motor

RC45 · 01-20-2005, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by SFDMALEX

/\/\/\I can name quite a few, you forgot to mention the price

Go ahead.. name the car AND the price.

Lets see the list... and remember it has to meet or beat in EVERY catagory.

* A non-limited production, available in the showroom
* All weather (as in rain or shine - obviosly snow is not a requirment)
* with space for luggage (at least 2 full size golf bags and hand luggage)
* Decent gas mileage (15mpg city, 26mpg hiway)
* 4s 0-60
* 12.xs 1/4 mile
* 180mph top speed
* 60-0 in 104ft
*1G skid pad
*7:56 Nurburgring lap

* New Price $50,000 (avg used price $35,000)

SFDMALEX · 01-20-2005, 09:11 PM

What I said that there is quite a few cars that will match or beat the C6 but you'll come back at me with the big "ITS ONLY 50 000 and your ferrari is 3 times more then that"...Im sure you can figure out by your self what these cars are/

RC45 · 01-21-2005, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by SFDMALEX

What I said that there is quite a few cars that will match or beat the C6 but you'll come back at me with the big "ITS ONLY 50 000 and your ferrari is 3 times more then that"...Im sure you can figure out by your self what these cars are/

NO - I won't cme back with "It only cost $50K.. I just want to rad the list of cars that match the criteria... (price ignored)... the cars listed must meet or beat these numbers:

* A non-limited production, available in the showroom
* All weather (as in rain or shine - obviosly snow is not a requirment)
* with space for luggage (at least 2 full size golf bags and hand luggage)
* Decent gas mileage (15mpg city, 26mpg hiway)
* 4s 0-60
* 12.xs 1/4 mile
* 180mph top speed
* 60-0 in 104ft
*1G skid pad
*7:56 Nurburgring lap

There are few that come close - but will lose because no place for your golf clubs, or cannot get better than 8mpg or have no roof, or are limited production or took 8min + to lap the 'ring.

This is why I am interested in exactly which cars people think are this versatile.

TeflonTron · 01-21-2005, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by RC45

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Originally Posted by RC45

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

Originally Posted by SFDMALEX

Originally Posted by RC45

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

I'm sure a Caterham will still walk the 'Vette. 'nuff said.

Bring it on.

Now.

Which Caterham first of all?

Well, we should get the prices as "near" as possible, so that would leave us with the R500. Cost is roughly $55,000 or so, and it'll nail 60 in 3.4, 100 in 8.1 and would muder the 'Vette on a racetrack. We'll leave the next Caterham up (the R600 Superlight) back home!

Not the most practical car to live with (I wouldn't want one as my only car, that's for sure!) but any discussion about "ultimate bang for your buck" is not complete without it.

In that case - the C5R will chew the R500 up and spit it out in little pieces.

Well, if it takes a race car to match the Caterham then that says more about the Corvette than it does about the R500. The R500, whether you like it on not, will outgun any road-legal car in production (aside from a few limited edition cars, who are also English). On a racetrack, a standard, off the showroom Corvette does not stand a chance against the English Rose. That's not knocking the 'Vette, but simply saying that you have to take the Caterham into the arguement whenever you talk about bang for buck.

It says nothing except that the R500 is a seat with an engine strapped on and is of no other use.. period.

So quit comparing single use non-daily cars to general purpose all round champs.

That's the truth.

Please provide another general purpose, daily use, practical 2 seater that can run and gun with the C5 Z06 or the C6 Z06.

A non-limited production, available in the showroom, all weather, with space for luggage and decent gas mileage 4s 0-60 , 12s 1/4 mile 180mph top speed, 60-0 in 100ft, 1G kid pad, 7:56 Nurburgring lapping car.

Just one.

Please do.

Let's hear it.

I'll take a TVR Cerbera 4.5 please. Or a Marcos Mantis. Both are as fast or faster, have livable boot space, etc. And not every middle-aged, balding fat man has one.

