z06 vs modena

z06 has faster 0-60 faster 1/4 mile more hp and faster slolom (cant't spell) speed i like the z06
:iceslolan :feedback:

yea i completly agree with you i would probably take the z06, both are impressive but the z06 has way more tuning capibilities that you would just not do with a ferrari unless u were gunna take it to konig which would cost alot.

thank you! all the assholes at the ferrari forums dont want to admit it but they cant run form the truth forever the z06 is also fast then all the other current ferraries cept the enzo and if chevy builds the ss man 0-60 in 5.1 thats faster than the astons :iceslolan

what if i wanted the looks of a modena, and the performance of a z06, corvettes look nice, but ferrari's are alot more appealing to me. you can only go so fast on the street, and i don't anticipate taking a $50k+ car to the track very often, so i'd get the chick magnet

meh i guess your kinda right you could prob. wait for the 05' vette the base will be lighter and have more bhp than the current z06 and the c6 zo6 will have 500bhp and the c6 is supposed to kinda look like ferraries and maby better but think about it your only spending $50k hah! only, on a car with better performance and not that bad looks or you could buy a $176k car with less performance but better looks and more prestige kind of a noodle scratcher

If I were going for looks it really hard to beat the physic of a Ferrari. (even though that C5 body is so sweet). But If I was buying the car for their abilities, im goona have to go with the Z06. And especially for the price tag its hard to match it up with anything. It also rapes the modena in gas milage comparison. city/highway Z06 19/28, Modena 10/16 ouch. Guess thats what happens when you have 5 valves per cylinder.

who needs chicks when you got a wicked car...plus any girls that would date you just of your ferrari are not appealing to me...dont get me wrong, i love women but z06 is certainly more pleasing.

hahahahahahahaha i know eh no arguements except for when they need maitnence!!!!

........well then again if you have a vette or a ferrari u could get any woman u wanted i think the money would do the talkin.

........well then again if you have a vette or a ferrari u could get any woman u wanted i think the money would do the talkin.

:werd: no doubt about that.

hey i want to say thanx to anyone so far that has posted something almost anyone anywere else wont admit that a z06 is faster its realy pissing me off so thanx :cheers:

I think it was Motor Trend that ran a test on the all-around best performance car for the dollar, and it was the Z06 that won the contest the last several years in a row. The contenders were the Viper, the Z06, and the Ford Cobra-R (or some piece of crap, all I know is that it was a Ford Mustang). The Z06 is so user friendly--- rides great, handles well, runs awesome, and all with the a/c turned on and the tunes cranked up.

There is nothing like the coolness of a Ferrari, that is if you can afford one. I guess you have to consider the up keep too. If you can afford the car, you're supposed to be able to pay the repairs.

You're sitting at a red light and some guy in his Ferrari pulls up and revvs the engine. You look over and he's sitting there w/his black leather gloves, his cool shades and a woman by his side. The green light comes down and the prancing horse ends up getting smoked.

You end up stealing the Ferrari chick and the Ferrari prick is HISTORY.----Beating a Ferrari would be cooler than owning one. ---That's why you couldn't get a response in the ferrari forum.
---TEX---

Yeah, but if I remember right the SVT-Cobra R won this last year (it was close) It has the same 0-60 as the C5 and .1 faster in the 1/4 based on that mag. It also was I think 8 large cheaper than the c5. The Cobra looks like ass though... The new mustang looks a lot more muscular thank god. Ford's last attempt at the mustang looked too family car-ish to be a sports car, ya know? it's almost like they were competing with firebirds and camaro's and such. They don't really have a contender for the z06 tho. And the mustang had to go through forced induction to pull out those extra 30 ponies over the c5.

I think it was Motor Trend that ran a test on the all-around best performance car for the dollar, and it was the Z06 that won the contest the last several years in a row. The contenders were the Viper, the Z06, and the Ford Cobra-R (or some piece of crap, all I know is that it was a Ford Mustang). The Z06 is so user friendly--- rides great, handles well, runs awesome, and all with the a/c turned on and the tunes cranked up.

There is nothing like the coolness of a Ferrari, that is if you can afford one. I guess you have to consider the up keep too. If you can afford the car, you're supposed to be able to pay the repairs.

You're sitting at a red light and some guy in his Ferrari pulls up and revvs the engine. You look over and he's sitting there w/his black leather gloves, his cool shades and a woman by his side. The green light comes down and the prancing horse ends up getting smoked.

You end up stealing the Ferrari chick and the Ferrari prick is HISTORY.----Beating a Ferrari would be cooler than owning one. ---That's why you couldn't get a response in the ferrari forum.
---TEX---

hahahahahah i took a buddy of mine in his ferrari in my vette c5. the ferrari got crapped on. but ide have to say it is still a real nice car.

just think when the c6 z06 comes out 500bhp and it will be lighter ahh man the viper gone the 360 already gone and so on

:rolleyes:

Pretty much all of you in this thread are idiots. The Z06 has a much bigger motor than the 360; of course it will have more power. The 360 was not built to go fast in a straight line. It was made to go fast around the turns and I'm afraid that the Z06 can't touch it there. Go ahead and argue with me because I know you will since everybody knows that there isn't a car on the face of the earth that can out-handle the Z06. :rolleyes:

I am sorry but the Z06 might have the 360 beat in acceleration, but the 360 looks far better than the plain uninspiring design of the Z06, it is far more exclusive and unique, the fit and finish is far better, and it is better on the track. The only thing the Z06 really has going for it is the price and even that to me that is meaningless.

:rolleyes:

Pretty much all of you in this thread are idiots. The Z06 has a much bigger motor than the 360; of course it will have more power. The 360 was not built to go fast in a straight line. It was made to go fast around the turns and I'm afraid that the Z06 can't touch it there. Go ahead and argue with me because I know you will since everybody knows that there isn't a car on the face of the earth that can out-handle the Z06. :rolleyes:

I am sorry but the Z06 might have the 360 beat in acceleration, but the 360 looks far better than the plain uninspiring design of the Z06, it is far more exclusive and unique, the fit and finish is far better, and it is better on the track. The only thing the Z06 really has going for it is the price and even that to me that is meaningless.
STOP saying that all people here are idiots, although I havent posted in this thread, I can say you are one.

"The Z06 has a much bigger motor than the 360; of course it will have more power."

Thats so lame man, thats such a stupid sentence, so stupid!!!....
Mmm...lets take an example, take a mustang with a 3.8 liter engine v6 producing less than 200 hp, now take a honda 2.0 s2000 producing 240 hp. Mmmm sounds weird...Of course more displacement DOES NOT equal more power, and stop saying people here are stupid, as far as im concerned we know more about cars than you do...

STOP saying that all people here are idiots, although I havent posted in this thread, I can say you are one.

"The Z06 has a much bigger motor than the 360; of course it will have more power."

Thats so lame man, thats such a stupid sentence, so stupid!!!....
Mmm...lets take an example, take a mustang with a 3.8 liter engine v6 producing less than 200 hp, now take a honda 2.0 s2000 producing 240 hp. Mmmm sounds weird...Of course more displacement DOES NOT equal more power, and stop saying people here are stupid, as far as im concerned we know more about cars than you do...

Hey noobie, stop for a second and think about what you just said. You don't know me, so don't pretend that you do. Stick around for a while before lodging your foot in your mouth. I hate to break it to you but more displacement does equal more power. Granted simply increasing the displacement doesn't mean that you just get more power. You used a poor example since the V6 in the mustang is a horrible engine with poor engineering and tuning while the S2000's 6 cylinder is quite the opposite. You can only get so much power from smaller displacement engines reliably. Granted the 360 was also tuned and designed for top end more than acceleration. Its smaller displacement is simply one of the factors. I'm sorry if my post pissed you off, but I am sick and tired of the Z06 people giving themselves pats on the back prematurely. As for my intelligence, you don't become a Moderator here by being stupid, so I would say there are a lot of people that will disagree with you on that aspect here. Also, I didn't say everyone that has posted in this thread was stupid, I said some. So pull your head out of your butt and stop flaming people.

I hate to break it to you but more displacement does equal more power. Granted simply increasing the displacement doesn't mean that you just get more power. You used a poor example since the V6 in the mustang is a horrible engine with poor engineering and tuning while the S2000's 6 cylinder is quite the opposite. You can only get so much power from smaller displacement engines reliably. Granted the 360 was also tuned and designed for top end more than acceleration. Its smaller displacement is simply one of the factors.

Yeah displacement does equal more power, if tuned properly. The 360 Modena 3.6L V8 is a great engine, as is the LS6.

I think you may have a typo here though, an S2000 is a 4cyl, and yes, the mustang V6 is horrible. (at least i think it is)

I don't however think that a Modena can oust a Z06 on a track. The new Z06 ran a 7:56 on the Nuerburgring, the best time I could find for the Modena was an 8:09. If you could find a better time for the Modena post it cause thats the best I could find.

But I would go for the looks of a Modena over the Z06 anyday, their just to sweet.

When takling about performance, Z06 certainly has the advantage and it sure is the car to go for if that is all a person cares. The Z06 is in a class of its own within its price range.
But the Z06 loses its advantage when it comes to other things.
Although they both offer great V8 engines, but the Modena offers a much more hi-tech and costly engine, with 5 valves per cylinder and pumping out more than 100bhp per litre.
The Z06 does have one of the best tuned OHV engine, but not quite up to the level of the DOHC V8 inside the Modena.
Also the interor, as it would be pretty important for when someone spends $150,000 on a road-car.
The 360 Modena is more unique, and almost everything could be made to the customer's choice. This is also what people might look for when they spend this kind of money.
With the 360 Modena costing nearly 3 times more than the Z06, it pretty much explains that these two cars are for people in two different world.
As I still believe what you get what you pay for.
I would not consider a 20k car when I could afford one at 60k.
No matter what, it is always nice to find out how a lower priced car and outperform a car costing 3 times as much and this is what the American automakers are offering now.
Proving to other automakers that "we can burn your a$$ with more $$$ in yuor own pocket"

Yeah displacement does equal more power, if tuned properly. The 360 Modena 3.6L V8 is a great engine, as is the LS6.

