Z06/C5 vs 928...FACTS
11-18-2002, 08:39 AM
#31
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bcdavis,
I'm sorry I didn't communicate more effectively since I knew that you were referring to how fast your bike is; those things are unreal.
My response was that I know of no stock car that can do that, nor even come close, wholeheartedly agreeing to what you've said. Why? It's all in the time slips for all to see, and fits easily within the 'trends'.
As a matter of fact, the only car that I know that can do 0-60 in 2.1s is the Lingenfelter(?) Twin-Turbo Corvette. Needless to say, it's not even close to stock, and bone-stock is what this discussion is all about.
Normy,
I know you don't like books or magazines, but I'm much more inclined to believe published times than someone's claims which do not follow the trends.
A good example of that is when someone says their 3,500lb car at 288hp can turn the same times as a bunch of other 3,500lb cars with 350hp; it just doesn't add up, and it's time to raise the BS flag.
By the way, here's another sub 12 second stock car, independent of any book or magazine (..anything for you, Normy):
<a href="http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25356" target="_blank">http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25356</a>
If you look in his sig, you'll see his time on his stock radials. Scroll down some and you can read how he did it.
I'm sorry I didn't communicate more effectively since I knew that you were referring to how fast your bike is; those things are unreal.
My response was that I know of no stock car that can do that, nor even come close, wholeheartedly agreeing to what you've said. Why? It's all in the time slips for all to see, and fits easily within the 'trends'.
As a matter of fact, the only car that I know that can do 0-60 in 2.1s is the Lingenfelter(?) Twin-Turbo Corvette. Needless to say, it's not even close to stock, and bone-stock is what this discussion is all about.
Normy,
I know you don't like books or magazines, but I'm much more inclined to believe published times than someone's claims which do not follow the trends.
A good example of that is when someone says their 3,500lb car at 288hp can turn the same times as a bunch of other 3,500lb cars with 350hp; it just doesn't add up, and it's time to raise the BS flag.
By the way, here's another sub 12 second stock car, independent of any book or magazine (..anything for you, Normy):
<a href="http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25356" target="_blank">http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25356</a>
If you look in his sig, you'll see his time on his stock radials. Scroll down some and you can read how he did it.
11-18-2002, 09:05 AM
#32
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ft. Lauderdale FLORIDA
Posts: 5,248
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
I never said anything about Z06's srv. What I would like you to do is spend some time at the dragstrip or hangin' with car guys/gals so that you can learn which cars are overblown [stock Buick GN, Acura NSX's and Integras, C5 vettes] and which cars are sleepers. Just sending me a link to some site that talks about some hot pass tells me nothing...just that someone knows how to build a website [geez that's real hard!]. Again, [and I'm not flaming you, or at least trying hard not to!], I watched my supposedly inferior performer embarass a regular C5 one afternoon, so that ought to tell you something~
And not that my car is especially fast!
N!
310 hp and not a pushrod in sight!
And not that my car is especially fast!
N!
310 hp and not a pushrod in sight!
11-18-2002, 10:11 AM
#33
Advanced
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: United States - Iowa
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am just curious as to where all the trash-talk is about?
The 928 is a luxury/sports car! If one looks at the facts for each year of the 928 compared to the same year GM junk, you will find that the 928 matches and/or exceeds in many areas.
The Vettes are big engined/high geared vehicles that can run 1/4 miles fairly quickly indeed and had good top end speed.
The 928 was a heavy car, that was faster (top end) and was built to run that fast all day! When was the last time anyone heard of a "STOCK" vette driving on the autobauhn at 140 MPH for 200-600 Km/s?.
What I want to know is, why did it take GM so bleeping long to finally build the Vette correctly (C5 version). Just to make the Vette race worthy, it takes lots of money and modifications to get it to handle on a race course without "snow plowing/understeering" being so nose heavy. (Think I'm full of it? Talk to anyone who's tried to race a stock older Vette on a road course or the racer's who do!).
