2005 GTO vs 2004 Corvette/2004 Cobra

I recently checked out some of the new cars that are coming out soon and was surprised to see that the Pontiac GTO was getting the LS2 engine for the 2005 model year. So I wondered how would it fare against last years Vette or the Cobra. Since they are both pretty close in performance.
Anybody have any new information or thoughts on these matchups.

I'm glad to see all the muscle cars making such big leaps. The new Mustang, the new Corvette, and the new GTO are all very good cars for the price. Dodge is bringing back the Charger too, and it looks promising. The Chevelle might even come back too.

The new GTO with the LS2 looks very good, but I don't think it's quite ready to run with a Corvette; it needs to go on a serious diet first. :)

I think with the extra 50hp it mgiht be able to beat both of the other cars. Ofcourse we still have to see if Pontiac did as they said they would and get rid of some of that weight. But it should be a fast car for sure.
As far as the new Charger goes. I dont think its gonna be too good its first year. From what ive seen it is even heavier than the GTO and will have less power. I believe it was said to be somewhere in the neighborhood of about 4100 lbs. Now thats a fat piggie.
But yeah it is nice to see all the muscle cars on the rise. I heard that there is gonna be a new bill being passed around 2008 that reduces emissions again. Are we looking at the end of high HP cars again?

i dont think itll keep up just based on the weight... but will be very close. and i cant wait for the charger, the gto was kinda a letdown (granted if they make the judge they might redeem themselves) all my hopes rest in the charger now (with the exception of the shelby nameplate returning to the mustang)

Shelby Cobra vs. GTO Judge...that'd be too much fun.

Eh hate to break it to you, but the GTO (2004) is a step backwards really. It's handling is exactly what fits the American stereotype, and with dealer price hikes it is really not worth the money. Adding 50 (2005) more horsepower and a bunch of ground effects isn't going to change any of that. I'm not defending the Cobra either though. I'm a Mustang nut but I can admit that the Cobra also falls into this catagory. I really hope that the performance ability of the 2005 Mustang, if Motor Trend's numbers are acturate, and the C6's proven track ability forces American companies to go back to the drawing boards and give up this "straight line is everything" mentality that is killing American cars. The straight line era is dead.

Of course, you can have the agrument that normal driving won't show the difference between a Cobra and an Evolution, but when has normal driving ever mattered? If it did, why do people brag about top speeds?

American Cars have plenty of handling ability. For one the Corvette C6 has a .94 lateral G. And the C5 Corvette had a .90 Lateral G, could be lowered for free, and both have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution. And the corvette ZO6 had a .99-1.00 Lateral G. That is more than the Saleen S7, Ferrari Enzo and many other cars. And the Cobra had a .90 Lateral G.

Here are some handling numbers on some of the most popular foreign cars.

Mazda RX-8: .88G
Lancer Evolution: .88G
WRX STI: .88G
Acura NSX: .91G

All these numbers where provided by Road and Track November 2003 Issue.
So i say, "we lack handling," HA HA HA. All of our performance cars outhandle even all-wheel drive cars.

American Cars have plenty of handling ability. For one the Corvette C6 has a .94 lateral G. And the C5 Corvette had a .90 Lateral G, could be lowered for free, and both have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution. And the corvette ZO6 had a .99-1.00 Lateral G. That is more than the Saleen S7, Ferrari Enzo and many other cars. And the Cobra had a .90 Lateral G.

Here are some handling numbers on some of the most popular foreign cars.

Mazda RX-8: .88G
Lancer Evolution: .88G
WRX STI: .88G
Acura NSX: .91G

All these numbers where provided by Road and Track November 2003 Issue.
So i say, "we lack handling," HA HA HA. All of our performance cars outhandle even all-wheel drive cars.

Wow... um what are the prices on those cars? They aren't even in the same brackets. Had you read my post, you would notice I already mentioned the C6 and 2005 Mustang. So what was your point again? Beyond that, skidpad is NOT the best way to test handling. All it tells is roadholding in a circle.