I think you may have a typo here though, an S2000 is a 4cyl, and yes, the mustang V6 is horrible. (at least i think it is)

I don't however think that a Modena can oust a Z06 on a track. The new Z06 ran a 7:56 on the Nuerburgring, the best time I could find for the Modena was an 8:09. If you could find a better time for the Modena post it cause thats the best I could find.

But I would go for the looks of a Modena over the Z06 anyday, their just to sweet.

Sorry, yes, the S2000 does have a 4 cylinder. I don't really pay attention to times like that. Conditions and drivers adversly change things. What I would trust is a side by side run done with the same driver.

What I would trust is a side by side run done with the same driver.

That's definatly the best way to solve this. I don't belive mere words can establish victory, but until then, i'm holding to my opinion.

Yeah displacement does equal more power, if tuned properly. The 360 Modena 3.6L V8 is a great engine, as is the LS6.

I think you may have a typo here though, an S2000 is a 4cyl, and yes, the mustang V6 is horrible. (at least i think it is)

I don't however think that a Modena can oust a Z06 on a track. The new Z06 ran a 7:56 on the Nuerburgring, the best time I could find for the Modena was an 8:09. If you could find a better time for the Modena post it cause thats the best I could find.

But I would go for the looks of a Modena over the Z06 anyday, their just to sweet.

make that the 04 commemorative edition z06, cause thats the yr, and model they tested, i dont know about the regular 04 z06, but i think thats about as fast, commemorative being probably a little quicker, cause of the lighter parts it has. the previous z06 vettes, below 04, probably wont be able to make that time, cause they changed some things on the suspension for all the 04 vettes, i dont know if it was just the z06 or all vettes, but it was the 04. they said that change made a big difference on the track.

i think that the new 360 modena challenge stradale, is a more fair comparison vs the z06, since they re both a more performance oriented version of the original car. its more expensive, but it makes more sense to take the performance versions of both. i dont think ferrari made the original modena a pure performance machine, they probably detuned it a little, or less track ready, to make it more drivable on the road, where the challenge stradale is more performance, like the z06 version of the c5 vette.

the 360 challenge is even more money though... it's a cool 225k... y don't you just compare a jaguar xj220 to a z06. once again the comparison between the 360 modena and the z06 is strictly in personal preference (luxury to speed)

how come i just read something that said the 2000 360 modena runs the 1/4 in 12.2 :dunno: thats not right is it?

Good to see Polygon put some intellegence in this god-forsaken thread.


The 360 Modena is $100k more than a ZO6 and it feeld like it is worth much more than that- firstly- it uses a DOHC V8- as opposed to a low-tech old school OHV. Secondly the cars handling setup is far superior to the ZO6- MR driven train and track-bred suspension that can handle conditions other than Americas billiard-table smooth highways. Then there is the clear message that the Modena is light years ahead of MR Plastic-fantastic in terms of quality- using PROPER materials...........


So while a ZO6 will blow off a 360 at the lights- any closer inspection of the two shows the ZO6 clearly as the inferior car.........

Good to see Polygon put some intellegence in this god-forsaken thread.


The 360 Modena is $100k more than a ZO6 and it feeld like it is worth much more than that- firstly- it uses a DOHC V8- as opposed to a low-tech old school OHV. Secondly the cars handling setup is far superior to the ZO6- MR driven train and track-bred suspension that can handle conditions other than Americas billiard-table smooth highways. Then there is the clear message that the Modena is light years ahead of MR Plastic-fantastic in terms of quality- using PROPER materials...........


So while a ZO6 will blow off a 360 at the lights- any closer inspection of the two shows the ZO6 clearly as the inferior car.........

Well you'll be wishing you had OHV when your oil pressure is to low to lubricate your cam, thats an expensive repair.

I think the reason that a Z06 is far inferior may be due to the price difference. Once again performance doesn't reflect 'plastic-fantastic', thats hardly an argument as far as performance comparision.

Oh wow... the Z06 has an inferior engine?!? Are you serious? I didn't know that! (pardon the sarcasm) That seems to be the only major plus in this car (plastic sidepaneling on the interior and the worst leather seats known to man among other things) The LS6 is a fairly widely used tuner engine especially for american exotics and kit cars (don't laugh). Among these would be Callaway's C12, and Mosler's MT 900 Photon. I'm a viper fan true to heart, but the engine of a z06 is impressive out of the box, and it's very versatile. Don't knock it boys and girls until you know what all it can do. (Just remember Einstein failed science) Just because it may not be amazing to start with doesn't mean it doesn't have the most potential out of any v8 (contest that!)

:rolleyes:

Pretty much all of you in this thread are idiots. The Z06 has a much bigger motor than the 360; of course it will have more power. The 360 was not built to go fast in a straight line. It was made to go fast around the turns and I'm afraid that the Z06 can't touch it there. Go ahead and argue with me because I know you will since everybody knows that there isn't a car on the face of the earth that can out-handle the Z06. :rolleyes:

I am sorry but the Z06 might have the 360 beat in acceleration, but the 360 looks far better than the plain uninspiring design of the Z06, it is far more exclusive and unique, the fit and finish is far better, and it is better on the track. The only thing the Z06 really has going for it is the price and even that to me that is meaningless.

It may be larger in volume, but in physical dimensions it takes up about as much room, being that OHV is much more space efficient. As to the track times, they've been proven, aruge if you like it won't make you right, unless now the ring is a poor test of handling ability?

If price is meaningless, then go buy a mclaren, otherwise ignoring price is a cop out, the Z06 performs with the 360 for less then 1/4 the price, looks are subjective and fit & finish is a dash grabbers argument (besides that, I dont know who says a 360s interior is high quality or luxurious, it's as spartan as the Z06's), get some better arguments, just say you like the car better and leave it at that, you have no proof of anything otherwise.

Jimster, rampant bias (or lack of knowledge, or both) continues to amaze me. OHV is in the range of 10-15 years older then OHC is, both were made before the turn of the 1900s, and both are old school. OHV has many benefits, and if you don't require multiple valves, high RPM or variable valve timing (which you can still effectivly do on a single cam, it just isn't as useful) then you don't need DOHC. The LS6 has a large bore allowing for large valves, which solves the lack of multiple valve flow problem, it doesn't need high RPM because of it's displacement, and while VVT would be nice, it obviously isn't hurting the motor any. It gets better fuel mileage (a viable engine feature, even in a sportscars case) has more power potential, and produces as much power in a lower RPM range.

If you'd like to truly add something to this thread, why don't you find the 360's engine weight and we can throw that into the mix as well, I've ben unsuccessful so far.

Nismo, the 04 Z06 recieved no changes in suspenision, and save for the commemorative editions 10 lb lighter hood it's the same as the Z06, the base C5 models had the magnetic ride controlled shocks added as an option, it is not standard nor available on the Z06. Besides that, the commemorative hasn't been proven to outlap the regular Z06, the hood could help it's laptimes, but the difference would not be anything major.

It may be larger in volume, but in physical dimensions it takes up about as much room, being that OHV is much more space efficient. As to the track times, they've been proven, aruge if you like it won't make you right, unless now the ring is a poor test of handling ability?

If price is meaningless, then go buy a mclaren, otherwise ignoring price is a cop out, the Z06 performs with the 360 for less then 1/4 the price, looks are subjective and fit & finish is a dash grabbers argument (besides that, I dont know who says a 360s interior is high quality or luxurious, it's as spartan as the Z06's), get some better arguments, just say you like the car better and leave it at that, you have no proof of anything otherwise.

Jimster, rampant bias (or lack of knowledge, or both) continues to amaze me. OHV is in the range of 10-15 years older then OHC is, both were made before the turn of the 1900s, and both are old school. OHV has many benefits, and if you don't require multiple valves, high RPM or variable valve timing (which you can still effectivly do on a single cam, it just isn't as useful) then you don't need DOHC. The LS6 has a large bore allowing for large valves, which solves the lack of multiple valve flow problem, it doesn't need high RPM because of it's displacement, and while VVT would be nice, it obviously isn't hurting the motor any. It gets better fuel mileage (a viable engine feature, even in a sportscars case) has more power potential, and produces as much power in a lower RPM range.

If you'd like to truly add something to this thread, why don't you find the 360's engine weight and we can throw that into the mix as well, I've ben unsuccessful so far.

Nismo, the 04 Z06 recieved no changes in suspenision, and save for the commemorative editions 10 lb lighter hood it's the same as the Z06, the base C5 models had the magnetic ride controlled shocks added as an option, it is not standard nor available on the Z06. Besides that, the commemorative hasn't been proven to outlap the regular Z06, the hood could help it's laptimes, but the difference would not be anything major.
Oh I'm sorry, I forgot- the ZO6 is the handling supremo of the world- nothing can play it down- sheeit an idiot driving a ZO6 could fry Schumacher in an Enzo- silly me how dare I ever question the obvious supremity of the Corvette. And of course the interior is made of nothing but the finest Aluminium and Outback Leather and premium New Zealand wool for the carpets, oh and the most important thing for any High-performance car buyer?? GREAT GAS MILEAGE- I mean damn to think that isn't an issue when you are flogging the ass off your high-performance car would be completely moronic. That is generally what you are trying to say.......

And the reason that there is more tuning potential for the LS6 comes down to a vaster aftermarket- If a company can pull huge bhp gains out of a B18c- then whats stoppig them modifying a 360 Modena??? to that extent- by the looks of your post you appear to be saying that you can't modify one :huh: Koenig have proved that you can.

And nobody can really say that the ZO6 handles better than the ZO6- there are too many variables to take into account- that we just can't put down to numbers- as told in the Murcielago vs ZO6 thread- there are factors like who drove what (IF they were driven around the ring by the same driver then that cancels out somewhat) the Engine power/size/torque- which in this case figures in the equation- due to the ZO6 being brawnier- if the 360 had similar engine figures to the ZO6 would the numbers still weigh in the ZO6's favour???? we don't know- two evenly powered/torqued cars around the same track with the same driver is the only way you'll find which chassis is superior........So nobody can claim either is a better handler unless they have driven both (and I have only driven a 360- but no ZO6- just a regular C5- WHICH is inferior to the 360- but not too similar enough to the ZO6) I'm hoping you have driven a 360 FYRHWK1- or else your opinion is redundant to me.

