed the rules of the race.
Porsche 917, 1970, 1,100 hp. 1,580 hp in qualifying tune. The 917 still holds the speed record on the Mulsanne straight.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/2006FOS_1970Porsche917KGulf.jpg)
I don't think Cap knows about the 917's or he wouldn't be commenting on how the Corvettes dominate Porsche in racing. But Le Mans to Cap is a car made by Pontiac not a race.
-
Scuzzy there not complete rebuilts and there are plenty of small shops that are much cheaper then the dealership.
Yep, and there are plenty of small shops (far more than those that work on Porsche) who will work on the Corvette for far less than a GM dealership as well.
No matter how you slice it, long term costs of ownership for a Porsche will be higher than a Corvette.
It does not make either marque better than the other. It is just simple economics. Parts costs more for a Porsche. Labor costs more. It is the cost doing things with finesse versus a sledge hammer.
EDIT: Between the 2009 Porsche 911 and the Corvette, the cars are expected to lose about 57% of their value over 5 years. They are within a couple of percentage points of each other. One day the Porsche is at 56% and the Corvette is at 58% and the next day it reverses. It's a wash in terms of depreciation. Of course the Porsche starts out at around $75,000 versus the Corvette's $50,000.
Out of pocket depreciation, the Porsche will cost quite a bit more. Roughly $35,000 to the Corevette's $20,000.
-
how does their depreciation compare in the US? (I suppose mpg and insurance also factor for TCO but not to such a degree)
-
how does their depreciation compare in the US? (I suppose mpg and insurance also factor for TCO but not to such a degree)
Corvettes being one of the most expensive cars to insure for the cost of the car.
-
Yep, and there are plenty of small shops (far more than those that work on Porsche) who will work on the Corvette for far less than a GM dealership as well.
No matter how you slice it, long term costs of ownership for a Porsche will be higher than a Corvette.
It does not make either marque better than the other. It is just simple economics. Parts costs more for a Porsche. Labor costs more. It is the cost doing things with finesse versus a sledge hammer.
2009 porsche 911
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 5 YR TOTAL
Depreciation $7,853 $7,041 $6,545 $6,351 $5,982 $33,772
Financing $4,160 $3,360 $2,480 $1,558 $556 $12,114
Insurance $1,938 $1,938 $1,938 $1,938 $1,938 $9,689
State Fees N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fuel $2,135 $2,364 $2,618 $2,898 $3,209 $13,225
Maintenance N/A $304 $1,728 $31 $1,476 $3,539
Repairs N/A N/A N/A $734 $1,622 $2,356
Cost Per Year $16,086 $15,008 $15,309 $13,511 $14,782 $74,695
2009 corvette
Depreciation $18,607 $8,547 $7,323 $8,586 $8,396 $51,459
Financing $5,548 $4,482 $3,307 $2,078 $741 $16,156
Insurance $2,437 $2,437 $2,437 $2,437 $2,437 $12,183
State Fees $198 $155 $148 $134 $129 $764
Fuel $2,706 $2,996 $3,317 $3,673 $4,067 $16,759
Maintenance $179 $219 $2,412 $650 $2,632 $6,093
Repairs N/A N/A $107 $231 $254 $592
Cost Per Year $29,674 $18,836 $19,051 $17,789 $18,655 $104,006
There is almost a $30,000 difference that proves my point. I would imagine that the amount increases the older the car gets.
-
Given the same variables (over 25 years of age, no accidents, daily driver...) Insurance for the Corvette is about $1600.00 per year. For the Porsche 911, it is around $1900.00 per year.
It will vary between states.
-
Given the same variables (over 25 years of age, no accidents, daily driver...) Insurance for the Corvette is about $1600.00 per year. For the Porsche 911, it is around $1900.00 per year.
It will vary between states.
not according to what the internet has to say about cost of ownership over 5 years in regards to insurance cost.
-
Yep, and there are plenty of small shops (far more than those that work on Porsche) who will work on the Corvette for far less than a GM dealership as well.
No matter how you slice it, long term costs of ownership for a Porsche will be higher than a Corvette.
It does not make either marque better than the other. It is just simple economics. Parts costs more for a Porsche. Labor costs more. It is the cost doing things with finesse versus a sledge hammer.
EDIT: Between the 2009 Porsche 911 and the Corvette, the cars are expected to lose about 57% of their value over 5 years. They are within a couple of percentage points of each other. One day the Porsche is at 56% and the Corvette is at 58% and the next day it reverses. It's a wash in terms of depreciation. Of course the Porsche starts out at around $75,000 versus the Corvette's $50,000.
Out of pocket depreciation, the Porsche will cost quite a bit more. Roughly $35,000 to the Corvette's $20,000.
Given the same variables (over 25 years of age, no accidents, daily driver...) Insurance for the Corvette is about $1600.00 per year. For the Porsche 911, it is around $1900.00 per year.
It will vary between states.
Correct. Most Corvettes are cheaper on insurance than a Mustang GT. BigPlay, there is no way in hell a Porsche is cheaper to maintain or insure than a Corvette and the GT Series has not one thing to do with it.
-
2009 porsche 911
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 5 YR TOTAL
Depreciation $7,853 $7,041 $6,545 $6,351 $5,982 $33,772
Financing $4,160 $3,360 $2,480 $1,558 $556 $12,114
Insurance $1,938 $1,938 $1,938 $1,938 $1,938 $9,689
State Fees N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fuel $2,135 $2,364 $2,618 $2,898 $3,209 $13,225
Maintenance N/A $304 $1,728 $31 $1,476 $3,539
Repairs N/A N/A N/A $734 $1,622 $2,356
Cost Per Year $16,086 $15,008 $15,309 $13,511 $14,782 $74,695
2009 corvette
Depreciation $18,607 $8,547 $7,323 $8,586 $8,396 $51,459
Financing $5,548 $4,482 $3,307 $2,078 $741 $16,156
Insurance $2,437 $2,437 $2,437 $2,437 $2,437 $12,183
State Fees $198 $155 $148 $134 $129 $764
Fuel $2,706 $2,996 $3,317 $3,673 $4,067 $16,759
Maintenance $179 $219 $2,412 $650 $2,632 $6,093
Repairs N/A N/A $107 $231 $254 $592
Cost Per Year $29,674 $18,836 $19,051 $17,789 $18,655 $104,006
There is almost a $30,000 difference that proves my point. I would imagine that the amount increases the older the car gets.
BS. Only if your driving habits are terrible. A C3-5 wouldn't even cost that much to "maintain" over 5 years, let alone a C6.
-
Not sure what Corvette he is looking at. I found the site he is using and here is the 2009 Corvette numbers they have.
| Depreciation | $4,752 | $4,002 | $3,464 | $4,099 | $4,055 | $20,372 |
| Financing | $2,476 | $2,000 | $1,476 | $927 | $331 | $7,210 |
| Insurance | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $7,741 |
| State Fees | $127 | $94 | $92 | $84 | $82 | $479 |
| Fuel | $2,221 | $2,459 | $2,723 | $3,015 | $3,338 | $13,756 |
| Maintenance | $165 | $205 | $1,286 | $410 | $1,382 | $3,447 |
| Repairs | N/A | N/A | $107 | $231 | $254 | $592 |
| Cost Per Year | $11,289 | $10,308 | $10,695 | $10,314 | $10,991 | $53,598 |
Seems to me if you are comparing a base 911, you should be comparing a base Corvette as well, as they are very similar in performance.
-
Not sure what Corvette he is looking at. I found the site he is using and here is the 2009 Corvette numbers they have.
| Depreciation | $4,752 | $4,002 | $3,464 | $4,099 | $4,055 | $20,372 |
| Financing | $2,476 | $2,000 | $1,476 | $927 | $331 | $7,210 |
| Insurance | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $7,741 |
| State Fees | $127 | $94 | $92 | $84 | $82 | $479 |
| Fuel | $2,221 | $2,459 | $2,723 | $3,015 | $3,338 | $13,756 |
| Maintenance | $165 | $205 | $1,286 | $410 | $1,382 | $3,447 |
| Repairs | N/A | N/A | $107 | $231 | $254 | $592 |
| Cost Per Year | $11,289 | $10,308 | $10,695 | $10,314 | $10,991 | $53,598 |
So he's "doubling that websites numbers" to justify the purchase of the Porsche? Because this is what it seems like now.
-
Ok, he is comparing the base 911 to the Corvette ZR1. Here is the 911 Turbo Coupe numbers, which should be used when comparing to the ZR1.
The base 911 and the base Corvette compare favorably in terms of performance.
These are the 911 Turbo Coupe numbers.
---------
| Depreciation | $20,799 | $10,510 | $9,878 | $9,526 | $9,032 | $59,245 |
| Financing | $7,052 | $5,696 | $4,203 | $2,641 | $942 | $20,534 |
| Insurance | $2,437 | $2,437 | $2,437 | $2,437 | $2,437 | $12,183 |
| State Fees | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Fuel | $2,360 | $2,613 | $2,893 | $3,204 | $3,547 | $14,617 |
| Maintenance | N/A | $304 | $2,034 | $31 | $1,782 | $4,151 |
| Repairs | N/A | N/A | N/A | $770 | $1,700 | $2,470 |
| Cost Per Year | $32,148 | $21,560 | $21,445 | $18,608 | $19,439 | $113,200 |
-
I do not know where those numbers came from. The total depreciation is more than the base Corvette costs. He shows a 2009 Corvette and those numbers are not for a base Corvette.
I should think a base 911 and a base Corvette would be as close to apples-to-apples as you can get between the two models.
Exactly. My guess is he's comparing a base 911 with a Z06 or better yet, a ZR1.
-
I edited.
-
I edited.
:rofl Too funny Skuzzy, saw those numbers. Yep, the Vette is cheaper, regardless of what BP says.
-
Not sure what Corvette he is looking at. I found the site he is using and here is the 2009 Corvette numbers they have.
| Depreciation | $4,752 | $4,002 | $3,464 | $4,099 | $4,055 | $20,372 |
| Financing | $2,476 | $2,000 | $1,476 | $927 | $331 | $7,210 |
| Insurance | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $1,548 | $7,741 |
| State Fees | $127 | $94 | $92 | $84 | $82 | $479 |
| Fuel | $2,221 | $2,459 | $2,723 | $3,015 | $3,338 | $13,756 |
| Maintenance | $165 | $205 | $1,286 | $410 | $1,382 | $3,447 |
| Repairs | N/A | N/A | $107 | $231 | $254 | $592 |
| Cost Per Year | $11,289 | $10,308 | $10,695 | $10,314 | $10,991 | $53,598 |
Seems to me if you are comparing a base 911, you should be comparing a base Corvette as well, as they are very similar in performance.
Z1r, that model seems to be what everyone wants to talk about. There are too many 911 models to compare so I went with standard 911, still depreciation is huge when it concerns the corvette.
-
Well, the ZR1 is $103,000, while the 911 Turbo Coupe is $130,000.
The overall depreciation of the ZR1 is more than than the initial cost, while the 911 Turbo Coupe is about 86% of its cost. At that level the Turbo Coupe shows to be a slightly better deal than the ZR1.
However, the situation is flipped at the base level of the two models.
My choices to compare are to chose the models whose performance are a good match.
Z1r, that model seems to be what everyone wants to talk about. There are too many 911 models to compare so I went with standard 911, still depreciation is huge when it concerns the corvette.
You chose to compare the cheapest 911 Carrera Coupe to the most expensive Corvette. That's just nonsense.
The base Porsche 911 Carrera and base Corvette are very nearly the same in depreciation percentages.
-----------------------------
By the way, that WEB site you are using does not have realistic numbers for many things. Compare what they claim for resale value, to what the models are actually getting. Puts a bit of a ding in their credibility.
-
You know, I would never have figured Skuzzy for a car guy...
-
This should sum it up. There are different cars for different people and no 1 car meets all the criteria that all people want. Many say the ZR1 has it all over the competition but there is more to owning a car then performance and cost alone. All of these cars have something to offer over the other. To me owning a Corvette even the ZR1 doesn't do it. I doubt that anyone of us would ever get to use all of what any of these cars have to offer performance wise so from that aspect performance on this level is rather mute. They were all very close on all of the trials that were performed on the test track. I don't think there was 2 seconds difference on lap times within the group. For me if I was going to get my dream car. I would need something to remind me daily that this in fact is my dream car. I don't want to see it rolling down the street everyday right next to me and that's one reason I would not pick the Corvette. But as stated.... everyone has different criterias for owning a car.
War of the Worlds: ZR1 vs GT2 vs 599 vs GT-R. Motor Trends Test
The Dust Clears
So? Who wins the War of the Worlds? For sure, each car in this field qualifies as a superstar. The Nissan GT-R delivers 21st Century electro-wonder and shattering performance at a base price ($77,840) that borders on the unbelievable. The Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano offers succulent styling, shameless hedonism, peerless refinement, and speed and handling matched only by a handful of cars on the planet. The Porsche GT2, which Theys dubbed "the raciest in the bunch," churns out effortless speed (the variable-vane twin-turbo engine feels naturally aspirated, so smooth is its power delivery) and seems utterly bulletproof. You know you could hammer on it all day long and it would never complain. The ZR1 has a few glaring flaws -- including a fade-into-the-traffic-flow exterior and a cockpit lacking almost any signs of flying first-class -- yet by nearly every objective measure (and most subjective ones, too) this new Chevy expands the performance envelope for premium supercars. And at a fraction of the price of the European thoroughbreds. In the supercar realm, the 2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 rules.
America still sucks at the castle thing, though.
First Place: Chevrolet Corvette ZR1
Class-shattering power, race-car handling grip, monster brakes, and sweet control inputs leave even the bluebloods in this Chevy's wake.
Second Place: Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano
Costs huge, but delivers huge, too. Still one of the planet's finest sports cars. And when it comes to sex appeal, forget it: The Ferrari is the only one you'd choose for a date with Gisele Bundchen.
Third Place: Porsche GT2
The Rolex of sports cars: brilliantly engineered and bulletproof. Unreal speed, hellacious grip, and superb controls -- everyday drives become laps at Le Mans.
Fourth Place: Nissan GT-R
That a machine this incredible finishes fourth shows you how spectacular the other three really are. At the price, nothing comes close. And if you think Nissan is resting on its 480-horsepower laurels, stay tuned for Act II: GT-R V-Spec.
-
Oh really..... is Ferrari interested in anything but F-1? Hell NO ! Is Porsche interested in American LeMans series, NO ! Not too many of the racing community is. CanAm road racing was the last true road racing venue that was worth a hill of beans. Not that being said the American LeMans series is growing but we will see just how big it gets.
Ferrari, no, not at a factory level, but you're being silly if you think Porsche doesn't spend quite a bit of time and effort on ALMS/FIA GT and supporting national club racing both here and abroad. They offer factory built race cars in various configurations depending on series and as far as ALMS/ELMS/Le Mans goes they went to the trouble of building the RS Spyer got LMP2 (and I'd bet my paycheck each one was sold at a loss wrt the R&D and manufacturing costs), so... yeh, I'd say there is some factory interest/involvement there.
-
I don't think Cap knows about the 917's or he wouldn't be commenting on how the Corvettes dominate Porsche in racing. But Le Mans to Cap is a car made by Pontiac not a race.
Yep, pulling on race wins from 20, 30 and almost 40 years ago has a lot to do with racing today. :huh
The 917 was a remarkable car, no doubt. As was the 962. I'm just trying to figure out what that has to do with the 911 and the Vette in GT2 today.
Oh yeh. Nothing.
Where and when has Chevy gone up against Porsche in International Sports Car Racing? Here in the US plenty of pro teams fielded Porsches of various models, and the vast majority of the times the Corvette teams had their way with all of the competition, Porsche included. They weren't factory Porsche teams, but privateer pro teams, just like the Corvette teams. And they were doing it all in production-based cars built from street cars, a heck of a lot closer to what you and I might drive on the street than some 917/962/LMP2 RS Spyder. Even if I could go to a dealership and buy a Porsche P2 racecar, I can't get it inspected and legal to drive on the roads at the local DMV, so what Porsche does with prototype race cars for a once-a-year race is irrelevant when it comes to street cars and whether the 911 or Vette is king.
Corvette never faced Porsche in GT1 since 2000, though they bested Ferrari, Aston, Lamborghini, Maserati, and Dodge. In GT2 so far in Corvette's first season in the class, they're solidly handling Porsche.
-
Ferrari, no, not at a factory level, but you're being silly if you think Porsche doesn't spend quite a bit of time and effort on ALMS/FIA GT and supporting national club racing both here and abroad. They offer factory built race cars in various configurations depending on series and as far as ALMS/ELMS/Le Mans goes they went to the trouble of building the RS Spyer got LMP2 (and I'd bet my paycheck each one was sold at a loss wrt the R&D and manufacturing costs), so... yeh, I'd say there is some factory interest/involvement there.
I didn't say that they focus on that level of racing. Street cars modified into race cars to me doesn't indicate total factory devotion to that area of racing. Interested and total all out devotion like they did in the 70's, 80's and 90's with it's complete resources are completely different. If Ferrari found another way to fund it's F-1 costs they would dump building cars for the public in a heartbeat. Although I don't believe Porsche is as devoted to racing first anymore they aren't going to dump huge resources into ALMS like they would into Le Mans. I also doubt that many of their R&D ever made much if any money in racing. I would believe it was more for bragging rights then anything else. Ferrari's R&D goes straight into their racing and the street car is merely a byproduct of that R&D.
-
Yep, pulling on race wins from 20, 30 and almost 40 years ago has a lot to do with racing today. :huh
The 917 was a remarkable car, no doubt. As was the 962. I'm just trying to figure out what that has to do with the 911 and the Vette in GT2 today.
Oh yeh. Nothing.
Last Le Mans win was 1998, you need another math course. My statement was to indicate (as I posted) was that when Porsche focused on the prize that they got it in spades. They dominated the Le Mans and the Can Am circut for years with impunity having the rules changed in both types of racing because of their dominance. My point was that Porsche didn't set out to out to beat US sport cars it was the other way around. The 2 companies have completely different philosophies as to what a sports car should be. But when racing is mentioned the US really never was able to compete on the level that say the Ferrari's and the Porsche's were. My response was made in regards to Porsche being donut wupped on what I consider to be a type of racing that they really don't and haven't put their true dovotion into to and that if they did, (since they do have scoreboard) they could.
-
This should sum it up. There are different cars for different people and no 1 car meets all the criteria that all people want. Many say the ZR1 has it all over the competition but there is more to owning a car then performance and cost alone. All of these cars have something to offer over the other. To me owning a Corvette even the ZR1 doesn't do it. I doubt that anyone of us would ever get to use all of what any of these cars have to offer performance wise so from that aspect performance on this level is rather mute. They were all very close on all of the trials that were performed on the test track. I don't think there was 2 seconds difference on lap times within the group. For me if I was going to get my dream car. I would need something to remind me daily that this in fact is my dream car. I don't want to see it rolling down the street everyday right next to me and that's one reason I would not pick the Corvette. But as stated.... everyone has different criterias for owning a car.
Agreed. To each his own. The Vette doesn't do it for you. Likewise, I find the 911 series uninspiring, an anachronism living off its reputation. As long as you're happy, and I'm happy, we're all happy! :aok
-
Last Le Mans win was 1998, you need another math course.
no, my math is fine. My point was that other than a few years in the late '90's, most all of Porsche's dominance in racing was in the mid '80's and earlier back to 1970. And I was also referring specifically to the pic of the 917, which won it's last Le Mans in 1971.
My statement was to indicate (as I posted) was that when Porsche focused on the prize that they got it in spades. They dominated the Le Mans and the Can Am circut for years with impunity having the rules changed in both types of racing because of their dominance.
Still haven't figured out what any of that has to do with Porsche and Corvette today. Basically you're saying "it doesn't matter if Corvette whoops up on Porsche head-to-head in any form of racing today, if Porsche wanted to they could beat 'em, they just don't care" ?
My point was that Porsche didn't set out to out to beat US sport cars it was the other way around. The 2 companies have completely different philosophies as to what a sports car should be. But when racing is mentioned the US really never was able to compete on the level that say the Ferrari's and the Porsche's were.
Emphasis added mine
Ahhh.. I see what you're trying to say. Too bad it's completely wrong. Ford proved that when we want to, we can school the best Europe has to Offer. GM proved that in their class with the C5R and C6R in GT1. You fail to realize that GM didn't partake of international road racing (le Mans) at a corporate level in the 60's thru the late '70's due to a self-imposed ban on direct factory involvement. Zora Arkus-Duntov secretly built a few factory race cars, the original Grand Sport Corvettes, and laid a major beat-down on the Shelby Cobras until GM brass found out about them and ordered the cars disposed of. Penske wound up with them even though they were supposed to be destroyed. They just WOULD NOT put together any sort of factory effort. The closest Corvettes ever came were privateer teams in '69 and the early '70's, but they just didn't have the deep pockets.
And why would GM worry about sports car racing in the '60's and '70's? I mean, as far as racing and the major American manufacturers go, the entire racing world has been here, turning left all Sunday afternoon on asphault ovals. None of the American manufacturers really cared to contest Le Mans. Ford showed they could, and they have never cared wnough to go back. GM decided to in the late '90's, and ran off every bit of the competition.
Don't fool yourself and think that just because they (GM, Ford, etc) didn't then that they couldn't have if there had been ample motivation.
-
I didn't say that they focus on that level of racing. Street cars modified into race cars to me doesn't indicate total factory devotion to that area of racing.
My point is that "total factory devotion" is not what I'm arguing about and is secondary to the discussion. Specifically, I'm talking about cars racing that are very similar to what you or I might drive, not some open cockpit 1100 hp prototype that shares absolutely nothing in common but a name with a street car you can buy.
Although I don't believe Porsche is as devoted to racing first anymore they aren't going to dump huge resources into ALMS like they would into Le Mans.
You do realize that the rules sets for the ALMS classes and the Le Mans classes are virtually identical, don't you? For all practical purposes, ALMS = Le Mans.
-
a link to the chewer of all things european, circa 1966. proof positive that should an american car company choose, they not only can, but WILL chew the euro cars into leeeetle teeny eeeni pieces. :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT40
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/Ford-GT40s-at-Le-Mans.jpg)
and in the rain too........ :D
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/ford-gt40-lemans-victory-1966thumbn.jpg)
so, really, it's not a case of porsche choosing not to compete on such a low level. most probably there is some "backdoor" sponsorships for some of the porsche teams as it is.(they'll never admit to it though)
but rather it is that ford and chevy both know that they have nothing to prove, so why should they waste the money?> they've both already proven that they can take the titles at will. :aok :D
-
To be fair to the euros the Ford GT40 was designed by Lola, a UK racing car maker, and built at the Lola factory in Bromley. The engine was American though.
-
a link to the chewer of all things european, circa 1966. proof positive that should an american car company choose, they not only can, but WILL chew the euro cars into leeeetle teeny eeeni pieces. :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT40
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/Ford-GT40s-at-Le-Mans.jpg)
and in the rain too........ :D
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/ford-gt40-lemans-victory-1966thumbn.jpg)
so, really, it's not a case of Porsche choosing not to compete on such a low level. most probably there is some "backdoor" sponsorships for some of the Porsche teams as it is.(they'll never admit to it though)
but rather it is that ford and Chevy both know that they have nothing to prove, so why should they waste the money?> they've both already proven that they can take the titles at will. :aok :D
Cap, these cars all won at the time Porsche was just cutting it's teeth in racing. The GT40 was produced to beat Ferrari's that were domainante at the time and all because Enzo backed out of selling the company to Ford. After 1969 there was no American winner at Le Mans to date. Ford and Chevey like Ferrari and Porsche chose to put their resources into different areas of racing. As far as endurance racing is concerned nothing US built ever was able to compete, not at Le Mans, Sebring nor 24 Hours at Nürburgring where Porsche won the last 4 years. I believe there are US built cars racing there as well. Now Europe was and imo still is the apex of auto racing not NASCAR, IRL nor American Le Mans series. The American Le Mans series doesn't have the worlds attention as do the big races in Europe so trying to compair these races to those is ridiculous.The constant reference to the Corvette beating the pants off of Porsche and Ferrari in racing is a rather small minded comment. I suppose that if GM of Ford wanted to compete in F1 they would domainate there as well.
Corvette is domainate in a very limited type racing that now many people that they are the kings of the racing world not to mention the streets of the world.
-
Do the new Corvette's still use leaf spring suspension?
-
I do not believe so JD.......
-
Do the new Corvette's still use leaf spring suspension?
The Corvettes still use a traverse composite monospring, so in one way the answer is yes, but it is neither steel nor is it composed of a "leaf" structure, and has not been so since 1981.
Why still use this setup? Space. It is extremely compact from a packaging standpoint, and just as effective as a coil spring.
-
The Corvettes still use a traverse composite monospring, so in one way the answer is yes, but it is neither steel nor is it composed of a "leaf" structure, and has not been so since 1981.
Why still use this setup? Space. It is extremely compact from a packaging standpoint, and just as effective as a coil spring.
To go one step further, I believe Formula One cars use torsion bars instead of coil springs. For the same reason you mention, packaging.
Edit: Just trying to make the point that what may be considered archaic technology by some, can be regarded by others as superior for a given application by others.
-
The technology may be archaic, but that doesn't mean it can't have a modern application. Last time I checked the wheel was exactly new.
-
Cap, these cars all won at the time Porsche was just cutting it's teeth in racing. The GT40 was produced to beat Ferrari's that were domainante at the time and all because Enzo backed out of selling the company to Ford.
And he mentioned the GT40's because you said American car companies couldn't compete against Europe in sports car racing........ his point stands.
After 1969 there was no American winner at Le Mans to date. Ford and Chevey like Ferrari and Porsche chose to put their resources into different areas of racing.
Bingo. You said it yourself.. it's because they didn't, not because they couldn't....
As far as endurance racing is concerned nothing US built ever was able to compete, not at Le Mans, Sebring nor 24 Hours at Nürburgring where Porsche won the last 4 years.
Put.the.crack.pipe.down.
"As far as endurance racing is concerned nothing US built ever was able to compete, not at Le Mans, Sebring "
???
GT40? Multiple class victories by Corvette and Viper?
24 Hours at Nürburgring where Porsche won the last 4 years. I believe there are US built cars racing there as well.
Are you putting the 24 hrs at the Ring on the same level as Le Mans and Sebring? An even open to club racers and amateurs? Has a factory effort of any kind ever competed there? Really?
And you discount US-based pro-racing and national level SCCA racing in the US? OMG.
Now Europe was and imo still is the apex of auto racing not NASCAR, IRL nor American Le Mans series.