I'm happy to see that the C5's are finally worthy of being "Internationally competetive"...
But I'll keep my 928...I still can keep ahead of new 911 Carrera's and Boxters on the track. Oh, my 928 is the early 1979 version...with 360 rated street tires.
The 928 is a luxury/sports car! If one looks at the facts for each year of the 928 compared to the same year GM junk, you will find that the 928 matches and/or exceeds in many areas.
The Vettes are big engined/high geared vehicles that can run 1/4 miles fairly quickly indeed and had good top end speed.
The 928 was a heavy car, that was faster (top end) and was built to run that fast all day! When was the last time anyone heard of a "STOCK" vette driving on the autobauhn at 140 MPH for 200-600 Km/s?.
What I want to know is, why did it take GM so bleeping long to finally build the Vette correctly (C5 version). Just to make the Vette race worthy, it takes lots of money and modifications to get it to handle on a race course without "snow plowing/understeering" being so nose heavy. (Think I'm full of it? Talk to anyone who's tried to race a stock older Vette on a road course or the racer's who do!).
I'm happy to see that the C5's are finally worthy of being "Internationally competetive"...
But I'll keep my 928...I still can keep ahead of new 911 Carrera's and Boxters on the track. Oh, my 928 is the early 1979 version...with 360 rated street tires.
11-18-2002, 12:01 PM
#34
Nordschleife Master
Not too Change the Subject but I ageee with BC. My shark is fast, in it's own right, comparable to a C5. But sometimes it's just not fast enough for me, so when I reach this threshold. I switch vehicles. I hop on my 98 CBR600F3 (not stock) and get the "need for speed" satisfaction. To this day, NO CAR EVER has come close or Even some bikes for that matter. I guess, whatever way you would like to look at it - there is always something faster.
One good point that I thought was brought up.
Hypothetical of Course -
Let's look at the model years for 928 and Corvette.
In 84, 85 & 86 all the way to 95.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the early 80's vette a Joke?. All show with absolutley no go?. L88 or that cross fire injection crap?. I'm not slamming vettes, my favorite two are the ZR1 and a 71 with a LT1 350. (my father always said, real vettes have chrome bumpers - before he passed on) I'm trying to ask if you guys think the 928 was a "all aroung better car" for each year manufactured in contrast to the Vette.
Including comparing performance specs. Include ROW as well, they were available so why not include them. Did Chevy export non US Spec cars to Europe?.
One good point that I thought was brought up.
Hypothetical of Course -
Let's look at the model years for 928 and Corvette.
In 84, 85 & 86 all the way to 95.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the early 80's vette a Joke?. All show with absolutley no go?. L88 or that cross fire injection crap?. I'm not slamming vettes, my favorite two are the ZR1 and a 71 with a LT1 350. (my father always said, real vettes have chrome bumpers - before he passed on) I'm trying to ask if you guys think the 928 was a "all aroung better car" for each year manufactured in contrast to the Vette.
Including comparing performance specs. Include ROW as well, they were available so why not include them. Did Chevy export non US Spec cars to Europe?.
11-18-2002, 01:20 PM
#35
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 1,446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drew,
Yes the Porsche is obviously a better put together car, specifically the 928. This is the reason they were so expensive from day one.
I have never cared for Corvettes, but the C5 series Vette is a lot of car for the money. Vettes of the early 80s aren't that great, not a whole lot faster than a normally aspirated 944, certainly didn't handle any better.
I have always said to myself that if GM got serious about really putting the Vette together well, I just might consider buying one. I think the C5 body is very nice, but the inside of the car looks, feels and is very poorly constructed. This is done for a reason, because most Vette owners don't care, the car is catered to a different demographic than Porsche cars are. Think I'm full of it, take a look at the inside of a Cadillac, then the best Chevrolet, there is a huge difference.
I admire the fact that Chevrolet can build such a great performing car for the money. But, I see many C5s in a week's time and they are becoming very common (like Boxsters). I also admire the fact that the 928 is stiff competition for a lot of new $50,000+ cars.