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot- the ZO6 is the handling supremo of the world- nothing can play it down- sheeit an idiot driving a ZO6 could fry Schumacher in an Enzo- silly me how dare I ever question the obvious supremity of the Corvette. And of course the interior is made of nothing but the finest Aluminium and Outback Leather and premium New Zealand wool for the carpets, oh and the most important thing for any High-performance car buyer?? GREAT GAS MILEAGE- I mean damn to think that isn't an issue when you are flogging the ass off your high-performance car would be completely moronic. That is generally what you are trying to say.......

And the reason that there is more tuning potential for the LS6 comes down to a vaster aftermarket- If a company can pull huge bhp gains out of a B18c- then whats stoppig them modifying a 360 Modena??? to that extent- by the looks of your post you appear to be saying that you can't modify one :huh: Koenig have proved that you can.

And nobody can really say that the ZO6 handles better than the ZO6- there are too many variables to take into account- that we just can't put down to numbers- as told in the Murcielago vs ZO6 thread- there are factors like who drove what (IF they were driven around the ring by the same driver then that cancels out somewhat) the Engine power/size/torque- which in this case figures in the equation- due to the ZO6 being brawnier- if the 360 had similar engine figures to the ZO6 would the numbers still weigh in the ZO6's favour???? we don't know- two evenly powered/torqued cars around the same track with the same driver is the only way you'll find which chassis is superior........So nobody can claim either is a better handler unless they have driven both (and I have only driven a 360- but no ZO6- just a regular C5- WHICH is inferior to the 360- but not too similar enough to the ZO6) I'm hoping you have driven a 360 FYRHWK1- or else your opinion is redundant to me.

You twist my words, I simply stated that it pulled just as good a ring time, which for all intensive purposes means it handles as well, that track is a good gauge of all kinds of turns.

I knew someone would jump on the gas mileage addition, but point is, the LS6 roughly the same size dimensionally, it's much larger in displacement and yet it gets better mileage. Gas mileage is just one aspect, but if you can have 2 motors which produce the same power and one has better mileage, who has the upper hand? I guess I shouldn't mention that in professional racing fuel mileage is extremely important, the Audi R8 owes most of it's domination to it's fuel mileage for the obvious pitting reasons.

If you find aluminum interiors impressive then fine, we obviously share different tastes, I'm by no means saying the Z06's interior is up to quality with a 360, but the 360 is far from luxurious.

The 360 will do better with an aftermarket, but it will still never produce as much power as an LS6 of equal tune, it can't overcome the displacement difference. Besides that, as it gains more and more power it will fall into the same problem many other smaller motors have, a decrease in its powerbands range, which i'm sure you know is very necessary for a track car. Either way, i'm hardly saying you can't modify one, you just won't get as large a result as you would with an LS6, which had to be detuned from factory with smaller cams and rich fuel profiles.

The 360 may do better witht he Z06's powerband, but it wasn't designed with said engine in it, just like a car like the honda S2000 would perform better with a flatter powerband. It would have other affects from using a larger engine with a flatter powerband as well, so you can't say what either would do with more powerband unless we're going aftermarket, in which case the Z06 would do better as well.

Even with the same driver it could be swayed, he might be better with the Z06 as (this is by word of mouth) it's a more forgiving car, with its powerband and front engine setup, or perhaps he has more wheel time with the Z06, or vice versa.

I haven't driven a 360, nor do I foresee myself being able to, the best I can say is I've experienced both cars in question from the passenger seat (Ive driven the Z06, but riding and driving are 2 vastly different things)

It may be larger in volume, but in physical dimensions it takes up about as much room, being that OHV is much more space efficient. As to the track times, they've been proven, aruge if you like it won't make you right, unless now the ring is a poor test of handling ability?

If price is meaningless, then go buy a mclaren, otherwise ignoring price is a cop out, the Z06 performs with the 360 for less then 1/4 the price, looks are subjective and fit & finish is a dash grabbers argument (besides that, I dont know who says a 360s interior is high quality or luxurious, it's as spartan as the Z06's), get some better arguments, just say you like the car better and leave it at that, you have no proof of anything otherwise.

Jimster, rampant bias (or lack of knowledge, or both) continues to amaze me. OHV is in the range of 10-15 years older then OHC is, both were made before the turn of the 1900s, and both are old school. OHV has many benefits, and if you don't require multiple valves, high RPM or variable valve timing (which you can still effectivly do on a single cam, it just isn't as useful) then you don't need DOHC. The LS6 has a large bore allowing for large valves, which solves the lack of multiple valve flow problem, it doesn't need high RPM because of it's displacement, and while VVT would be nice, it obviously isn't hurting the motor any. It gets better fuel mileage (a viable engine feature, even in a sportscars case) has more power potential, and produces as much power in a lower RPM range.

If you'd like to truly add something to this thread, why don't you find the 360's engine weight and we can throw that into the mix as well, I've ben unsuccessful so far.

Nismo, the 04 Z06 recieved no changes in suspenision, and save for the commemorative editions 10 lb lighter hood it's the same as the Z06, the base C5 models had the magnetic ride controlled shocks added as an option, it is not standard nor available on the Z06. Besides that, the commemorative hasn't been proven to outlap the regular Z06, the hood could help it's laptimes, but the difference would not be anything major.

the article saids that the 04 z06s handling has been improved. it specifically says that it got revised chassis tuning, and suspension dampening characteristics to improve handling. it also says something about reducing its roll on tight corners. if you dont believe me, go ahead and read the article, click the link below, i was going by what the article saids. if you have complaints about it, talk to the author man, not me.

http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2004/index.shtml

I've read what it says, the bulk of it is marketing, as they aren't about to change the chassis this late in the C5's lifetime, that would cost a boatload just for a minor tweak, and GM doesn't like wasting money, especially at the assembly lines.

Fine, it has new shock valving, wow, not useless but hardly anything major, there still isn't any documented proof comparing both versions.

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot- the ZO6 is the handling supremo of the world- nothing can play it down- sheeit an idiot driving a ZO6 could fry Schumacher in an Enzo- silly me how dare I ever question the obvious supremity of the Corvette. And of course the interior is made of nothing but the finest Aluminium and Outback Leather and premium New Zealand wool for the carpets, oh and the most important thing for any High-performance car buyer?? GREAT GAS MILEAGE- I mean damn to think that isn't an issue when you are flogging the ass off your high-performance car would be completely moronic. That is generally what you are trying to say.......

And the reason that there is more tuning potential for the LS6 comes down to a vaster aftermarket- If a company can pull huge bhp gains out of a B18c- then whats stoppig them modifying a 360 Modena??? to that extent- by the looks of your post you appear to be saying that you can't modify one :huh: Koenig have proved that you can.

And nobody can really say that the ZO6 handles better than the ZO6- there are too many variables to take into account- that we just can't put down to numbers- as told in the Murcielago vs ZO6 thread- there are factors like who drove what (IF they were driven around the ring by the same driver then that cancels out somewhat) the Engine power/size/torque- which in this case figures in the equation- due to the ZO6 being brawnier- if the 360 had similar engine figures to the ZO6 would the numbers still weigh in the ZO6's favour???? we don't know- two evenly powered/torqued cars around the same track with the same driver is the only way you'll find which chassis is superior........So nobody can claim either is a better handler unless they have driven both (and I have only driven a 360- but no ZO6- just a regular C5- WHICH is inferior to the 360- but not too similar enough to the ZO6) I'm hoping you have driven a 360 FYRHWK1- or else your opinion is redundant to me.


That pretty much summed it up for me except a few of things. I would think that you would know, FYRHWK1, that an engines displacement has very little to do with physical engine size. Displacement can be changed by increasing the bore and stroke of the engine which will not change its physical size at all so I fail to see your point here. They are still different displacements and the 360’s engine is smaller in that respect. Also the fit and finish of the 360 is sparse, it was meant to be, it is a sports car. I never said the Z06 had a sparse interior, I am saying that it has a shitty interior. They use cheap looking and feeling plastics. I have been told that they even have a worse fit and finish than a damn Hyundai. The 360's interior might be sparse, but it is for from being cheap. There is a big difference between being cheap and inexpensive. As for the price debate, your right, price has nothing to do with it. This is a performance comparison, not a price comparison and even if it was I would still choose the Modena because the Z06 can't give me what I want. If I wanted a sports car that everybody else had with very plain styling I would have bought a Mustang in the 80s. Now for my last point. The point of OHC is to reduce the amount of friction and less resistance means more power. With pushrods you have much more resistance than you do with an OHC design. There are also more tuning options with OHC cam then there are with a pushrod design. And people please stop using OHV to represent pushrod engines. All piston based engines are OHV.

That pretty much summed it up for me except a few of things. I would think that you would know, FYRHWK1, that an engines displacement has very little to do with physical engine size. Displacement can be changed by increasing the bore and stroke of the engine which will not change its physical size at all so I fail to see your point here. They are still different displacements and the 360’s engine is smaller in that respect. Also the fit and finish of the 360 is sparse, it was meant to be, it is a sports car. I never said the Z06 had a sparse interior, I am saying that it has a shitty interior. They use cheap looking and feeling plastics. I have been told that they even have a worse fit and finish than a damn Hyundai. The 360's interior might be sparse, but it is for from being cheap. There is a big difference between being cheap and inexpensive. As for the price debate, your right, price has nothing to do with it. This is a performance comparison, not a price comparison and even if it was I would still choose the Modena because the Z06 can't give me what I want. If I wanted a sports car that everybody else had with very plain styling I would have bought a Mustang in the 80s. Now for my last point. The point of OHC is to reduce the amount of friction and less resistance means more power. With pushrods you have much more resistance than you do with an OHC design. There are also more tuning options with OHC cam then there are with a pushrod design. And people please stop using OHV to represent pushrod engines. All piston based engines are OHV.

My point is that the LS6 is larger volumetrically yet roughly the same size dimensionally, it's a more efficient use of space.

As for the hyundai comment :lol: I take cars apart all day and there isn't any truth to it, whatsoever. I actually see the panels removed from the car, the corvettes interior is built fine, if you don't like the feeling of it then modify it, new panels arent that much.

Price does matter, if you don't include that then we're simply fantasizing, which (no offense to anyone here) is basically all you'll be doing if you're a 360 fan. A higher possible pricetag means they can put more into the car, with GMs ability and a 175K pricetag the Z06 would be the finest sportscar on the road, but they don't have that luxury and they STILL perform with the competition.