I don't argue that as a sports car racing enthusiast, but I would suggest that all of the crowd attention and $$$ of ALL European-based series outside of F1 (including Le Mans, ELMS, FIA GT, etc) all rolled together can't touch NASCAR's popularity, $$$, and viewership. And that KILLS me to say that because trust me friend, I'd rather watch wrestling or poke needles under my fingernails than watch NASCAR. But facts are, after F1, that's where the money is right now, and that's how its been for the last 20+ years. HUGE money, and that's what draws GM, Ford, Dodge, and now Toyota.
And you're still missing the point that, although all the races are in N America, the ALMS is still equivalent to Le Mans. ALL the major teams that run Le Mans are at Sebring and the Petit, and a larger percentage than not of the 24 Hours of Le Mans class winners across the board in recent years have been ALMS teams or European-based teams who compete in most if not all of the ALMS races. Joest Audi, AudiSport NA, Corvette GT1, Oreca Viper team (Late '90's - early 2000's), Flying Lizards Porsche, to name a few. The ALMS teams are well represented.
The American Le Mans series doesn't have the worlds attention as do the big races in Europe so trying to compair these races to those is ridiculous.
No, they're watching FIA GT, ELMS, etc. All series that ALMS is every bit as good as. To discount the excellence of ALMS competitiors just because they're not in Europe and not being watched on the "telly" by the Europeans is extremely silly and ignorant. Like I've already said... the event results from the 24 Hrs of Le Mans show the ALMS has more than its fair share of talent, regardless of whether the races are broadcast overseas.
The constant reference to the Corvette beating the pants off of Porsche and Ferrari in racing is a rather small minded comment.
Playboy Cup
Escort Endurance Series
World Challenge
ALMS
You know what is small minded? Someone who discounts Corvette because they don't have a dozen overall 24 Hours wins from 11-40 years ago in prototypes (cars that mean nearly nothing when you compare them to what you and I can buy off the dealership lot), when the vast majority of times that Corvettes have actually faced Porsches on the track, in the same class, on equal footing, Corvettes have frequently and regularly prevailed.
I suppose that if GM of Ford wanted to compete in F1 they would domainate there as well.
If they wanted to, probably. I seem to remeber F1 was dominated for years by a lot of cars powered by Ford Cosworth V8's.....
Corvette is domainate in a very limited type racing that now many people that they are the kings of the racing world not to mention the streets of the world.
en Englese, por favor?? :huh
Never said they were the kings of the racing world, only that more often than not, when they have actually raced against Europe's finest, they have won. That's all.
-
The technology may be archaic, but that doesn't mean it can't have a modern application. Last time I checked the wheel was exactly new.
True. Probably should have used the word inferior instead.
-
Cap, these cars all won at the time Porsche was just cutting it's teeth in racing. The GT40 was produced to beat Ferrari's that were domainante at the time and all because Enzo backed out of selling the company to Ford. After 1969 there was no American winner at Le Mans to date. Ford and Chevey like Ferrari and Porsche chose to put their resources into different areas of racing. As far as endurance racing is concerned nothing US built ever was able to compete, not at Le Mans, Sebring nor 24 Hours at Nürburgring where Porsche won the last 4 years. I believe there are US built cars racing there as well. Now Europe was and imo still is the apex of auto racing not NASCAR, IRL nor American Le Mans series. The American Le Mans series doesn't have the worlds attention as do the big races in Europe so trying to compair these races to those is ridiculous.The constant reference to the Corvette beating the pants off of Porsche and Ferrari in racing is a rather small minded comment. I suppose that if GM of Ford wanted to compete in F1 they would domainate there as well.
Corvette is domainate in a very limited type racing that now many people that they are the kings of the racing world not to mention the streets of the world.
how can you say nothing us built never won? the gt40(even if it was designed by lola) was built by ford. powered by ford. and it won 4 years.
i know why the gt40 was built. and it proves my point. ford set out to beat the best.....and they did it with style.
it would stand to reason, that should either ford ot gm decide to do so again, that they will, with relative ease.
nascar sucks......it's so frakkin neutered, it's frightening. irl....eehh.....never been much for open wheel. trans-am racing if enjoyable to watch. and coincidentally, the mustangs kicked everyone's bellybutton in their class last year...including the AWD audis in the rain.
also, wasn't there an oldsmobile engine that was dominate for a time in f1? or was that in the indy racing legues?
-
Reaper, I'll want to see GM balance a checkbook before taking on the euros on their own turf. Ford did beat the euros back in the 60s, but only by hiring the euros to do it for them. The GT40 is a Ford car, but not an American car. Most of the drivers were euros too.
If you want to prove American automotive superiority over Europe, the GT40 is not a good example. Just sayin.
-
True. Probably should have used the word inferior instead.
old technology isn't inferior.
otherwise there wouldn't still be pushrod engines. :aok
-
Well, push-rod valves are outdated and inferior to more modern valve technologies... However that doesn't make them useless.
-
Well, push-rod valves are outdated and inferior to more modern valve technologies... However that doesn't make them useless.
obviously not.......the z06(i think) uses a pushrod engine to make its 500 or 600 usable horsepower.
i'm not sure about the zr1
-
Cap, these cars all won at the time Porsche was just cutting it's teeth in racing. The GT40 was produced to beat Ferrari's that were domainante at the time and all because Enzo backed out of selling the company to Ford. After 1969 there was no American winner at Le Mans to date. Ford and Chevey like Ferrari and Porsche chose to put their resources into different areas of racing. As far as endurance racing is concerned nothing US built ever was able to compete, not at Le Mans, Sebring nor 24 Hours at Nürburgring where Porsche won the last 4 years. I believe there are US built cars racing there as well. Now Europe was and imo still is the apex of auto racing not NASCAR, IRL nor American Le Mans series. The American Le Mans series doesn't have the worlds attention as do the big races in Europe so trying to compair these races to those is ridiculous.The constant reference to the Corvette beating the pants off of Porsche and Ferrari in racing is a rather small minded comment. I suppose that if GM of Ford wanted to compete in F1 they would domainate there as well.
Corvette is domainate in a very limited type racing that now many people that they are the kings of the racing world not to mention the streets of the world.
It's Official, you know very little about racing, that quote proves it.
-
ZR1 uses a 6.2L LS series engine, with pushrods, just like the 7.0L Z06 engine. Same engine family, different displacement.
They've been saying the pushrod engines are obsolete(oudated and inferior mean the same thing as obsolete), but we still see them, delivering comparable or sometimes superior performance as the so called new stuff.
-
Well, push-rod valves are outdated and inferior to more modern valve technologies... However that doesn't make them useless.
More compact yet = power. How is that inferior?
-
obviously not.......the z06(i think) uses a pushrod engine to make its 500 or 600 usable horsepower.
i'm not sure about the zr1
Sure, but they have large displacements. The japs and euros pull that kind of power out of a 2-liter. The ZR1's engine is a 6.3 liter.
-
Sure, but they have large displacements. The japs and euros pull that kind of power out of a 2-liter. The ZR1's engine is a 6.3 liter.
....and the Japanese need turbochargers to hit those "power" numbers.
-
Of course.
-
Of course.
Wanna slap a 5lb boost system on that Z06 and see if the numbers stay close?
Can be had for approx $5k.
Where is your turbo 2ltr now hmm?
-
Well, lets take the earlier example of the Porsche 917 race car. A 4.5 liter flat-12 with turbo. 1580 hp almost 40 years ago. What does the Corvette C6.R produce today with its bigger engine?
-
Yes, but Die Hard, in the aftermarket, those stock Corvette engines can be pushed to 1000 HP and still be very streetable. You can buy street crate engines that push 900HP. There are those who would argue that much horsepower is useless, but then they are not familiar with tracking thier car.
As an example, this weekend at the 2.5 mile track at Texas Motor Speedway, it is open day for racing. $150 will buy a full day of it. I'll see Cobras (kits), Ford GT's (actually, there is only two that race regularly), Corvettes, Porsches, Lotus, BMW, and everything inbetween. It is just a safe and competitive environment for those who like to race.
That is where you can use that power. The current lead car is a Cobra with a 427 Ford small block. At the rear wheels, he is tipping over 600 HP. He drives it to the tracks. I have ridden in that car, and it will suck the blood right out of your eyes when he is in a hurry.
Although Texas Motor Speedway is a challenge due to its long straight. It will be a fun weekend.
-
Here's a 1,000 hp Nissan Skyline. That has a 2.5 liter I believe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdoggdVhwiU
Here's another on a Japanese highway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsNulEYQutI
-
Die Hard, 2,000HP (http://www.motortopia.com/videos/view/p/cars/t/garage/vi/260/i/2000_hp_twinturbo_522_big_block_chevy) in a street car engine from a big block Chevy is very attainable.
2600HP (http://videos.streetfire.net/video/2600HP-1957-Chevy-Twin_637894.htm)
If you want, I can find some race engines that push 5,000HP.
-
1,200 hp Volkswagen (lol)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsIIvQiNAms
-
2,000 hp Toyota 3.4 liter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN1J-ZSto9I
-
Ok, now you are just getting silly. :)
I cannot see anything at Youtube anyway.
Are you really trying to argue that smaller engines can reliably produce as much power as larger engines?
-
....and the Japanese need turbochargers to hit those "power" numbers.
and said turbos significantly shorten the engines life.
-
Well, lets take the earlier example of the Porsche 917 race car. A 4.5 liter flat-12 with turbo. 1580 hp almost 40 years ago. What does the Corvette C6.R produce today with its bigger engine?
ok wisenheimer......
8,000 horsepower.......PUSHROD ENGINE. :D
http://www.hotrod.com/newsletter/hrdp_0308_racing_engine_jr_drag_racing_league/index.html
forgot the link. :rofl
-
Ok, now you are just getting silly. :)
I cannot see anything at Youtube anyway.
Are you really trying to argue that smaller engines can reliably produce as much power as larger engines?
Nope. I'm saying that smaller engines with newer technology can reliably produce as much power as larger engines with old technology.
-
ok wisenheimer......
8,000 horsepower.......PUSHROD ENGINE. :D
I think you forgot to post a link or something... ;)
-
and said turbos significantly shorten the engines life.
Nah.
-
I think you forgot to post a link or something... ;)
There are several examples.
8,000HP (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=120159)
-
ZR1 uses a 6.2L LS series engine, with pushrods, just like the 7.0L Z06 engine. Same engine family, different displacement.
They've been saying the pushrod engines are obsolete(oudated and inferior mean the same thing as obsolete), but we still see them, delivering comparable or sometimes superior performance as the so called new stuff.
thanks....i didn't know what engine was in them.
for the guys that think overhead cams are new tech.....they're not. neither are disc brakes, superchargers, turbos, rack and pinion steering, hidden headlights.....it's ALL been around since the 30's i think.
and with performance....simple is best....and most reliable.
ever seen a smallblock chevy blow a head gasket? yet ya see 4 cylinders pop em all the time....same with the flat 6's i think.
-
Well, lets take the earlier example of the Porsche 917 race car. A 4.5 liter flat-12 with turbo. 1580 hp almost 40 years ago. What does the Corvette C6.R produce today with its bigger engine?
well....put a turbo on it, and we'll see.
there's 5.0L's out there making over 1,000 hp on turbos.
better question? what did that flat 12 make without its turbo?
you guys need to stop trying to plug the holes in the stories with your fingers. :D
-
There are several examples.
8,000HP (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=120159)
Top fuel... I should have guessed. ;)
-
Yes, but Die Hard, in the aftermarket, those stock Corvette engines can be pushed to 1000 HP and still be very streetable. You can buy street crate engines that push 900HP. There are those who would argue that much horsepower is useless, but then they are not familiar with tracking thier car.
As an example, this weekend at the 2.5 mile track at Texas Motor Speedway, it is open day for racing. $150 will buy a full day of it. I'll see Cobras (kits), Ford GT's (actually, there is only two that race regularly), Corvettes, Porsches, Lotus, BMW, and everything inbetween. It is just a safe and competitive environment for those who like to race.
That is where you can use that power. The current lead car is a Cobra with a 427 Ford small block. At the rear wheels, he is tipping over 600 HP. He drives it to the tracks. I have ridden in that car, and it will suck the blood right out of your eyes when he is in a hurry.
Although Texas Motor Speedway is a challenge due to its long straight. It will be a fun weekend.
but you know that they';re gonna argue that the cobra is an english car, right/?
it doesn't matter to them that it was re-engineered to handle a real engine, rather than the one that ace was trying to put in them before they went under. :D
-
What ever happened to the Dodge Viper!? Sure it only has 510 Hp stock, but its good old American muscle!!! Who doesn't like a roaring V10!?!? :rock
(http://p.webwombat.com.au/motoring/images/dodge-viper-srt10-acr-4-big.jpg)
(http://acpathope.net/student%20sites%202009/Unnamed%20Site%2011/graphics/2003_Viper_engine_500.jpg)
I don't care who you are, dats sexy rite dare...
-
well....put a turbo on it, and we'll see.
there's 5.0L's out there making over 1,000 hp on turbos.
better question? what did that flat 12 make without its turbo?
you guys need to stop trying to plug the holes in the stories with your fingers. :D
That 4.5 flat-12 made about 600 hp without the turbo... 40 years ago.
If you scroll up you'll see I've posed a variety of links to euro and jap cars that make 1,000+ hp on relatively small displacement engines.
-
There is no replacement for displacement.
Whatever you do to a small engine you can do to the big engine. The big engine is going to make more power. No getting round it.
-
but you know that they';re gonna argue that the cobra is an english car, right/?
it doesn't matter to them that it was re-engineered to handle a real engine, rather than the one that ace was trying to put in them before they went under. :D
The proper name for that car is the AC Cobra. Guess what the AC stands for? ;)
And no I wouldn't call it an english car. I'd call it mid-Atlantic.
-
There is no replacement for displacement.
Whatever you do to a small engine you can do to the big engine. The big engine is going to make more power. No getting round it.
Yes, if you use new technology on the big engine it will make more power. Thank you for making my point.
-
I think you forgot to post a link or something... ;)
i just realized it. it's in there now.....or here.....
http://www.hotrod.com/newsletter/hrdp_0308_racing_engine_jr_drag_racing_league/index.html
-
That 4.5 flat-12 made about 600 hp without the turbo... 40 years ago.
If you scroll up you'll see I've posed a variety of links to euro and jap cars that make 1,000+ hp on relatively small displacement engines.
And ya have to wind the pee out of it. Making it very, very temperamental. You can make that hp in a push rod v8 and make it streetable and reliable.
-
Nah.
yes. the early grand nationals had problems if you didn;t let em cool down after boosting them.
we had a turbo honda at the track. the dude knew his chit. he had a turbo'd mustang running 7's. his honda only ran 12's. his honda also blew up ever 3 runs, like clockwork. :rofl
his mustang was streetable, had he chosen.
-
Yes, if you use new technology on the big engine it will make more power. Thank you for making my point.
Pushrod or OHC makes no diff on displacement and hp. Now what's more compact?
-
Top fuel... I should have guessed. ;)
and your point? it's 8,000 horsepower on pushrods. :D
-
What ever happened to the Dodge Viper!? Sure it only has 510 Hp stock, but its good old American muscle!!! Who doesn't like a roaring V10!?!? :rock
(http://p.webwombat.com.au/motoring/images/dodge-viper-srt10-acr-4-big.jpg)
(http://acpathope.net/student%20sites%202009/Unnamed%20Site%2011/graphics/2003_Viper_engine_500.jpg)
I don't care who you are, dats sexy rite dare...
those v-10's don't roar. they friggin BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Z
-
And ya have to wind the pee out of it. Making it very, very temperamental. You can make that hp in a push rod v8 and make it streetable and reliable.
All the cars I posted were street legal. And since they're all computer controlled, I can't imagine they'd be any more "temperamental".
-
That 4.5 flat-12 made about 600 hp without the turbo... 40 years ago.
If you scroll up you'll see I've posed a variety of links to euro and jap cars that make 1,000+ hp on relatively small displacement engines.
so with 4 extra jugs, it makes about the same horsepower that a 289 ford can make....or a 283 chevy, or a 350 chevy...........and the chevys WILL be more reliable. :x
-
The original AC Cobras were a bit of a flop at the races. It was not until Ford and Shelby redesigned the body, the suspension, well,...everything, that the Daytona Coupe was born. By the way, the Daytona coupes were driven by Americans, not Europeans. Dan Gurney and Bob Bondurant were the first team. Bob won the Lemans in his first outing with the Daytona, and they continued to rack up enough points (they won 7 out of ten races) to win the World Manufacturer Racing cup in 1965.
The Daytona coupes would have been more sucessful had Ford not pulled the plug, favoring the Lola designed GT-40.
-
Yes, if you use new technology on the big engine it will make more power. Thank you for making my point.
but that technology is NOT new.
-
Pushrod or OHC makes no diff on displacement and hp. Now what's more compact?
Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies. I'm talking computer controlled variable-timed valves with hydraulic lifters. Some would say that those aren't even "modern" anymore since the japs and euros have been using them since the early 90s. Honda V-Tech, BMW Vanos etc.
-
but that technology is NOT new.
Which one are you referring to?
-
All the cars I posted were street legal. And since they're all computer controlled, I can't imagine they'd be any more "temperamental".
we built an eagle talon for a guy. dyno'd the engine to almost 900 hp under boost. it wasn't an AWD car. we had also installed an aftermarket computer control system.
i had set the fuel, timing, and boost curves to what the engine builder told me to. they were to stay at that setting for the first 1k miles. he also had up turn down the rev limiter to 4500rpm.
the dude drove it just as he was instructed, then brought it back after the first 1k miles. i turned the boost back up, re-set the fuel, timing, etc.....rev limiter to 7k.
the engine lasted 3 weeks. this was a reputable engine builder too. it blew the rings i think, as when he went into boost, it blew the dipstick out of the tube.
you can make big power from little engines. you can't do so reliably. it's proven. fords, chevies, and dodges are still running from 40 years ago.
do you REALLY think any of this boosted junk will be?
ooo....in japan, don't you have to replace the engine by law after 40k miles/? and isn't the skyline only available there?
-
The original AC Cobras were a bit of a flop at the races. It was not until Ford and Shelby redesigned the body, the suspension, well,...everything, that the Daytona Coupe was born. By the way, the Daytona coupes were driven by Americans, not Europeans. Dan Gurney and Bob Bondurant were the first team. Bob won the Lemans in his first outing with the Daytona, and they continued to rack up enough points (they won 7 out of ten races) to win the World Manufacturer Racing cup in 1965.
The Daytona coupes would have been more sucessful had Ford not pulled the plug, favoring the Lola designed GT-40.
Still doesn't change the fact that it is very much an international product. Redesigned, not designed.
-
Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies. I'm talking computer controlled variable-timed valves with hydraulic lifters. Some would say that those aren't even "modern" anymore since the japs and euros have been using them since the early 90s. Honda V-Tech, BMW Vanos etc.
do you know how many problems i've seen, all because of vsriable valve timing?
on the other hand, it is a good idea, and i like it.
imagine the power output of a good ole v-8 pushrod engine with variable valve timing?(drooly icon goes here)
-
Which one are you referring to?
all of it.
turbos
superchargers
overhead cams
fuel injection
disc brakes
rack n pinion
hidden headlights
all been arond since the 30's(except maybe rack n pinion steering)
-
you can make big power from little engines. you can't do so reliably. it's proven.
No it is not. Over-boosting an engine not designed for it will of course shorten its life. An engine designed from the start as a forced induction engine is built to handle the increased pressure.
ooo....in japan, don't you have to replace the engine by law after 40k miles/?
I have no idea.
and isn't the skyline only available there?
No. Well, technically it isn't available anywhere now since it is out of production. The Nissan GT-R is its successor.
-
all of it.
turbos
superchargers
overhead cams
fuel injection
disc brakes
rack n pinion
hidden headlights
all been arond since the 30's(except maybe rack n pinion steering)
Really? Computer controlled fuel injection and valve timing has been around since the 30s. That's news to me!
-
do you know how many problems i've seen, all because of vsriable valve timing?
on the other hand, it is a good idea, and i like it.
imagine the power output of a good ole v-8 pushrod engine with variable valve timing?(drooly icon goes here)
Exactly! Welcome to my world CAP :)
Btw. Honda has never had a warranty claim for a failed VTech engine. And they've built millions of them.
-
Still doesn't change the fact that it is very much an international product. Redesigned, not designed.
ac replica
(http://aussieexotics.com/drivers/albums/imported/dingo/perth-spotting/md_ac-cobra-replica--%282%29.jpg)
shelby daytona
(http://img.motorpasion.com/galleries/2008-superformance-shelby-cobra-daytona/superperformance_shelby_cobra_daytona-04.jpg)
Nothing left after the chili king fixed it. Totally different car.
-
Still doesn't change the fact that it is very much an international product. Redesigned, not designed.
Well, I guess if you call using a lug nut from the AC making it an "International" product, then so be it. That is about what it amounted to, when it was all said and done.
-
If you want to prove American automotive superiority over Europe, the GT40 is not a good example. Just sayin.
really. if you want to claim the GT40 as a US car not a british car, then we'll have to claim the P51 as a british fighter, not a US fighter.
GT40: US commission and powerplant; brit design, development and construction.
P51: Brit commission and powerplant; US design, development and contruction.
likewise the Cosworth V8 - Ford ordered and badged it, otherwise a very brit engine.
The Cobra was considered a bit of a dog when released, in contrast to the Ace which although 10 years old by then was a nicely resolved, if underpowered sports car. As skuzzy mentioned, the Daytona Coupe really pulled everything together into a superb race car built specifically for hunting down GTOs. note that even on the Daytona the lead test driver and most of the dev team still had british accents :)
-
Well, I guess if you call using a lug nut from the AC making it an "International" product, then so be it. That is about what it amounted to, when it was all said and done.
If you take an existing design and redesign it, even if not a single part remains the same, it is still not an original design. The Spitfire Mk. XIV is still a Spitfire even if it has little in common with the original Mk. I.
-
those v-10's don't roar. they friggin BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Z
Guy I work with used to work for Outerlimits (Google outerlimits powerboats). They put 2 naturally aspirated viper engines in a few boats. I believe he said they did over 140 mph.
He said they sound much better with the exhaust they used.
-
If you take an existing design and redesign it, even if not a single part remains the same, it is still not an original design. The Spitfire Mk. XIV is still a Spitfire even if it has little in common with the original Mk. I.
So, using that logic, all automobiles air conditioning systems are American, as Packard Motor Car was the first automobile manufacturer to incorporate the technology in 1939. Thus making all cars "international".
Sometimes an existing design is simply used as a guide of the things not to do in a new design. The Daytona Coupe was a new design. The things not done, were a result of what was learned from the AC Cobra.
-
Well, push-rod valves are outdated and inferior to more modern valve technologies... However that doesn't make them useless.
Hmmm... The pushrod LS1 motor in my 12 year old firebird takes up less space than the 4.6L dual overhead cam mustang motor, puts out more horsepower and torque over a wider power band, and gets better mileage. It's more durable and can be modified to put out sick horsepower much easier and cheaper than the DOHC mustang motor.
New isn't always better... The "archiac" and "inferior" pushrod LS series motors are simply better than the overhead cam ford motors for a large variety of applications. They have larger displacement in a smaller package, get the same or better fuel economy, are more reliable/durable, can still be worked on by true garage mechanics, and are easier/cheaper to modify. It's simply no contest. It took almost 8 years after the introduction of the overhead cam mustang engine before ANY factory mustang, including the cobras, could even come close to beating my firebird.
-
So, using that logic, all automobiles air conditioning systems are American, as Packard Motor Car was the first automobile manufacturer to incorporate the technology in 1939. Thus making all cars "international".
Sometimes an existing design is simply used as a guide of the things not to do in a new design. The Daytona Coupe was a new design. The things not done, were a result of what was learned from the AC Cobra.
Obviously the ball stops somewhere, but the AC Cobra was still an AC product.
#Like many British specialist manufacturers, AC Cars had been using the smooth, refined Bristol straight-6 engine in its small-volume production, including its AC Ace 2-seater roadster. This had a hand built body with a steel tube frame, and aluminium body panels that were made using English wheeling machines. The engine was a pre-World War II design of BMW which by the 1960s was considered dated.
Bristol decided in 1961 to cease production of its engine and instead to use Chrysler 313cid (5.1 L) V8 engines. Although untrue, it is commonly believed that AC was left without a future source of power and that American ex-racing driver Carroll Shelby saved the company from bankruptcy.
AC started using the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine in its cars. In September 1961, Shelby airmailed AC a letter asking them if they would build him a car modified to accept a V8 engine. AC agreed, provided a suitable engine could be found. He first went to Chevrolet to see if they would provide him with engines, but not wanting to add competition to the Corvette they said no.
Ford however, wanted a car that could compete with the Corvette and they happened to have a brand new thin-wall small-block engine which could be used in this endeavor. It was Ford's 260 in³ HiPo (4.2 L) engine - a new lightweight, thin-wall cast small-block V8 tuned for high performance. In January 1962 mechanics at AC Cars in Thames Ditton, Surrey fitted the prototype chassis CSX0001 with a 221ci Ford V8. After testing and modification, the engine and transmission were removed and the chassis was air-freighted to Shelby in Los Angeles on 2 February 1962.[1] His team fitted it with an engine and transmission in less than eight hours and began road-testing.
Production proved to be easy, since AC had already made most of the modifications needed for the small-block V8 when they installed the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine, including the extensive rework of the AC Ace's front end. The most important modification was the fitting of a stronger rear differential to handle the increased engine power. A Salisbury 4HU unit with inboard disk brakes to reduce unsprung weight was chosen instead of the old ENV unit. It was the same unit used on the Jaguar E-Type. On the production version, the inboard brakes were moved outboard to reduce cost. The only modification of the front end of the first Cobra from that of the AC Ace 2.6 was the steering box, which had to be moved outward to clear the wider V8 motor.
Badge
The first 75 Cobra Mark I (including the prototype) were fitted with the 260 engine (4.2 L). The remaining 51 Mark I model were fitted with a larger version of the Windsor Ford engine, the 289 in³ (4.7 L) V8."
-
Hmmm... The pushrod LS1 motor in my 12 year old firebird takes up less space than the 4.6L dual overhead cam mustang motor, puts out more horsepower and torque over a wider power band, and gets better mileage. It's more durable and can be modified to put out sick horsepower much easier and cheaper than the DOHC mustang motor.
And what makes you think the 4.6 Mustang engine is technologically modern? The Rolls-Royce Merlin was a DOHC engine.
-
The Daytona Coupe was a new design.
hardly a new design - they just rebodied the existing cobra for better aero and added an oil cooler to the diff iirc.
-
Really? Computer controlled fuel injection and valve timing has been around since the 30s. That's news to me!
not computer controled.......but fi has been. never said vtec was.