The Lingenfelter (sp?) Vette is obviously quite a car, I'm sure. His performance enhancements are very well respected, just like Reeves Callaway's creations were. Long live the Bastard!
Yes the Porsche is obviously a better put together car, specifically the 928. This is the reason they were so expensive from day one.
I have never cared for Corvettes, but the C5 series Vette is a lot of car for the money. Vettes of the early 80s aren't that great, not a whole lot faster than a normally aspirated 944, certainly didn't handle any better.
I have always said to myself that if GM got serious about really putting the Vette together well, I just might consider buying one. I think the C5 body is very nice, but the inside of the car looks, feels and is very poorly constructed. This is done for a reason, because most Vette owners don't care, the car is catered to a different demographic than Porsche cars are. Think I'm full of it, take a look at the inside of a Cadillac, then the best Chevrolet, there is a huge difference.
I admire the fact that Chevrolet can build such a great performing car for the money. But, I see many C5s in a week's time and they are becoming very common (like Boxsters). I also admire the fact that the 928 is stiff competition for a lot of new $50,000+ cars.
The Lingenfelter (sp?) Vette is obviously quite a car, I'm sure. His performance enhancements are very well respected, just like Reeves Callaway's creations were. Long live the Bastard!
11-18-2002, 04:44 PM
#36
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the reason this whole debate got started was because some of us were talking about how our old cars had beaten many new cars, including C5's. Which put the small contingent of Chevy fans on this board on the defensive. Because no one with an expensive new car wants to hear about, or experience, losing to an old, inexpensive, used Porsche...
I think the truth is pretty obvious.
Some new cars are going to be faster than our stock 928s. If not now, in a few more years.
But there will always be the lucky race, or the one where driver skill defeated horsepower. Or that we just caught someone at the time and place where we could properly use our powerband. But when you put weight and horsepower to the comparison, and eliminate the driver factor, and the conditions of the race, the fact will be that there are cars faster than ours.
BUT...
The original post was about a fun race, where a 928 beat a C5. Why? How? Who knows? Maybe the C5 was running on 7 cylinders that day. Maybe he could not drive very well. But regardless, it is a cool story, and a fun story. The point is that our cars are much older, and much cheaper. Our cars will beat 99% of the cars of the same model year as our own. But to beat new cars, is a very awesome feat. So when you do, be proud, and post it. It doesn't mean the 928 is faster, or better. It just proves that new stuff does not always win. Despite what the horsepower numbers say. Hell, I did a pretty good job keeping up to my friend's Viper on the freeway. So if I did not know him, I would never hae known why, and I would have told everyone that Vipers are not that much faster than a 928. But truth is, that he spun his Viper when accelerating on the freeway, to race a Ferarri. Just too much power... So now he is cautious about his acceleration... So driver skill, and aggressiveness, plays a big role too.
I think the truth is pretty obvious.
Some new cars are going to be faster than our stock 928s. If not now, in a few more years.
But there will always be the lucky race, or the one where driver skill defeated horsepower. Or that we just caught someone at the time and place where we could properly use our powerband. But when you put weight and horsepower to the comparison, and eliminate the driver factor, and the conditions of the race, the fact will be that there are cars faster than ours.
BUT...
The original post was about a fun race, where a 928 beat a C5. Why? How? Who knows? Maybe the C5 was running on 7 cylinders that day. Maybe he could not drive very well. But regardless, it is a cool story, and a fun story. The point is that our cars are much older, and much cheaper. Our cars will beat 99% of the cars of the same model year as our own. But to beat new cars, is a very awesome feat. So when you do, be proud, and post it. It doesn't mean the 928 is faster, or better. It just proves that new stuff does not always win. Despite what the horsepower numbers say. Hell, I did a pretty good job keeping up to my friend's Viper on the freeway. So if I did not know him, I would never hae known why, and I would have told everyone that Vipers are not that much faster than a 928. But truth is, that he spun his Viper when accelerating on the freeway, to race a Ferarri. Just too much power... So now he is cautious about his acceleration... So driver skill, and aggressiveness, plays a big role too.