No, not all engines are OHV, OHV describes an engine where the valves are over the camshaft, OHC describes an engine where the cams are over the valves.

Tell me something, take a V8 for example, how are you going to REDUCE friction by adding 3 cams (DOHC vs OHV) adding twice as many valves, valvesprings, rockers or lifters and only removing a set of pushrods? You don't, DOHC valvetrains have much more friction involved, they have other advantages to them which outweigh it if thats what your setup requires.

My point is that the LS6 is larger volumetrically yet roughly the same size dimensionally, it's a more efficient use of space.

As for the hyundai comment :lol: I take cars apart all day and there isn't any truth to it, whatsoever. I actually see the panels removed from the car, the corvettes interior is built fine, if you don't like the feeling of it then modify it, new panels arent that much.

Price does matter, if you don't include that then we're simply fantasizing, which (no offense to anyone here) is basically all you'll be doing if you're a 360 fan. A higher possible pricetag means they can put more into the car, with GMs ability and a 175K pricetag the Z06 would be the finest sportscar on the road, but they don't have that luxury and they STILL perform with the competition.

No, not all engines are OHV, OHV describes an engine where the valves are over the camshaft, OHC describes an engine where the cams are over the valves.

Tell me something, take a V8 for example, how are you going to REDUCE friction by adding 3 cams (DOHC vs OHV) adding twice as many valves, valvesprings, rockers or lifters and only removing a set of pushrods? You don't, DOHC valvetrains have much more friction involved, they have other advantages to them which outweigh it if thats what your setup requires.


They probably aren't the same rough size physically. The Modena's engine might look bigger than it is because DOHC heads are huge compared to pushrod heads. The block itself is quite small.

You can't say that any of us are dreaming about owning a Modena. You don't know how much money I have access to or will in the future. Also, you can't simply say that with more money the Z06 would be the finest sports car around. Just simply throwing a lot of money at a project doesn't guarantee results. The Saleen S7 is a great example of that.

I would love to see where you got that definition for overhead valves. Over head valve means that the valves are over the piston. Please, I implore you to prove me wrong. If you do I will gladly admit it.

First off SOHC designs have less moving parts than a pushrod design. Less moving parts in most cases equals less friction which in turn equals more power. While DOHC might not have less moving parts they don't add three cams, that would make a TOHC, which does not exist. Also OHC designs are made for more flow which equals more power. Also you have to think about the long thin stick that is a pushrod and imagine the flex it will produce and inertial forces as the engine speed rises robbing you of power. Also, with tuning you have many more options with OHC than pushrod since you have limitless control over the valves. You can't tell me that all of the Super cars, and all the race cars out there, besides NASCAR, are stupid for using OHC? For instance, imagine the Ford 2.0L I4 Ztec engine. Imagine instead of being DOHC it was pushrod. Instead of producing 132 HP it would produce more like 50 HP. The only reason the larger displacement engines can get away with pushrods is because of their displacement. If they were to use a DOHC design they would be pushing a lot more power.

I must also comment on the Nuremburg ring times. I also don't give a rats ass about ANY car that has run laps there. There is no sanctioning body that makes sure that the cars being run are stock. For all you know the Z06 that posted those times had suspension mods or engine mods. Hell you don't even know if was a completely different car underneath. There is nobody to stop you or say the car isn't stock. So I don't trust them since I don't know the conditions that the laps were run under. That is why I only trust a side by side comparison, run by the same driver, on the same day, in the same conditions, and with both cars being completely stock.

I am just getting sick of the fact that every car that anybody ever compares to the Z06 isn't good enough. The Z06 is America's Skyline. Perhaps I will ram the two together at top speed and create the ultimate car.

Also here are some interesting numbers I found on the net, once again not side by side but that only matters with acceleration.

2000 Ferrari 360 Modena:
0-60: 4.3 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.0 Seconds
Top Speed: 190MPH
Horsepower: 395
Torque: 275 ft/lbs
Engine: 218.8CI DOHC V8 (5 Valves per Cylinder)
Curb Weight: 3064 Pounds
Max Engine Speed: 8,500RPM

2002 Chevy Corvette Z06
0-60: 3.9 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 12.6 Seconds
Top Speed: 171MPH
Horsepower: 400
Torque: 405 ft/lbs
Engine: 345.7CI Pushrod V8 (2 Valves per Cylinder)
Curb Weight: 3,117 Pounds
Max Engine Speed: 6,500RPM

So it would seem that the Z06 is only about four tenths faster than the Modena in the straight line, not much for that much more torque. I would just love to see the two on the track. The SRT-10 can out handle the Z06 on the track, which was proven with the Motor Trend side by side and both cars were driven by Justin Bell. I am, as most of you know, and big Chrysler fan but I would in no way consider that the SRT-10 could out do the Modena on the track. Perhaps the Viper Competition Coupe has a chance at that. So if the Viper beats the Z06 on the track then the Z06 has no chance at beating the Modena plain and simple. The Modena seems to be the better all around performer.

I've read what it says, the bulk of it is marketing, as they aren't about to change the chassis this late in the C5's lifetime, that would cost a boatload just for a minor tweak, and GM doesn't like wasting money, especially at the assembly lines.

Fine, it has new shock valving, wow, not useless but hardly anything major, there still isn't any documented proof comparing both versions.

sure bud, think what you want.

i tihnk that the 360 is the only ferrari slower than the Z06, and that will soon change, the 360 hasnt been upgraded in ages, the Z06 has. Once ferrari comes out with a replacment and or facelift it will most likley wipe the floor with the Z06(even if only to save face).

Id take the ferrari any day, its fast enough(faster top speed to if i recall corectly) looks alot better, and Sounds like noitnhg else.

Wow, at first this thread was pretty simple but now it looks crazy! I don't know much about the Z06 , and what it has over a regular C5, so I'll do some reseach on it now. All I'm going to say is I'd choose a 360 because it's a Ferrari, although the Z06 may be a better car.

They probably aren't the same rough size physically. The Modena's engine might look bigger than it is because DOHC heads are huge compared to pushrod heads. The block itself is quite small.

Doesn't matter, though you're right, since the overall engine height with heads is quite large, and thats what matters.

You can't say that any of us are dreaming about owning a Modena. You don't know how much money I have access to or will in the future. Also, you can't simply say that with more money the Z06 would be the finest sports car around. Just simply throwing a lot of money at a project doesn't guarantee results. The Saleen S7 is a great example of that.

It's a fairly safe assumption, until someone comes in here with a 360 I'm going to stick with it.

I would love to see where you got that definition for overhead valves. Over head valve means that the valves are over the piston. Please, I implore you to prove me wrong. If you do I will gladly admit it.

Live in your belief if you want, but which makes more sense, 1 definition that describes all piston IC engines and one that only describes some of them (OHV and OHC respectivly) or one that describes one type of valvetrain and one that describes the other? It simply makes more sense, and thats why it's right.

First off SOHC designs have less moving parts than a pushrod design. Less moving parts in most cases equals less friction which in turn equals more power. While DOHC might not have less moving parts they don't add three cams, that would make a TOHC, which does not exist. Also OHC designs are made for more flow which equals more power.

Just to get this out of the way, last I checked, DOHC V8s had 4 cams, OHV V8s have 1, there's your 3 cams.

SOHC designs do have less moving parts, and SOHC designs also don't produce any noticable gain save for high RPM capability. DOHC designs are where the flow gains are found, so all you have with an SOHC design is more RPM capability, which if you have a motor of decent size you dont need more then the 6500-7000 RPM which pushrods are easily capable of.

The LS6 head has flowed over 290/220 CFM, save for the ford 2000 cobra R head, there isn't a single proven DOHC head which has flower more air. I'm sure they exist, and if you can find them then be my guest to post them, until then you're speculating where I have proof of the LS6 heads ability.

CFM flow numbers aren't everything either, velocity is just as important, and velocity DECREASES when volume increases. Meaning all that extra flow area you add with DOHC VASTLY hurts velocity, it's designed that way to keep from restricting the motor at high RPM, but if your motor isn't spinning to high RPM all you have is a dog slow motor down low with a shitty powerband and an overly complicated valvetrain. So which do YOU think is better, switch the LS6 over to a heavier, larger, higher friction head with poorer velocity and equivalent flow numbers, or stick with what we've got, a nearly 6L motor that weighs as much as most OHC 4L motors? This is rhetorical, there's only 1 answer.

Also you have to think about the long thin stick that is a pushrod and imagine the flex it will produce and inertial forces as the engine speed rises robbing you of power. Also, with tuning you have many more options with OHC than pushrod since you have limitless control over the valves. You can't tell me that all of the Super cars, and all the race cars out there, besides NASCAR, are stupid for using OHC?

What about the pushrod? it's common knowledge there's deflection found in it, which is why you add a small amount of extra lift into the cam, not hard to overcome, the power loss is minimal, and I dare you to find me numbers saying what they are.

Limitless control? you're dreaming here, there's only a small range of variable valve timing to be found in DOHC setups, they're enough to matter but hardly "infinite", besides that, 1 camshaft gets the Z06 around just as fast as many other DOHC cars and has tuners putting out a thousand + horsepower, there's nothing wrong with 1 cam timing.

Stupid? when did I say it was stupid? OHC has it's positive points and so does OHV. If you use a larger engine and don't plan on revving it over 7K then why go DOHC? I'll get to the flow in a second, but other then valve timing what do you gain? an exceptionally large amount of extra friction, more weight, a MUCH taller engine and complexity. Now if you plan on using a small motor with a small bore you use a multiple valve, high RPM valvetrain, both have their places, but one is far from better.

For instance, imagine the Ford 2.0L I4 Ztec engine. Imagine instead of being DOHC it was pushrod. Instead of producing 132 HP it would produce more like 50 HP. The only reason the larger displacement engines can get away with pushrods is because of their displacement. If they were to use a DOHC design they would be pushing a lot more power.

I've already touched on what would happen to the Z06 if you went DOHC above, there would be no gain as it sits, and a large displacement motor does not need to rev high, it's a waste and detrimental to its longevity. You're also assuming based on your bias.