-
Exactly! Welcome to my world CAP :)
Btw. Honda has never had a warranty claim for a failed VTech engine. And they've built millions of them.
funny......you wanna see the invoice from the cylinder head i just had to do? and the new vtec solenoid?
when i called honda about it, they were clueless. they thought that i was nuts.
the thing is.....at 90k, the dealers aren;t gonna see these. people bring em to the guys that know what they're doing as soon as they're out of warranty.
-
Hmmm... The pushrod LS1 motor in my 12 year old firebird takes up less space than the 4.6L dual overhead cam mustang motor, puts out more horsepower and torque over a wider power band, and gets better mileage. It's more durable and can be modified to put out sick horsepower much easier and cheaper than the DOHC mustang motor.
New isn't always better... The "archiac" and "inferior" pushrod LS series motors are simply better than the overhead cam ford motors for a large variety of applications. They have larger displacement in a smaller package, get the same or better fuel economy, are more reliable/durable, can still be worked on by true garage mechanics, and are easier/cheaper to modify. It's simply no contest. It took almost 8 years after the introduction of the overhead cam mustang engine before ANY factory mustang, including the cobras, could even come close to beating my firebird.
you were right till the "more durable" part.
it's actually easier to get power from a 4.6 ford.....and you can build them to over 700hp on the stock block,
they're not "V" engines. they're "Y" blocks. crossbolted mains make em very very strong.
-
Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies. I'm talking computer controlled variable-timed valves with hydraulic lifters. Some would say that those aren't even "modern" anymore since the japs and euros have been using them since the early 90s. Honda V-Tech, BMW Vanos etc.
1st V-tech engines are OHC
2nd VVT technology doesn't mean MORE horsepower.
3rd VVT helps produce a flat torque curve.
VVT
torque curve,
(http://eogld.ecomm.gm.com/images/lightduty/graytabs/powercurves/2008_36l_vvt_di_llt_cts.gif)
Non vvt torque curve.
(http://www.katechengines.com/street_performance/images/engine_products/KAT-4727.jpg)
VVT doesn't magically change max lift and max duration. Which would be needed to make MORE power.
The ability to make more hp/torque is dependent on cramming more air/fuel in a given area.
What has more area to cram air/fuel, 2Ltr or 6ltr? You just cant change the laws of physics.
-
And revs... which you conveniently forgot to mention.
-
Really? Computer controlled fuel injection and valve timing has been around since the 30s. That's news to me!
No one mentioned "Computer controlled", just yourself. But yes, FI has been around since the 30's. Instead of Electronic FI, they were Electric. I don't have to mention the Fuel Injected Wright R-3350, the Daimler-Benz DB 603, the BMW 801 and the Shvetsov ASh-82FN, do I?
IIRC, the first Electronic FI mass produced was offered by AMC (of all companies).
Valve timing has been around the longest. Lobing a camshaft is difficult. :uhoh
-
funny......you wanna see the invoice from the cylinder head i just had to do? and the new vtec solenoid?
when i called honda about it, they were clueless. they thought that i was nuts.
the thing is.....at 90k, the dealers aren't gonna see these. people bring em to the guys that know what they're doing as soon as they're out of warranty.
Yep.
-
hardly a new design - they just rebodied the existing cobra for better aero and added an oil cooler to the diff iirc.
The underpinnings had already been replaced in order to shoe in the big block 427. The body of the Daytona Coupe did not share any external panels with the original AC Cobra. The body pan was replaced to allow the new body to fit. One only has to look at the rear of the two cars to know there were drastic design changes made from the ground up.
Die Hard, yes, the AC Cobra was a modified Bristol body with different underpinnings, for the AC Cobra 427. I have never argued the AC Cobra was not of "international" design. The Daytona Coupes are a different animal.
-
The underpinnings had already been replaced in order to shoe in the big block 427. The body of the Daytona Coupe did not share any external panels with the original AC Cobra. The body pan was replaced to allow the new body to fit. One only has to look at the rear of the two cars to know there were drastic design changes made from the ground up.
Die Hard, yes, the AC Cobra was a modified Bristol body with different underpinnings, for the AC Cobra 427.
Correct.
-
No one mentioned "Computer controlled", just yourself.
Yes, and since I'm the one who made the claim I get to define its meaning. Are you seriously arguing that an engine with new technology isn't better than an engine with old technology if all other factors are equal (displacement, forced induction etc.)?
-
Die Hard, yes, the AC Cobra was a modified Bristol body with different underpinnings, for the AC Cobra 427. I have never argued the AC Cobra was not of "international" design. The Daytona Coupes are a different animal.
Well, this is the post I responded to:
but you know that they';re gonna argue that the cobra is an english car, right/?
It's the Cobra that's in question.
-
Yes, and since I'm the one who made the claim I get to define its meaning. Are you seriously arguing that an engine with new technology isn't better than an engine with old technology if all other factors are equal (displacement, forced induction etc.)?
No, again, you're taking "Valve Timing" and throwing it back trying to say "Variable Valve Timing", or "Fuel Injection" and throwing it back as "Electronic Fuel Injection".
Personally, give me an old car any day of the week. Actually, CAP1 gave the list, you get to "define" zilch.
-
No...
So then you also have no problem with my original argument?
I'm saying that smaller engines with newer technology can reliably produce as much power as larger engines with old technology.
-
Personally, give me an old car any day of the week.
If you buy American, I'm inclined to agree with you.
-
Actually, CAP1 gave the list...
Because I asked him to clarify his definition, and you know what? He didn't mention computer/electronic, or even valve timing at all. I did.
-
Well, this is the post I responded to:
It's the Cobra that's in question.
Well, we were miscommunicating. The AC Cobra is absolutely a British car that had been modified. I was referring to the Daytona Coupes being a different animal.
It is all rather odd today. The Daytona Coupes were the cars that won all the races for Ford. When Ford pulled them so as not to compete against the GT-40, they were going to field, they could not give away the Daytona Coupes. Meanwhile the AC Cobra was garnering near mythical status and really did not do well in racing.
Today, the Daytona Coupe is the most sought after car out of the lot, and the AC Cobra is the most replicated car in the world. Really quite interesting.
-
So then you also have no problem with my original argument?
No. When you add Turbo's to an engine, you're adding a few more things to go wrong down the road. I'm responding to your retort to CAP1's list. Actually, the "argument" is null and void since the "pushrod powered" Vette does not need a turbo to attain 430hp (base model C6). I've never come across a "trouble free Turbo" so far, because there is no such thing.
I don't "imply", "misuse", etc other people posts.
-
Because I asked him to clarify his definition, and you know what? He didn't mention computer/electronic, or even valve timing at all. I did.
No, you implied. But a few of us are already onto your game. ;)
-
And what makes you think the 4.6 Mustang engine is technologically modern? The Rolls-Royce Merlin was a DOHC engine.
THAT statement just made the point i've been trying to make to you for the last 3 pages.......ohc technology is not new.
allison was using ohc before rr i think(although i'm not sure)
-
And revs... which you conveniently forgot to mention.
my camaro was dyno'd to 820 hp. at 6400 rpm.
sure, you can get that same power from a 2.0 turbotoy. at about 8k to 9k.
why in the world would i want to run an engine that high if i don't have to?
-
Obviously the ball stops somewhere, but the AC Cobra was still an AC product.
#Like many British specialist manufacturers, AC Cars had been using the smooth, refined Bristol straight-6 engine in its small-volume production, including its AC Ace 2-seater roadster. This had a hand built body with a steel tube frame, and aluminium body panels that were made using English wheeling machines. The engine was a pre-World War II design of BMW which by the 1960s was considered dated.
Bristol decided in 1961 to cease production of its engine and instead to use Chrysler 313cid (5.1 L) V8 engines. Although untrue, it is commonly believed that AC was left without a future source of power and that American ex-racing driver Carroll Shelby saved the company from bankruptcy.
AC started using the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine in its cars. In September 1961, Shelby airmailed AC a letter asking them if they would build him a car modified to accept a V8 engine. AC agreed, provided a suitable engine could be found. He first went to Chevrolet to see if they would provide him with engines, but not wanting to add competition to the Corvette they said no.
Ford however, wanted a car that could compete with the Corvette and they happened to have a brand new thin-wall small-block engine which could be used in this endeavor. It was Ford's 260 in³ HiPo (4.2 L) engine - a new lightweight, thin-wall cast small-block V8 tuned for high performance. In January 1962 mechanics at AC Cars in Thames Ditton, Surrey fitted the prototype chassis CSX0001 with a 221ci Ford V8. After testing and modification, the engine and transmission were removed and the chassis was air-freighted to Shelby in Los Angeles on 2 February 1962.[1] His team fitted it with an engine and transmission in less than eight hours and began road-testing.
Production proved to be easy, since AC had already made most of the modifications needed for the small-block V8 when they installed the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine, including the extensive rework of the AC Ace's front end. The most important modification was the fitting of a stronger rear differential to handle the increased engine power. A Salisbury 4HU unit with inboard disk brakes to reduce unsprung weight was chosen instead of the old ENV unit. It was the same unit used on the Jaguar E-Type. On the production version, the inboard brakes were moved outboard to reduce cost. The only modification of the front end of the first Cobra from that of the AC Ace 2.6 was the steering box, which had to be moved outward to clear the wider V8 motor.
Badge
The first 75 Cobra Mark I (including the prototype) were fitted with the 260 engine (4.2 L). The remaining 51 Mark I model were fitted with a larger version of the Windsor Ford engine, the 289 in³ (4.7 L) V8."
so,..,,,,,,,,what you;re saying, is that i can take that triumph that's sitting outside in my lot, drop a 427 and a 4 speed in it, and it's going to be a race winner? it's such a wonderful design, that i don't have to change anything else, right?
the cobra was a completley different car than the ace. we all know why ford built it. the t-bird couldn't compete with the corvettes, and ford wanted something to compete.
to put 600 horses in that car though, everything had to be changed, otherwise that ford power would've either broken every single suspension part in the rear, or simply twisted the car in half.
-
THAT statement just made the point i've been trying to make to you for the last 3 pages.......ohc technology is not new.
allison was using ohc before rr i think(although i'm not sure)
Absolutely!!! Bentley, Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Maserati and Peugot were running DOHC's in the 19 Teen's. But these were produced and used in Grand Prix cars of that time. I'm sure some of that technology oozed into saloon's of that period in limited numbers. Just as it happens today.
-
Yes, and since I'm the one who made the claim I get to define its meaning. Are you seriously arguing that an engine with new technology isn't better than an engine with old technology if all other factors are equal (displacement, forced induction etc.)?
i don't believe you originally said computer controled fuel injection. you only said fuel injection.
you(and others) need to pick one definition, and stick to it. can't keep changing em to try and win yaknow. :aok
-
Well, this is the post I responded to:
It's the Cobra that's in question.
correct. and the body shape and original unmodified frame was.
the drivetrain, powertrain, and suspension(i think) was all ford built.
-
No, again, you're taking "Valve Timing" and throwing it back trying to say "Variable Valve Timing", or "Fuel Injection" and throwing it back as "Electronic Fuel Injection".
Personally, give me an old car any day of the week. Actually, CAP1 gave the list, you get to "define" zilch.
i wonder if these guys even know what variable valve timing does? :D
-
Because I asked him to clarify his definition, and you know what? He didn't mention computer/electronic, or even valve timing at all. I did.
define foe me "valve timing", and what affect it has on horsepower please?
-
No. When you add Turbo's to an engine, you're adding a few more things to go wrong down the road. I'm responding to your retort to CAP1's list. Actually, the "argument" is null and void since the "pushrod powered" Vette does not need a turbo to attain 430hp (base model C6). I've never come across a "trouble free Turbo" so far, because there is no such thing.
I don't "imply", "misuse", etc other people posts.
i just stopped by my old boss's shop the other night. he had his 2006 F650 tow truck up on stands. seems the turbo blew. the thing only has 120k on it too.
-
i wonder if these guys even know what variable valve timing does? :D
Die Hard? No. Die Hard is the type of person that doesn't get his hands dirty and pays others to do it. There are many of us who have have worked on a lot of cars and know what to expect. Heck, I'm only 36 and the most difficult brake job I ever did was in my Freshman year of HS in Autp Shop class. Our principal had a Series III Jaguar XJ6. The inboard rotors took me 3 days/classes to complete on my own. It was a learning experience for me at 14 years of age.
-
Die Hard? No. Die Hard is the type of person that doesn't get his hands dirty and pays others to do it. There are many of us who have have worked on a lot of cars and know what to expect. Heck, I'm only 36 and the most difficult brake job I ever did was in my Freshman year of HS in Autp Shop class. Our principal had a Series III Jaguar XJ6. The inboard rotors took me 3 days/classes to complete on my own. It was a learning experience for me at 14 years of age.
i did a set of them once. just once. a loooooong time ago. never again. :rofl
i bet as soon as he decides to answer, he'll hit google, and we'll see a quote straight from some website or another, explaining vvt to us. hope he gets it right. :aok
-
Oh - y'all met DieHard in here, too, eh?
He's a peice of work that one - fun, though. :aok
Better go read the thread. Bet hes talking about Hondas or something.
-
Same ole DieHard, Mazz........lol! He and BigPlay have been edumacating us on how superior European cars are compared to American ones.
The overall impression I get from both of them is that if it's American, they hate it. If it's European, especially of German manufacture........it's the best thing since sliced bread, innovative in every way, superior in every way to everything American.
Asteroid headed towards Earth? No problem, we'll contact Porsche! They'll send up a car to deal with it.
Seriously though, I do get that impression from both of them. Neither of them has stated it outright, but I get the impression that they look down on ALL things American, ya know?
Actually, I WOULD like to see DieHard define what he is referring to as new technology? And be specific about what he considers "old technology" in American cars, especially the powerplants.
-
THAT statement just made the point i've been trying to make to you for the last 3 pages.......ohc technology is not new.
allison was using ohc before rr i think(although i'm not sure)
No, over head cams certainly isn't new technology, so why you mentioned it in the first place is rather puzzling. I certainly never claimed it was new. If you think I did please quote me.
What part of my post back on page 28 did you not understand?
Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies. I'm talking computer controlled variable-timed valves with hydraulic lifters. Some would say that those aren't even "modern" anymore since the japs and euros have been using them since the early 90s. Honda V-Tech, BMW Vanos etc.
my camaro was dyno'd to 820 hp. at 6400 rpm.
sure, you can get that same power from a 2.0 turbotoy. at about 8k to 9k.
why in the world would i want to run an engine that high if i don't have to?
Why in the world would you not run an engine that high if you can? How much HP would your Camaro produce if you could safely rev it to 9000 rpm? The answer is a lot more.
the cobra was a completley different car than the ace.
Irrelevant. Both the Ace and the Cobra were designed and produced by AC Cars.
i don't believe you originally said computer controled fuel injection. you only said fuel injection.
You're wrong. Check for yourself and quote me if you think otherwise.
correct. and the body shape and original unmodified frame was.
the drivetrain, powertrain, and suspension(i think) was all ford built.
No it wasn't. Only the engine (and possibly the gear box) was Ford.
"Production proved to be easy, since AC had already made most of the modifications needed for the small-block V8 when they installed the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine, including the extensive rework of the AC Ace's front end. The most important modification was the fitting of a stronger rear differential to handle the increased engine power. A Salisbury 4HU unit with inboard disk brakes to reduce unsprung weight was chosen instead of the old ENV unit. It was the same unit used on the Jaguar E-Type. On the production version, the inboard brakes were moved outboard to reduce cost. The only modification of the front end of the first Cobra from that of the AC Ace 2.6 was the steering box, which had to be moved outward to clear the wider V8 motor.
Badge
The first 75 Cobra Mark I (including the prototype) were fitted with the 260 engine (4.2 L). The remaining 51 Mark I model were fitted with a larger version of the Windsor Ford engine, the 289 in³ (4.7 L) V8. In late 1962 Alan Turner, AC's chief engineer completed a major design change of the car's front end and was able to fit it with rack and pinion steering while still using transverse leaf spring suspension. The new car entered production in early 1963 and was designated Mark II. The steering rack was borrowed from the MGB while the new steering column came from the VW Beetle. About 528 Mark II Cobras were produced to the summer of 1965 (the last US-bound Mark II was produced in November 1964)."
define foe me "valve timing", and what affect it has on horsepower please?
Its effect is that it allows you to run an engine at high RPM without sacrificing low RPM performance. You could safely run your Camaro engine at higher RPM and not having to idle it at 3000.
"In 2001 BMW introduced the Valvetronic system. The Valvetronic system is unique in that it can continuously vary intake valve lift, in addition to timing for both the intake and exhaust valves. The precise control the system has over the intake valves allows for the intake charge to be controlled entirely by the intake valves, eliminating the need for a throttle valve and greatly reducing pumping loss. The reduction of pumping loss accounts for more than a 10% increase in power output and fuel economy."
BLOW DOWN
On the power stroke, the combustion pushes the piston down in the cylinder. During this stroke, it is necessary to open the exhaust valve before the piston gets to the bottom of the cylinder. This will allow the excess pressure in the cylinder to "vent out" just before the piston reaches the bottom of the stroke. The term "Blow Down" is used to describe this event.
Timing the exhaust valve in this manner assures no pressure is left in the cylinder to push against the piston on the exhaust stroke. Otherwise, there could be 20 PSI (or so) pushing against the piston as it starts up the cylinder. This would require some of your engine's power just to push the exhaust out of the cylinder.
High RPM engines need to have the exhaust valve open sooner so the pressure has a better chance to exit the cylinder. However, at lower RPMs, opening the exhaust valve too soon means you didn't take full advantage of the power stroke.
OVERLAP
As the engine cycles, there is a period when both the intake and exhaust valves are open at the same time. This valve timing is known as "overlap." Think of this as the exhaust and intake cycles overlapping each other.
The valves are timed so the intake valve opens slightly before the piston reaches top dead center (TDC) on the exhaust stroke. Likewise, the exhaust valve is timed to close just after the piston starts down on the intake stroke.
The objective of overlap is for the exhaust gas which is already running down the exhaust pipe, to create an effect like a siphon and pull a fresh mixture into the combustion chamber. Otherwise, a small amount of burned gasses would remain in the combustion chamber and dilute the incoming mixture on the intake stroke. This valve timing is a product of the cam's duration and separation specs. For more information on these cam specs see the Cam Specs & Effects page.
The science involved with overlap is quite complex. Pressures, runner lengths, temperature, and many other aspects influence how well the overlap effect works.
RAM EFFECT
When the piston reaches the bottom of the cylinder on the intake stroke, the intake valve doesn't immediately close at this point. The intake valve remains open even though the piston is starting up the cylinder on the compression stroke. The expression "ram effect" is used to describe this event.
Timing the intake valve in this manner allows an additional amount of fresh mixture to be rammed into the cylinder. The effect is very similar to water hammer in plumbing. What happens is that during the intake stroke the fresh mixture is running fast enough down the intake manifold and into the cylinder that it can not instantly stop when the piston stops at the bottom of the intake stroke. Just like the water hammer effect, the incoming mixture is rammed into the cylinder even though the piston may be starting up on the compression stroke.
High RPM engines can have the intake valve remain open longer to take advantage of this ram effect. However, at low RPMs, the ram effect is not strong enough and the piston will start to push the fresh mixture back out of the cylinder. Of all the different valve timing effects, this one can have the greatest impact on your engine's performance.
i just stopped by my old boss's shop the other night. he had his 2006 F650 tow truck up on stands. seems the turbo blew. the thing only has 120k on it too.
Then why didn’t he change it before it blew? Doesn’t Ford have a replacement interval on their turbos? I think that’s pretty common now. Turbos wear out just like fan belts and brake pads.
Die Hard is the type of person that doesn't get his hands dirty and pays others to do it.
You're absolutely right about that, even if it’s quite irrelevant.
-
Seriously though, I do get that impression from both of them. Neither of them has stated it outright, but I get the impression that they look down on ALL things American, ya know?
Quite wrong. I'm just not into national masturbation like some people here.
-
The underpinnings had already been replaced in order to shoe in the big block 427. The body of the Daytona Coupe did not share any external panels with the original AC Cobra. The body pan was replaced to allow the new body to fit. One only has to look at the rear of the two cars to know there were drastic design changes made from the ground up.
Die Hard, yes, the AC Cobra was a modified Bristol body with different underpinnings, for the AC Cobra 427. I have never argued the AC Cobra was not of "international" design. The Daytona Coupes are a different animal.
the chassis, drivetrain and steering had indeed all been upgraded from the Ace to accommodate the Ford V8s, but by AC in Thames Ditton using parts from Jags, MGs, Triumphs and even the Beetle :o even on the 427 MkIII the only US designed/sourced components were the engine and (I'm assuming) gearbox.
The Daytona Coupes used the very same rolling chassis (MkII leaf-sprung) including the main ladder chassis. they added subframes for rigidity and to support the new bodywork. there is no "body pan" as such, as its not a monocoque design. its a rebodied cobra, certainly not redesigned "from the ground up". In fact the bodywork for all except the prototype was actually done in Italy.
The Cobra was certainly not a modified Bristol body. it was entirely an AC design, although Aces did use a Bristol straight 6 until it was discontinued - hence the need for the Ford V8.
btw CAP you should get a decent book on the Cobra (even a glance at wikip would help)
-
No, over head cams certainly isn't new technology, so why you mentioned it in the first place is rather puzzling. I certainly never claimed it was new. If you think I did please quote me.
What part of my post back on page 28 did you not understand?you've been insuniuating all along that overhead cams are modern tech, and that overhead valves are not.
Why in the world would you not run an engine that high if you can? How much HP would your Camaro produce if you could safely rev it to 9000 rpm? The answer is a lot more.would you seriously consider revving 560 cubic inches to 9k?
Irrelevant. Both the Ace and the Cobra were designed and produced by AC Cars.
You're wrong. Check for yourself and quote me if you think otherwise.
No it wasn't. Only the engine (and possibly the gear box) was Ford.which were/are the most important parts......like i said..i THOUGHT the rear was. i couldn't imagine a british rear handling 600+ hp back then.
"Production proved to be easy, since AC had already made most of the modifications needed for the small-block V8 when they installed the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine, including the extensive rework of the AC Ace's front end. The most important modification was the fitting of a stronger rear differential to handle the increased engine power. A Salisbury 4HU unit with inboard disk brakes to reduce unsprung weight was chosen instead of the old ENV unit. It was the same unit used on the Jaguar E-Type. On the production version, the inboard brakes were moved outboard to reduce cost. The only modification of the front end of the first Cobra from that of the AC Ace 2.6 was the steering box, which had to be moved outward to clear the wider V8 motor.
Badge
The first 75 Cobra Mark I (including the prototype) were fitted with the 260 engine (4.2 L). The remaining 51 Mark I model were fitted with a larger version of the Windsor Ford engine, the 289 in³ (4.7 L) V8. In late 1962 Alan Turner, AC's chief engineer completed a major design change of the car's front end and was able to fit it with rack and pinion steering while still using transverse leaf spring suspension. The new car entered production in early 1963 and was designated Mark II. The steering rack was borrowed from the MGB while the new steering column came from the VW Beetle. About 528 Mark II Cobras were produced to the summer of 1965 (the last US-bound Mark II was produced in November 1964)."
Its effect is that it allows you to run an engine at high RPM without sacrificing low RPM performance. You could safely run your Camaro engine at higher RPM and not having to idle it at 3000.
"In 2001 BMW introduced the Valvetronic system. The Valvetronic system is unique in that it can continuously vary intake valve lift, in addition to timing for both the intake and exhaust valves. The precise control the system has over the intake valves allows for the intake charge to be controlled entirely by the intake valves, eliminating the need for a throttle valve and greatly reducing pumping loss. The reduction of pumping loss accounts for more than a 10% increase in power output and fuel economy."
BLOW DOWN
On the power stroke, the combustion pushes the piston down in the cylinder. During this stroke, it is necessary to open the exhaust valve before the piston gets to the bottom of the cylinder. This will allow the excess pressure in the cylinder to "vent out" just before the piston reaches the bottom of the stroke. The term "Blow Down" is used to describe this event.
Timing the exhaust valve in this manner assures no pressure is left in the cylinder to push against the piston on the exhaust stroke. Otherwise, there could be 20 PSI (or so) pushing against the piston as it starts up the cylinder. This would require some of your engine's power just to push the exhaust out of the cylinder.
High RPM engines need to have the exhaust valve open sooner so the pressure has a better chance to exit the cylinder. However, at lower RPMs, opening the exhaust valve too soon means you didn't take full advantage of the power stroke.
OVERLAP
As the engine cycles, there is a period when both the intake and exhaust valves are open at the same time. This valve timing is known as "overlap." Think of this as the exhaust and intake cycles overlapping each other.
The valves are timed so the intake valve opens slightly before the piston reaches top dead center (TDC) on the exhaust stroke. Likewise, the exhaust valve is timed to close just after the piston starts down on the intake stroke.
The objective of overlap is for the exhaust gas which is already running down the exhaust pipe, to create an effect like a siphon and pull a fresh mixture into the combustion chamber. Otherwise, a small amount of burned gasses would remain in the combustion chamber and dilute the incoming mixture on the intake stroke. This valve timing is a product of the cam's duration and separation specs. For more information on these cam specs see the Cam Specs & Effects page.
The science involved with overlap is quite complex. Pressures, runner lengths, temperature, and many other aspects influence how well the overlap effect works.
RAM EFFECT
When the piston reaches the bottom of the cylinder on the intake stroke, the intake valve doesn't immediately close at this point. The intake valve remains open even though the piston is starting up the cylinder on the compression stroke. The expression "ram effect" is used to describe this event.
Timing the intake valve in this manner allows an additional amount of fresh mixture to be rammed into the cylinder. The effect is very similar to water hammer in plumbing. What happens is that during the intake stroke the fresh mixture is running fast enough down the intake manifold and into the cylinder that it can not instantly stop when the piston stops at the bottom of the intake stroke. Just like the water hammer effect, the incoming mixture is rammed into the cylinder even though the piston may be starting up on the compression stroke.
High RPM engines can have the intake valve remain open longer to take advantage of this ram effect. However, at low RPMs, the ram effect is not strong enough and the piston will start to push the fresh mixture back out of the cylinder. Of all the different valve timing effects, this one can have the greatest impact on your engine's performance.
Then why didn’t he change it before it blew? Doesn’t Ford have a replacement interval on their turbos? I think that’s pretty common now. Turbos wear out just like fan belts and brake pads.
You're absolutely right about that, even if it’s quite irrelevant.
i'll read the part of this post about vtec when i sit back up here for lunch. i just came up to write an invoice.
oooo...and bmw wasn't the first with variable valve timing. honda was.