*edit*
Oh and as of your original post, putting the GTO and the C6 in the same sentence is an insult to the Corvette. Not even closely the same car.

well, road holding is in my opinion handling at its best as far as weight distrubution and suspension goes, if a car can hold the road better in a circle itll do it better in corners to the only thing it doesnt measure is quick change of direction which is where u run the slalom, so if a cras better in the g robit and slalom it handles better. and when i said they could redeem the gto with the judge i meant handling and weight, not power cause it already has plenty of that. and if they do go ahead with the shelby cobra u can bet it will handle, thats what the original shelbys were, track cars. and as far as price, the nsx was the most expensive and in my opinion the most overrated. the new corvette owns all those cars.

Finally something me and Fordjunky agree on. And i am comparing the 05 GTO to the C5 Vette. And the GTO is a nice car, the only thing holding it back is the weight. But how can you not like a car with an LS2, 54/46 weight distribution, and a corvette ZO6 transmission. And Sean you said american cars. Well lets look at it, there really arent a whole lot of them. Because American car guys dont consider V6's or I-4's to be performance vehicles. So there is only Mustangs, Vettes, Vipers, GTO's, and F-Bodies to relly choose from. Oh and another thing, the Corvette C5's are selling for barely more than STI's and Evo's, now. I have seen them advertised at $29k in Atlanta Georgia, in the Corvette Trader, for brand new.
And Skidpad or Lateral G is the only real way to test a cars handling. You cant go by the slalom or other road tests, because different power outputs. The Skidpad is the only place where are things are equally tested. And the only rel test that matters for handling.

well, road holding is in my opinion handling at its best as far as weight distrubution and suspension goes, if a car can hold the road better in a circle itll do it better in corners to the only thing it doesnt measure is quick change of direction which is where u run the slalom (usually heavy cars dont change direction as well, ie. cobra but the corvette is fairly light weight so...) and when i said they could redeem the gto with the judge i meant handling and weight, not power cause it already has plenty of that. and if they do go ahead with the shelby cobra u can bet it will handle, thats what the original shelbys were, track cars. and as far as price, the nsx was the most expensive and in my opinion the most overrated. the new corvette owns all those cars.

Therein lies the problem. Most tracks good tracks aren't just one long oval. At least the slalom pulls out the body roll in the car, which is something a skidpad can't show. This is a hugely important stat as heavy bodied cars, like the old SS Camaro, car hold in a circle very well but roll like none other. In the end, full out track running is the only way to prove a car's worth. The japanese cars (At least the ones at 30k range, NSX is not useful in that list) he listed have proven themselves, whereas the current GTO, and sadly, the old Mustangs have failed.

I am by no means a Japanese lover, in fact I'm much more American fan boy, but I guess I am getting tired of substandard handling on lower priced cars. American cars aren't going to be able to compete if this trend doesn't end. Luckily, Ford (2005 Mustang) , Dodge (STR-4), Chevy (C6), and Cadillac (CTS/CTS-V) have figured this out. It just makes me cringe when I read that the next Charger is going to be 4100 pounds or the best thing touted in the new GTO is the horsepower.

And Sean you said american cars. Well lets look at it, there really arent a whole lot of them. Because American car guys dont consider V6's or I-4's to be performance vehicles. So there is only Mustangs, Vettes, Vipers, GTO's, and F-Bodies to relly choose from.

And bam, that's my point. There isn't much to choose from, and that needs to end. I just don't get why people are so against pushing for better handling American cars. Sorry, but track numbers don't lie. Beyond the z06, the new C6, and the Viper, there are no real threats to the various Evolutions and WRXs of the world. Is it me, or does that seems awfully wrong? Too many people see 400 horsepower and are satisfied. If horsepower were everything, then why do these little 200-300 horsepower 4-bangers keep selling?