I must also comment on the Nuremburg ring times. I also don't give a rats ass about ANY car that has run laps there. There is no sanctioning body that makes sure that the cars being run are stock. For all you know the Z06 that posted those times had suspension mods or engine mods. Hell you don't even know if was a completely different car underneath. There is nobody to stop you or say the car isn't stock. So I don't trust them since I don't know the conditions that the laps were run under. That is why I only trust a side by side comparison, run by the same driver, on the same day, in the same conditions, and with both cars being completely stock.

And the 360 could have been modded as well, you're completely right, but it's all we've got to compare with as I've only ridden in a 360 and not driven one, nor do I have the time to learn the car well. It's far from the be all end all comparison, but again, what else do we have? What makes you say the 360 handles better? I'd like to see you explain it technically (as in the suspension and chassis design, not "it's a ferrari" bullshit) if you wont use laptimes.

I am just getting sick of the fact that every car that anybody ever compares to the Z06 isn't good enough. The Z06 is America's Skyline. Perhaps I will ram the two together at top speed and create the ultimate car.

The Z06 is affordable performance that keeps up with everyone else, I wasn't even going to post in here until jimster started spreading ignorance about engine design. Youre right, it is hyped, but hardly as bad as ferrari's ability is, and then people like you come in ad start making statements that have no technical backing, you're simply asking to be corrected.

Also here are some interesting numbers I found on the net, once again not side by side but that only matters with acceleration.

2000 Ferrari 360 Modena:
0-60: 4.3 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.0 Seconds
Top Speed: 190MPH
Horsepower: 395
Torque: 275 ft/lbs
Engine: 218.8CI DOHC V8 (5 Valves per Cylinder)
Curb Weight: 3064 Pounds
Max Engine Speed: 8,500RPM

2002 Chevy Corvette Z06
0-60: 3.9 Seconds
1/4 Mile: 12.6 Seconds
Top Speed: 171MPH
Horsepower: 400
Torque: 405 ft/lbs
Engine: 345.7CI Pushrod V8 (2 Valves per Cylinder)
Curb Weight: 3,117 Pounds
Max Engine Speed: 6,500RPM

So it would seem that the Z06 is only about four tenths faster than the Modena in the straight line, not much for that much more torque. I would just love to see the two on the track. The SRT-10 can out handle the Z06 on the track, which was proven with the Motor Trend side by side and both cars were driven by Justin Bell. I am, as most of you know, and big Chrysler fan but I would in no way consider that the SRT-10 could out do the Modena on the track. Perhaps the Viper Competition Coupe has a chance at that. So if the Viper beats the Z06 on the track then the Z06 has no chance at beating the Modena plain and simple. The Modena seems to be the better all around performer.

Those numbers are so off it's not even worth talking about, the Z06, and the 360 as well, have both run much better 1/4 miles then those posted here. I also don't get your point about the torque, I'd hope that you realize the ferrari runs much shorter gearing then the Z06 because of its high rpm, small engine design, are you trying to knock the Z06? It uses a different method, so again, I'm missing your point.

Oh, so you think the SRT-10 wouldn't hand a 360 it's ass on a platter? Because I'm 100% positive that it can and has happened, and I'm right because I say so. . .

Which is essentially what you're saying to me, from your arguments side anyway.

The Z06 was proven to lap around a second faster then a pro driven 911 turbo, on the same day, on the same track, at the exact same time, are you saying that the 911 turbo can't run a track with a 360? You have NO technical proof of ANY of your claims, meaning it's opinion, and I'm sorry but they don't go very far. Are you also saying that the SRT-10 can outhandle a porsche 911 turbo? You'd have to, since the Z06 essentially turns the same laptime as one, so now a 360 outhandles the viper, porsche and Z06? Yet the current 'Ring times (which can neither be proven nor disproven) show that the Z06 runs with it, so by that reasoning the SRT-10 actually *outlaps* the 360, if it handles so much better then the Z06, which it should given it's a brand new design and the Z06 is working off of a car that came out in '97.

Live in your belief if you want, but which makes more sense, 1 definition that describes all piston IC engines and one that only describes some of them (OHV and OHC respectivly) or one that describes one type of valvetrain and one that describes the other? It simply makes more sense, and thats why it's right.

Here is a definition that I found on the net for OHV. I told you to "PROVE" me wrong, not tell me which makes more sense. I'm not an idiot, so don't assume I'm one.


Over-head Valves [OHV]

This is where there are valves that open and close directly above the rising piston. These valves are operated via a timing chain and rockers all mounted above the piston. This setup is apposed to the valves moving up and down beside the piston, although this method is more direct not requiring rockers or timing chains as they can be operated directly via cam's from the crankcase, it limits the speed/ revs the engine can do.


SOHC designs do have less moving parts, and SOHC designs also don't produce any noticable gain save for high RPM capability. DOHC designs are where the flow gains are found, so all you have with an SOHC design is more RPM capability, which if you have a motor of decent size you dont need more then the 6500-7000 RPM which pushrods are easily capable of.

Once again, this might be true for larger displacement engines where they can afford to be a pushrod design. There are huge gains for smaller displacement engines. Also, pushrod engines max RPM is usually about 7,000, to me that is not easy since they are prone to have a catastrophic failure at that speed.

The LS6 head has flowed over 290/220 CFM, save for the ford 2000 cobra R head, there isn't a single proven DOHC head which has flower more air. I'm sure they exist, and if you can find them then be my guest to post them, until then you're speculating where I have proof of the LS6 heads ability.

Though I hate to bring it up, I have to mention Ford's Cammer, which was a SOHC design. There was also a one-off Hemi that was DOHC that produced around 900HP. Reliability was an issue with these engines because it was the first that either company had really worked with them.

CFM flow numbers aren't everything either, velocity is just as important, and velocity DECREASES when volume increases. Meaning all that extra flow area you add with DOHC VASTLY hurts velocity, it's designed that way to keep from restricting the motor at high RPM, but if your motor isn't spinning to high RPM all you have is a dog slow motor down low with a shitty powerband and an overly complicated valvetrain. So which do YOU think is better, switch the LS6 over to a heavier, larger, higher friction head with poorer velocity and equivalent flow numbers, or stick with what we've got, a nearly 6L motor that weighs as much as most OHC 4L motors? This is rhetorical, there's only 1 answer.

Just because there are more moving parts does not mean there is more friction, I would agree with that if the rollers being used had flat heads. The rollers they have these days have very little resistance. So don't assume that all DOHC heads have more friction than a pushrod design. In most cases they don't. Also, by your logic, a smaller exhaust would prove to be a more efficient use of power than a full three-inch. Airflow equals power, and yes, velocity has something to do with it but do you think that these people are designing heads, intakes manifolds, and exhaust manifolds that have worse airflow than the LS6 head? That is pure speculation.

What about the pushrod? it's common knowledge there's deflection found in it, which is why you add a small amount of extra lift into the cam, not hard to overcome, the power loss is minimal, and I dare you to find me numbers saying what they are.

Why? All you do is post retorts with no backing information of your own.

Limitless control? you're dreaming here, there's only a small range of variable valve timing to be found in DOHC setups, they're enough to matter but hardly "infinite", besides that, 1 camshaft gets the Z06 around just as fast as many other DOHC cars and has tuners putting out a thousand + horsepower, there's nothing wrong with 1 cam timing.

I'm not talking about variable valve timing. I am talking about tuning valve overlap. Sure you can do that with a pushrod engine but it requires changing the cam every damn time you want to change it. Pretty expensive if you ask me. With a DOHC design you can simply change the timing. Variable valve timing and lift are also some other good things you can get with DOHC that you can't with a pushrod.

I've already touched on what would happen to the Z06 if you went DOHC above, there would be no gain as it sits, and a large displacement motor does not need to rev high, it's a waste and detrimental to its longevity. You're also assuming based on your bias.

My bias of what?


And the 360 could have been modded as well, you're completely right, but it's all we've got to compare with as I've only ridden in a 360 and not driven one, nor do I have the time to learn the car well. It's far from the be all end all comparison, but again, what else do we have? What makes you say the 360 handles better? I'd like to see you explain it technically (as in the suspension and chassis design, not "it's a ferrari" bullshit) if you wont use laptimes.

Exactly, which is why I discount its time as well. I won't say that just because it is a Ferrari it is better, but in a way it is. Ferrari has a boatload more money to put into development then Chevy ever could. Also, just because the platform is older does not make it inferior. Just look at Lotus, some of their platforms are ages old but they are still some of the best in the world.

The Z06 is affordable performance that keeps up with everyone else, I wasn't even going to post in here until jimster started spreading ignorance about engine design. Youre right, it is hyped, but hardly as bad as ferrari's ability is, and then people like you come in ad start making statements that have no technical backing, you're simply asking to be corrected.

No it isn't. So you're telling me a Z06 can keep up with a Ferrari Enzo or a McClaren F1. Stop kidding yourself. The difference between the hype on Ferrari and hype on Chevy is the fact that Ferrari has a proven track record to back it up. Chevy does not. Also, you're being a hypocrite. You're simply coming in here and doing the same thing, making statements with some technical backing. Mind you, I provided just as much technical backing as you did so don't preach to me.

Those numbers are so off it's not even worth talking about, the Z06, and the 360 as well, have both run much better 1/4 miles then those posted here. I also don't get your point about the torque, I'd hope that you realize the ferrari runs much shorter gearing then the Z06 because of its high rpm, small engine design, are you trying to knock the Z06? It uses a different method, so again, I'm missing your point.

Then, next time, instead of posting useless crap post some numbers of your own since the ones I found on the net are totally wrong. :rolleyes:

Oh, so you think the SRT-10 wouldn't hand a 360 it's ass on a platter? Because I'm 100% positive that it can and has happened, and I'm right because I say so. . .

Which is essentially what you're saying to me, from your arguments side anyway.

Did I say that the SRT-10 hands the Z06 is ass on a platter? No, don't stick words in my mouth. I simply said that it beat it and that was proven in that Motor Trend side by side. Every time someone brings that up you refuse to believe it even though all the cars driven were driven by Justin Bell, a C6-R driver.

And once again you're being a hypocrite.