1983
-
you've been insuniuating all along that overhead cams are modern tech, and that overhead valves are not.
No I have not. Quote me if you think otherwise, or shut up.
-
No I have not. Quote me if you think otherwise, or shut up.
oooooo...resorting to this? ya know you were, or you'd have never said that. everyone on here 'cept you and bp knows what you're trying to do. :rofl :aok
-
to put [485] horses in that car though, everything had to be changed, otherwise that ford power would've either broken every single suspension part in the rear, or simply twisted the car in half.
... which is exactly what happened when they dropped the 427 into it, hence why AC beefed up the twin beams of the ladder chassis and other components for the MkIII.
edit: btw CAP since you mentioned the Golf water pumps a while back I checked my service schedule and mine was replaced together with the cam belt, asked around and this is apparently SOP with VW specialists :aok
-
oooooo...resorting to this? ya know you were, or you'd have never said that. everyone on here 'cept you and bp knows what you're trying to do. :rofl :aok
Quote me. I have never said nor insinuated that OHC technology is "new". In fact I have specifically stated it was obsolete.
"Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies."
What part of this statement do you not understand?
-
oooo...and bmw wasn't the first with variable valve timing. honda was.
Actually FIAT was the first, but that's ok. You've been wrong about so many things, one more isn't going to matter.
-
Actually FIAT was the first, but that's ok. You've been wrong about so many things, one more isn't going to matter.
when?
-
Quote me. I have never said nor insinuated that OHC technology is "new". In fact I have specifically stated it was obsolete.
"Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies."
What part of this statement do you not understand?
before you made this statement, you and bp both kept saying modern this, modern that.
if i felt like going back through 32 pages, i'd look for it.
-
err not wanting to be too pedantic but steam engines were using VVT 150yrs ago :D
-
how can you say nothing us built never won? the gt40(even if it was designed by lola) was built by ford. powered by ford. and it won 4 years.
i know why the gt40 was built. and it proves my point. ford set out to beat the best.....and they did it with style.
it would stand to reason, that should either ford ot gm decide to do so again, that they will, with relative ease.
nascar sucks......it's so frakkin neutered, it's frightening. irl....eehh.....never been much for open wheel. trans-am racing if enjoyable to watch. and coincidentally, the mustangs kicked everyone's bellybutton in their class last year...including the AWD audis in the rain.
also, wasn't there an oldsmobile engine that was dominate for a time in f1? or was that in the indy racing legues?
My friend you need to read back about 15 pages.... I never said that an American didn't win the Le Mans, I said they haven't won it since 1969. In the mid to late 60's Ferrari was not a operation with deep pockets like they are today. It wasn't hard for ford to spend their way to victory. Porsche wasn't even on the map back then. This thread is starting to wear me out so I will post no further on this subject. I believe I said my piece about the topic 15 times and non of you koolaid drinkers will even acknowledge any facts .
-
when?
Late 60s or early 70s, I forget. If I'm not mistaken they still hold the patent.
-
before you made this statement, you and bp both kept saying modern this, modern that.
if i felt like going back through 32 pages, i'd look for it.
If you're going to accuse someone of making insinuations, don't you think it is a good idea to check your facts first? When did I even remotely connect OHC with "modern"? The answer is "never". I said "modern", you thought "OHC". The connection is only in your mind and you really need to work on your reading comprehension.
-
"Pushrod and classic OHC are both obsolete technologies."
What part of this statement do you not understand?
Not so fast there, Wrongy McWrongenstein.
Take a look at a cylinder head off on LS-series engine and compare it in size to a head off a DOHC V8 of similar displacement. Notice anything?
Take a 6.2L LS-series V8 and compare the total package size to a DOHC V8 of similar displacement. Notice anything?
The "pushrod" technology allows for a dramatically larger displacement engine in a smaller, lighter package size than would be possible with a DOHC engine. Did you know the LS-series V8 weighs virtually the same as many Japanese 4-cylinder engines with less than half of the displacement and less than 2/3 of the hp and tq of the American engine?
Two different ways to get to the same end here, that's all. Larger displacement pushrod engine turning at lower rpms to produce the same power as a smaller displacement DOHC engine turning at higher rpms. Computer controlled, VVT, whatever you want to add to the smaller engine, that's fine. You add additional layers of complexity you can increase power output, but you will likely increase maintenance requirements at the same time.
Is the pushrod engine "lower tech?" Maybe, although there's plenty of tech in the bits and pieces (piston design, combustion chamber design, block and head architecture, etc). Has the pushrod engine been around longer? Sure.
Is it "obsolete?" That is a silly thing to try to say.
In many cases, newer =/ better.
There's a reason GM dumped the DOHC V8's in the '90's (LT5 and Northstar) in favor the smaller, lighter, more powerful, more reliable LS-series engines, even though they were "obsolete technology." :rofl
-
oops. Had you confused with Porsche fanboi.
-
are you comparing alloy blocks with cast blocks? because then you would have the different engines weighing about the same?
-
Actually FIAT was the first, but that's ok. You've been wrong about so many things, one more isn't going to matter.
I thought you were wrong again, so I Googled my way to the answers.
It seems that VVT systems first came into use in steam-powered locomotives - thats 19th Century, there.
Aircraft engines began using VVT systems in the 1920's.
Oh... and since it caught my eye, BMW's first use of a VVT system was not Valvetronic, nor was it in 2001. VANOS was first used on their higher-end 6-pots in 1992.
-
No, over head cams certainly isn't new technology, so why you mentioned it in the first place is rather puzzling. I certainly never claimed it was new. If you think I did please quote me.
What part of my post back on page 28 did you not understand?
Why in the world would you not run an engine that high if you can? How much HP would your Camaro produce if you could safely rev it to 9000 rpm? The answer is a lot more.PHYSICS. the higher i rev the engine, the higher the stress on the rotating mass. the higher the stress, the lower the life expectancy. my 820hp engine will last many years only spinning 6400 rpm. use that same engine spinning 8000 rpm on a regular basis, and i'll be lucky to get a full season from it.
Irrelevant. Both the Ace and the Cobra were designed and produced by AC Cars.
You're wrong. Check for yourself and quote me if you think otherwise.
No it wasn't. Only the engine (and possibly the gear box) was Ford.
"Production proved to be easy, since AC had already made most of the modifications needed for the small-block V8 when they installed the 2.6 litre Ford Zephyr engine, including the extensive rework of the AC Ace's front end. The most important modification was the fitting of a stronger rear differential to handle the increased engine power. A Salisbury 4HU unit with inboard disk brakes to reduce unsprung weight was chosen instead of the old ENV unit. It was the same unit used on the Jaguar E-Type. On the production version, the inboard brakes were moved outboard to reduce cost. The only modification of the front end of the first Cobra from that of the AC Ace 2.6 was the steering box, which had to be moved outward to clear the wider V8 motor.
Badge
The first 75 Cobra Mark I (including the prototype) were fitted with the 260 engine (4.2 L). The remaining 51 Mark I model were fitted with a larger version of the Windsor Ford engine, the 289 in³ (4.7 L) V8. In late 1962 Alan Turner, AC's chief engineer completed a major design change of the car's front end and was able to fit it with rack and pinion steering while still using transverse leaf spring suspension. The new car entered production in early 1963 and was designated Mark II. The steering rack was borrowed from the MGB while the new steering column came from the VW Beetle. About 528 Mark II Cobras were produced to the summer of 1965 (the last US-bound Mark II was produced in November 1964)."
Its effect is that it allows you to run an engine at high RPM without sacrificing low RPM performance. You could safely run your Camaro engine at higher RPM and not having to idle it at 3000.close, but no cigar. oo.....my camaro only idles at 1100 rpm.
it isn't intended to "allow" you to rev your engine higher. it is used, because you "need" to rev your engine higher. it will optomize the timing profile for this. some change the valve timing profile only, others, the lift too. some of the hondas switched to a completely different intake cam when the conditions were right.
"In 2001 BMW introduced the Valvetronic system. The Valvetronic system is unique in that it can continuously vary intake valve lift, in addition to timing for both the intake and exhaust valves. The precise control the system has over the intake valves allows for the intake charge to be controlled entirely by the intake valves, eliminating the need for a throttle valve and greatly reducing pumping loss. The reduction of pumping loss accounts for more than a 10% increase in power output and fuel economy."
BLOW DOWN
On the power stroke, the combustion pushes the piston down in the cylinder. During this stroke, it is necessary to open the exhaust valve before the piston gets to the bottom of the cylinder. This will allow the excess pressure in the cylinder to "vent out" just before the piston reaches the bottom of the stroke. The term "Blow Down" is used to describe this event.
Timing the exhaust valve in this manner assures no pressure is left in the cylinder to push against the piston on the exhaust stroke. Otherwise, there could be 20 PSI (or so) pushing against the piston as it starts up the cylinder. This would require some of your engine's power just to push the exhaust out of the cylinder.
High RPM engines need to have the exhaust valve open sooner so the pressure has a better chance to exit the cylinder. However, at lower RPMs, opening the exhaust valve too soon means you didn't take full advantage of the power stroke.
OVERLAP
As the engine cycles, there is a period when both the intake and exhaust valves are open at the same time. This valve timing is known as "overlap." Think of this as the exhaust and intake cycles overlapping each other.
The valves are timed so the intake valve opens slightly before the piston reaches top dead center (TDC) on the exhaust stroke. Likewise, the exhaust valve is timed to close just after the piston starts down on the intake stroke.
The objective of overlap is for the exhaust gas which is already running down the exhaust pipe, to create an effect like a siphon and pull a fresh mixture into the combustion chamber. Otherwise, a small amount of burned gasses would remain in the combustion chamber and dilute the incoming mixture on the intake stroke. This valve timing is a product of the cam's duration and separation specs. For more information on these cam specs see the Cam Specs & Effects page.
The science involved with overlap is quite complex. Pressures, runner lengths, temperature, and many other aspects influence how well the overlap effect works.
RAM EFFECT
When the piston reaches the bottom of the cylinder on the intake stroke, the intake valve doesn't immediately close at this point. The intake valve remains open even though the piston is starting up the cylinder on the compression stroke. The expression "ram effect" is used to describe this event.
Timing the intake valve in this manner allows an additional amount of fresh mixture to be rammed into the cylinder. The effect is very similar to water hammer in plumbing. What happens is that during the intake stroke the fresh mixture is running fast enough down the intake manifold and into the cylinder that it can not instantly stop when the piston stops at the bottom of the intake stroke. Just like the water hammer effect, the incoming mixture is rammed into the cylinder even though the piston may be starting up on the compression stroke.
High RPM engines can have the intake valve remain open longer to take advantage of this ram effect. However, at low RPMs, the ram effect is not strong enough and the piston will start to push the fresh mixture back out of the cylinder. Of all the different valve timing effects, this one can have the greatest impact on your engine's performance.
Then why didn’t he change it before it blew? Doesn’t Ford have a replacement interval on their turbos? I think that’s pretty common now. Turbos wear out just like fan belts and brake pads.
You're absolutely right about that, even if it’s quite irrelevant.
if they do, it should last longer than `120k. that's only break in mileage on most deisel engines. i can't imagine they'd put a turbo on it that wouldn't last with the engine.
-
... which is exactly what happened when they dropped the 427 into it, hence why AC beefed up the twin beams of the ladder chassis and other components for the MkIII.
edit: btw CAP since you mentioned the Golf water pumps a while back I checked my service schedule and mine was replaced together with the cam belt, asked around and this is apparently SOP with VW specialists :aok
i didn't actually specify golf......i said vw in general. audi too. and their thermostats. :D
i still think the engineer that came up with that ingenious idea needs a good swift kick in the nuts. :noid
-
I thought you were wrong again, so I Googled my way to the answers.
It seems that VVT systems first came into use in steam-powered locomotives - thats 19th Century, there.
Aircraft engines began using VVT systems in the 1920's.
Oh... and since it caught my eye, BMW's first use of a VVT system was not Valvetronic, nor was it in 2001. VANOS was first used on their higher-end 6-pots in 1992.
I'm sure you'll find VVT systems in ancient plumbing as well, but we're talking about car engine applications here. FIAT was first. I mentioned VANOS earlier in the thread, but it isn't exactly "modern" anymore. Never claimed Valvatronic was BM's first VVT technology.
if they do, it should last longer than `120k. that's only break in mileage on most deisel engines. i can't imagine they'd put a turbo on it that wouldn't last with the engine.
It all depends on their design-life. I believe BMW change/refurbish the turbo on their TDs every 60k miles or thereabouts as part of their service cycle. In any case, there are lots of parts on modern cars that are not designed to last the car's lifetime. Mostly because it is not practical to do so. If you can accept that you have to change the brake pads and rotors every once in a while, why can't you accept that the turbo needs replacing once in a while? I'm sure it's doable to design brakes that last a car's lifetime, but I can't imagine they'll be practical or economical.
-
oops. Had you confused with Porsche fanboi.
and nobody has you confused, we all know what your all about...... the BS fanboi would be the first on a list of many.
-
and nobody has you confused, we all know what your all about...... the BS fanboi would be the first on a list of many.
Ah, somebody had sand in their va...... oops, sorry skuzzy. Almost went there!
:rofl
For what it's worth BigPlay, I say fanboi in a lighthearted, joking way. I freely admit to being a Vette fanboi. And a rabid one.
If only I had the budget to race the Vette instead of Hondas and Acuras...... :noid
-
I'm sure you'll find VVT systems in ancient plumbing as well, but we're talking about car engine applications here. FIAT was first. I mentioned VANOS earlier in the thread, but it isn't exactly "modern" anymore. Never claimed Valvatronic was BM's first VVT technology.
Ah HAH! So were not talking about VVT technology in *engines* but, rather, *car engines.* Got it.
Not sure why an aqueduct would need variable valve timing.
"Modern" was never a point of discussion. In fact, by cutting and pasting from Wikipedia that Fiat was the first automaker to use VVT technology, I think "modern" is thuroughly out of the discussion by your own hand.
It all depends on their design-life. I believe BMW change/refurbish the turbo on their TDs every 60k miles or thereabouts as part of their service cycle. In any case, there are lots of parts on modern cars that are not designed to last the car's lifetime. Mostly because it is not practical to do so. If you can accept that you have to change the brake pads and rotors every once in a while, why can't you accept that the turbo needs replacing once in a while? I'm sure it's doable to design brakes that last a car's lifetime, but I can't imagine they'll be practical or economical.
How many BMW's have you owned? Let alone of the TD variety?
I ask because, if you'll excuse my saying so, you seem to be talking out of your rear bumper.
-
"Modern" was never a point of discussion.
It's the word I used.
How many BMW's have you owned? Let alone of the TD variety?
Five... I think. Not sure if one of them was in my wife's name. Never had a TD though. Drive Audi now due to "creative differences" with BMW.
-
Interesting thing is .. any staging lane I have ever been in .. the blown Hemi Cuda is what everyone goes to watch.
Not a whole lot line up to watch a Vtech Honda or any other 'hi tech wundercar'
You *know* they'd trade all that hi tech in a heartbeat for the Cuda.
Obsolete all the way, politically incorrect, gut wrenching FUN through and through.
Interesting point about holding the record in the Mulsanne Straight at Lemans.
Gonna be awhile before that is broken, if ever, since they put the chicane in.
I'm sure a very great number of cars running today could slam dunk it, if they were allowed to do so.
Sayin a vette is fast and best bang for the buck is like chumming for sharks :)
Always cracks me up the way people discount what actually happened or is happening and just blather on spouting opinion
..or even worse, posting tables of numbers garnered from apples to compare to oranges. (lies, damn lies, and statistics applies)
Kinda expect quotes from Car and Driver/Motor Trend to follow .. oops .. they did .. ROFL!
I especially enjoy reading articles that state "well the vette annihilated everyone but it's fifth on *our* list because <insert any BS you want in here>" ...credibility .. need some.
Lotta nice cars out there .. lotta hype surround a lot of them, gotta wear hipwaders to find the truth.
It's interesting to note the extremes some will go to just to get close to what a modern day vette can do.
Sure brings a rabid dog reaction from some of the yer-a-peein badge boys
.. god help you if you quote a 'ring number or mention GT1
(next year it'll be GT2 verboten for light discussion in Yoo-roop)
-shrug-
I'll drive the Vette GS in a couple years . . the Z06 if things go well soon after.
In circles around any comparable car available if I want to .. because I will be able to.
I'll be out at the track when I can .. surrounded by the 'V-tech Yo' boys 300 strong
-yawn-
-Frank aka GE
-
Each to his own. The Vette is nice, but I never was much into two-seaters. I need four and preferably four doors as well.
-
Ah, somebody had sand in their va...... oops, sorry skuzzy. Almost went there!
:rofl
For what it's worth BigPlay, I say fanboi in a lighthearted, joking way. I freely admit to being a Vette fanboi. And a rabid one.
If only I had the budget to race the Vette instead of Hondas and Acuras...... :noid
then I pass the peace pipe. :salute This thread has been stomped into the ground anyway, there still maybe room enough for cap to completly discribe his latest engine teardown in complete detail down to what he had for lunch.
-
then I pass the peace pipe. :salute This thread has been stomped into the ground anyway, there still maybe room enough for cap to completly discribe his latest engine teardown in complete detail down to what he had for lunch.
and the fact that i CAN tear em down, and put em back together again....and make em run well......and know what breaks in em......and know what causes the broken parts to break..........is why i know that none of the lil turbotoys will ever compare to the good ole american v8's. and to be fair, the mercedes and bmw v-8;s too.
there IS no replacement for displacement. period.
-
and the fact that i CAN tear em down, and put em back together again....and make em run well......and know what breaks in em......and know what causes the broken parts to break..........is why i know that none of the lil turbotoys will ever compare to the good ole american v8's. and to be fair, the mercedes and bmw v-8;s too.
there IS no replacement for displacement. period.
Amen. I know Savage would agree too.
-
And revs... which you conveniently forgot to mention.
What about the revs?
-
What about the revs?
HP = Torque * RPM / 5252
-
HP = Torque * RPM / 5252
actually, if i'm not mistaken, horsepower is a byproduct of torque.
there's turbodeisels that'll hammer gas cars....and i don't think they go over 3 or 4k doing it.
i've seen a kenworth runh 14 second 1/4 mile.
torque is what moves your car.
that's why when we build street cars, we try to bring the curve for torque and hp together at our desired rpm.
my camaro runs 9.9's never going over 6400.
my mustang(before it got totaled) ran 12.20's. i launched it at 6100 rpm, and shifted at 5600. that yeilded my best 60 ft times, and overall 1/4 mile times.
yet the hondas, mazdas, toyotas, revving 8 to 10k.....well, if you're good, you can almost predict the explosion.
now to give em credit, there used to be a couple guys that brought their supras with straight 6's to atco. they were amazing cars. they ran 7's easily.
they broke easily too.
-
Horsepower is a product of torque and rpm. You can convert one into the other with gears, but the HP stays the same (mathematically anyway).
-
It's the word I used.
Which is what I wrote. Yet, you use it as a reason not to consider facts that do not agree with your assessment(s). Leaving out the portion of my statement which addresses this and then pretending its not there in an effort to artificially suit your point of view is silly.
Five... I think. Not sure if one of them was in my wife's name. Never had a TD though. Drive Audi now due to "creative differences" with BMW.
Then you know full well that BMW has no such service interval for turbochargers. Actually, Im not aware of any auto maker who has such a maint policy on "refurbishing" snails. They go within warranty and are replaced or they dont and arent. Its cheaper to replace than to rebuild.
Turbochargers are the bane of many an auto maker, frankly. With the exception, in my opinion, of Porsche, Saab and Audi/VW, turbos are a massive cost drain because, as is the case with Mitsubishi for example, the target market (read: over-extended 20-somethings who have seen 2Fast2Furious2ManyTimes) hasnt the slightest clue about how to take care of them.
This is the main reason Mistubishi axed forced induction of the Eclipse line. While the old Talon/Eclipse block is phenomenal for holding boost in stock form, and while the drivers are very knowledgable about how to turn the dial, something as simple as letting the car idle for 30 seconds before shutdown to cycle cool oil through the turbocharger is completely lost on them. This problem is just now rearing its head with the Evo's, as expected.
Always cracks me up the way people discount what actually happened or is happening and just blather on spouting opinion
..or even worse, posting tables of numbers garnered from apples to compare to oranges. (lies, damn lies, and statistics applies)
Kinda expect quotes from Car and Driver/Motor Trend to follow .. oops .. they did .. ROFL!
I especially enjoy reading articles that state "well the vette annihilated everyone but it's fifth on *our* list because <insert any BS you want in here>" ...credibility .. need some.
Lotta nice cars out there .. lotta hype surround a lot of them, gotta wear hipwaders to find the truth.
It's interesting to note the extremes some will go to just to get close to what a modern day vette can do.
Sure brings a rabid dog reaction from some of the yer-a-peein badge boys
.. god help you if you quote a 'ring number or mention GT1
(next year it'll be GT2 verboten for light discussion in Yoo-roop)
-shrug-
I'll drive the Vette GS in a couple years . . the Z06 if things go well soon after.
In circles around any comparable car available if I want to .. because I will be able to.
I'll be out at the track when I can .. surrounded by the 'V-tech Yo' boys 300 strong
-yawn-
-Frank aka GE
I wouldnt be so quick to defend the Corvette - its a waste of time. I think youll find that most people who know anything about racing, at all, wont be bashing the car so, in effect, youre just defending against the ignorant.
The newer Vettes (C5+) are outstanding track toys. It sounds like youre talking about 1320 racing above but, on road courses, I think they are an even better bang for the buck, performance-wise.
Ive never owned one, personally, but have driven several and my father was a diehard (no pun) Vette fan. Wouldnt hear of anything else.
I say "was" because he refered to my precious P-cars as "Volkswagons" for years until I finally talked him into driving the one I had at the time. Six months later, I was driving him to a seller's house to pick up his first "Volkswagon." He hasnt bought a Vette since.
Different strokes for different folks. Both the 911 and the Vette are icons. Both have been around for the better part of half a century, both are instantly recognizable and both are very, very good at what they do.
I suppose my point is that (and Im speaking generally and ignoring the discussions about most of the Japanese garbage) they are different tools which go about accomplishing the same thing in different ways. Some like one, some like the other, some like both.
Specific to this thread, I recommended that the original poster drive both and that the decision would be easy. I still maintain this. While the Z06, ZR1 or any other top of the line Vette will wipe the floor with any non GT-* 997, I find that it still lacks the feel of the P-cars.
I had an opportunity to ring out both a Z06 and a C4S last summer, nearly back to back and, while the Z06 was simply punishing and awe inspiring in its capability, it didnt make me smile. In the C4S, I was a giddy school girl for days afterward - and hell - I think the new ones are porkers. A few months after that, I had a chance to take a new Turbo (albeit a cab) through its paces and, to be completely honest, I dont think Ive ever driven a better car. Ever. It was that good. I really have no idea how they will improve upon it, but Im sure people have been saying that since the first 930 was released in the mid-70's.
Whether the Z06 will finish the quarter mile a quarter second quicker in a magazine just isnt important to me. For that kind of money, I need to be having real-life fun at all speeds and I think Porsche does that better than anyone else.
Each to his own. ;)
-
Horsepower is a product of torque and rpm. You can convert one into the other with gears, but the HP stays the same (mathematically anyway).
what makes your car move?
-
what makes your car move?
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
what makes your car move?
Kinetic energy.
-
Kinetic energy.
and what produces this kinetic energy?
a clue for ya: what are your gears multiplying?
-
The kinetic energy is produced by the violent expansion of gases in a confined area.
-
In a 4-stroke V8 you have 8 bangs for ever 4 revolutions. If you double the RPM you double the number of bangs and thus the generated kinetic energy. There are of course losses involved in increasing RPM so it is a case of diminishing returns.
-
In a 4-stroke each piston fires every other revolution of the crank..... thus 8 "bangs" ever two revolutions, not 4 revolutions.
-
You're right of course. Brain fart.
-
The kinetic energy is produced by the violent expansion of gases in a confined area.
ooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WRONGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wanna try again?
-
In a 4-stroke V8 you have 8 bangs for ever 4 revolutions. If you double the RPM you double the number of bangs and thus the generated kinetic energy. There are of course losses involved in increasing RPM so it is a case of diminishing returns.
you're still wrong. wanna try again? :D
holy google batman!!
-
No. I was right the first time.
-
No. I was right the first time.
no ya weren't.
i'll give ya another clue.
violent explosions in confined spaces in an internal combustion engine will destroy said engine in short order.
wanna try again? :D
-
The piston and crank does not produce any power. They only convert the kinetic energy produced by the expanding gases into rotational force, know as torque.
-
The piston and crank does not produce any power. They only convert the kinetic energy produced by the expanding gases into rotational force, know as torque.
wait? i thought there were explosions in there?
o ya.........and you got the second part above correct.....so.....now.....wh at moves your car?
-
The piston and crank does not produce any power. They only convert the kinetic energy produced by the expanding gases into rotational force, know as torque.
Just when you think it cant get much better.
-
I said "violent expansions", not explosions. Reading comprehension again CAP...
My car is moved by the violent expansion (read it right this time) of gases in a confined space. That's where the energy is produced. Nowhere else.
-
Just when you think it cant get much better.
he's digging. i think he's got the market cornered on shovels right now.
i'm trying to be nice, and helpful....and i suspect he's on google as i type this. :D
-
Just when you think it cant get much better.
:devil
-
Just when you think it cant get much better.
Exactly how does the piston and crank produce power without the expanding fuel/air mix? They don't.
-
I said "violent expansions", not explosions. Reading comprehension again CAP...
My car is moved by the violent expansion (read it right this time) of gases in a confined space. That's where the energy is produced. Nowhere else.
got me there...i mis-read that somehow.
the expansion is not violent. it is controlled. if it was violent, then it would be an explosion...and would destroy the engine.
-
and the fact that i CAN tear em down, and put em back together again....and make em run well......and know what breaks in em......and know what causes the broken parts to break..........is why i know that none of the lil turbotoys will ever compare to the good ole american v8's. and to be fair, the mercedes and bmw v-8;s too.
there IS no replacement for displacement. period.
jezz cap if you could tong yourself I'm sure you would. Great self promotion except that many living in the tristate area are now going to avoid "Cappy's Domestic only and Tractor / Lawn Equipment Repair" due to the overwhelming support of a very onesided view of anything made out of Detroit. I hear you refuse to work on Honda lawnmowers.
-
Exactly how does the piston and crank produce power without the expanding fuel/air mix? They don't.
how does the expanding air/fuel mixture produce power without them?
1) spark plug ignites the air/fuel mixture.
2) this creates a flame front in a controlled burn.