As for describing the Caterham as an engine with two seats, that's a little unfair. Was it not you who brought up the C5R? I believe that that is a race car, right?

I love how it's always a US guy who bangs on about how great the 'Vette is and how it'll mess up any other car for the same money, and then whines when the Caterham is brought into the mix. The fact is that Caterham have been making cars for many, many years, and they make them for the same market as the Corvette: people who like to drive. For you to then bash them for achieving this in a better fashion than Chevy is crazy.

graywolf624 · 01-21-2005, 12:07 PM

I'll take a TVR Cerbera 4.5 please.

Maybe in a straight line, if you can keep in running.

I love how it's always a US guy who bangs on about how great the 'Vette is and how it'll mess up any other car for the same money, and then whines when the Caterham is brought into the mix. The fact is that Caterham have been making cars for many, many years, and they make them for the same market as the Corvette: people who like to drive. For you to then bash them for achieving this in a better fashion than Chevy is crazy.

It has nothing to do with bashing the caterham.. But if the best you can compare a 2 seater car that is comfortable enough to fit two people in a golf bag and be driven every day too is basically a car that cant carry anything but the driver and is more uncomfortable then almost anything else on the road..then you clearly dont understand car categories..
The cathrham is a great car, but its not the same thing. You buy it as a car for a track.. You can buy a vette as your daily driver or at least as something youd drive often on the street.

TeflonTron · 01-21-2005, 12:37 PM

I do believe that the statement was "bang for buck" in which case the Caterham is in the same category as the Vette: bang has nothing to do with practicalities.

graywolf624 · 01-21-2005, 12:46 PM

I do believe that the statement was "bang for buck" in which case the Caterham is in the same category as the Vette: bang has nothing to do with practicalities.

Bang for the buck doesnt necessarily mean just performance but rather best mix of everything..
And in that category.. the corvette meets that goal.

It isnt best bang for the buck as a people carrier..
And it isnt best bang for the buck for a pickup.
Just like it isnt best bang for the buck for performance sacrificing everything else or the best luxury mixed with performance.
Its the best bang for the buck for performance in a car you can deal with every day. Clearly there is a market for such a car.. Diversity.. Theres no such thing as a car that everyone likes or meets every need.

RC45 · 01-22-2005, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by TeflonTron

I'll take a TVR Cerbera 4.5 please. Or a Marcos Mantis. Both are as fast or faster, have livable boot space, etc. And not every middle-aged, balding fat man has one.

As for describing the Caterham as an engine with two seats, that's a little unfair. Was it not you who brought up the C5R? I believe that that is a race car, right?

I love how it's always a US guy who bangs on about how great the 'Vette is and how it'll mess up any other car for the same money, and then whines when the Caterham is brought into the mix. The fact is that Caterham have been making cars for many, many years, and they make them for the same market as the Corvette: people who like to drive. For you to then bash them for achieving this in a better fashion than Chevy is crazy.

I have humoured your nonsense answers for a while now.

Try comprehend the below statement.

I just want to read the list of cars that match the follwing criteria... (price ignored)... the cars listed must meet or beat the numbers in each of these catagories:

* A non-limited production, available in the showroom

* All weather (as in rain or shine - obviosly snow is not a requirment)

* with space for luggage (at least 2 full size golf bags and hand luggage)

* Decent gas mileage (15mpg city, 26mpg hiway)

* 4s 0-60

* 12.xs 1/4 mile

* 180mph top speed

* 60-0 in 104ft

*1G skid pad

*7:56 Nurburgring lap

There are few that come close - but many will lose because of no place for your golf clubs, or cannot get better than 8mpg or have no roof, or are limited production or took 8min + to lap the 'ring.

This is why I am interested in exactly which cars people think are this versatile.

So Teflon Tron - instead of just spuing crap - lets see the results of your choices in each fo the above catagories.

I am open to new experiences... but it seems you like many speak from "magazine" stats and not actual experience.