The Z06 was proven to lap around a second faster then a pro driven 911 turbo, on the same day, on the same track, at the exact same time, are you saying that the 911 turbo can't run a track with a 360? You have NO technical proof of ANY of your claims, meaning it's opinion, and I'm sorry but they don't go very far. Are you also saying that the SRT-10 can outhandle a porsche 911 turbo? You'd have to, since the Z06 essentially turns the same laptime as one, so now a 360 outhandles the viper, porsche and Z06? Yet the current 'Ring times (which can neither be proven nor disproven) show that the Z06 runs with it, so by that reasoning the SRT-10 actually *outlaps* the 360, if it handles so much better then the Z06, which it should given it's a brand new design and the Z06 is working off of a car that came out in '97.

They may have been run in the same conditions but was the Z06 and the 911 driven by the same driver? If not then I don't give two squirts about your lap times that you keep throwing around. Those are your only backing of your argument and you never post a site or a magazine article to back them up. I don't care if it beat a 911 around the track. If they weren't driven by the same driver then that holds no water. You could give me the Z06 to drive around the track and someone like Ralph Shumaker to drive Ford Focus. Who would have a better lap time? Probably not me. That is why you must use the same driver like the guys on Top Gear do. Otherwise your results are worthless. Next time you post lap times, have some backing to prove them, and don't bother posting them unless they were done on the same day, in the same conditions, with the same driver. Otherwise I don't care.

I am pretty much done with this thread, I have proven my point and until both cars are run that way we will never know which is truly better around the track. I still stand by my opinion that the Modena is a better car in every aspect. Don't get me wrong, I like the Z06, but I would never buy one. I would rather own a mid 60s Stingray of any of the Corvettes. The new ones just have no style.

Here is a definition that I found on the net for OHV. I told you to "PROVE" me wrong, not tell me which makes more sense. I'm not an idiot, so don't assume I'm one.

That neither proves nor disproves either point. Look, believe what you like, I'm going to stick with what makes more sense and until the SAE puts up an article telling me i'm completely wrong, that' how it's going to be. Don't however, assume you're correct, I simply can't find any websites (cause we know they're always right) saying what everyone already knows, OHV is a pushrod design where OHC is an overhead cam design.

Once again, this might be true for larger displacement engines where they can afford to be a pushrod design. There are huge gains for smaller displacement engines. Also, pushrod engines max RPM is usually about 7,000, to me that is not easy since they are prone to have a catastrophic failure at that speed.

You're exactly right, because larger engines don't need ot rev sky high because they don't need as much gear reduction to make a decent amount of wheel torque. So if you get a pushrod head that flows well with high velocity you can fit a larger volume motor in the same space as a smaller (displacement) one, and you don't need to rev high either.

Though I hate to bring it up, I have to mention Ford's Cammer, which was a SOHC design. There was also a one-off Hemi that was DOHC that produced around 900HP. Reliability was an issue with these engines because it was the first that either company had really worked with them.

They made 900 HP because they ran much higher compression ratios and had quite a bit of displacement on the LS6. I've never seen any flow benches on these heads though if you can find one I'd be indebted to you, I've been wondering how well the ford cammer heads flow for a while now.

Just because there are more moving parts does not mean there is more friction, I would agree with that if the rollers being used had flat heads. The rollers they have these days have very little resistance. So don't assume that all DOHC heads have more friction than a pushrod design. In most cases they don't. Also, by your logic, a smaller exhaust would prove to be a more efficient use of power than a full three-inch. Airflow equals power, and yes, velocity has something to do with it but do you think that these people are designing heads, intakes manifolds, and exhaust manifolds that have worse airflow than the LS6 head? That is pure speculation.

lol, more parts don't mean more friction now? no, not diectly, but considering the parts added to a DOHC setup (mostly the 3 cams, rockers and springs, which ARE high friction pieces) it's fairly obvious which has more frictional loss. It's seeing twice the spring load, transferring power through twice as many rockers and has 4 times the cam bearing contact area, there isn't getting around that friction.

I'm not talking about variable valve timing. I am talking about tuning valve overlap. Sure you can do that with a pushrod engine but it requires changing the cam every damn time you want to change it. Pretty expensive if you ask me. With a DOHC design you can simply change the timing. Variable valve timing and lift are also some other good things you can get with DOHC that you can't with a pushrod.

Valve overlap? what, you're going to take your chain/belt off and change the timing gear settings? that's EASILY as involved as changing a cam on a pushrod engine seeing as how you have 4 gears to adjust and all I have to do is take a few covers off and slide the cam out. A pain yes, but not impossible, and if you spec the cam right the first time you won't HAVE to change it, so where's your point here?

My bias of what?

OHC engines over OHV ones, with no real proof of either being better.

Exactly, which is why I discount its time as well. I won't say that just because it is a Ferrari it is better, but in a way it is. Ferrari has a boatload more money to put into development then Chevy ever could. Also, just because the platform is older does not make it inferior. Just look at Lotus, some of their platforms are ages old but they are still some of the best in the world.

When did the 360 come out? the Z06's chassis was designed in the mid to late 90's, whch makes it pretty damn old.

GM has MUCH, MUCH more money to throw into R&D, and they have a much larger engineering department which is capable of some of the best designs around, if htey're allowed. GM chose to let them design the corvette instead of the bean counters this time, and it shows. Ferrari's design team is very talented, anyone saying otherwise is a fool, but that doesnt mean everything that they make is better.

No it isn't. So you're telling me a Z06 can keep up with a Ferrari Enzo or a McClaren F1. Stop kidding yourself. The difference between the hype on Ferrari and hype on Chevy is the fact that Ferrari has a proven track record to back it up. Chevy does not. Also, you're being a hypocrite. You're simply coming in here and doing the same thing, making statements with some technical backing. Mind you, I provided just as much technical backing as you did so don't preach to me.

Here's my problem with your entire argument, I'm well aware that an enzo or a mclaren would beat a Z06. BUT, you have no professional laptimes, nor did you place a few reasons WHY. In this case, it's not so necessary as the enzo is a completely different type of car, but with the 360 the lines are close to the point where simply saying the ferrari name will not get you anywhere.

You didn't provide jack for technical backing and I didn't retort with any because there wasn't a technical argument going on. If you're going to claim that the Z06, which has proven itself on the track, is inferior you better come up with a reason why. I.E.- It's suspension can't control camber over rough roads (which it can, perfectly) or it has a poor weight distribution (which it has a closer to 50/50 then the 360) or it's suspension doesn't have enough travel or camber control through it's travel, or it has large amounts of bodyroll, etc.

You didn't do any of that, you just said "the 360 is better", only not in so many words.

Then, next time, instead of posting useless crap post some numbers of your own since the ones I found on the net are totally wrong. :rolleyes:

Having personally witnessed a bone stock 2003 Z06 run a 12.3 @ 118 MPH, that I rode down to the track in, know the owner as he's my good friend and well aware that the car is bone stock, I really don't need to go find a magazine as they won't be able to reproduce that time. I couldn't find a magazine that will do much better then that time, even though I know the cars could, so whichever, we'll work with it, again what does that prove? I hope youre not sticking with the "it has more torque so it should be faster" bullshit.

Did I say that the SRT-10 hands the Z06 is ass on a platter? No, don't stick words in my mouth. I simply said that it beat it and that was proven in that Motor Trend side by side. Every time someone brings that up you refuse to believe it even though all the cars driven were driven by Justin Bell, a C6-R driver.

No, actually I did. The SRT-10 brakes better, turns as well and has a large acceleration advantage, it would beat a Z06 around a track. Also, C6-R driver? I'm not poking at any typos, I'm jsut curious if anything new has been announced about the C6-R program, the last I saw they were sticking with the current C5-R drivers.

They may have been run in the same conditions but was the Z06 and the 911 driven by the same driver? If not then I don't give two squirts about your lap times that you keep throwing around. Those are your only backing of your argument and you never post a site or a magazine article to back them up. I don't care if it beat a 911 around the track. If they weren't driven by the same driver then that holds no water. You could give me the Z06 to drive around the track and someone like Ralph Shumaker to drive Ford Focus. Who would have a better lap time? Probably not me. That is why you must use the same driver like the guys on Top Gear do. Otherwise your results are worthless. Next time you post lap times, have some backing to prove them, and don't bother posting them unless they were done on the same day, in the same conditions, with the same driver. Otherwise I don't care.

Uh, actually they were driven by their respective companies representatives, the porsche driven by a winning lemans driver and the Z06 by a test engineer. How does having different drivers prove ANYTHING? It doesn't, its one more attempt for you to bullshit your way out of the fact that the Z06, driven by someone who can operate it to it's full potential, out lapped a 911 driven by someone who took it to it's full potential. Having the same driver would have done nothing but hurt the times, end of story.

I am pretty much done with this thread, I have proven my point and until both cars are run that way we will never know which is truly better around the track. I still stand by my opinion that the Modena is a better car in every aspect. Don't get me wrong, I like the Z06, but I would never buy one. I would rather own a mid 60s Stingray of any of the Corvettes. The new ones just have no style.

Sorry, but all you've proven is you can sit there and tell me the ferrari is a better can because you say so, you've not shown one design flaw in the Z06's performance to discredit it's laptimes. You've blatantly ignored laptimes because they don't support your argument, yet haven't come up with replacements. Remember YOU are the one making the accusations, it's up to you to prove your point, it's not my job to prove you wrong, GM has already done so.

Wow.. this is getting pretty damned heated. Someone turn the hose on these boys. Chill guys, the 360 has a slower slalom time a worse skidpad worse weight distribution slower accel slower 1/4 mi time, a pricier tag, less horsepower and torque... where's the contest? Can this be over now? Or do I actually have to go find the stats on the cars again?

Modena
0-60: 4.3
1/4: 12.8
400hp
275 lb-ft torque
skidpad: .96g
slalom: 67.4
top speed 189

Z06
0-60: 4.2
1/4: 12.5
405 hp
400 lb-ft torque
skidpad: .98g
slalom: 70.3
top speed: 171

The only thing the modena beats the z06 in is top speed, and I don't know anyone that has run their z06 to 170mph. Can we be done with all of the arguing now? This is getting rediculous. It's totally sounding like we're in kindergarten again.

I forgot to post prices.
z06 -> 56k
360 -> 152k

now seriously is there much of a contest?