3) this forces the piston down, creating your kinetic energy.
4) the crankshaft converts this "flat" kinetic energy into "rotational" energy(torque)
the crank, and piston in essence DO create the torque. without them, the air/fuel mixture would simply "flash" and do nothing. there would be nothing to create the torque.
so now.......what makes your car move?
-
got me there...i mis-read that somehow.
the expansion is not violent. it is controlled. if it was violent, then it would be an explosion...and would destroy the engine.
Yes you continue to read what you want to read instead of what I write. You really need to learn the language; it is not an explosion. It is an expansion, and it is violent. However, violence can be controlled, and are in an internal combustion engine.
-
he's digging. i think he's got the market cornered on shovels right now.
i'm trying to be nice, and helpful....and i suspect he's on google as i type this. :D
I tried the "nice and helpful" bit a few weeks back with this one. Figured out that it was a waste of time and proceeded down the "laugh at, not with" road.
There just aint much you can do with a guy who is an expert on every subject and a master of self-delusion.
"No, no, no! The sky is aqua-sea-marine-turquoise-ish... not BLUE idiot!"
Mmmmkay. And physics classes ain't what they used to be. Guess funding for the definition of kinetic energy was dropped.
It is fun though, eh? :aok
-
jezz cap if you could tong yourself I'm sure you would. Great self promotion except that many living in the tristate area are now going to avoid "Cappy's Domestic only and Tractor / Lawn Equipment Repair" due to the overwhelming support of a very onesided view of anything made out of Detroit. I hear you refuse to work on Honda lawnmowers.
:rofl :rofl
i work on everything. except jags. i frakkin hate em.
work on pretty much anything else that comes in the bays. it's how i know what i know about this stuff. i don't talk on opinions. i talk on what i've done, and fixed dude. :aok
-
I tried the "nice and helpful" bit a few weeks back with this one. Figured out that it was a waste of time and proceeded down the "laugh at, not with" road.
There just aint much you can do with a guy who is an expert on every subject and a master of self-delusion.
"No, no, no! The sky is aqua-sea-marine-turquoise-ish... not BLUE idiot!"
Mmmmkay. And physics classes ain't what they used to be. Guess funding for the definition of kinetic energy was dropped.
It is fun though, eh? :aok
dude, i should be out in the shop cleaning up right now. but this is too funny...almost beyond laughing. the worst part is that if i could see his face as this went on, i'm sure i'd see that "frak, he's right" look. concerning the torque. :aok :D
-
Exactly how does the piston and crank produce power without the expanding fuel/air mix? They don't.
How does completely changing the argument to one that suits your position convince you that you did not just lost the previous contest miserably?
-
Which is what I wrote. Yet, you use it as a reason not to consider facts that do not agree with your assessment(s). Leaving out the portion of my statement which addresses this and then pretending its not there in an effort to artificially suit your point of view is silly.
Then you know full well that BMW has no such service interval for turbochargers. Actually, Im not aware of any auto maker who has such a maint policy on "refurbishing" snails. They go within warranty and are replaced or they dont and arent. Its cheaper to replace than to rebuild.
Turbochargers are the bane of many an auto maker, frankly. With the exception, in my opinion, of Porsche, Saab and Audi/VW, turbos are a massive cost drain because, as is the case with Mitsubishi for example, the target market (read: over-extended 20-somethings who have seen 2Fast2Furious2ManyTimes) hasnt the slightest clue about how to take care of them.
This is the main reason Mistubishi axed forced induction of the Eclipse line. While the old Talon/Eclipse block is phenomenal for holding boost in stock form, and while the drivers are very knowledgable about how to turn the dial, something as simple as letting the car idle for 30 seconds before shutdown to cycle cool oil through the turbocharger is completely lost on them. This problem is just now rearing its head with the Evo's, as expected.
I wouldnt be so quick to defend the Corvette - its a waste of time. I think youll find that most people who know anything about racing, at all, wont be bashing the car so, in effect, youre just defending against the ignorant.
The newer Vettes (C5+) are outstanding track toys. It sounds like youre talking about 1320 racing above but, on road courses, I think they are an even better bang for the buck, performance-wise.
Ive never owned one, personally, but have driven several and my father was a diehard (no pun) Vette fan. Wouldnt hear of anything else.
I say "was" because he refered to my precious P-cars as "Volkswagons" for years until I finally talked him into driving the one I had at the time. Six months later, I was driving him to a seller's house to pick up his first "Volkswagon." He hasnt bought a Vette since.
Different strokes for different folks. Both the 911 and the Vette are icons. Both have been around for the better part of half a century, both are instantly recognizable and both are very, very good at what they do.
I suppose my point is that (and Im speaking generally and ignoring the discussions about most of the Japanese garbage) they are different tools which go about accomplishing the same thing in different ways. Some like one, some like the other, some like both.
Specific to this thread, I recommended that the original poster drive both and that the decision would be easy. I still maintain this. While the Z06, ZR1 or any other top of the line Vette will wipe the floor with any non GT-* 997, I find that it still lacks the feel of the P-cars.
I had an opportunity to ring out both a Z06 and a C4S last summer, nearly back to back and, while the Z06 was simply punishing and awe inspiring in its capability, it didnt make me smile. In the C4S, I was a giddy school girl for days afterward - and hell - I think the new ones are porkers. A few months after that, I had a chance to take a new Turbo (albeit a cab) through its paces and, to be completely honest, I dont think Ive ever driven a better car. Ever. It was that good. I really have no idea how they will improve upon it, but Im sure people have been saying that since the first 930 was released in the mid-70's.
Whether the Z06 will finish the quarter mile a quarter second quicker in a magazine just isnt important to me. For that kind of money, I need to be having real-life fun at all speeds and I think Porsche does that better than anyone else.
Each to his own. ;)
very well said :salute
-
how does the expanding air/fuel mixture produce power without them?
It produces power by the virtue of expanding rapidly. This is not useful power however and needs to be harnessed. That's where the cylinder, piston and crank comes in.
1) spark plug ignites the air/fuel mixture.
2) this creates a flame front in a controlled burn.
3) this forces the piston down, creating your kinetic energy.
4) the crankshaft converts this "flat" kinetic energy into "rotational" energy(torque)
the crank, and piston in essence DO create the torque. without them, the air/fuel mixture would simply "flash" and do nothing. there would be nothing to create the torque.
so now.......what makes your car move?
No they do not create anything. They convert the kinetic energy into torque. Is it really that difficult to understand the difference between generating energy and transmitting it?
My car is gas powered. I don't fill it up with torque at the service station.
-
dude, i should be out in the shop cleaning up right now. but this is too funny...almost beyond laughing. the worst part is that if i could see his face as this went on, i'm sure i'd see that "frak, he's right" look. concerning the torque. :aok :D
What no lesser employees to clean the shop?
-
How does completely changing the argument to one that suits your position convince you that you did not just lost the previous contest miserably?
What contest was that?
-
What contest was that?
Ask the internet to give you a crash course on kinetic energy.
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are capable of visually differentiating a cam shaft from a television, what you actually typed is laughable to anyone who attended a junior high science class.
-
What no lesser employees to clean the shop?
It's a good thing you know how to work on engines yourself, just think of all the money you'll save.
-
Ask the internet to give you a crash course on kinetic energy.
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are capable of visually differentiating a cam shaft from a television, what you actually typed is laughable to anyone who attended a junior high science class.
Nice personal attack. Losers often use those when they have no real argument to offer.
-
What no lesser employees to clean the shop?
nah........just me, myself, and i. :D
-
It produces power by the virtue of expanding rapidly. This is not useful power however and needs to be harnessed. That's where the cylinder, piston and crank comes in.
No they do not create anything. They convert the kinetic energy into torque. Is it really that difficult to understand the difference between generating energy and transmitting it?
My car is gas powered. I don't fill it up with torque at the service station.
they convert this energy, thus creating torque. torque in the engine would not exist without them.
what
moves
your
car
?
-
I've answered that several times now. You obviously believe torque moves your car and that RPM has no effect on power.
-
Nice personal attack. Losers often use those when they have no real argument to offer.
so, then you're admitting loss?
telling me to "shut up" and to "learn reading comprehension" when i made a mistake in reading seems kind of like a personal attack to me.
i still want to hear what moves your car. :aok
and kinetic energy is the wrong answer. :D
-
Jesus Christ... My car is powered by gasoline.
-
I've answered that several times now. You obviously believe torque moves your car and that RPM has no effect on power.
torque is exactly what moves your car.
kinetic energy is something your car possesses when it is in motion. :D :aok
-
Jesus Christ... My car is powered by gasoline.
i know you're being deliberately now, right?
-
know what the absolute worst part about this entire thread is???
here i am, a ford nut, and i spent sooo dam much time defending chevys. :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
torque is exactly what moves your car.
kinetic energy is something your car possesses when it is in motion. :D :aok
Torque is rotational kinetic energy.
The chemical energy stored in the fuel is converted into kinetic energy by heat expanding the gas. The cylinder and piston converts this kinetic energy into linear kinetic energy, which is then converted into rotational kinetic energy by the crank. At the end of the power train the wheels convert the rotational kinetic energy into linear kinetic energy in the form of propelling the vehicle forward.
Please... please... get it.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/rke.html
-
i know you're being deliberately now, right?
Deliberately what? You seem to have forgotten a word there.
You see, when I say you have a problem with reading I'm not being mean to you. I'm trying to let you know you have a problem.
-
Torque is rotational kinetic energy.
The chemical energy stored in the fuel is converted into kinetic energy by heat expanding the gas. The cylinder and piston converts this kinetic energy into linear kinetic energy, which is then converted into rotational kinetic energy by the crank. At the end of the power train the wheels convert the rotational kinetic energy into linear kinetic energy in the form of propelling the vehicle forward.
Please... please... get it.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/rke.html
The kinetic energy of an object is the extra energy which it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its current velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. Negative work of the same magnitude would be required to return the body to a state of rest from that velocity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
torque moves the car. kinetic energy is stored in the car as it cruises.
but now that we've established that torque moves your car, do you get it?
the torque curve can be optimized to be where ever the engine designer wants it.
lower is often better, although you guys that like the little 4 cylinders seem to think it's better to rev an engine till it's bordering on exploding.
oo......the word i forgot in the other post was "obtuse". a customer walked in, and i had to tab over to my invoicing program.
oo....BTW...the combustion process does not create kinetic energy. :devil
-
Nice personal attack. Losers often use those when they have no real argument to offer.
No, son.
Loser's cry "personal attack" when their visit to Wikipedia results in "Oh, poo... he's right."
-
No, son.
Loser's cry "personal attack" when their visit to Wikipedia results in "Oh, poo... he's right."
Keep 'em coming. They bounce right off. :aok
-
The kinetic energy of an object is the extra energy which it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its current velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. Negative work of the same magnitude would be required to return the body to a state of rest from that velocity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
torque moves the car. kinetic energy is stored in the car as it cruises.
but now that we've established that torque moves your car, do you get it?
the torque curve can be optimized to be where ever the engine designer wants it.
lower is often better, although you guys that like the little 4 cylinders seem to think it's better to rev an engine till it's bordering on exploding.
oo......the word i forgot in the other post was "obtuse". a customer walked in, and i had to tab over to my invoicing program.
oo....BTW...the combustion process does not create kinetic energy. :devil
Please... "The kinetic energy of an object is the extra energy which it possesses due to its motion." When the fuel/air mix is expanding it is very much in motion, and the only way for it to transfer energy to the piston is for the gas molecules to collide with the piston, thus transferring their kinetic energy. There is no magical force involved here CAP.
-
Please... "The kinetic energy of an object is the extra energy which it possesses due to its motion." When the fuel/air mix is expanding it is very much in motion, and the only way for it to transfer energy to the piston is for the gas molecules to collide with the piston, thus transferring their kinetic energy. There is no magical force involved here CAP.
i know that.
but the combustion process does not create kinetic energy. it does create something, but not kinetic energy.
-
Nothing better than a good ole fashion torque versus power discussion. :devil
-
Nothing better than a good ole fashion torque versus power discussion. :devil
:aok :devil
it is fun.
-
i know that.
but the combustion process does not create kinetic energy. it does create something, but not kinetic energy.
Yes it creates kinetic energy and heat. The gasoline itself is stored chemical potential energy. When you burn it the potential energy is converted to kinetic energy as motion of molecules in converting to gas and heat of combustion and formation into combustion products.
-
i know that.
but the combustion process does not create kinetic energy. it does create something, but not kinetic energy.
Correct
-
Wrong.
-
Wrong.
Do you realize you're incorrect and proving it, regardless of the websites you visit? :rofl
-
yup .. "too each his own."
Saw a pretty fast porsche 924 at Bakersfield a few years ago .. had a big block chebby in it, was clickin off 9's and makin it look easy.
I'll take the B&B bullets behind the 'obsolete' pushrod V8 anyday, mk thx.
It made me smile *every* day walkin out to that shape, and when she fired up, ..music.
P-cars have way too much Vee-Dub in 'em for me to consider layin out what they want for 'em.
Nothin I have ever seen or heard done to 'em makes 'em sound good, the shape just doesn't float my boat,
handling ..well .. better drivers have posted the numbers at the 'ring and other places.
GT2 next year is gonna be fun to watch.
-Frank aka GE
-
Energy is found in different forms including light, heat, chemical, and motion. There are many forms of energy, but they can all be put into two categories: potential and kinetic.
Kinetic energy is motion — of waves, molecules, objects, substances, and objects. There are several forms of kinetic energy:
Radiant Energy is electromagnetic energy that travels in transverse waves. Radiant energy includes visible light, x-rays, gamma rays and radio waves. Light is one type of radiant energy. Sunshine is radiant energy, which provides the fuel and warmth that make life on Earth possible.
Thermal Energy, or heat, is the vibration and movement of the atoms and molecules within substances. As an object is heated up, its atoms and molecules move and collide faster. Geothermal energy is the thermal energy in the Earth.
Motion Energy is energy stored in the movement of objects. The faster they move, the more energy is stored. It takes energy to get an object moving and energy is released when an object slows down. Wind is an example of motion energy. A dramatic example of motion is a car crash, when the car comes to a total stop and releases all its motion energy at once in an uncontrolled instant.
Sound is the movement of energy through substances in longitudinal (compression/rarefaction) waves. Sound is produced when a force causes an object or substance to vibrate — the energy is transferred through the substance in a wave. Typically, the energy in sound is far less than other forms of energy.
Potential energy is stored energy and the energy of position — gravitational energy. There are several forms of potential energy:
Chemical Energy is energy stored in the bonds of atoms and molecules. Biomass, petroleum, natural gas, and coal are examples of stored chemical energy. Chemical energy is converted to thermal energy when we burn wood in a fireplace or burn gasoline in a car's engine.
Mechanical Energy is energy stored in objects by tension. Compressed springs and stretched rubber bands are examples of stored mechanical energy.
Nuclear Energy is energy stored in the nucleus of an atom — the energy that holds the nucleus together. Very large amounts of energy can be released when the nuclei are combined or split apart. Nuclear power plants split the nuclei of uranium atoms in a process called fission. The sun combines the nuclei of hydrogen atoms in a process called fusion.
Gravitational Energy is energy stored in an object's height. The higher and heavier the object, the more gravitational energy is stored. When you ride a bicycle down a steep hill and pickup speed, the gravitational energy is being converted to motion energy. Hydropower is another example of gravitational energy, where the dam "piles" up water from a river into a reservoir.
Electrical Energy is what is stored in a battery, and can be used to power a cell phone or start a car. Electrical energy is delivered by tiny charged particles called electrons, typically moving through a wire. Lightning is an example of electrical energy in nature, so powerful that it is not confined to a wire.
-
:aok :devil
it is fun.
For the record you can't ignore RPM. There are two variables torque and RPM, as well as a constant 5252. It's a balancing act between the two variables.
-
boring
-
For the record you can't ignore RPM. There are two variables torque and RPM, as well as a constant 5252. It's a balancing act between the two variables.
Power = torque * RPM
RPM and torque are equally important for the generation of power. Double either one and you double the power. Of course in real life there are other factors that limit both torque and RPM.
The 5252 constant is a product of (33,000 ft·lbf/min)/(2π rad./rev.) which was supposed to approximate the work force of a mining-horse.
-
Do you realize you're incorrect and proving it, regardless of the websites you visit? :rofl
Every time you make the effort in your vain attempts to get a rise out of me you make me smile. :)
-
Yes it creates kinetic energy and heat. The gasoline itself is stored chemical potential energy. When you burn it the potential energy is converted to kinetic energy as motion of molecules in converting to gas and heat of combustion and formation into combustion products.
nope.
google it.
-
For the record you can't ignore RPM. There are two variables torque and RPM, as well as a constant 5252. It's a balancing act between the two variables.
very true, but the higher you take the rpm, the more it actually kind of fights against you.
-
Energy is found in different forms including light, heat, chemical, and motion. There are many forms of energy, but they can all be put into two categories: potential and kinetic.
Kinetic energy is motion — of waves, molecules, objects, substances, and objects. There are several forms of kinetic energy:
Radiant Energy is electromagnetic energy that travels in transverse waves. Radiant energy includes visible light, x-rays, gamma rays and radio waves. Light is one type of radiant energy. Sunshine is radiant energy, which provides the fuel and warmth that make life on Earth possible.
Thermal Energy, or heat, is the vibration and movement of the atoms and molecules within substances. As an object is heated up, its atoms and molecules move and collide faster. Geothermal energy is the thermal energy in the Earth.
Motion Energy is energy stored in the movement of objects. The faster they move, the more energy is stored. It takes energy to get an object moving and energy is released when an object slows down. Wind is an example of motion energy. A dramatic example of motion is a car crash, when the car comes to a total stop and releases all its motion energy at once in an uncontrolled instant.
Sound is the movement of energy through substances in longitudinal (compression/rarefaction) waves. Sound is produced when a force causes an object or substance to vibrate — the energy is transferred through the substance in a wave. Typically, the energy in sound is far less than other forms of energy.
Potential energy is stored energy and the energy of position — gravitational energy. There are several forms of potential energy:
Chemical Energy is energy stored in the bonds of atoms and molecules. Biomass, petroleum, natural gas, and coal are examples of stored chemical energy. Chemical energy is converted to thermal energy when we burn wood in a fireplace or burn gasoline in a car's engine.
Mechanical Energy is energy stored in objects by tension. Compressed springs and stretched rubber bands are examples of stored mechanical energy.
Nuclear Energy is energy stored in the nucleus of an atom — the energy that holds the nucleus together. Very large amounts of energy can be released when the nuclei are combined or split apart. Nuclear power plants split the nuclei of uranium atoms in a process called fission. The sun combines the nuclei of hydrogen atoms in a process called fusion.
Gravitational Energy is energy stored in an object's height. The higher and heavier the object, the more gravitational energy is stored. When you ride a bicycle down a steep hill and pickup speed, the gravitational energy is being converted to motion energy. Hydropower is another example of gravitational energy, where the dam "piles" up water from a river into a reservoir.
Electrical Energy is what is stored in a battery, and can be used to power a cell phone or start a car. Electrical energy is delivered by tiny charged particles called electrons, typically moving through a wire. Lightning is an example of electrical energy in nature, so powerful that it is not confined to a wire.
now, in amongst those definitions, you do have what is created by the combustion process. again, it is not kinetic energy.
would you like another clue sir? :D
-
Power = torque * RPM
RPM and torque are equally important for the generation of power. Double either one and you double the power. Of course in real life there are other factors that limit both torque and RPM.
The 5252 constant is a product of (33,000 ft·lbf/min)/(2π rad./rev.) which was supposed to approximate the work force of a mining-horse.
so what you're saying, is that if my 560 makes 820 hp at 6400 rpm, then at 12,800 rpm it'll make 1640hp?
:rofl :lol :rofl :O :rofl
hhmmmm........wondering about the highlighted part
-
The combustion process creates thermal energy and motion energy. Both kinetic energies. Are you by any chance... How can I put this delicately... Special?
-
so what you're saying, is that if my 560 makes 820 hp at 6400 rpm, then at 12,800 rpm it'll make 1640hp?
:rofl :lol :rofl :O :rofl
hhmmmm........wondering about the highlighted part
That's a big if right there. You can't have your cake and eat it too. ;)
-
so what you're saying, is that if my 560 makes 820 hp at 6400 rpm, then at 12,800 rpm it'll make 1640hp?
:rofl :lol :rofl :O :rofl
hhmmmm........wondering about the highlighted part
The answer is yes. Of course your engine would fly apart at that rpm... but that's a different matter.
Let's do some more examples that illustrate several different values of torque which produce 300 HP. Maybe you'll get it if I use practical examples (I can only hope):
Example 1: How much TORQUE is required to produce 300 HP at 2700 RPM?
since HP = TORQUE x RPM / 5252 then by rearranging the equation: TORQUE = HP x 5252 / RPM
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 2700 = 584 lb-ft.
Example 2: How much TORQUE is required to produce 300 HP at 4600 RPM?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 4600 = 343 lb-ft.
Example 3: How much TORQUE is required to produce 300 HP at 8000 RPM?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 8000 = 197 lb-ft.
Example 4: How much TORQUE does the 41,000 RPM turbine section of a 300 HP gas turbine engine produce?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 41,000 = 38.4 lb-ft.
Example 5: The output shaft of the gearbox of the engine in Example 4 above turns at 1591 RPM. How much TORQUE is available on that shaft?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 1591 = 991 lb-ft. (ignoring losses in the gearbox, of course).
The point to be taken from those numbers is that a given amount of horsepower can be made from an infinite number of combinations of torque and RPM.
Are you learning anything yet CAP?
-
The answer is yes. Of course your engine would fly apart at that rpm... but that's a different matter.
You know, I'm scratching my head trying to figure out if there has ever been an internal combustion engine with a perfectly flat, linear power curve......
-
The combustion process creates thermal energy and motion energy. Both kinetic energies. Are you by any chance... How can I put this delicately... Special?
nooooo......kinetic energy is stored in a moving body.
thermal energy is the energy created by the combustion of the air/fuel mixture.
it took ya awhile to go back and read what i was tryin to get at.
so now we're getting there. the combustion process creates thermal energy, which creates torque, which creates power.
the torque moves your vehicle, and in so doing, creates kinetic energy, which is stored in the moving vehicle.
if you use your brakes, that kinetic energy is converted back to thermal energy, in order to slow the car down.
oo oo.....i just got confusing now. i converted kinetic back to thermal.
but then, we've been only really converting different energies all along.
this is almost as much fun as diving a p38 into a sea of spitfires. :D
oo.....and although you're phrasing them nicely, the personal attacks(and yes, that is what they are) are proving you're running serious circles trying to find a way out of this. :devil
-
That's a big if right there. You can't have your cake and eat it too. ;)
well, that's why i laughed so hard. trying to spin my 560 to that rpm would put some of it in orbit. :rofl
-
You know, I'm scratching my head trying to figure out if there has ever been an internal combustion engine with a perfectly flat, linear power curve......
Probably not, and a lot of factors limit the practical application of torque and RPM. Valves being one of the most important factors in getting an engine to rev high. At very high RPM you need some form of forced induction just to get the air and fuel into the cylinders fast enough. Increasing torque is in many ways the easiest way to increase power. Like adding a turbo.
-
You know, I'm scratching my head trying to figure out if there has ever been an internal combustion engine with a perfectly flat, linear power curve......
i don't think so.....
-
Nothin I have ever seen or heard done to 'em makes 'em sound good
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksckf0vN3zU&#t=0m50s
-
nooooo......kinetic energy is stored in a moving body.
A gas molecule is a moving body. Go back and read what I posted on different types of kinetic energies.
-
You know, I'm scratching my head trying to figure out if there has ever been an internal combustion engine with a perfectly flat, linear power curve......
....on the other hand I can think of a few with a nearly linear torque curve.
-
The answer is yes. Of course your engine would fly apart at that rpm... but that's a different matter.
Let's do some more examples that illustrate several different values of torque which produce 300 HP. Maybe you'll get it if I use practical examples (I can only hope):
Example 1: How much TORQUE is required to produce 300 HP at 2700 RPM?
since HP = TORQUE x RPM / 5252 then by rearranging the equation: TORQUE = HP x 5252 / RPM
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 2700 = 584 lb-ft.
Example 2: How much TORQUE is required to produce 300 HP at 4600 RPM?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 4600 = 343 lb-ft.
Example 3: How much TORQUE is required to produce 300 HP at 8000 RPM?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 8000 = 197 lb-ft.
Example 4: How much TORQUE does the 41,000 RPM turbine section of a 300 HP gas turbine engine produce?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 41,000 = 38.4 lb-ft.
Example 5: The output shaft of the gearbox of the engine in Example 4 above turns at 1591 RPM. How much TORQUE is available on that shaft?
Answer: TORQUE = 300 x 5252 / 1591 = 991 lb-ft. (ignoring losses in the gearbox, of course).
The point to be taken from those numbers is that a given amount of horsepower can be made from an infinite number of combinations of torque and RPM.
Are you learning anything yet CAP?
yea i am. i'm remembering things i've long forgotten. i'm learnign that you seem to be one of those guys that when you see a possibility of having to admit you may be not quite correct, you jump to another area.
we all like to brag about our horsepower numbers. hell, people look at my camaro, and ask me what it'll run. i tell em it should go in the 8.90's at around 140-150mph. they then ask me how much horsepower it has. i tell em,,,,,,,,820 dyno'd.
but the horsepower does not move my car. it is a byproduct of making torque. by those formulas, i am making 673 lb/ft of torque. that is what moves my car. it's what moves your car. it's what moves every car on the road. torque. it's what's being multiplied by your transmission, and your differential. torque.
7.3 powerstroke is a torquemonster. know why it;'s called that? because it'll pull a tree right out of the ground. yet i think they're only rated at just under 200hp. but they have torque out the arse.
now, as for making more power at higher rpm.......well.......there are several limiting factors, the least of which is whether or not the engine will stay together.
less time for the flame front to travel. less intake duration. less exhaust duration. less time at full lift.
then we can to to some minor mechanical problems. valve float. valve bounce(and yes i have seen evidence of it) bent pushrods. broken rocker arms. broken rocker arm studs. seized cam(ohc). followers popping out(ohc) wiped cam lobes(ohc).
torque is what moves your car, and kinetic energy is the energy stored within, till you stop it somehow. when you hit another car, yours is releasing it's stored kinetic energy into that car, damaging it. if you didn't have this excess stored energy, you would do no damage.
jumping back to your f1 cars....you ever see em with the brake rotors glowing red? that's the cars kinetic energy being converted back to thermal energy.
and i'm talking normal engines here, before you try to jump back to a vtec engine.