Those little junk wagons keep selling because of uninformed kids and movies. There arent any movies glamorizing muscle cars in them. Atleast not any good ones. And the Evos and STI's are AWD and still arent fast. The Cobra can beat them both, the Mach 1 should be somewhere close and F-Bodies beat them both. Look at the MPH or trap speed, that gives you somewhat of an idea of how fast the car really is. And as me and forjunky have said, a set of DR will get our cars better1/4 times than the AWD cars, because we trap anywhere from 106-112 depending on the car and driver. Those things only trap around 103.

when u combine the g orbit and slalom thats the best way to test handling abilities. the corvette excels at both, the cobra didnt cause its pretty heavy (slalom) and no matter how good ur suspension is or how good the weight distribution is ull eventually lose the war to momentum.

Those little junk wagons keep selling because of uninformed kids and movies. There arent any movies glamorizing muscle cars in them. Atleast not any good ones. And the Evos and STI's are AWD and still arent fast. The Cobra can beat them both, the Mach 1 should be somewhere close and F-Bodies beat them both. Look at the MPH or trap speed, that gives you somewhat of an idea of how fast the car really is. And as me and forjunky have said, a set of DR will get our cars better1/4 times than the AWD cars, because we trap anywhere from 106-112 depending on the car and driver. Those things only trap around 103.

I think you are missing my point here. I'm not talking about straight line speed. I am talking about track performance, not drag. There isn't one American car that can match an, on a track, Evolution MR or STI under the C6, which is 45k as opposed to 30-32k. This a huge problem. It's no secret that lower end handling on American cars is non-existant. It's no secret that Car and Driver and Motor Trend rarely mix Japanese/European and American cars (40k down) on the track because it's a bad match up. It's no secret that the world looks at American cars as nothing but heavy barges that turn leftish and rightish. If you're happy with that, I can't change that. Personally, I am sick of it.

And if you say something like, "Well straight line is all that matters on the street." then again, why do people brag about top speed? Because they have the car magazine numbers to back it up.

when u combine the g orbit and slalom thats the best way to test handling abilities. the corvette excels at both, the cobra didnt cause its pretty heavy (slalom) and no matter how good ur suspension is or how good the weight distribution is ull eventually lose the war to momentum.

That's kind of what I was getting at. Like I said, a Camaro SS can roadhold like none other (.90) but there is no way in hell it could take an Evolution, NSX, STI, ect on a track. It just isn't happening. There are so many factors that go into handling that one number is just not good enough to claim superiority. Hell to prove that, the C6 on the Top Gear test track beat out the STI WR1 and the EVO FQ-300 while having a lower slalom and skidpad rating... on a track purposely made to test handling. With "Ox Cart" suspension to boot. Go figure.

i wouldnt necesarily say that a rwd car with slicks will be fatser than an awd casr cause ive seen awd cars with slicks and they f'in haul, the reason rwd is better is cause of high end speed, awd is only good for so long (like the 1/8th mile) but after that rwd starts to catch up, like if uve seen a evo race a cobra itll take it in the 8th and then lose it and on top of that the cobra is good for 175mph, the evo isnt close to that. but thats besides the point cause this is about handling, not which is better, rwd or awd for dragging.

Eh hate to break it to you, but the GTO (2004) is a step backwards really. It's handling is exactly what fits the American stereotype, and with dealer price hikes it is really not worth the money. Adding 50 (2005) more horsepower and a bunch of ground effects isn't going to change any of that. I'm not defending the Cobra either though. I'm a Mustang nut but I can admit that the Cobra also falls into this catagory. I really hope that the performance ability of the 2005 Mustang, if Motor Trend's numbers are acturate, and the C6's proven track ability forces American companies to go back to the drawing boards and give up this "straight line is everything" mentality that is killing American cars. The straight line era is dead.

Of course, you can have the agrument that normal driving won't show the difference between a Cobra and an Evolution, but when has normal driving ever mattered? If it did, why do people brag about top speeds?
What in gods name are you talking about? There is nothing wrong with the way a GTO handles (Not as good as the equivalent BA Ford Falcon, but still decent for it's size) Have you even driven one around the track? I have (Series 1 Monaro CV8, meaning bottom of the barrel as well).

And it's not American, it's Australian.