#1: :rolleyes: @ this thread...
#2: :rolleyes: @ MT performance numbers...
#3: Price, the Z06 might be dirt cheap in the US, but the difference is not that big ever here.
#4: Whoever said the Z06 have better weight balance, how?
#5: The Z06 have not been independantly tested by any renown European car magazine agains it's competitors.
#6: How is a cars acceleration from zero relevant to a cars performance on a track?
#7: Good laptimes does not equal good handeling.
#8:

The Z06 was proven to lap around a second faster then a pro driven 911 turbo, on the same day, on the same track, at the exact same time, are you saying that the 911 turbo can't run a track with a 360? You have NO technical proof of ANY of your claims, meaning it's opinion, and I'm sorry but they don't go very far. Are you also saying that the SRT-10 can outhandle a porsche 911 turbo? You'd have to, since the Z06 essentially turns the same laptime as one, so now a 360 outhandles the viper, porsche and Z06?

'Prove it sparky, it should be interesting'

How much is a z in norway? And what about a modena? I'm guessing that a modena's still going to be a good 125 even in europe... and a z if it's 56k here.. it's prolly what.. 65-70 there? 0-60 does have to do with a car's performance on the track... if a car can't accelerate worth a damn, then how's it going to get out of a corner quickly? to fully understand a car's acceleration of course you need to look at more than 0-60.. that's why most people examine 0-30 all the way to 0-120 or so.. but we don't have the data for all of this, so 0-60 is a number most people use to judge acceleration. The 1/4 mile is also another way to judge acceleration.. and that is posted as well. And a good lap time in a hard course can be an indicator of good handling. Of course a good lap time is a combination of a lot of factors including acceleration, skidpad, handling, gear ratio's, power, torque.. but without very good handling none of the others matter. A car w/ the rest set up right, but the handling sucks is what we like to call a dyno queen.. or a drag car. And modena, and z06 are neither of these

That neither proves nor disproves either point. Look, believe what you like, I'm going to stick with what makes more sense and until the SAE puts up an article telling me i'm completely wrong, that' how it's going to be. Don't however, assume you're correct, I simply can't find any websites (cause we know they're always right) saying what everyone already knows, OHV is a pushrod design where OHC is an overhead cam design.

Fine by me.

They made 900 HP because they ran much higher compression ratios and had quite a bit of displacement on the LS6. I've never seen any flow benches on these heads though if you can find one I'd be indebted to you, I've been wondering how well the ford cammer heads flow for a while now.

Yeah, I would love to see some results from a flow bench on both those heads as well. However; I should point out that the Cammer with the SOHC made about 650HP and the Hemi DOHC made 900HP. Then again, since they were very limited I guess they were poor examples.

lol, more parts don't mean more friction now? no, not diectly, but considering the parts added to a DOHC setup (mostly the 3 cams, rockers and springs, which ARE high friction pieces) it's fairly obvious which has more frictional loss. It's seeing twice the spring load, transferring power through twice as many rockers and has 4 times the cam bearing contact area, there isn't getting around that friction.

Exactly, more moving parts does not ALWAYS mean more friction. You have to look into the design of the parts as well, not just how many there are.

Valve overlap? what, you're going to take your chain/belt off and change the timing gear settings? that's EASILY as involved as changing a cam on a pushrod engine seeing as how you have 4 gears to adjust and all I have to do is take a few covers off and slide the cam out. A pain yes, but not impossible, and if you spec the cam right the first time you won't HAVE to change it, so where's your point here?

My point was that changing a cam isn't cheap while changing the timing is free if you know what you're doing. Also, to the amateur mechanic changing the timing would be a lot easier than changing a cam.

OHC engines over OHV ones, with no real proof of either being better.

Why do I have to prove they are when it is my opinion? I never stated that they were for a fact. That is my opinion, which I have stated plenty of proof as to why I think they are better.

When did the 360 come out? the Z06's chassis was designed in the mid to late 90's, whch makes it pretty damn old.

GM has MUCH, MUCH more money to throw into R&D, and they have a much larger engineering department which is capable of some of the best designs around, if htey're allowed. GM chose to let them design the corvette instead of the bean counters this time, and it shows. Ferrari's design team is very talented, anyone saying otherwise is a fool, but that doesnt mean everything that they make is better.

First off, I already told you that you can't write off the Modena as old technology because it was designed in 1997. The car that holds the record on your precious Nuremberg ring is by far older than either of these cars. Also, like I said, Lotus has some old platforms that still hold against some of the newest; so don't use age as an argument point because it holds no water.

Second, GM might be one of the largest corporations in the world, but that doesn’t mean they have more money. I would be willing to bet that Ferrari has more money than Chevy does. Remember that Chevy is simply a division of GM and has a certain budget they don’t share all of GMs earnings. Ferrari on the other hand can focus earnings wherever they want to and with how much they can afford to pay Ralph, I would bet it is A LOT.

Here's my problem with your entire argument, I'm well aware that an enzo or a mclaren would beat a Z06. BUT, you have no professional laptimes, nor did you place a few reasons WHY. In this case, it's not so necessary as the enzo is a completely different type of car, but with the 360 the lines are close to the point where simply saying the ferrari name will not get you anywhere.

If you were “well aware” then why did you make the statement that the Z06 could run with the finest sports cars? That would include cars like the F1, the Enzo, the Zonda, and the Mosler. I don’t post lap times because they are worthless and you seem to think they are the holy grail of handling. Yet the lap times you do post hold no water because they are run on a track were there is no sanctioning body to make sure cars are completely stock, the weather conditions might have been different because they were run on different days, and to top it all off they were all run with different drivers. They are meaningless and have no reflection on how much better one car on the track is over another. My problem with your argument as that is ALL you have to back it up and even those I have to take your word on, you have no proof. At least my crap in Motor Trend can be seen by others.

You didn't provide jack for technical backing and I didn't retort with any because there wasn't a technical argument going on. If you're going to claim that the Z06, which has proven itself on the track, is inferior you better come up with a reason why. I.E.- It's suspension can't control camber over rough roads (which it can, perfectly) or it has a poor weight distribution (which it has a closer to 50/50 then the 360) or it's suspension doesn't have enough travel or camber control through it's travel, or it has large amounts of bodyroll, etc.

I already posted why I think the Z06 is inferior, and I never said that I think the Modena would murder it on the track. I simply think that since the Viper beats the Z06 on the track that the Z06 can’t beat the Modena on the track, stock for stock, because I don’t think the Viper can beat the Modena on the track either.

Having personally witnessed a bone stock 2003 Z06 run a 12.3 @ 118 MPH, that I rode down to the track in, know the owner as he's my good friend and well aware that the car is bone stock, I really don't need to go find a magazine as they won't be able to reproduce that time. I couldn't find a magazine that will do much better then that time, even though I know the cars could, so whichever, we'll work with it, again what does that prove? I hope youre not sticking with the "it has more torque so it should be faster" bullshit.

:rolleyes:

The thing I love here as that you simply expect me to believe that because you said so, something you mocked me for. I am not saying that the Z06 isn’t faster in the straight line, because it is, but it isn’t that much faster like some people are making it out to be. These seem to be the only numbers that you can prove to me.


No, actually I did. The SRT-10 brakes better, turns as well and has a large acceleration advantage, it would beat a Z06 around a track. Also, C6-R driver? I'm not poking at any typos, I'm jsut curious if anything new has been announced about the C6-R program, the last I saw they were sticking with the current C5-R drivers.

Sorry, I don’t know why I said C6-R, Justin Bell is a C5-R driver.

Uh, actually they were driven by their respective companies representatives, the porsche driven by a winning lemans driver and the Z06 by a test engineer. How does having different drivers prove ANYTHING? It doesn't, its one more attempt for you to bullshit your way out of the fact that the Z06, driven by someone who can operate it to it's full potential, out lapped a 911 driven by someone who took it to it's full potential. Having the same driver would have done nothing but hurt the times, end of story.

Having different drivers is a huge deal. One driver’s ability can far exceed the others. This is not a fair test as the results are unbalanced. Also, You keep talking about this and you have NO PROOF. This is just something I have to take your word again like in EVERY argument anyone has ever had with you.

Sorry, but all you've proven is you can sit there and tell me the ferrari is a better can because you say so, you've not shown one design flaw in the Z06's performance to discredit it's laptimes. You've blatantly ignored laptimes because they don't support your argument, yet haven't come up with replacements. Remember YOU are the one making the accusations, it's up to you to prove your point, it's not my job to prove you wrong, GM has already done so.

Once again, you’re being a hypocrite. Also, you’re having a debate with me, and the point of debating with someone is to prove them wrong, so don’t argue with someone if you don’t plan to try to prove them wrong.

Wow.. this is getting pretty damned heated. Someone turn the hose on these boys. Chill guys, the 360 has a slower slalom time a worse skidpad worse weight distribution slower accel slower 1/4 mi time, a pricier tag, less horsepower and torque... where's the contest? Can this be over now? Or do I actually have to go find the stats on the cars again?

Modena
0-60: 4.3
1/4: 12.8
400hp
275 lb-ft torque
skidpad: .96g
slalom: 67.4
top speed 189

Z06
0-60: 4.2
1/4: 12.5
405 hp
400 lb-ft torque
skidpad: .98g
slalom: 70.3
top speed: 171

The only thing the modena beats the z06 in is top speed, and I don't know anyone that has run their z06 to 170mph. Can we be done with all of the arguing now? This is getting rediculous. It's totally sounding like we're in kindergarten again.

Skidpad numbers and slalom times don’t reflect true handling ability. Also we are having a discussion, not flaming each other. Why is it every time someone is having a discussion someone has to come in and tell that we’re acting like children? :rolleyes:

Also, this is not a price debate, this is a discussion of which is the better performer, so drop it.

Wow, this has been an interesting thread.

Check these sites out:

http://www.datsuns.com/Tech/ohv_vs_ohc.htm

http://theautoindex.com/makes002.php/Engines/auto/index

THIS is an interesting site indeed:

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Lane/9318/evolutionpg2.html


Anyways, my .02 is, the Z06 is by far the best bang for the buck, any car that can keep up with or beat cars that cost 2-5 times as much? I'll take it. Especially since even if I was rich, there is NO WAY IN HELL I would ever spend that much money on just a car. They sure as hell didn't cost that much to build and i could spend 30,000 extra for a custom interior with sound deadening for the Z06, plus extra performance goodies. The Ferraris are cool, but way to goddamned much money for something that only amounts to an ego toy.

Wow, this has been an interesting thread.