1966 Shelby GT350 - How To Rebuild A 289 Hi-Po
RPM HP TORQUE FUEL LB/HR BSFC
3,400 193.9 299.5 87.8 0.50
3,500 199.9 299.9 85.7 0.49
3,600 204.9 298.9 85.5 0.46
3,700 208.9 296.5 85.2 0.46
3,800 213.2 294.7 86.0 0.45
3,900 219.7 295.9 88.6 0.45
4,000 226.7 297.6 91.7 0.45
4,100 231.1 296.0 92.5 0.45
4,200 235.4 294.4 94.2 0.45
4,300 242.3 295.9 98.9 0.46
4,400 248.7 296.8 103.7 0.47
4,500 257.4 300.4 103.3 0.45
4,600 259.2 295.9 105.7 0.46
4,700 264.4 295.4 105.3 0.46
4,800 267.1 292.3 109.4 0.46
4,900 276.3 296.1 108.2 0.44
5,000 281.3 295.5 114.6 0.46
5,100 282.0 290.4 115.9 0.46
5,200 285.7 288.6 118.2 0.46
5,300 287.0 284.4 124.2 0.49
5,400 286.6 278.7 125.9 0.49
5,500 291.3 278.2 125.2 0.48
5,600 291.2 273.1 125.3 0.48
5,700 287.0 264.4 128.3 0.50
5,800 288.2 261.0 126.5 0.49
5,900 288.8 257.1 130.8 0.51
6,000 288.2 252.3 135.6 0.53
from the above, you want to tell me where this engines "sweet spot" is?
-
....on the other hand I can think of a few with a nearly linear torque curve.
i believe that the power curve will change, due to the efficiency that the engine produces its torque. as it produces torque very well, it will make a lot of power. as the efficiency of torque production drops off, then so too, will the power.
so it is perfectly understandable to have a linear torque curve, with a non linear power curve.
-
A gas molecule is a moving body. Go back and read what I posted on different types of kinetic energies.
i read it. you're pretty much trying to split atoms(pun intended) with the wording.
the combustion produces thermal energy.
-
but the horsepower does not move my car. it is a byproduct of making torque. by those formulas, i am making 673 lb/ft of torque. that is what moves my car. it's what moves your car. it's what moves every car on the road. torque. it's what's being multiplied by your transmission, and your differential. torque.
How much torque do you have at 0 rpm?
Torque X RPM = power. Power propels your car, not torque alone. Two cars identical in every way except one gets max hp at high revs and the other gets max hp at low revs will have identical performance (gearing not considered for this example). The high rev engine will produce less torque than the low revving engine.
-
i read it. you're pretty much trying to split atoms(pun intended) with the wording.
the combustion produces thermal energy.
They were not my words, but from a physics lecture, and perhaps fittingly it was meant for children. Thermal energy is kinetic energy; it is the motion of molecules. Heat is motion on a molecular level.
"Thermal energy is most easily defined in the context of an ideal gas. In a monatomic ideal gas, the thermal energy is exactly given by the kinetic energy of the constituent particles."
-
from the above, you want to tell me where this engines "sweet spot" is?
4,500 - 5,600 RPM?
-
How much torque do you have at 0 rpm?
Torque X RPM = power. Power propels your car, not torque alone. Two cars identical in every way except one gets max hp at high revs and the other gets max hp at low revs will have identical performance (gearing not considered for this example). The high rev engine will produce less torque than the low revving engine.
now you're getting into the engine design.
-
4,500 - 5,600 RPM?
that could be a good range...i'd say the actual sweet spot is about 5200 rpm though.
:aok
-
now you're getting into the engine design.
Which is what we're discussing at the moment.
How much torque does you engine have at 0 RPM?
-
They were not my words, but from a physics lecture, and perhaps fittingly it was meant for children. Thermal energy is kinetic energy; it is the motion of molecules. Heat is motion on a molecular level.
"Thermal energy is most easily defined in the context of an ideal gas. In a monatomic ideal gas, the thermal energy is exactly given by the kinetic energy of the constituent particles."
they are still 2 different types of energy.
if you could safely retain more of the heat produced from the combustion process, you could make more torque, and power.
if we could eliminate the egr systems from cars, we could make it more with less too.
-
A gas molecule is a moving body. Go back and read what I posted on different types of kinetic energies.
You're still wrong, and its painful (in a good way - like being whipped by Kate Beckensale) to watch.
I do see quite a few personal attacks from you over the past couple pages, though! Since that means, in your own words, that you have no argument, what ever are we to think? :aok
yea i am. i'm remembering things i've long forgotten. i'm learnign that you seem to be one of those guys that when you see a possibility of having to admit you may be not quite correct, you jump to another area.
Bingo. Jackpot. Door #3 = A NEW CAR! :lol
-
Thermal and motion energy are both kinetic energies. Why is that so difficult to understand?
-
Which is what we're discussing at the moment.
How much torque does you engine have at 0 RPM?
at 0 we have no torque.
we can make an engine produce its maximum torque at 2,000 rpm, or we can make it produce it at 10,000 rpm.
either way, drive the vehicle to it's design(kind of like flying in ah) and you'll do good.
explain why the guy spinning 9,000 rpm in the next lane is losing to me? why exactly am i able to run him down, and throttle it to pick how much i want to nose him out by?
because i make my torque in a more usable rpm band than he does.
you jumped subjects again BTW.
-
You're still wrong, and its painful (in a good way - like being whipped by Kate Beckensale) to watch.
A moving gas molecule is not a moving body? :lol
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksckf0vN3zU&#t=0m50s
I see your water-pumper and raise you a proper cooling system. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZUqSY5tpAI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB-Tuw_3dtA
-
You're still wrong, and its painful (in a good way - like being whipped by Kate Beckensale) to watch.
I do see quite a few personal attacks from you over the past couple pages, though! Since that means, in your own words, that you have no argument, what ever are we to think? :aok
Bingo. Jackpot. Door #3 = A NEW CAR! :lol
dude......my mind is going in all different directions now. i had an immediate mental picture of her from underworld....... :noid
please insert drooly icon here.
-
Thermal and motion energy are both kinetic energies. Why is that so difficult to understand?
kinetic energy is energy stored in a moving body.
so....in a stretch, i guess you're right. there is kinetic energy(sort of) stored in thermal energy.
-
at 0 we have no torque.
Shocking!
we can make an engine produce its maximum torque at 2,000 rpm, or we can make it produce it at 10,000 rpm.
If the max torque is the same for both examples the 10,000 rpm one will be 5 times as powerful.
explain why the guy spinning 9,000 rpm in the next lane is losing to me?
Because you have more HP?
-
Die Hard are you the same guy that tried to tell me a few years back that the Focke Wulf I used to fly wasn't a Focke Wulf despite the data plate, registration and emblems saying exactly that? This style of argument seems very familiar.
Gschultz?
-
dude......my mind is going in all different directions now. i had an immediate mental picture of her from underworld....... :noid
please insert drooly icon here.
Ill do you one better than a drolly icon...
"No, Mister CAP... I expect you to die... hard." :D
(http://www.moviewallpaper.net/wpp/Kate_Beckinsale_in_Underworld:_Evolution_Wallpaper_3_800.jpg)
-
Gschultz?
Theories vary.
Not a new poster, in any event...
-
I see your water-pumper and raise you a proper cooling system. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZUqSY5tpAI
i see your noise, and raise you some true heavy metal. :D :aok
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7OnudP840&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufltAe42Vng&feature=related
-
kinetic energy is energy stored in a moving body.
so....in a stretch, i guess you're right. there is kinetic energy(sort of) stored in thermal energy.
Not "sort of", a defined fact of physics. Kinetic energy is not a single form of energy it is a group of energies that are all based on motion on some level.
-
Die Hard are you the same guy that tried to tell me a few years back that the Focke Wulf I used to fly wasn't a Focke Wulf despite the data plate, registration and emblems saying exactly that? This style of argument seems very familiar.
Gschultz?
heya golfer. joining the fun? :devil
-
Die Hard are you the same guy that tried to tell me a few years back that the Focke Wulf I used to fly wasn't a Focke Wulf despite the data plate, registration and emblems saying exactly that? This style of argument seems very familiar.
Gschultz?
:huh
No.
-
that could be a good range...i'd say the actual sweet spot is about 5200 rpm though.
:aok
I see what your saying, your basing the sweet spot off of the BSFC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless you have a CVT, you want the gear spacing to be such that you shift at max HP and when engaging the next gear you don't drop below max torque?
-
No I've been subscribed to this thread back when it was a "what should I get" thread before it turned into my gasoline molecule is better than your cubic inch circle jerk. It just struck me as familiar because I felt back then like I was talking to a brick wall who grasped onto one little idea and wouldn't let it out of their kung fu death grip.
I don't know enough about cars in the first place to hold my own just how to do some minor maintenance and after a few weeks ago replace air conditioning compressors despite the fact all I needed was a new AC pulley. Solution: $280 pulley...doh! 250 for the compressor and 30 for the pulley :huh
-
Shocking!
If the max torque is the same for both examples the 10,000 rpm one will be 5 times as powerful.
Because you have more HP?
surly you jest??
because
i
have
more
torque
we were both rated at the same horsepower. :devil
-
Ill do you one better than a drolly icon...
"No, Mister CAP... I expect you to die... hard." :D
(http://www.moviewallpaper.net/wpp/Kate_Beckinsale_in_Underworld:_Evolution_Wallpaper_3_800.jpg)
goddddammmiiittt!!!!
doin a little more than drooling now!!!!!!!
:rofl
-
.
-
surly you jest??
because
i
have
more
torque
we were both rated at the same horsepower. :devil
You were the better driver?
(http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/hungarystart_2007_fm.jpg)
Toyota F1 RVX-06 engine 740 hp at 19,000 RPM. Boy those engineers must be morons!
-
I see what your saying, your basing the sweet spot off of the BSFC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless you have a CVT, you want the gear spacing to be such that you shift at max HP and when engaging the next gear you don't drop below max torque?
i was basing my idea of the sweet spot on a little of everything.
5,200 285.7 288.6 118.2 0.46
at 5200 rpm, the torque and horsepower are at their closest in the entire band. yet on a shift, using a close ratio manual transmission(which most all smallblocks use) the rpm will drop no more than 200 or 300 rpm, keeping the curves nearly the same.
i was also basing it on the fact that i had built pretty much this identical engine when i was 17 years old, and that's what worked with my close ratio top loader 4 speed. it had a 2.78 1st gear, and that got me out of the hole nicely. i only had to run 4.10's, where most others with similar engines(both ford and chevy) were running 4.56 rears to do the same as i was. :D :aok
-
.
:rofl :rofl
-
You were the better driver?
(http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/hungarystart_2007_fm.jpg)
Toyota F1 RVX-06 engine 740 hp at 19,000 RPM. Boy those engineers must be morons!
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/AVIATION032.jpg)
820 horsepower at 6400 rpm. what;s your point?
stop trying to dance to different subjects. :devil
BTW...speaking of changine the subject......notice the yellow and green lights both still lit.
THAT my friends is cutting a PERFECT light. :D, and is why others tried to avoid lining up next to me in the first round. :devil
-
No I've been subscribed to this thread back when it was a "what should I get" thread before it turned into my gasoline molecule is better than your cubic inch circle jerk. It just struck me as familiar because I felt back then like I was talking to a brick wall who grasped onto one little idea and wouldn't let it out of their kung fu death grip.
I don't know enough about cars in the first place to hold my own just how to do some minor maintenance and after a few weeks ago replace air conditioning compressors despite the fact all I needed was a new AC pulley. Solution: $280 pulley...doh! 250 for the compressor and 30 for the pulley :huh
did you do the compressor yourself? what kind of car?
and are you at least having as much fun in this thread as the rest of us? :aok
-
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/AVIATION032.jpg)
820 horsepower at 6400 rpm. what;s your point?
stop trying to dance to different subjects. :devil
BTW...speaking of changine the subject......notice the yellow and green lights both still lit.
THAT my friends is cutting a PERFECT light. :D, and is why others tried to avoid lining up next to me in the first round. :devil
I'm not "dancing". We're still talking about torque and RPM are we not? Unless you're still not clear on kinetic energy that is. Those F1 engine makers must be imbeciles to rev their engines to 19,000 rpm when they could have made due with 6,400 like your engine. That's if RPM has nothing to do with power.
I am of course being sarcastic.
HP = TORQUE x RPM / 5252
-
I see your water-pumper and raise you a proper cooling system. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlFEvkpAw3w#t=1m37s
:D
Nice sound on the second one sitting on the dyno, once he actually punches it, though.
-
I'm not "dancing". We're still talking about torque and RPM are we not? Unless you're still not clear on kinetic energy that is. Those F1 engine makers must be imbeciles to rev their engines to 19,000 rpm when they could have made due with 6,400 like your engine. That's if RPM has nothing to do with power.
I am of course being sarcastic.
HP = TORQUE x RPM / 5252
how often do those F1 engines get rebuilt?
-
how often do those F1 engines get rebuilt?
Never. The teams only are allowed 8 engines per season. They are sealed and can't be serviced. There are 17 races in the championship so each engine must last two race weekends. That includes 3 practice sessions, qualifying, and the race.
Edit: The drivers do complain that there is distinct lack of power toward the end of an engines life.
-
the rpm will drop no more than 200 or 300 rpm, keeping the curves nearly the same.
:O That is some tight gear spacing. I'm pretty sure F1 cars can't afford that tight of spacing. Probably closer to a 1,500 RPM gap.
-
did you do the compressor yourself? what kind of car?
and are you at least having as much fun in this thread as the rest of us? :aok
2000 Silverado and I DIY'd.
I was doing the front brakes and while I had it on the lift I decided to investigate why my AC wasn't working as well as it should. I found the melted belt laying on the pulleys. Thinking the compressor seized I walked right out and bought the compressor (you can see how I learned my lesson) as I already had an AC charging manifold on hand. I took it to over to my buddys house (Corvette nut and one of the guys I fly with) since he had a better workspace. We took the compressor off and went through the hard part only to find that when I was mounting the new belt that the old pulley had gone to hell. Doh! Called up a couple stores to find one in stock and 30 bucks later we were done. Turns out I didn't need a new compressor but what the hell I have a new one now. 2-1/2 cans of 134a later I had plenty of cold air to help combat Die Hard's hot.
Easy enough to do and total work time was less than 2 hours not counting running out for parts. Afterward we BBQ'd and watch the meat bombs fall from the sky at Cross Keys from his porch.
-
how often do those F1 engines get rebuilt?
This 2005 one is still running. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGUZJVY-sHo
-
2000 Silverado and I DIY'd.
Reminds me of the time the water pump went out on my Subaru. I got the water pump and a manual. Then a realized the darn thing was driven by the timing belt. :mad:
I was able to get the job done. Took me about two hours....times three.
-
Yeah, oops. I learned to do a more thorough inspection before I go buy parts. Call it tuition.
-
This 2005 one is still running. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGUZJVY-sHo
That engine is either new, has been rebuilt, or is running at reduced RPM. There is no way an engine from 05 is running at it's rated output without a rebuild.
-
No, you're probably right. It's pretty cool anyway.
-
I'm not "dancing". We're still talking about torque and RPM are we not? Unless you're still not clear on kinetic energy that is. Those F1 engine makers must be imbeciles to rev their engines to 19,000 rpm when they could have made due with 6,400 like your engine. That's if RPM has nothing to do with power.
I am of course being sarcastic.
HP = TORQUE x RPM / 5252
they could easily make their power at lower rpm.
look at winston cup cars. (i friggin hate em anymore, but they can make a point though)
and they're not imbeciles...it's how they chose to build those engines.
and you are dancing. :D
-
And what makes you think the 4.6 Mustang engine is technologically modern? The Rolls-Royce Merlin was a DOHC engine.
Ford designed and built it fairly recently, touting it as the tech platform for the next couple decades of ford motors. Sounds to me like they made it as advanced as they could. The SOHC version goes in more vehicles, the DOHC is only in the mustang, and at first it was only in the cobra.
-
:O That is some tight gear spacing. I'm pretty sure F1 cars can't afford that tight of spacing. Probably closer to a 1,500 RPM gap.
with the speeds, and types of driving they have to do, i think that they need to have wider spaced gearing.
-
Never. The teams only are allowed 8 engines per season. They are sealed and can't be serviced. There are 17 races in the championship so each engine must last two race weekends. That includes 3 practice sessions, qualifying, and the race.
Edit: The drivers do complain that there is distinct lack of power toward the end of an engines life.
soo, 10 runs in the life of the engine...how many hours is that?
point being, they are ringing the engines up to 19,500 RPM but they don't need to last a hugely long time.
-
2000 Silverado and I DIY'd.
I was doing the front brakes and while I had it on the lift I decided to investigate why my AC wasn't working as well as it should. I found the melted belt laying on the pulleys. Thinking the compressor seized I walked right out and bought the compressor (you can see how I learned my lesson) as I already had an AC charging manifold on hand. I took it to over to my buddys house (Corvette nut and one of the guys I fly with) since he had a better workspace. We took the compressor off and went through the hard part only to find that when I was mounting the new belt that the old pulley had gone to hell. Doh! Called up a couple stores to find one in stock and 30 bucks later we were done. Turns out I didn't need a new compressor but what the hell I have a new one now. 2-1/2 cans of 134a later I had plenty of cold air to help combat Die Hard's hot.
Easy enough to do and total work time was less than 2 hours not counting running out for parts. Afterward we BBQ'd and watch the meat bombs fall from the sky at Cross Keys from his porch.
aaahhh.......that wasa the one that had the 4x4 light on too, right?
what fixed that? was it the switch?
-
Reminds me of the time the water pump went out on my Subaru. I got the water pump and a manual. Then a realized the darn thing was driven by the timing belt. :mad:
I was able to get the job done. Took me about two hours....times three.
subaru timing belts are gravy. i could do them all day long....and i HATE doing timing belts. :noid :D
-
Ford designed and built it fairly recently, touting it as the tech platform for the next couple decades of ford motors. Sounds to me like they made it as advanced as they could. The SOHC version goes in more vehicles, the DOHC is only in the mustang, and at first it was only in the cobra.
look At the SOHC 4.6, and a SOHC 427 side by side.
they're a LOT alike. :D
-
soo, 10 runs in the life of the engine...how many hours is that?
point being, they are ringing the engines up to 19,500 RPM but they don't need to last a hugely long time.
Yeah, but why are they doing that if torque is all that matters and RPM means diddly? Huh, CAP?
HP = TORQUE x RPM /5252
-
soo, 10 runs in the life of the engine...how many hours is that?
point being, they are ringing the engines up to 19,500 RPM but they don't need to last a hugely long time.
although it;s nowhere near the power output of those f1 engines, my 5 liter that used to be in my 89 mustang(it resides in a fairmont now) is still un-rebuilt from 1989, and will still run 12's all day long. and i can drive it anywhere anytime. and it will cruise the highways very nicely. :aok
-
Yeah, but why are they doing that if torque is all that matters and RPM means diddly? Huh, CAP?
HP = TORQUE x RPM /5252
they are using rpm to make up for lack of size. there's no way a 2.4(i think?) v8 can make the power that a 5.0 or a 6.0 will. there is no need to run em that high.
most winston cup teams make in the ballpark of 750. they do it with 358 ci engines....usually below 8,000 rpm. they haul 3400 pound cars around all day long at close to 200 mph. if the sanction body would let em run without the restrictor plates, they'd easily top 200 mph on the super speedways.
torque is what moves your car. :D you know it, and i know that you know it.....you just refuse to admit it. :devil
-
i see your noise, and raise you some true heavy metal. :D :aok
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7OnudP840&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufltAe42Vng&feature=related
Ah hah! I see your American V8's and raise you a greasy Italian version!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVQLXUvJjNQ
-
aaahhh.......that wasa the one that had the 4x4 light on too, right?
what fixed that? was it the switch?
Yep. New switch, 2 minutes and no more problems. Thanks again for the informaton. BFR still on me.
-
Ah hah! I see your American V8's and raise you a greasy Italian version!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVQLXUvJjNQ
i tried that on my dyno..........but my dyno isn't for rating horsepower...it's for emissions testing. i got a little over zealous shifting.....i slammed 3rd gear at about 5800 rpm......blew the belt right off the dyno. :rofl
-
Yep. New switch, 2 minutes and no more problems. Thanks again for the informaton. BFR still on me.
that is much appreciated sir.
i'm actually just glad i was able to help ya out, and save ya some money. :aok
-
Ah hah! I see your American V8's and raise you a greasy Italian version!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVQLXUvJjNQ
i shoulda thrown a chevy in there too, but as usual, i was/am multi-tasking.
i can't put a dodge in there, 'cause it'd be a viper....and they make the most annoying bbbbzzzzzzzzz
-
i know that.
but the combustion process does not create kinetic energy. it does create something, but not kinetic energy.
sorry ?
Remember Mayer and Carnot.
You missed the part where energy can be converted .
-
Ah hah! I see your American V8's and raise you a greasy Italian version!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVQLXUvJjNQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAkspWdG2AE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQeTdkxv8-w
-
soo, 10 runs in the life of the engine...how many hours is that?
point being, they are ringing the engines up to 19,500 RPM but they don't need to last a hugely long time.
I think they put between 1,600 and 2,000 Km on the engines over the course of it's life. The drivers have complained about a noticable lack of power when the engine is on it's second race weekend. So no, not very durable at all.
-
I think they put between 1,600 and 2,000 Km on the engines over the course of it's life. The drivers have complained about a noticable lack of power when the engine is on it's second race weekend. So no, not very durable at all.
well, in all honesty, i don't think any full on racing engines are. they're generally built with this in mind.
granted, the 454(bored to 461) that used to be in my camaro was still capable of running 9's after 3 years of use, but it was also only built to run the 1320. and it did that very well.
it's been awhile, but if i recall, winston cup guys have fresh engines for every race, although they have to keep the one they use for qualifying on any given weekend in the car for that race.
i think prostock runs them a few weekends between rebuilds, but i don't know........capt. hilts would know that better.......
-
sorry ?
Remember Mayer and Carnot.
You missed the part where energy can be converted .
no i didn't. :aok
-
Clarkson tests the Porsche GT2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CerPkm8ZZXw
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAkspWdG2AE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQeTdkxv8-w
:rock
I worked for a guy a few years back had a very nice ferrari collection (astons too) all of which he used as daily drivers. pretty sure the F40 had Tubis fitted, he'd use it every couple of days to drive to london. the sound idling was incedibly deep and menacing, you could actually feel it 100yds away, slotting 2nd on the mile straight just outside the house and letting rip was one of the most incredible, savage sounds ive ever heard. still gives me goosebumps thinking about it :D
-
sorry ?
Remember Mayer and Carnot.
You missed the part where energy can be converted .
Just give up now and save yourself from the frustration of trying to explain physics to grease monkeys.
-
:rock
I worked for a guy a few years back had a very nice ferrari collection (astons too) all of which he used as daily drivers. pretty sure the F40 had Tubis fitted, he'd use it every couple of days to drive to london. the sound idling was incedibly deep and menacing, you could actually feel it 100yds away, slotting 2nd on the mile straight just outside the house and letting rip was one of the most incredible, savage sounds ive ever heard. still gives me goosebumps thinking about it :D
http://www.nsxfiles.com/fontana_ferrari.htm
Videos at the bottom of the page.
-
Rule #6- Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
careful there moot, that link gave me wood :D
-
Just give up now and save yourself from the frustration of trying to explain physics to grease monkeys.
ooooo..another personal attack.
just an fyi....there is not a car or light truck that can or will roll into my bays that i cannot figure out. i have never once in almost 30 years lost to a car.
being as i'm a technician i am quite capable of diagnosing and repairing pretty much anything that rolls in my bay. including the high end things we were talking about before, although i haven't as yet.
so.....not by any means a grease monkey.
i know how to make cars get good gas mileage, i know how to make em go fast, i know how to make em run so frakkin clean, it's disgusting.
and another FYI........in order to diagnose just why an engine is putting out too much emissions, requires me to know how and why they run, and the processes. i'm very good at what i do. i've never had to go job hunting, as when people found out(on the rare occasion it happened) that i might be in need of a job, they called me.
should i not be able to keep my shop up and running(but i will), i will have no trouble getting work, as i will have a job as a diagnostic tech before i'm fully out the door. :aok
any more personal attacks snappy? :D
-
careful there moot, that link gave me wood :D
Hehe.. Makes my hair stand up even after seeing and hearing it so many times.
-
http://www.nsxfiles.com/fontana_ferrari.htm
Videos at the bottom of the page.
i was watching some vids of the 60's trans am races last night..........friggin awsome
-
ooooo..another personal attack.
just an fyi....there is not a car or light truck that can or will roll into my bays that i cannot figure out. i have never once in almost 30 years lost to a car.
being as i'm a technician i am quite capable of diagnosing and repairing pretty much anything that rolls in my bay. including the high end things we were talking about before, although i haven't as yet.
so.....not by any means a grease monkey.
i know how to make cars get good gas mileage, i know how to make em go fast, i know how to make em run so frakkin clean, it's disgusting.
and another FYI........in order to diagnose just why an engine is putting out too much emissions, requires me to know how and why they run, and the processes. i'm very good at what i do. i've never had to go job hunting, as when people found out(on the rare occasion it happened) that i might be in need of a job, they called me.
should i not be able to keep my shop up and running(but i will), i will have no trouble getting work, as i will have a job as a diagnostic tech before i'm fully out the door. :aok
any more personal attacks snappy? :D
I wasn't aware that grease monkey was a derogatory term.
-
I wasn't aware that grease monkey was a derogatory term.
well, ya.......it is.
-
yup .. "too each his own."
Saw a pretty fast porsche 924 at Bakersfield a few years ago .. had a big block chebby in it, was clickin off 9's and makin it look easy.
I'll take the B&B bullets behind the 'obsolete' pushrod V8 anyday, mk thx.
It made me smile *every* day walkin out to that shape, and when she fired up, ..music.
P-cars have way too much Vee-Dub in 'em for me to consider layin out what they want for 'em.
Nothin I have ever seen or heard done to 'em makes 'em sound good, the shape just doesn't float my boat,
handling ..well .. better drivers have posted the numbers at the 'ring and other places.
GT2 next year is gonna be fun to watch.
-Frank aka GE
-
well, ya.......it is.
Someone should tell these guys that...
http://www.greasemonkeyintl.com/companyinfo.htm
-
Someone should tell these guys that...
http://www.greasemonkeyintl.com/companyinfo.htm
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
now that's funny watermelon right there.
they're no better than jiffylube, or lubeworks.
they hire guys that can't hold jobs at pepboys and burgerking. :rofl :rofl
-
Now who's being derogatory?
-
See Rule #6
-
Ok, admin hat on.....