And skidpan figures are rubbish, I mean, far too much is dependent on the quality of the tyres (Easily changable) and there is no substitute for driving the cars and forming your own unbiased opinion.

and i think the reason the corvette did better was because on the top gear track theres the section where they can really open the thing up, if one car handles the same as another but acclerates alot better it can easily win by a few tenths or even a whole second (depending on how much faster it is) just because of that section of the track. that track was designed to show a cars overall performance which includes accelerating capabilities.

What in gods name are you talking about? There is nothing wrong with the way a GTO handles (Not as good as the equivalent BA Ford Falcon, but still decent for it's size) Have you even driven one around the track? I have (Series 1 Monaro CV8, meaning bottom of the barrel as well).

And it's not American, it's Australian.

And skidpan figures are rubbish, I mean, far too much is dependent on the quality of the tyres (Easily changable) and there is no substitute for driving the cars and forming your own unbiased opinion.

No matter where it's built, the badge is where it gets cast the "nationality". People see it as American whether it's designed, built, and shipped from Australia or Mars.

No, I have not driven it, but have read enough on it to know that it is not worth the 35k+ tag it holds. It's a good car for four people to ride in, but there are plenty of good cars out there for much less money. Now if the GTO were around say 28k, I'd say it was well worth it. I just couldn't justify paying 35k for it. At that point, there are much better choices.

and i think the reason the corvette did better was because on the top gear track theres the section where they can really open the thing up, if one car handles the same as another but acclerates alot better it can easily when by a few tenths or even a whole second (depending on how much faster it is) just because of that section of the track.

Fair enough, but any track is going to have a straight away. That track has only one, so it sort of deminishes the ability for a car to "brute strength" it's way through. Besides, there are plenty of "slower" cars that grabbed better times on the track.

No matter where it's built, the badge is where it gets cast the "nationality". People see it as American whether it's designed, built, and shipped from Australia or Mars.

No, I have not driven it, but have read enough on it to know that it is not worth the 35k+ tag it holds. It's a good car for four people to ride in, but there are plenty of good cars out there for much less money. Now if the GTO were around say 28k, I'd say it was well worth it. I just couldn't justify paying 35k for it. At that point, there are much better choices.
OK, so if I import a Corvette to Italy and put Ferrari badges on it, then it's an Italian car?


How about if I put the badges from my 330 onto my Civic, does that mean my British car (Designed and built in UK, not Japan) suddenly becomes German?

i just read my post and that sounds a little byest, im not saying the vettes not a good car (cause i would certainly take one over an evo or wrx)... im not trying to take away from the corvettes handling abilities, im saying the corvette has a great balance of speed abnd handling..

OK, so if I import a Corvette to Italy and put Ferrari badges on it, then it's an Italian car?


How about if I put the badges from my 330 onto my Civic, does that mean my British car (Designed and built in UK, not Japan) suddenly becomes German?

What do you consider a Mini then? Or maybe a some of the new Rovers? Both have German hands but are both considered British cars because of the label. Is Chysler now considered German? Because I could swear everytime one breaks down it's the same old "Damned American Cars". I'm not saying it isn't Australian, I'm saying that the average consumer, at least in the US, is going to see Pontiac and assume it's American. Maybe people outside of the US have better knowledge of who makes what, I doubt it, but people who don't know cars go by badge not the factory it came from. Hell if we went on where it was built, things would get really messy. There's a Mazda 6 plant about 30 miles south of me and Mazda is owned by Ford. So where are we again?

Wow, this turned out to be a really good thread. Sean_S, I agree with most of your points; it's time for the Americans to get with the program and start taking handling a lot more seriously. The Corvette has always been excellent, but the rest of the offerings are so-so compared to Japanese track monsters. The Lancer Evolution is one of the best handling cars that you can get for less than 100K -- in fact, it only costs 30K. The new Mustang weighs 3500 lbs., and although the suspension and chassis are much improved, the weight is still an issue. Ford could care less since they're going to sell hundreds of thousands of them anyways, but performance enthusiasts should care. Ditto for the GTO and the Charger.