Check these sites out:

http://www.datsuns.com/Tech/ohv_vs_ohc.htm

http://theautoindex.com/makes002.php/Engines/auto/index

THIS is an interesting site indeed:

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Lane/9318/evolutionpg2.html


Anyways, my .02 is, the Z06 is by far the best bang for the buck, any car that can keep up with or beat cars that cost 2-5 times as much? I'll take it. Especially since even if I was rich, there is NO WAY IN HELL I would ever spend that much money on just a car. They sure as hell didn't cost that much to build and i could spend 30,000 extra for a custom interior with sound deadening for the Z06, plus extra performance goodies. The Ferraris are cool, but way to goddamned much money for something that only amounts to an ego toy.


Indeed, those were some great sites, good read.

I won't argue with anyone on that point though, the Z06 is by far the best bang for the buck.

Polygon. What makes you so confident that a 360 can beat a srt-10? Stock a 360 could've beaten a generation 1 viper and probably been fairly equal if not beaten a gen 2, but the srt-10 has been moved pretty high up the totem pole.

#1: :rolleyes: @ this thread...
#2: :rolleyes: @ MT performance numbers...
#3: Price, the Z06 might be dirt cheap in the US, but the difference is not that big ever here.
#4: Whoever said the Z06 have better weight balance, how?
#5: The Z06 have not been independantly tested by any renown European car magazine agains it's competitors.
#6: How is a cars acceleration from zero relevant to a cars performance on a track?
#7: Good laptimes does not equal good handeling.
#8:

'Prove it sparky, it should be interesting'

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=3822&page_number=1

Unlike you, I can actually post proof of what I read, I'm still waiting for the 7:52 murcielago lap. . .

1 & 2 arent worth my time, #3 well that's too bad, but thankfullly it means you probably won't own one. #4 because it's engine is in the front and the transmission is in the rear unlike the modena which has the entire driveline at the rear wheels. 53/47 for the Z06, 43/57 for the 360, now who's closer to 50/50?

http://www.gmcanada.com/english/vehicles/chevrolet/corvette/corv_details.html#technical

http://www.ferrari.co.nz/models/360m/

reknown european magazine? strange, we just call them toilet paper over here.

Acceleration does matter, though not as much as some say. And, if good handling doesn't equal good track times then you're either seriously underpowered or you really don't handle well.

Exactly, more moving parts does not ALWAYS mean more friction. You have to look into the design of the parts as well, not just how many there are.

There isn't any way to get around double the spring pressure, 4 times the cam friciton and double the rocker loss, an OHC setup DOES have more friction, assuming both valvetrains are built well.

My point was that changing a cam isn't cheap while changing the timing is free if you know what you're doing. Also, to the amateur mechanic changing the timing would be a lot easier than changing a cam.

That may be true, but how many amateurs truly understand overlap, and how many should be doing it? It's a very serious change, I don't think I would build a cam without talking to someone about it, let alone changing stock cams overlap.

Why do I have to prove they are when it is my opinion? I never stated that they were for a fact. That is my opinion, which I have stated plenty of proof as to why I think they are better.

Thats my mistake, I read it as you were saying they were better, not that it's your opinion, apologies about that.

First off, I already told you that you can't write off the Modena as old technology because it was designed in 1997. The car that holds the record on your precious Nuremberg ring is by far older than either of these cars. Also, like I said, Lotus has some old platforms that still hold against some of the newest; so don't use age as an argument point because it holds no water.

I never said it should be written off, I was making a point that the C5 is roughly the same age as the 360, I'm well aware that older chassis can perform well, I wouldn't have chosen a car designed in the late 70's/early 80's if I thought differently.

And by the way, Nuremburg was the place of famous world war II trials, the Nurburgring is the track.

Second, GM might be one of the largest corporations in the world, but that doesn’t mean they have more money. I would be willing to bet that Ferrari has more money than Chevy does. Remember that Chevy is simply a division of GM and has a certain budget they don’t share all of GMs earnings. Ferrari on the other hand can focus earnings wherever they want to and with how much they can afford to pay Ralph, I would bet it is A LOT.

GM is the largest maker, they also own stock in many other companies who provide parts and services, such as allison, to my knowledge the largest heavy duty automatic transmission supplier in the world, easily the largest in the US either way.

The point is that chevy is just a brand name, they're part of a massive company with money to throw around, if GM decides that they want to put their money behind it, which they obviously did, then it's not a matter of brand name. They have a certain budget? where'd you read this? Seems to me like it's up to GM to decide how much they want to spend designing a car on a singular basis.

Having different drivers is a huge deal. One driver’s ability can far exceed the others. This is not a fair test as the results are unbalanced. Also, You keep talking about this and you have NO PROOF. This is just something I have to take your word again like in EVERY argument anyone has ever had with you.

Follow my link above, a 1.9 second road course difference between the Z06 and the 911. And, if you believe me to be talking out my ass, you're welcome to prove it, when it comes to any argument.

You'll also see that both drivers were chosen by their own company, now tell em, would they choose less then the best they could find for a comparison? Sorry, your argument doesnt hold any water here.

If you think price has no meaning in a performance comparison you must either be really rich or don't plan on ever buying either car.

i love vettes and ferraris equal i just think that people need to see vettes for their potential as seen somwhere above a z06 and 360 are tight and thats the way it should be vettes, and ferrari i say to hell with the rest. ive seen some wild vettes on the road latley and an increasing number of ferraris in my area. i just dont have a thing for porsch dont get me wrong thoug.

Wow, this has been an interesting thread.

Check these sites out:

http://www.datsuns.com/Tech/ohv_vs_ohc.htm

http://theautoindex.com/makes002.php/Engines/auto/index

THIS is an interesting site indeed:

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Lane/9318/evolutionpg2.html


Anyways, my .02 is, the Z06 is by far the best bang for the buck, any car that can keep up with or beat cars that cost 2-5 times as much? I'll take it. Especially since even if I was rich, there is NO WAY IN HELL I would ever spend that much money on just a car. They sure as hell didn't cost that much to build and i could spend 30,000 extra for a custom interior with sound deadening for the Z06, plus extra performance goodies. The Ferraris are cool, but way to goddamned much money for something that only amounts to an ego toy.

Good sites.

I just looked at that Motor Trend article and I must say that I was dissapointed that the Viper was not able to run the test with the others, but I am impressed that the Vette did manage to beat the 911.

I just looked at that Motor Trend article and I must say that I was dissapointed that the Viper was not able to run the test with the others, but I am impressed that the Vette did manage to beat the 911.

I would of never thought the Z06 would beat the 911 if anyone would of asked me beforehand, and yes it does suck that the Viper was not able to run the test. This only leads me to further believe in the potential of the Z06.

About that ACR, I do have a video of them comparing it to the Cobra R, and the Z06. On the coarse the Z06 outran the viper by 2 seconds, and the Cobra R by one. So by using that as a reference, maybe the Viper would of been behind both of them on the track. But its not concrete, its only a possible assumption given the different conditions.

Heres a link to the video:
http://www.brisbaneperformance.com/video.php
scroll down about 1/3, its their.

Now if this was an SRT-10, things could be different.

In the video there was no actual race by the cars, and the z06 now has more hp, and different suspension. Also I want to see an actual car comparison.. not just 0-60 times and 1/4 mi times. The driver also looks like he's driving like a c*nt. It doesn't look like he drives very agressively. I do want to say that I am a die-hard viper fan, and I do wanna see a race between the z and the viper. Anyone that has a legit vid should post it.

In the video there was no actual race by the cars, and the z06 now has more hp, and different suspension. Also I want to see an actual car comparison.. not just 0-60 times and 1/4 mi times. The driver also looks like he's driving like a c*nt. It doesn't look like he drives very agressively. I do want to say that I am a die-hard viper fan, and I do wanna see a race between the z and the viper. Anyone that has a legit vid should post it.

Well its the only video i can find, and I usually prefer seeing a video over a posting in some magazine. If you can find anything better, be sure to post it.

Sorry.. I sounded like I was saying you're a cock. It's a mediocre vid, but that site is great... everyone should download the lancer video. This french guy has amazing drifts, and then he sort slides into a puddle of water, and at those speeds... Boom.. he flips like a mother

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=3822&page_number=1

And this is what? The Corvette lapped it 0.7 seconds faster, ok. But what track wast that? Final time? Limited to 120 mph top speed?


Unlike you, I can actually post proof of what I read, I'm still waiting for the 7:52 murcielago lap. . .

http://www.deakins.org/lamborghini_murcielago_motorvision.asf


#4 because it's engine is in the front and the transmission is in the rear unlike the modena which has the entire driveline at the rear wheels. 53/47 for the Z06, 43/57 for the 360, now who's closer to 50/50?

And since when did a 50:50 front:rear weight distribution become perfect?


reknown european magazine? strange, we just call them toilet paper over here.

And the fact that most americans only speak one language might have something to do with that. Your opinion on this matter is worthless.


And, if good handling doesn't equal good track times then you're seriously underpowered...

Thank you for proving my point,.

And this is what? The Corvette lapped it 0.7 seconds faster, ok. But what track wast that? Final time? Limited to 120 mph top speed?


http://www.deakins.org/lamborghini_murcielago_motorvision.asf


And since when did a 50:50 front:rear weight distribution become perfect?


And the fact that most americans only speak one language might have something to do with that. Your opinion on this matter is worthless.


Thank you for proving my point,.

You obviously didn't read the article very well, they simply had a MINIMUM 120 MPH speed to reach at one of their test tracks straightaways, whereas they required a much higher one for the tuned cars. There was no maximum speed, what do you think, they simply let off the gas if they reached it?

The track is unimportant, though if you had the magazine you would see it's a fairly decent ~1.2 mile roadcourse with plenty of different turns, and since i'm not about to scan the page, you can find that for yourself. And, for the record, the corvette finished the roadcourse a full 1.9 seconds faster, it finished the entire track, including the high speed area, 0.7 seconds faster.

There is no one perfect weight distribution, however a 50:50 distribution offers the best compromise between loading during braking and acceleration. Go ahead and prove that the 360 benefits from its rear heavy design.

It's more to do with the fact that I have more automotive knowledge in my left testicle then the collective european magazines that sets me off. If they could drop their bias and ease up on the dash grabbing, and attend a few automotive schools, I might care what they bleated out.