The criteria are listed.. please provide the cars that v=can meet or beat EVERY one of them.

ikon2003 · 01-22-2005, 04:21 PM

Very interesting and thorough criteria. I like this comparison, though i think the list will b rather short.

7:56 ring lap is tough and the 1G skid pad is very tough too - it'll b hard getting reliable confirmations for all those.

i'd like to see which cars are viable for this competition.

astonmartinandy · 01-22-2005, 05:06 PM

What about an Evo FQ 340? I don't know how it would rate for some of the stats, but it has to be there for most of the performance criteria;

Available in showroom, all weather, space for golf clubs (and rear seats btw), combined mpg 21.6, 0-60 in 4s, don't know 1/4 mile or stopping distances. As for the skid pan and Nurburgring time it must be close with 4WD and all of the 3 letter acronyms known to man.

I will confess that the top speed is limited to 157 however.. so it does fall short of at least that specification.

FoxFour · 01-22-2005, 05:50 PM

Corvette C6 Z06 and the Mitsu FQ 340. Heck yeah! But if I was going to take my car to an occasional open track event then it would be the Z06 hands down. Not because it comes with road racing ( Like Le Mans) inspired technology (OK, I lie. Yes because it is equipped with that) but because I don't have to worry too much about voiding my warranty whenever I go to Road Atlanta for track days. GM said that taking the car out for an occasional track event will not void the warranty. Just take your EVO to an SCCA solo 1 or 2 event here in the states and they will hunt you down and void yours. Me- Track event/ street- Z06. Now if Mitsu would only stand behind their performance products..

astonmartinandy · 01-22-2005, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by FoxFour

Corvette C6 Z06 and the Mitsu FQ 340. Heck yeah! But if I was going to take my car to an occasional open track event then it would be the Z06 hands down. Not because it comes with road racing ( Like Le Mans) inspired technology (OK, I lie. Yes because it is equipped with that) but because I don't have to worry too much about voiding my warranty whenever I go to Road Atlanta for track days. GM said that taking the car out for an occasional track event will not void the warranty. Just take your EVO to an SCCA solo 1 or 2 event here in the states and they will hunt you down and void yours. Me- Track event/ street- Z06. Now if Mitsu would only stand behind their performance products..

Fair point, but for this topic can we just stick to the original criteria before we start over complicating things with manufacturer warranties!!

TeflonTron · 01-22-2005, 07:21 PM

RC45: I already did. I'd bet that the Cerbera 4.5 and Marcos Mantis can do what you have listed on your requirements. I'd also bet that a whole bunch of RUF cars can do it as well.

FoxFour · 01-22-2005, 07:54 PM

Has anyone mentioned an SRT-4 yet? It seems like a well put together package and it's a practical car as well. And you can get one for a shade over $20.000. It has a well tuned suspension package, nice turbo engine with an upgraded transaxle with a Limited Slip Differential. Four doors; etc.

graywolf624 · 01-22-2005, 08:37 PM

hahaha.. the srt-4 and the corvette in the same sentence..
Man fox, I know its saturday nite, but slow down on the drinking.

poor handlling, fwd car, with absolutely 0 reliability versus a lighter, higher hsp, good handling, rwd car, with proven reliability.

What does it say when in a comparison between the saturn ion redline and an srt-4, the magazines said that while the redline would lose on the track cause of a huge hsp gap, it was the better handler.

As for the mitsubishi..
a) it isnt sold in the US.
b) performance wise Id say its a competition (although it suffers from the same horried interior).
c) price wise they are about equal if we are talking price for what theyd sell in america. (non zo6 this is).
d) reliability, Im not sure.. maybe where there assembled but the american versions of the evo have a poor reputation for quality.. that and the dealership will void your warrenty on a dime.

Honestly, its probably the only car I would consider even similar to the vette in value per money, but it has a severe difference in type of car.. which potentially still doesnt make it competition for the vette. Either way, it proves a valid point.. It takes a hell of a car when you can think of only one car even close to its value for money.