I caution all of you about making personal attacks. From this point, I will have to consider any more personal attacks to be showing complete disrespect for the rules of this board and will act accordingly (i.e. there will be suspension of board privs).
Play nice.
-
Now who's being derogatory?
\
i am...and i;m being blatantly honest. not being derotagory towards you though
when i used to tow, between the local greasemonkey, and a couple of jiffylubes, we averaged about 8 cars a month that we towed out of those places. yet they ran and drove in.
funny thing was.......none of em would even turn over. seems some of those guys felt that oil in the engine was seriously over-rated. others felt that the drain plug wasn't necessary. others yet felt that the oil filter was just added weight, or hampered the free flow of oil through-out the engine. :D
-
Ok, admin hat on.....
I caution all of you about making personal attacks. From this point, I will have to consider any more personal attacks to be showing complete disrespect for the rules of this board and will act accordingly (i.e. there will be suspension of board privs).
Play nice.
most of us have been staying nice.
i wish i knew what bp put in there before ya got him........ :noid
and i've yet to level a personal attack at anyone. :aok
-
:lol
-
ooooo..another personal attack.
just an fyi....there is not a car or light truck that can or will roll into my bays that i cannot figure out. i have never once in almost 30 years lost to a car.
being as i'm a technician i am quite capable of diagnosing and repairing pretty much anything that rolls in my bay. including the high end things we were talking about before, although i haven't as yet.
so.....not by any means a grease monkey.
i know how to make cars get good gas mileage, i know how to make em go fast, i know how to make em run so frakkin clean, it's disgusting.
and another FYI........in order to diagnose just why an engine is putting out too much emissions, requires me to know how and why they run, and the processes. i'm very good at what i do. i've never had to go job hunting, as when people found out(on the rare occasion it happened) that i might be in need of a job, they called me.
should i not be able to keep my shop up and running(but i will), i will have no trouble getting work, as i will have a job as a diagnostic tech before i'm fully out the door. :aok
any more personal attacks snappy? :D
LOL Cap if your as good of a mechanic as you claim what the hell are you doing oil changes for??? How come your not on some race team or have some super dupper high performance shop? Don't answer please because I already know the answer. You probally are a very good everyday mechanic but you make it sound like you got all the bases covered. I do know one thing and that is if you are a , let's say Ferrari engine rebuilder and that's all you have been doing for 15 years my guess is he will do a much better, faster job of it then a mechanic with your general mechanic knowledge. I am also positive that you would be completely lost on said engine rebuild . No knock on you cause after all your a everyday mechanic and a good one. The problem lies in your constant reassuring that you can even work on anything including the space shuttle if given a chance and would even manage to get a couple of more horsepower out of it as well.
One thing that both you and I are not and that's a physicists, mathematician, engineer or any other highly trained person it takes to design any car not to mention the exotic ones. You may have a grasp on how things work and a understanding on it's design but to make the constant claims that you make only puts the things your really know and maybe really good at in bad light.
-
"Word" - as they say these days (I think).
-
LOL Cap if your as good of a mechanic as you claim what the hell are you doing oil changes for??? How come your not on some race team or have some super dupper high performance shop? Don't answer please because I already know the answer. You probally are a very good everyday mechanic but you make it sound like you got all the bases covered. I do know one thing and that is if you are a , let's say Ferrari engine rebuilder and that's all you have been doing for 15 years my guess is he will do a much better, faster job of it then a mechanic with your general mechanic knowledge. I am also positive that you would be completely lost on said engine rebuild . No knock on you cause after all your a everyday mechanic and a good one. The problem lies in your constant reassuring that you can even work on anything including the space shuttle if given a chance and would even manage to get a couple of more horsepower out of it as well.
One thing that both you and I are not and that's a physicists, mathematician, engineer or any other highly trained person it takes to design any car not to mention the exotic ones. You may have a grasp on how things work and a understanding on it's design but to make the constant claims that you make only puts the things your really know and maybe really good at in bad light.
actually, an answer is required.
racing techs are specialized. just like dealer techs. a racing tech does one thing. he works on race cars. just like the porsche tech does one thing. he works on porsches.
i'm an auto tech. i work on em all. i have no desire to be on a race team. when i run my camaro, or my fairmont, i do it for fun(and the rush of going 0 to 130 in 9 seconds. :D
i don't do high performance, because there is too much liability in it...especially here in the prnj. in this area, there;s not much money in it either.
that ferrari engine? give me the engine, and the information, and i can, and will rebuild it. i'll do it well too. i won't do it anywhere near as quickly as a ferrari tech will, but i can and will.
space shuttle? you're stretching things now.
can the space shuttle drive or be pushed inot my bay? is it a car or light truck?
hey skuzzy....since i know you're watching this thread pretty close now.......what'll it take to get a drooly icon added?
almost forgot.....so far, i've done nothing in here to shed bad light on my profession......except for my derogatory comments about the quicky lube places.......
engineers........got a little snicker outta me there too.
while they're very highly trained, and intelligent, most of them couldn't diagnose a problem with their designs, much less repair it.
that's in refernce to automotive engineers btw....and yes...i do know a couple of em.
-
while they're very highly trained, and intelligent, most of them couldn't diagnose a problem with their designs, much less repair it.
That's... *checks the rules one more time* very arrogant of you.
-
ROFL Bigplay and Die Hard..
Pistons are still round and go in the round holes, etc.
Rebuilding a ferrari engine compared to any other engine would require the torque specs and knowledge of any 'tricks' the 'engineers' like to play (ie: 17 bolts to hold a 289 water pump on is a 'trick' ..finding them all is the 'trick') .. another example: to R&R a headgasket on a northstar V-8 the whole top end has to come off, injectors, manifold, heads, distributor .. it's insanely time consuming.
FYI: Formula cars are limited by the rules to a specific displacement ..so they run the *crap* out of them to get the most they can from them.
If they had no rules about the size of the motor you would not see 19k motors in them. They are not cost effective.
-GE aka Frank
-
soo, 10 runs in the life of the engine...how many hours is that?
point being, they are ringing the engines up to 19,500 RPM but they don't need to last a hugely long time.
It used to be - before the FIA stuck its nose in and tried to neuter Ferrari - that you could pretty much do whatever you wanted with the engines. Hell - some lasted no longer than the few laps required to qualify.
When the rules were changed... what, two years ago, I guess... the FIA tried to "NASCAR-ize" F1 and make everyone play fair. As expected, the ridiculous rules about engines having to last for both qualifying and the race - let alone two race weekends - resulted in many blue clouds and oil slicks trailing cars as they coasted off to the side of the track.
-
Pistons are still round and go in the round holes, etc.
I'm afraid that's not always the case nowadays.
VW turbo diesel with oval cylinders.
(http://www.ibiblio.org/tkan/audi/audi-misc/oval1.jpg)
(http://www.ibiblio.org/tkan/audi/audi-misc/oval2.jpg)
-
Pretty sure oval pistons were commonly used at least for a season in motogp as well.
-
That's... *checks the rules one more time* very arrogant of you.
no, no it's not.
it's truthful, and honest.
-
ROFL Bigplay and Die Hard..
Pistons are still round and go in the round holes, etc.
Rebuilding a ferrari engine compared to any other engine would require the torque specs and knowledge of any 'tricks' the 'engineers' like to play (ie: 17 bolts to hold a 289 water pump on is a 'trick' ..finding them all is the 'trick') .. another example: to R&R a headgasket on a northstar V-8 the whole top end has to come off, injectors, manifold, heads, distributor .. it's insanely time consuming.
FYI: Formula cars are limited by the rules to a specific displacement ..so they run the *crap* out of them to get the most they can from them.
If they had no rules about the size of the motor you would not see 19k motors in them. They are not cost effective.
-GE aka Frank
you ever done a cylinder head on a northstar?
i'd like to have a few minutes with that engineer. the last one i did, 3 of the headbolts pulled the threads out of the block.
my favorite is "torque to yield" headbolts
step 1) torque to 21 lb ft.
step 2) torque to 29 lb ft
step 3) tighten all bolts an additional 90 degrees
step 4) loosen all bolts one at a time
step 5) tighten all bolts to 19 lb ft
step 6) tighten all bolts except #2 and #7 an additional 70 degrees
step 7) tighten #2 and #7 an aditional 120 degrees.
:rolleyes:
it's easy to find all the bolts on a 289 waterpump. the trick is to clean all the caked up grease off first. :D
they're just trying to change the discussion again, and the personal attacks from this morning, in my opinion, show that they have conceded victory to the rest of us this time. :aok
-
no, no it's not.
it's truthful, and honest.
"Arrogant" does not mean you're lying or being dishonest. I'm sure you believe all the... things you've posted.
Unfortunately.
-
ROFL Bigplay and Die Hard..
Pistons are still round and go in the round holes, etc.
Rebuilding a ferrari engine compared to any other engine would require the torque specs and knowledge of any 'tricks' the 'engineers' like to play (ie: 17 bolts to hold a 289 water pump on is a 'trick' ..finding them all is the 'trick') .. another example: to R&R a headgasket on a northstar V-8 the whole top end has to come off, injectors, manifold, heads, distributor .. it's insanely time consuming.
FYI: Formula cars are limited by the rules to a specific displacement ..so they run the *crap* out of them to get the most they can from them.
If they had no rules about the size of the motor you would not see 19k motors in them. They are not cost effective.
-GE aka Frank
I fail to see your relation to my post in yours.
I am a custom residential remodeling contractor and have been for 35 years. I do some commercial building and new home building on a very limited basis , One reason is because it takes a completely different type of crew. I need highly trained RESIDENTIAL carpenters and subcontractors with experience working on high end homes not commercial buildings . I don't have commercial carpenters or subcontractors so I am not competitive in that area of construction and tend to not make the amount of profit that should be made by an exclusive commercial contractor. I also do not turn these jobs over as quickly as they would. That being said they can't enter my world either and when they do it's not pretty. We all are working with the same plans and specs so why shouldn't the product turn out the same in the end?
IMO it would be that way if a general engine rebuilder took a shot at rebuilding a Ferrari engine it would be less then perfect. I don't know but it would seem to me that specialized tools and equipment would be needed to achieve said rebuild. So just having specs and the other things you mentioned doesn't convince me that it's that simple otherwise cap with his godly mechanic abilities would be rebuilding Ferrari engines at $30,000 a pop or whatever ungodly amount it costs and each and everyday and making himself rich.
-
"Arrogant" does not mean you're lying or being dishonest. I'm sure you believe all the... things you've posted.
Unfortunately.
i know what arrogant means. i was not, and am not being arrogant.
-
I fail to see your relation to my post in yours.
I am a custom residential remodeling contractor and have been for 35 years. I do some commercial building and new home building on a very limited basis , One reason is because it takes a completely different type of crew. I need highly trained RESIDENTIAL carpenters and subcontractors with experience working on high end homes not commercial buildings . I don't have commercial carpenters or subcontractors so I am not competitive in that area of construction and tend to not make the amount of profit that should be made by an exclusive commercial contractor. I also do not turn these jobs over as quickly as they would. That being said they can't enter my world either and when they do it's not pretty. We all are working with the same plans and specs so why shouldn't the product turn out the same in the end?
IMO it would be that way if a general engine rebuilder took a shot at rebuilding a Ferrari engine it would be less then perfect. I don't know but it would seem to me that specialized tools and equipment would be needed to achieve said rebuild. So just having specs and the other things you mentioned doesn't convince me that it's that simple otherwise cap with his godly mechanic abilities would be rebuilding Ferrari engines at $30,000 a pop or whatever ungodly amount it costs and each and everyday and making himself rich.
:rofl
-
That's... *checks the rules one more time* very arrogant of you.
CAP is right.
-
He's right.
that i'm arrogant?
-
Less purse swinging, more auto symphonics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw2NNwucQyw
-
Less purse swinging, more auto symphonics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw2NNwucQyw
shush you!!!!!
i paid for this gucci bag, and i'm gonna use it dammit!!!!
:rofl :rofl
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
i don't touch fast food.
i have to focus on my business, because in 35 years, i don;t intend to still be in business.....or even working for that matter.
clothes? i do the same as i always have. i wear what i'm comfortable in. price is irrelevent.
me?? try to fit in??? i'll tell ya a secret. i was one of the most unpopular kids in school. know why? because i NEVER tried to fit in. with anyone. never did, and never will. i don't need to. most do. i don't.
i'm me, and that's all i need to be.
in 10 years i'll be retired, living comfortably somewhere besides the prnj, waking in the morning to go flying in my own airplane.
if i need to still be in business in 30 years, i hope someone will look over what i did wrong that i am.
and i do feel the same. i came from nothing, and am making something out of it. i wuoldn't trade the life i've had for anything in the world.....especially not with someone that feels the need to "fit in" :aok
i should also add, that although my family had nothing "physical" to give me, i wouldn't trade them for any other family in the world either.
see....they gave me something much much more important. they gave me "me"
-
Less purse swinging, more auto symphonics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw2NNwucQyw
The Ferrari F50 GT1 clips were great. That link, on the other hand, was a big letdown. That music was awful.
-
See Rule #4
What..... that was bad?
-
If you know how to rebuild one engine, you can pretty much rebuild them all, all you need to know is the torelerences/ torque settings, they are all pretty much the same, yes a ferrari tech will do it quicker, deos not mean he will do it any better than me or cap1 would. I've rebuilt a few engines, and you very rarely need all the "special tools" they list. An Engine is an engine, once you know how to rebuild one..they are all the same.. I find it pretty simple and not very mentaly stimulating to be honest, however...I do love it when she kicks back to life.
unfortuantly, with all tradesman, you get the cowboys, the guys to cut corners to get it done quicker...which then will lead to a bad reputation...but you should hear some of the horror stories from the main dealers... :rolleyes:
-
If you know how to rebuild one engine, you can pretty much rebuild them all, all you need to know is the torelerences/ torque settings, they are all pretty much the same, yes a ferrari tech will do it quicker, deos not mean he will do it any better than me or cap1 would. I've rebuilt a few engines, and you very rarely need all the "special tools" they list. An Engine is an engine, once you know how to rebuild one..they are all the same.. I find it pretty simple and not very mentaly stimulating to be honest, however...I do love it when she kicks back to life.
unfortuantly, with all tradesman, you get the cowboys, the guys to cut corners to get it done quicker...which then will lead to a bad reputation...but you should hear some of the horror stories from the main dealers... :rolleyes:
there's only one dealer around here that i'll recommend people to....that's winner ford. i deal with their parts dept on a regular basis. good people. they'll bend over backwards for ya.
through civil air patrol, i've dealt with their service dept. SUPER NICE service managers. very knowledgable. i check over their work whenever i have to take one of our vans there(the newer ones are still under warranty), and have yet to find anything i can or want to complain about in their work.
i've dealt with other ford dealers up north....larson ford, miller ford in particular. they've made the blacklist. nothing from civil air patrol will ever go to them as long as i'm the LGT.
but yea.......most dealers have one or two techs, then a bunch of mechanics that just don't seem to care about their work. that's the ones i hear the horror stories from.
-
It used to be - before the FIA stuck its nose in and tried to neuter Ferrari - that you could pretty much do whatever you wanted with the engines. Hell - some lasted no longer than the few laps required to qualify.
When the rules were changed... what, two years ago, I guess... the FIA tried to "NASCAR-ize" F1 and make everyone play fair. As expected, the ridiculous rules about engines having to last for both qualifying and the race - let alone two race weekends - resulted in many blue clouds and oil slicks trailing cars as they coasted off to the side of the track.
Actually engines in F1 are very reliable and have been for a number of years, even when they mandated the switch from V10's, and the increasing need for engines to last past 2 races. Its rare for an engine to go in a big way like they used to.
Tronsky
-
Its rare for an engine to go in a big way like they used to.
Tronsky
Except for the Renault engines in the Redbulls. I blame Adrain Newey. :devil
-
So, what car did he eventually ended up buying? I didn't have the stamina to read all the 47 pages :)
Personally, I would have taken the Porsche :)
-
So, what car did he eventually ended up buying? I didn't have the stamina to read all the 47 pages :)
Personally, I would have taken the Porsche :)
He took the Porsche after comparing Insurance quotes and other useless "data" from a Base model 911 to a ZR-1. I.E. - He wasn't as thorough as he thought he was and "bought on impulse".
-
2006 GTO More bang for the Buck, a friend of mine has one. LT1 corvette motor stock 400+ HP. He destroyed a 40 year anniversary Shelby (over 500+ Hp stock). 911's are 'pretty' VW's
<S> Oz
-
He thoroughly road tested both and spent his money on the car which he enjoyed driving the most.
fixed :aok
btw Ultima GTR still gives the best bang for buck out of anything else posted so far, if your not bothered with cupholders and the like :D
-
2006 GTO More bang for the Buck, a friend of mine has one. LT1 corvette motor stock 400+ HP. He destroyed a 40 year anniversary Shelby (over 500+ Hp stock). 911's are 'pretty' VW's
<S> Oz
2006 GTO didn't have the LT1 engine.....they went from the 350hp LS1 engine to the 400hp LS2. I can't recall for certain the last year the LT1 was installed in anything.......1997 or 1998 IIRC.
-
2006 GTO More bang for the Buck, a friend of mine has one. LT1 corvette motor stock 400+ HP. He destroyed a 40 year anniversary Shelby (over 500+ Hp stock). 911's are 'pretty' VW's
<S> Oz
while they may be fast, and sound good....the new goats are actually much uglier than the porsches. they're kind of just like a ......"blah" kind of look to them.
on the plus side, i imagine that would let ya get away with a lil more though. :aok
-
Except for the Renault engines in the Redbulls. I blame Adrain Newey. :devil
Well it is a Renault :)
Tronsky
-
Well it is a Renault :)
Tronsky
know what gave me a good laugh yesterday?
a FUEGO drove pat my shop!!! :rofl :rofl :rofl
i had no clue any of them were still on the road. :rofl
-
know what gave me a good laugh yesterday?
a FUEGO drove pat my shop!!! :rofl :rofl :rofl
i had no clue any of them were still on the road. :rofl
Well maybe you should have ran the guy down and offered him free service so you can take claim that you maintain the only running Fuego in the world..... Now that would be a feather in your CAP, no pun intended.
-
Well maybe you should have ran the guy down and offered him free service so you can take claim that you maintain the only running Fuego in the world..... Now that would be a feather in your CAP, no pun intended.
dam dude.......no matter what i say, or how i say it, you have to take shots, don'tcha?
it's ok....i understand though.....really i do. :aok
-
dam dude.......no matter what i say, or how i say it, you have to take shots, don'tcha?
it's ok....i understand though.....really i do. :aok
:rofl
-
Actually engines in F1 are very reliable and have been for a number of years, even when they mandated the switch from V10's, and the increasing need for engines to last past 2 races. Its rare for an engine to go in a big way like they used to.
Tronsky
Kimi might disagree with you.
-
Hmmm,a question with all the talk of pushrod vs ohc,what do the F1 cars use for a valve train?
:salute
-
So, what car did he eventually ended up buying? I didn't have the stamina to read all the 47 pages :)
Personally, I would have taken the Porsche :)
oooooooooo, but you SHOULD. it starts getting good and entertaining at somewhere around page 33 or 34. :aok
-
Hmmm,a question with all the talk of pushrod vs ohc,what do the F1 cars use for a valve train?
:salute
all the pictures i can find, so far, the benze, beemr, and ferreri all look like cammers.
it would make sense too.......i can't see a pushrod engine spinning 18,000 rpm.
it's ashame they're limited to such a tiny engine..........a little bigger, and they could use lower rpms, and make the same numbers. :aok
-
all the pictures i can find, so far, the benze, beemr, and ferreri all look like cammers.
it would make sense too.......i can't see a pushrod engine spinning 18,000 rpm.
it's ashame they're limited to such a tiny engine..........a little bigger, and they could use lower rpms, and make the same numbers. :aok
No springs, pneumatic valve.
-
Kimi might disagree with you.
Remember in the "good" old days when half the field would grind to a halt with their engine covers on fire...While I think Kimi's problems extend past engines, look at Schumachers reliability in the last 4 years of his career at Ferrari
Tronsky
-
No springs, pneumatic valve.
rgr,That new tech... and the reason they can spin 19,000.A couple years or seasons back they were spinning over 20,thou but the new engine rules forced them to limit it to 19,000.
:salute
-
So BigPlay .. if yer not factory trained you can't build a perfect motor?
ROFL.
Diehard .. in the case of the oval pistons .. common sense would indicate the oval pistons go in the oval holes.
-shrug- .. still just another motor, albeit a weird one.
As I said .. all I need to know are the specs and any tricks. You two can nit-pick all you like.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
*I* built a bracket motor and it ran in the car for 18 years.
It never broke.
I changed intake system, cam, converter, gears, tires ..to go a bit faster.
Bracket finals 4 different years, in SoCal division 7 back in the day.
You have to be invited, and place in the top 16 of the field in your bracket over a years schedule of races,
..and be able to walk the walk.
I worked for a SoCal speed shop for almost 10 years ..part time, while I was in the USAF.
Engine builder-tuner.
*Hundreds*
-shrug-
But what do I know.
Never been to a 'factory' school .. taught some factory guys how to setup a Mallory with a tunnel ram tho.
Was kinda cool to build that 454 Monte Carlo the CHP used between Barstow and the state line to bust the Ferrari's with.
We dual turbo'd it, put a 2.54 gear in the back .. 1k hp was at 5500 rpm .. we had to put the big pirelli's on it, had steel rims made for it, painted black, fit up under it, an the lil center caps ..you had to look close to see that the rears were 12's :) Fronts were 10.5's :)
Guy who drove it said they popped some nimrod in his red ferrari the first nite out ..the guy punched it thinkin to outrun the big chebby 4-door .. the Monte Carlo dropped into second, smoked the tires a bit, and blew by the ferrari to pull in front .. would have loved a look at the guys face in the Ferrari :)
..but your right Bigplay, nothin I ever built was 'perfect' .. every single one of 'em could have been faster .. LOL
Closest I got to 'perfect' was the 529" marine rat motor, titanium rods, crane roller, dual 1050's feedin Mondello Nascar heads with the direct port nitrous setup by the specs from the guy who set the record with his IHRA car .. far as I know the nitrous was never used.
It yanked the '69 camaro around like it was nothin ..ran a 9.30 on it's very first pass .. second pass it ate the ford 9" (I told the owner it would .. the motor was a monster .. intake valves were 2.35's (!!) ..cam was over .700" lift .. 6500 rpm shifts ..probably could have twisted it further ..just not much need to.
-GE aka Frank
-
So BigPlay .. if yer not factory trained you can't build a perfect motor?
ROFL.
Diehard .. in the case of the oval pistons .. common sense would indicate the oval pistons go in the oval holes.
-shrug- .. still just another motor, albeit a weird one.
As I said .. all I need to know are the specs and any tricks. You two can nit-pick all you like.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
*I* built a bracket motor and it ran in the car for 18 years.
It never broke.
I changed intake system, cam, converter, gears, tires ..to go a bit faster.
Bracket finals 4 different years, in SoCal division 7 back in the day.
You have to be invited, and place in the top 16 of the field in your bracket over a years schedule of races,
..and be able to walk the walk.
I worked for a SoCal speed shop for almost 10 years ..part time, while I was in the USAF.
Engine builder-tuner.
*Hundreds*
-shrug-
But what do I know.
Never been to a 'factory' school .. taught some factory guys how to setup a Mallory with a tunnel ram tho.
Was kinda cool to build that 454 Monte Carlo the CHP used between Barstow and the state line to bust the Ferrari's with.
We dual turbo'd it, put a 2.54 gear in the back .. 1k hp was at 5500 rpm .. we had to put the big pirelli's on it, had steel rims made for it, painted black, fit up under it, an the lil center caps ..you had to look close to see that the rears were 12's :) Fronts were 10.5's :)
Guy who drove it said they popped some nimrod in his red ferrari the first nite out ..the guy punched it thinkin to outrun the big chebby 4-door .. the Monte Carlo dropped into second, smoked the tires a bit, and blew by the ferrari to pull in front .. would have loved a look at the guys face in the Ferrari :)
..but your right Bigplay, nothin I ever built was 'perfect' .. every single one of 'em could have been faster .. LOL
Closest I got to 'perfect' was the 529" marine rat motor, titanium rods, crane roller, dual 1050's feedin Mondello Nascar heads with the direct port nitrous setup by the specs from the guy who set the record with his IHRA car .. far as I know the nitrous was never used.
It yanked the '69 camaro around like it was nothin ..ran a 9.30 on it's very first pass .. second pass it ate the ford 9" (I told the owner it would .. the motor was a monster .. intake valves were 2.35's (!!) ..cam was over .700" lift .. 6500 rpm shifts ..probably could have twisted it further ..just not much need to.
-GE aka Frank
hehe nice. :aok
-
A visual aid:
(http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q260/1grayeagle/misc/torque.jpg)
-Frank aka GE
-
No springs, pneumatic valve.
ya know.....i forgot about them.
if i recall, ford was messing around with them and electronic solenoid controlled valvetrain back in the 80's. i think they were trying to do it on their 2.3 liter engines.
not sure, but i think gm was too.
-
A visual aid:
(http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q260/1grayeagle/misc/torque.jpg)
-Frank aka GE
no!!!! torque doesn't do anything in your car!
nice pic BTW............and i'd have loved to see that police car too!!
nj state pd is using dodge chargers now. so far the 2 i've seen, are both silver. dunno if they're very fast, or pretty much the same as the ones you and i can buy.
:aok
-
Aye Cap .. doin the Monte Carlo was fun.
So much room we could put stuff where it needed to be, not where there was a hole.
I told 'em when it was retired from service to let me know .. LOL
.. pretty sure it got snagged by one of the guys who drove it tho.
-GE aka Frank
-
Was kinda cool to build that 454 Monte Carlo the CHP used between Barstow and the state line to bust the Ferrari's with.
We dual turbo'd it, put a 2.54 gear in the back .. 1k hp was at 5500 rpm .. we had to put the big pirelli's on it, had steel rims made for it, painted black, fit up under it, an the lil center caps ..you had to look close to see that the rears were 12's :) Fronts were 10.5's :)
Guy who drove it said they popped some nimrod in his red ferrari the first nite out ..the guy punched it thinkin to outrun the big chebby 4-door .. the Monte Carlo dropped into second, smoked the tires a bit, and blew by the ferrari to pull in front .. would have loved a look at the guys face in the Ferrari :)
Not trying to dispute you, GE, but did you mean Impala or Caprice? I've never seen a 4 door Monte Carlo or heard of one either.