Those little junk wagons keep selling because of uninformed kids and movies. There arent any movies glamorizing muscle cars in them. Atleast not any good ones. And the Evos and STI's are AWD and still arent fast. The Cobra can beat them both, the Mach 1 should be somewhere close and F-Bodies beat them both. Look at the MPH or trap speed, that gives you somewhat of an idea of how fast the car really is. And as me and forjunky have said, a set of DR will get our cars better1/4 times than the AWD cars, because we trap anywhere from 106-112 depending on the car and driver. Those things only trap around 103.


Please get over yourself, as mentioned the Evo MR Fq 320 beat the C6 on the Tg test track. And that is a lotus designed track.

Also in Hot Rod the 04 STI took down the 03 cobra on the road course. And notice that the 05 STI hadle much much better than the 04.

So what is that about "junk wagons"?

Hehe, you have no idea how hard I was trying not to flame that guy. Thanks for taking a stand, Neutrino. :)

Alright i can see i am talking to ignorant import lovers, so flame away because this will be my last post on this ridiculous forum. All i have heard on this forum was nonsense and a lot of good things said about cars that suck. real world ive raced most of these cars, freeway, track, and road, and they arent that great, but enjoy the ricer rockets.
Im outta this place!!!

You're the only biased one here. Good riddance.

Hehe, you have no idea how hard I was trying not to flame that guy. Thanks for taking a stand, Neutrino. :)


No problem. I don't know why people can't apreciate all cars. Vettes are fast and a good deal, evos are also fast practical and even cheaper. Why do people have to hate them I don't know. Its sad. :disappoin

Yeah, the only thing I don't like about the Evo is the transmission/clutch issue, but other than that, it's an awesome car, better than the STi overall IMO.

Yeah, the only thing I don't like about the Evo is the transmission/clutch issue, but other than that, it's an awesome car, better than the STi overall IMO.


yeah hopefully the fixed it on the new 05s with the 6 speed and the ACD.

And i do prefer it over the STI too although those new 05 STI are greatly improved.

Yeah, as much as the STi improved for 05, the Evo MR should still own it.

back on subject the new vette is sure to be a bad ass car but the cobra I would love to see a race between the two

Alright i can see i am talking to ignorant import lovers, so flame away because this will be my last post on this ridiculous forum. All i have heard on this forum was nonsense and a lot of good things said about cars that suck. real world ive raced most of these cars, freeway, track, and road, and they arent that great, but enjoy the ricer rockets.
Im outta this place!!!
It doesn't matter if it's built in the USA or Togo mate, if it's a better car, it's a better car. It just so happens these junior rally cars are better than a Corvette in many respects. I'd get into contact with a damn good civil engineering firm if I were you, because that's an awfully big bridge you have to build......

back on subject the new vette is sure to be a bad ass car but the cobra I would love to see a race between the two

Eh wouldn't be pretty. Sad to say, being a Mustang guy, but the C6 is far beyond what the Cobra is.

O well there both cool cars in my book

American Cars have plenty of handling ability. For one the Corvette C6 has a .94 lateral G. And the C5 Corvette had a .90 Lateral G, could be lowered for free, and both have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution. And the corvette ZO6 had a .99-1.00 Lateral G. That is more than the Saleen S7, Ferrari Enzo and many other cars. And the Cobra had a .90 Lateral G.

Here are some handling numbers on some of the most popular foreign cars.

Mazda RX-8: .88G
Lancer Evolution: .88G
WRX STI: .88G
Acura NSX: .91G

All these numbers where provided by Road and Track November 2003 Issue.
So i say, "we lack handling," HA HA HA. All of our performance cars outhandle even all-wheel drive cars.

You need to wake up you bean counting magazine racer.

You've got a lot of numbers there that relate to road holding ability but don't prove how well a car can handle. All those numbers prove is how many Gs the tires can hold in a circle. That does not equate handling. You have to take weight into account, also a perfect 50/50 weight distribution doesn't mean the car will handle well either. You also have to look at slalom speeds, though shorter wheelbase cars do better in the slalom than long wheelbase cars. The best way to find out which car handles better is to take it to the track and see which cars have better lap times. Fifth Gear has done this with the C6 and the Lancer Evo out does it. The C6 also has leaf springs in the back.

Leaf springs?!?!

What in the hell is up with that?

You sir have a lot to learn about cars.

You need to wake up you bean counting magazine racer.

Fifth Gear has done this with the C6 and the Lancer Evo out does it. The C6 also has leaf springs in the back.

Leaf springs?!?!


Correction, the FQ320 outdid the C6 in laptimes (by .8 of a second), no other Evolution did. The C6 beat out the FQ300 and the STI WR1.


Here are times so there is no more confusion:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 min 19.0 secs - Radical SR3
1 min 19.8 secs - Porsche CGT
1 min 20.9 secs - Mercedes-McLaren SLR
1 min 21.9 secs - Ford GT
1 min 22.3 secs - Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale
1 min 22.3 secs - Porsche 911 GT3 RS
1 min 22.6 secs - Westfield XTR2
1 min 23.7 secs - Lamborghini Murcielago (2nd run)
1 min 23.8 secs - Pagani Zonda C12 S
1 min 23.9 secs - Koenigsegg CC8S
1 min 24.0 secs - Ariel Atom
1 min 25.0 secs - Caterham R400
1 min 25.0 secs - Noble M12 GTO-3
1 min 25.8 secs - Lamborghini Gallardo e-gear (Wet)
1 min 26.0 secs - Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII MR FQ-320
1 min 26.8 secs - Chevrolet Corvette C6
1 min 26.9 secs - Lotus Exige S2 (Wet)
1 min 27.0 secs - TVR T350C
1 min 27.2 secs - Porsche 911 GT3 (Wet)
1 min 27.3 secs - Spyker C8
1 min 28.0 secs - BMW M3 CSL (Dry/Damp)
1 min 28.2 secs - Lotus Elise Sport 190
1 min 28.7 secs - MTM Bimoto
1 min 28.9 secs - Mitsubishi EVO VIII FQ-300
1 min 29.0 secs - Lamborghini Murcielago
1 min 29.0 secs - Mercedes-Benz CL65 AMG
1 min 29.0 secs - BMW Alpina Z8
1 min 29.4 secs - AS One
1 min 29.4 secs - Subaru Impreza WRX STi WR1
1 min 30.1 secs - Subaru Impreza Sti Type UK PPP
1 min 30.4 secs - Aston Martin DB7 GT
1 min 30.9 secs - Audi S4
1 min 31.0 secs - Porsche 911 Turbo (Wet)
1 min 31.3 secs - Vauxhall VX220 Turbo
1 min 31.6 secs - Honda NSX Type-R (Wet)
1 min 31.8 secs - BMW M3
1 min 31.8 secs - Mazda RX-8
1 min 31.8 secs - Nissan 350Z
1 min 32.5 secs - Lotus Esprit
1 min 32.9 secs - Noble M12 GTO (Wet)
1 min 33.2 secs - Mercedes SL 55 AMG (Wet)
1 min 33.2 secs - Honda NSX Type-R (Wet)
1 min 33.3 secs - VW Golf R32
1 min 33.7 secs - MG ZT260
1 min 33.8 secs - Ford Focus RS (32.2secs)
1 min 34.9 secs - Lotus Elise 111S (Wet)
1 min 35.0 secs - Volvo S60R
1 min 35.2 secs - Ferrari 575 Maranello (Wet)
1 min 35.6 secs - Alfa Romeo 147 GTA
1 min 36.2 secs - Aston Martin V12 Vanquish (Wet)
1 min 36.2 secs - Renault Clio V6 MKII (Wet)
1 min 38.0 secs - Maserati 3200GT (Wet)
1 min 38.0 secs - Honda Civic Type R
1 min 39.0 secs - Subaru Impreza WRX
1 min 40.0 secs - Bentley Arnage T (Wet)

Correction, the FQ320 outdid the C6 in laptimes (by .8 of a second), no other Evolution did. The C6 beat out the FQ300 and the STI WR1.