I have heard stories of an unmarked police vehicle being used back in the 70's and 80's up here in the Panhandle......IIRC, it was a Laguna with a 396 (others who were supposedly involved with it's operation claim it was really 454 stroked out to a 496) swapped in. Built to run down speeders along I-40 and allegedly very successful in surprising many a foreign "super car" owner by overtaking them and then handing out a hefty citation.
-
rgr,That new tech... and the reason they can spin 19,000.A couple years or seasons back they were spinning over 20,thou but the new engine rules forced them to limit it to 19,000.
:salute
Remember in 80's f1 engines were producing 1400+ HP out of 1.5 litre? They still had spring valves,13000 rpm was their limit tho
-
eddieK .. it was a 4-door .. you're absolutely right .. was a Caprice .. I have no idea why Monte Carlo stuck in my head.
It had the 'cage' in back and the 12 gauge up front.. the CHP useda take the gun out when they brought it in --evil grin--
-GE aka Frank
-
Remember in the "good" old days when half the field would grind to a halt with their engine covers on fire...While I think Kimi's problems extend past engines, look at Schumachers reliability in the last 4 years of his career at Ferrari
Tronsky
No doubt Ferrari had it down cold.
Now... as for the good old days... I think they ended when Mika left. Loved him.
-
No doubt Ferrari had it down cold.
Now... as for the good old days... I think they ended when Mika left. Loved him.
heh.....
was watchin top gear last night. they had to buy "supercars" for under 10,000 pounds. they got an old ferreri, an old lambo, and an old something else.
wanna guess which one lost it's engine on the highway? :rofl :noid :aok
-
The "something else".
Was a Maserati Merak btw. The Ferrari had electrical problems and the Lamborghini ran out of gas.
-
So...Mondego..... what ya getting :lol
-
The "something else".
Was a Maserati Merak btw. The Ferrari had electrical problems and the Lamborghini ran out of gas.
thank you. i couldn't remember what the "something else" was. :D
-
So...Mondego..... what ya getting :lol
He drove both cars and the Porsche was the one for him. That got lost about oh......8 or more pages back I think.
At least he drove both and didn't just take some magazine article to heart. Enjoy your car, Mondego! Don't let us nut cases bother ya now..... :x
-
Remember in 80's f1 engines were producing 1400+ HP out of 1.5 litre? They still had spring valves,13000 rpm was their limit tho
Oh ya those were the days,man that 1.5 BMW in the Brabum was a thing of beauty!
IIRC they were pushing close to 7 atmospheres through those blocks,supposedly unused 2002 blocks.
-
Oh ya those were the days,man that 1.5 BMW in the Brabum was a thing of beauty!
IIRC they were pushing close to 7 atmospheres through those blocks,supposedly unused 2002 blocks.
Those were 2002 blocks? Holy crap.
-
He took the Porsche after comparing Insurance quotes and other useless "data" from a Base model 911 to a ZR-1. I.E. - He wasn't as thorough as he thought he was and "bought on impulse".
Now...... he didn't use your money and did his own amount of research that made him comfortable with his purchase. Your bias comments really doesn't have a place in any of it does it. I can assure you that if given the opportunity I can scrutinize many of your choices as well.
-
So BigPlay .. if yer not factory trained you can't build a perfect motor?
ROFL.
Diehard .. in the case of the oval pistons .. common sense would indicate the oval pistons go in the oval holes.
-shrug- .. still just another motor, albeit a weird one.
As I said .. all I need to know are the specs and any tricks. You two can nit-pick all you like.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
*I* built a bracket motor and it ran in the car for 18 years.
It never broke.
I changed intake system, cam, converter, gears, tires ..to go a bit faster.
Bracket finals 4 different years, in SoCal division 7 back in the day.
You have to be invited, and place in the top 16 of the field in your bracket over a years schedule of races,
..and be able to walk the walk.
I worked for a SoCal speed shop for almost 10 years ..part time, while I was in the USAF.
Engine builder-tuner.
*Hundreds*
-shrug-
But what do I know.
Never been to a 'factory' school .. taught some factory guys how to setup a Mallory with a tunnel ram tho.
Was kinda cool to build that 454 Monte Carlo the CHP used between Barstow and the state line to bust the Ferrari's with.
We dual turbo'd it, put a 2.54 gear in the back .. 1k hp was at 5500 rpm .. we had to put the big pirelli's on it, had steel rims made for it, painted black, fit up under it, an the lil center caps ..you had to look close to see that the rears were 12's :) Fronts were 10.5's :)
Guy who drove it said they popped some nimrod in his red ferrari the first nite out ..the guy punched it thinkin to outrun the big chebby 4-door .. the Monte Carlo dropped into second, smoked the tires a bit, and blew by the ferrari to pull in front .. would have loved a look at the guys face in the Ferrari :)
..but your right Bigplay, nothin I ever built was 'perfect' .. every single one of 'em could have been faster .. LOL
Closest I got to 'perfect' was the 529" marine rat motor, titanium rods, crane roller, dual 1050's feedin Mondello Nascar heads with the direct port nitrous setup by the specs from the guy who set the record with his IHRA car .. far as I know the nitrous was never used.
It yanked the '69 camaro around like it was nothin ..ran a 9.30 on it's very first pass .. second pass it ate the ford 9" (I told the owner it would .. the motor was a monster .. intake valves were 2.35's (!!) ..cam was over .700" lift .. 6500 rpm shifts ..probably could have twisted it further ..just not much need to.
-GE aka Frank
Then open your own shop if your all that. I still wouldn't have you work on my airplane , Ferrari or home heating system without proper training. Here in California there are probally more exotic cars then anywhere in the world and every shop that I see that rebuilds engines have their technicians factory trained. I'm not sure but I would ponder that Ferrari wouldn't sell you parts without this designation. My understanding is that you can't order a new Ferrari without previously owning one.
I doubt that you could legally work on an airplanes engine without proper training and the required qualifications either. So when people say that they can work on anything and aren't trained through proper channels I avoid them. I wouldn't let anyone touch a $300,000 car when they have no business doing so. Just because you or anyone else says that they can doesn't convince me. If you or anyone else can do what you say you can then what's stopping you from moving away from the double wide and making money with said talent. My point was that I , meaning me would have my reservations about having a car as expensive as a Ferrari serviced by anyone less then a factory trained technician. So no need to defend your knowledge about engine rebuilding to me because if I did own one no amount of convincing from you or even the motor god Cap would or could change my mind.
-
I doubt that you could legally work on an airplanes engine without proper training and the required qualifications either.
I hate to burst your bubble but not only can you work on an airplane engine, airframe and avionics without a license it happens every single day in shops all across the country. Legally, professionally and on the up and up.
The qualifications come into play regarding being able to sign off the work either as a licensed mechanic or an additional certification which is known as an inspection authorization. Any joe off the street with some mechanical aptitude can walk into an aircraft maintenance shop and get a job. When enough time has passed and their apprenticeship requirements completed they can obtain their own aircraft and/or powerplant certifications to now endorse the work they have performed on airplanes requiring such logbook entries.
-
My understanding is that you can't order a new Ferrari without previously owning one.
so......if one can't buy a ferrari, without having previously owned one, then how does one become a first time ferrari owner?
-
that only applies to the really special stuff like the Enzo, you had to own several decent ferraris before they would even consider selling you one. same for 599s, you move up the list a lot quicker if you have a 212 Inter parked up at home ;)
theres not many car makers in a position to pick who they sell to, Bristol are notorious for turning down sales to "unsuitable" customers :D
-
I hate to burst your bubble but not only can you work on an airplane engine, airframe and avionics without a license it happens every single day in shops all across the country. Legally, professionally and on the up and up.
The qualifications come into play regarding being able to sign off the work either as a licensed mechanic or an additional certification which is known as an inspection authorization. Any joe off the street with some mechanical aptitude can walk into an aircraft maintenance shop and get a job. When enough time has passed and their apprenticeship requirements completed they can obtain their own aircraft and/or powerplant certifications to now endorse the work they have performed on airplanes requiring such logbook entries.
Bubble not burst, I wasn't sure but as stated there is a certified person that has to put there john Hancock on and in order for said mechanic to get his certification there is a process that is required. Maybe any joe can do the work but as you stated there but needs a guy in there that can sign off on the work with the proper certs. What I was trying to say is even if Greyeagle had the knowledge he doesn't have the authorization to do it legally. Now would you buy a plane that was serviced by a shop that had no certification to do so. My guess is no. My point is I have no interest in purchasing or owning anything that is not maintained by what the manufactures requirements are for maintenance personal.
-
so......if one can't buy a ferrari, without having previously owned one, then how does one become a first time ferrari owner?
Jezz Cap, by purchaseing a used one first. I said you can't order a new one without first owning one and that would mean a used one. You can buy if available a starter Ferrari but even their hard to come by.
-
Oops... Posted in the wrong thread <nevermind>
-
that only applies to the really special stuff like the Enzo, you had to own several decent ferraris before they would even consider selling you one. same for 599s, you move up the list a lot quicker if you have a 212 Inter parked up at home ;)
theres not many car makers in a position to pick who they sell to, Bristol are notorious for turning down sales to "unsuitable" customers :D
Actually it's for the more rarer models not just the Enzo. You can buy a 360 rather easy but as you said moving up to the more expensive models needs a series of move ups not jumps. Considering that production on Ferrari's is very low on other more expensive models and demand is higher on say the 360 then on the rarer. The 360's are hard to find. Then there's the subdivisions within the 360 that are considered a rarer packaged car, so starting with a better model used can escalate the process.
-
buy something economical. bank or donate what you would have foolishly spent.
-
Actually it's for the more rarer models not just the Enzo. You can buy a 360 rather easy but as you said moving up to the more expensive models needs a series of move ups not jumps. Considering that production on Ferrari's is very low on other more expensive models and demand is higher on say the 360 then on the rarer. The 360's are hard to find. Then there's the subdivisions within the 360 that are considered a rarer packaged car, so starting with a better model used can escalate the process.
Feel free to to hop on the Pretentiousness Turnpike, it's quicker to the Town of Admittance.
-
that only applies to the really special stuff like the Enzo, you had to own several decent ferraris before they would even consider selling you one. same for 599s, you move up the list a lot quicker if you have a 212 Inter parked up at home ;)
theres not many car makers in a position to pick who they sell to, Bristol are notorious for turning down sales to "unsuitable" customers :D
i was actually being a wise arse. :rofl :aok
-
i was actually being a wise arse. :rofl :aok
It was good sarcasm. :cool:
-
It was good sarcasm. :cool:
ya//but i think my sarcasm was riding on airforce one. :noid :D :O
-
You two should get a room...
-
Bigplay .. you crack me up :)
I owned my own paint-body shop for a little while .. too much like hard work.
I was part of three startup 'shops' ..two are still goin strong as far as I know, in SoCal.
Spent some time helpin out on one owners alchohol funny car.. just a total blast.
Got asked to drive a digger but I was havin too much fun with my 440 duster .. I turned him down.
As far as workin on airplanes .. I was the sign off authority (red X) on nuclear capable aircraft.
Among other things.
If I wanted a Testarossa I would get one, and it would never see the inside of a Ferrari dealership.
(prolly stuff a dual turbo aluminum Rat motor on methanol in it and embarrass the *crap* outta them itty-bitty ferrari motored red cars)
"We found 26 used Ferrari listings within 100 miles of Phoenix,"
umm .. direct from Autotrader ..dood. I would bet if I offered the money, they would sell me a new one out of Scottsdale,
should I call the dealer? ... nah .. just not worth my time.
But you just keep on keepin on dood .. tellya what .. send the ferrari police to arrest me.
I love when Ferrari has to recall their motors cause the oil pan is too porous and leaks oil right thru the metal .. I'm talkin worth every penny ..you bet ..
ROFL
-GE aka Frank
-
that only applies to the really special stuff like the Enzo...
This is correct. There is no restriction on buying "ordinary" Ferraris.
However, in the case of very limited production models; Enzo, FX, et al., I believe that you actually had to be given an invitation by the company to purchase one. A long-time friend of mine who lives outside of Los Angeles married very well. The father-in-law owns an Enzo... and (I think) seven other F-cars including both an F40 and an F50 and... my personal favorite... a 288.
Now... me? If I had that kind of cash and wanted a mid-engined supercar, I'd be shopping for a black Carrera GT. I know it'll start in the morning. As Charlie Sheen's character so aptly put it when stealing a 930 Slantnose parked in proximity to a Ferrari... "Bah... Italian trash." :D
-
This is correct. There is no restriction on buying "ordinary" Ferraris.
However, in the case of very limited production models; Enzo, FX, et al., I believe that you actually had to be given an invitation by the company to purchase one. A long-time friend of mine who lives outside of Los Angeles married very well. The father-in-law owns an Enzo... and (I think) seven other F-cars including both an F40 and an F50 and... my personal favorite... a 288.
Now... me? If I had that kind of cash and wanted a mid-engined supercar, I'd be shopping for a black Carrera GT. I know it'll start in the morning. As Charlie Sheen's character so aptly put it when stealing a 930 Slantnose parked in proximity to a Ferrari... "Bah... Italian trash." :D
Correct. BP is trying to place himself on a pedestal and cut down CAP and GE. It's a shame watching some people "spill money" and never fill in that hole they are hoping is filled.
-
Feel free to to hop on the Pretentiousness Turnpike, it's quicker to the Town of Admittance.
I really do not need any direction from you , but thanks.
-
This is correct. There is no restriction on buying "ordinary" Ferraris.
However, in the case of very limited production models; Enzo, FX, et al., I believe that you actually had to be given an invitation by the company to purchase one. A long-time friend of mine who lives outside of Los Angeles married very well. The father-in-law owns an Enzo... and (I think) seven other F-cars including both an F40 and an F50 and... my personal favorite... a 288.
Now... me? If I had that kind of cash and wanted a mid-engined supercar, I'd be shopping for a black Carrera GT. I know it'll start in the morning. As Charlie Sheen's character so aptly put it when stealing a 930 Slantnose parked in proximity to a Ferrari... "Bah... Italian trash." :D
Mazz,I agree tho I'd be putting my cash down on a 930 with the Ruff package,oh and it would be a mid 80's aircooled demon....
I have a buddy who "fixes" these toys quite often,he lost his drivers license a couple years ago on a test drive.I told him we were in a 50 zone...but he said ya,I'm closing on a buck 50.
He was ticketed going 218 Km in a 80 km zone,thats considered dangerous driving and warrants a 6 months suspension.Needless to say the cop just would accept his excuse"the owner said it had a high speed shimmy in the wheel and I was trying to find it..... :lol
-
Bigplay .. you crack me up :)
I owned my own paint-body shop for a little while .. too much like hard work.
I was part of three startup 'shops' ..two are still goin strong as far as I know, in SoCal.
Spent some time helpin out on one owners alchohol funny car.. just a total blast.
Got asked to drive a digger but I was havin too much fun with my 440 duster .. I turned him down.
As far as workin on airplanes .. I was the sign off authority (red X) on nuclear capable aircraft.
Among other things.
If I wanted a Testarossa I would get one, and it would never see the inside of a Ferrari dealership.
(prolly stuff a dual turbo aluminum Rat motor on methanol in it and embarrass the *crap* outta them itty-bitty ferrari motored red cars)
"We found 26 used Ferrari listings within 100 miles of Phoenix,"
umm .. direct from Autotrader ..dood. I would bet if I offered the money, they would sell me a new one out of Scottsdale,
should I call the dealer? ... nah .. just not worth my time.
But you just keep on keepin on dood .. tellya what .. send the ferrari police to arrest me.
I love when Ferrari has to recall their motors cause the oil pan is too porous and leaks oil right thru the metal .. I'm talkin worth every penny ..you bet ..
ROFL
-GE aka Frank
Please send me a glossary of the language your speaking next time . I assume dood is a misspelled version of dude. Also your reading retention needs a little work as well . I never said you can't buy a used Ferrari . I said past a starter Ferrari you cant by one without meeting there ownership criteria (Definition Statement of needs, rules, standards, or tests that must be used in evaluating a decision, idea, opportunity, program, project, etc., to form correct judgment regarding the intended goal. Criteria is plural of criterion)
I would love to be in the room when you called said Ferrari dealership. My bet is after 2 minutes on the phone with you they would just hang up. (prolly stuff a dual turbo aluminum Rat motor on methanol in it and embarrass the *crap* outta them itty-bitty ferrari motored red cars) Is prolly another word for probally?
I would also like to see who gets embarrassed when pulling up next to a group of women. The Ferrari or the duel turbo aluminum rat powered hayseed mobile. No brains needed to answer that one.
-
Please send me a glossary of the language your speaking next time . I assume dood is a misspelled version of dude. Also your reading retention needs a little work as well . I never said you can't buy a used Ferrari . I said past a starter Ferrari you cant by one without meeting there ownership criteria (Definition Statement of needs, rules, standards, or tests that must be used in evaluating a decision, idea, opportunity, program, project, etc., to form correct judgment regarding the intended goal. Criteria is plural of criterion)
I would love to be in the room when you called said Ferrari dealership. My bet is after 2 minutes on the phone with you they would just hang up. (prolly stuff a dual turbo aluminum Rat motor on methanol in it and embarrass the *crap* outta them itty-bitty ferrari motored red cars) Is prolly another word for probally?
I would also like to see who gets embarrassed when pulling up next to a group of women. The Ferrari or the duel turbo aluminum rat powered hayseed mobile. No brains needed to answer that one.
UUMM......
if you're going to go after his grammar and spelling, then, perhaps you should be a little more cognizant of your own?
i almost fell off of my chair here laughing at that second one i highlighted for ya. :rofl :aok :rofl
-
Correct. BP is trying to place himself on a pedestal and cut down CAP and GE. It's a shame watching some people "spill money" and never fill in that hole they are hoping is filled.
I'm not trying to cut down anyone, but because you don't see the place in the auto world for the likes of Porsche or Ferrari and make ridicules comments regarding these cars compared with their US counterparts and the people that purchase these cars instead of lets say a corvette, makes me wonder what makes them so narrow minded. You buy and own whatever you like as will I . I see your from Michigan and can feel you pain in regards to the auto industry but no amount of revisititations to the movie "Gran Torino" and the fondness ole Clint's character has for his car will change the fact that there are people out there that don't see the comparison between the US sport cars and the European sport cars.
Making comments about people you never met and assuming that they are unfulfilled lost souls because they like things that cost a little more money then the average person is willing to pay is rather petty. I can assure you I am not one of those types. I merely do not agree with many statements that have been posted in this thread regarding the comparison between the 2 cars .
-
See Rule #4
-
Mazz,I agree tho I'd be putting my cash down on a 930 with the Ruff package,oh and it would be a mid 80's aircooled demon....
I have a buddy who "fixes" these toys quite often,he lost his drivers license a couple years ago on a test drive.I told him we were in a 50 zone...but he said ya,I'm closing on a buck 50.
He was ticketed going 218 Km in a 80 km zone,thats considered dangerous driving and warrants a 6 months suspension.Needless to say the cop just would accept his excuse"the owner said it had a high speed shimmy in the wheel and I was trying to find it..... :lol
150 in a 50 is a bit much. LOL
PS: Somewhere in California this week, there is a 993 being put on a truck and headed eastbound. :noid
-
See Rule #4
I havent been reading much of your stuff because Ive been involved in other thread-specific discussions but, honestly...
...who the fornicate are you?
-
See Rule #4
well, first off, i won't be freeing my arse off.
second off.........i'm not frustrated about anything. don;t have any reason to be.
i'll be retired in a few years, and you'll still be workin your but off. :D :aok
-
I havent been reading much of your stuff because Ive been involved in other thread-specific discussions but, honestly...
...who the fornicate are you?
he's lazytimedog's protege. :noid
and of course he's now mad, because as he was pointing out some grammatical(is that a real word) errors, he made a couple of his own. :D and was called on it. :aok
-
well, first off, i won't be freeing my arse off.
second off.........i'm not frustrated about anything. don;t have any reason to be.
i'll be retired in a few years, and you'll still be workin your but off. :D :aok
wrong again cap. I have more equity in my house currently (even with this economy) then you will ever see. I also have no intention of retiring completely. I also have other assets that factor in that are more retirement minded then relying on my house equity for retirement. You have owned your shop fro what 2-3 years. I have had 3 companies for over 15 one for 30 so I have a big jump on you. From what I remember about you from the old squad days you were just a mechanic pounding out a living before purchasing your shop.
-
Get a Yugo!
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_M0cuxJsSjdU/SOSUoJ0cxKI/AAAAAAAAFE0/95A6KMdmy5E/s400/yugo.jpg)
-
he's lazytimedog's protege. :noid
and of course he's now mad, because as he was pointing out some grammatical(is that a real word) errors, he made a couple of his own. :D and was called on it. :aok
Mad at you :rofl for what being, corrected by you is so insignificant it really has done little more then make me laugh. Your old squaddies carry the same opinion of you that I do . You should proof read some of your 5000 posts first before calling out anyone. I see your finally using the spell check feature for a change because I haven't seen a page of yellow pop up that I normally do when replying to one of your exaggerated posts.
-
wrong again cap. I have more equity in my house currently (even with this economy) then you will ever see. I also have no intention of retiring completely. I also have other assets that factor in that are more retirement minded then relying on my house equity for retirement. You have owned your shop fro what 2-3 years. I have had 3 companies for over 15 one for 30 so I have a big jump on you. From what I remember about you from the old squad days you were just a mechanic pounding out a living before purchasing your shop.
technician, making a good living. we make good money here. mechanics don't make poop. i won't pick my head up off the pillow for what a mechanic makes.
and you've made my point. with this business, i'll be able to retire before i'm 60. if i get bored with it, i'll do something.
-
Get a Yugo!
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_M0cuxJsSjdU/SOSUoJ0cxKI/AAAAAAAAFE0/95A6KMdmy5E/s400/yugo.jpg)
do they still build those things?? :rofl
i think i worked on one about 20 years ago. :rofl
-
Mad at you :rofl for what being, corrected by you is so insignificant it really has done little more then make me laugh. Your old squaddies carry the same opinion of you that I do . You should proof read some of your 5000 posts first before calling out anyone. I see your finally using the spell check feature for a change because I haven't seen a page of yellow pop up that I normally do when replying to one of your exaggerated posts.
hey......i never claimed to be perfect.....and i don't go 'round correcting others grammar when they start getting the better of me.
i was simply pointing out to you, that if you're going to point out someone else's errors, then you should be sure about yours.
and which old squaddies? the hg? there is no one in that squad who's opinion matters. they are fairly insignificant.
satans playmates? i still fly with them some, and they generally seem happy for my help.
kinda makes me think you're getting a little delusional here.........
probally :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
What one considers a good living is purely a matter of opinion. Retiring at 60 rather then is 65 is imo not that big a leap. But you seem to feel comfortable about being able to retire in the current state that you reside in which is fine.
-
What one considers a good living is purely a matter of opinion. Retiring at 60 rather then is 65 is imo not that big a leap. But you seem to feel comfortable about being able to retire in the current state that you reside in which is fine.
won't be retiring here.will be somewhere that i can have a nice large, private chunk of land.
-
"My understanding is that you can't order a new Ferrari without previously owning one."
Speakin of 'reading and retention' .. that is a copy paste of what you said, BigPlay
..apparantly you do not comprehend what you type and waffle when proven wrong
..along with redirecting to spelling .. of all things.
Good luck wit dat.
Dood.
-Frank aka GE
-busy planning my next hayseedmobile to embarrass the crap out of 'it's gotta be factory' morons.
-
"My understanding is that you can't order a new Ferrari without previously owning one."
Speakin of 'reading and retention' .. that is a copy paste of what you said, BigPlay
..apparantly you do not comprehend what you type and waffle when proven wrong
..along with redirecting to spelling .. of all things.
Good luck wit dat.
Dood.
-Frank aka GE
-busy planning my next hayseedmobile to embarrass the crap out of 'it's gotta be factory' morons.
we used to have a few really interesting cars at atco all the time.
there was the 454 powered 65 beetle. i think i'd have been a little afraid to drive that one, but it was a bullet.
then there was the 454 powered chevette. that one ran low 9's on a bad day.
there was the street driven ford maverick with a boss 302 in it, with a 4 speed. it ran mid 10's, but although he claimed he did, i don't think that car could be reasonably driven on the street every day.
and my favorite? one of those 60's jags. the one that looked like a bullet. street car with a 350 chevy. ran high 10's, and this dude did drive it every day. :aok
-
"My understanding is that you can't order a new Ferrari without previously owning one."
Speakin of 'reading and retention' .. that is a copy paste of what you said, BigPlay
..apparantly you do not comprehend what you type and waffle when proven wrong
..along with redirecting to spelling .. of all things.
Good luck wit dat.
Dood.
-Frank aka GE
-busy planning my next hayseedmobile to embarrass the crap out of 'it's gotta be factory' morons.
:rofl that's nice . That last post of yours had nothing I wrote cut and pasted in it. Just for the record. You may have to drive that next hayseed mobile of yours a long way to find one of them there " it's gotta be factory" morons. Make sure when you do take that long roadtrip of embarrassment you have your best rope belt on. You never know who you will run into while away from home.
P.S. my spelling correction suggestion is still in affect for you. Apparently is misspelt FYI. I won't even go into your personal replacement for know words but you probally already know that.
Take care !
-
:rofl that's nice . That last post of yours had nothing I wrote cut and pasted in it. Just for the record. You may have to drive that next hayseed mobile of yours a long way to find one of them there " it's gotta be factory" morons. Make sure when you do take that long roadtrip of embarrassment you have your best rope belt on. You never know who you will run into while away from home.
P.S. my spelling correction suggestion is still in affect for you. Apparently is misspelt FYI. I won't even go into your personal replacement for know words but you probally already know that.
Take care !
^^^^^
^^^^^
dood......do you know how to spell ^^^^^ this word?
^^^^^
:rofl :noid :D
look at the other bold ones too. :aok
-
^^^^^
^^^^^
dood......do you know how to spell ^^^^^ this word?
^^^^^
:rofl :noid :D
look at the other bold ones too. :aok
What Cap.... I can't use slang? You seem to all the time. I don't think apparently was meant to be slang do you?
-
What Cap.... I can't use slang? You seem to all the time. I don't think apparently was meant to be slang do you?
nah.......use it all you want. but if you're going to correct someone else's "slang" then it's generally best to avoid using it yourself.
i use it all the time, except when i'm correcting someone else's.
i also never capitalize, simply because i type using "hunt and peck", and it slows me down too much. :D
-
What Cap.... I can't use slang? You seem to all the time. I don't think apparently was meant to be slang do you?
I said that apparently was not meant as slang. The rest of his version of slang is.... well let's say it's not common slang.
-
Well, this thread seems to have turned into a threeway that has moved from an actual discussion of the topic to a skit for "King of the Hill".
You three should take it private. It's unsettling to watch it unfold on the board.