AH, sorry I didn't mention that it was the MR. However, my point still stands. He doesn't know what he is talking about. He shows it in every post he makes.

AH, sorry I didn't mention that it was the MR. However, my point still stands. He doesn't know what he is talking about. He shows it in every post he makes.

Oh you think? Never occured to me.

i read the title and it said gto vs. corvette, but some idiot got us on this subject that will only get this thread closed.

i read the title and it said gto vs. corvette, but some idiot got us on this subject that will only get this thread closed.

I don't see what there is to debate about that though. I think it is fairly obvious that the Corvette is superior in every way to the GTO.

actually i think that the gto is a much better car all around, any ways the corvette(C6) is friggin ugly the gto is only bland.

I don't see what there is to debate about that though. I think it is fairly obvious that the Corvette is superior in every way to the GTO.


I would not quite say that since it has a very different purpose. the GTO its a nice luxury sport coupe that can easily sit 4 and its practical.

The vette on the other hand its pure sport.

The C6 would be my choice from the listed cars. I am a fan of the GTO also, but the Corvette portrays my ideal car better than the GTO or the Cobra. Granted if I was maybe 15+yrs older, I may be singing a different tune. Even stacked against the Evo MR and the new Sti I would still choose the C6. They are very serious cars, but their styling cue's are not what I am looking for.....not even close.

I would not quite say that since it has a very different purpose. the GTO its a nice luxury sport coupe that can easily sit 4 and its practical.

The vette on the other hand its pure sport.

I do see your point. I should have worded that differently. The Corvette is an all around better performing car than the GTO, but that is what it was designed for. I would expect the fit and finish in the GTO to be better than the Corvette as well as the ride plus, like you said, it is a much more practical car. It seems like the Corvette still hasn’t shed its cheap plastic interior either.

I'm glad the Corvette has a cheap plastic interior; reduces costs and saves weight. :)

I'm glad the Corvette has a cheap plastic interior; reduces costs and saves weight. :)
and makes you feel like you bought a $7000 Toyota Corolla, good job.

and makes you feel like you bought a $7000 Toyota Corolla, good job.

It wouldn't feel like that at all every time I hit up the local track.

It wouldn't feel like that at all every time I hit up the local track.
It still feels cheap though, if you pay the cost of a Corvette (I'd imagine it'd sell for about NZ$200,000- About the cost of a 911 Carrera 4) you'd expect a decent interior of at least Audi-standards, not Toyota standards. Remembering that you'd only hit the track once a week max, unless you race pro, in which case you wouldn't drive street cars on it- The rest of the week'd be spent driving sedately and you'd feel the cheapness of the car. I wouldn't accept cheap plastics for that price, full stop.

Oh, I could care less what the interior of my car is made out of; I'm more concerned with how it's layed out and how easy it is to reach. I dunno about NZ, but here in America, the Corvette is 30 grand cheaper than a Carrera 4 coupe.

It still feels cheap though, if you pay the cost of a Corvette (I'd imagine it'd sell for about NZ$200,000- About the cost of a 911 Carrera 4) you'd expect a decent interior of at least Audi-standards, not Toyota standards. Remembering that you'd only hit the track once a week max, unless you race pro, in which case you wouldn't drive street cars on it- The rest of the week'd be spent driving sedately and you'd feel the cheapness of the car. I wouldn't accept cheap plastics for that price, full stop.

If your expecting at least Audi standard interior in a Corvette your standards are very high. When comparing any interior to an Audi's, it better be REALLY good.. I honestly feel that the Corvette's new interior design is right where it should be. Its a very comforable style (as in you can get in it everyday and feel satisfied with your purchase). I've been in it first hand, and it meshes very good in the overall picture of the car. Remember this is not a C5.

In all fairness also, tell me what 45k Audi can perform even close to the C6 can. You give and you take. To expect an Audi interior (Which mind you, never impressed me. Seemed like a lot of plastic. Maybe some plastics are better then others?) and the performance ability of the C6 at 45k is insane. You have price, interior, and performance. You can have two reasonably well, but all three and no dice.

You have price, interior, and performance. You can have two reasonably well, but all three and no dice.

You can have a descent interior and performance for a descent price. It can be done. The Corvette’s interior is overly cheap and disproportionate to its price. I still can't get over that fact that your spending $45,000 on a car that still uses leaf springs. That is just a rip off. There is no excuse for using leaf springs in a sports car, I'm sorry.

Since the new 06' Z06 is gonna get around 450-500HP....it may be possible that Pontiac will drop this engine into a GTO and with a few retro-style items(Hood mounted tach,shaker hood ect) will call it the GTO Judge and all hell will break loose!!

You can have a descent interior and performance for a descent price. It can be done. The Corvette’s interior is overly cheap and disproportionate to its price. I still can't get over that fact that your spending $45,000 on a car that still uses leaf springs. That is just a rip off. There is no excuse for using leaf springs in a sports car, I'm sorry.

Leaf or not, track numbers prove its beyond a capable car. You are right you can get average performance, average price, and average interior. Or you can get great performance, great price, and low level interior. Or you can get great interior, great price, and low level performance. There is a balance that is usually struck. Chevy put everything into performance for the price and damned interior. No one ever bitches about the Evolution's (Say the more expensive ones like the FQ320-FQ400s) interior or the Elise's. People say things like, "Well as long as it performs well." I don't see how it's fair to take the Corvette out of that catagory.

the vette has been known to have a cheap interior I agree but the c6 has it going way better there is now way to get it all for a low price in my opinion there has to be a weak spot

Leaf or not, track numbers prove its beyond a capable car. You are right you can get average performance, average price, and average interior. Or you can get great performance, great price, and low level interior. Or you can get great interior, great price, and low level performance. There is a balance that is usually struck. Chevy put everything into performance for the price and damned interior. No one ever bitches about the Evolution's (Say the more expensive ones like the FQ320-FQ400s) interior or the Elise's. People say things like, "Well as long as it performs well." I don't see how it's fair to take the Corvette out of that catagory.

You just don't get it, and I am tired of explaining myself, but I'll do it one last time.

Leaf springs have no place on a modern sports car. I don't care if it is still a capable car. The fact of the matter is that they skimped on the performance side of things. You would have much better performance if they were using a proper suspension in the back. For a $44,000 car I would expect a hell of a lot more than leaf springs. Like is said before, that is NOT value, that is a rip off.

You can have great performance, average interior, and a great price. Hell, the Mustang has a better interior than the Corvette and the Cobra is nearly $10,000 less. The Cobra is a very strong straight-line runner and it will give the Corvette a very good run for its money on the track. The Cobra is what I would call a value. You're getting more for your money in my opinion.

On your third point, you're once again, comparing the Corvette to cars that aren't in its class. The Evo doesn't have that bad of an interior for a sub $30,000 car. The Evo not only has a better quality interior than the Corvette it also out performs it. I do have one complaint with the Evo; the gauge cluster doesn't suite me much. You also compare the Corvette to the Elise, which is a limited production supercar while the Corvette is a mass-produced sports car. I would also live to see the C6 keep up with the Elise on the track, not a chance in hell. When you're dealing with supercars weight savings is a big issue so it is very common to see the bare carbon fiber that the body is made of. Supercars are not meant to be user friendly if they were the Acura NSX would have been a success.

I am not saying that the Corvette is not a capable car. I am saying that it is not as good of a value as most people make it out to be. You keep comparing it to cars that aren’t in its class.

personally i dont see how the ineterior is so bad, looks damned good to me, maybe the materials used arent as nice but i could care less about that, as long as it functions good and looks good who cares? if u want good interior go "overpay" for an import. the corvette is one of the best bargains u will find anywhere and if anyone disagrees feel free to point out a car that has comparable price and performance and better interior cause i can point out a hell of a lot that dont come close.