11-18-2002, 05:14 PM
#37
Nordschleife Master
Just think ....if there were a 2003 928 - wouldn't that be awesome!.
I will have to say that in regards to performance levels, new cars are getting smaller in C.I. and higher in power. Hell, my 2000 Nissan Altima does very well for a four banger rice burner. Or How about a WS-6 Trans Am or the SS camaro. By any standard, powerful cars with a $$$$ price tag.
A car that is still fearful to run against -
The Buick Grand National or GSX, GN - Turbo'd Six Cyclnder that'll easily do a 13 second 1/4 mile. Or the GSX, were talking 12 second 1/4 mile STOCK. The worst thing Buick ever did was drop these cars from their line up.
It was fun to challenge the C5 and win. I couldn't beleive it then and I'm still curious if it was driver error, mechanical issue or if my shark is just that fast from kickdown.
On occasion, she'll even surprise me with the powerband at high rpms. It seems that the faster I go, the faster I climb to redline - so my top end is awesome. That's where I get the biggest adrenaline rush! (I'm addicted to that)
I will have to say that in regards to performance levels, new cars are getting smaller in C.I. and higher in power. Hell, my 2000 Nissan Altima does very well for a four banger rice burner. Or How about a WS-6 Trans Am or the SS camaro. By any standard, powerful cars with a $$$$ price tag.
A car that is still fearful to run against -
The Buick Grand National or GSX, GN - Turbo'd Six Cyclnder that'll easily do a 13 second 1/4 mile. Or the GSX, were talking 12 second 1/4 mile STOCK. The worst thing Buick ever did was drop these cars from their line up.
It was fun to challenge the C5 and win. I couldn't beleive it then and I'm still curious if it was driver error, mechanical issue or if my shark is just that fast from kickdown.
On occasion, she'll even surprise me with the powerband at high rpms. It seems that the faster I go, the faster I climb to redline - so my top end is awesome. That's where I get the biggest adrenaline rush! (I'm addicted to that)
11-18-2002, 10:04 PM
#38
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the performance of earlier Vette’s versus same year 928’s, here’s a page with times for a bunch of cars:
<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~jfgalbraith/qtimes.html" target="_blank">http://home.earthlink.net/~jfgalbraith/qtimes.html</a>
Looks like a draw to me.
You have no argument from me regarding the Corvettes of the 80’s and early 90’s. It wasn’t until the ZR-1 came along that I became only mildly interested in them. I do not like the C4 body at all.
When the C5 came out, I liked the body style right away, but still, I was indifferent.
Then I heard about the Z06 and took one for a test drive; as the saying goes, the rest is history. If you ever get the opportunity to drive one, do it!
The interior is not the best, but as John noted, for someone like me it’s good enough since my main concerns are performance and sharp styling. I just wish it had better seats. The dash layout is perfect.
There’s no comparison to my Dad’s $5,000 full red leather option in his 993 (..actually, the color is more of a dark rose). The stitching everywhere on that car is pin-point perfect, and has to be seen to be believed...
If a quality interior is the utmost importance to you, then stay away from the C5 (..obviously).
However, if you want that quality interior along with the uncompromising performance of the Z06, then you’ll have to shell out an additional $70,000 to buy the Porsche Twin Turbo.
Is it worth it? I’m sure it is to the people who bought them. I’ll tell you what though, that $70k difference can buy me some pretty nice seats!
Bcdavis,
Don’t forget, I own one of those old, inexpensive, used Porsche’s. This whole debate started because even though Drew conceded he’d lose to a Z06, he was under the impression it wouldn’t be by much. I do know better, and was merely trying to help him understand what he’s really up against.
Drewster,
Your Buick numbers seemed slightly optimistic so I did a quick search:
<a href="http://www.impactsites2000.com/autozone/buick_gsx.htm" target="_blank">http://www.impactsites2000.com/autozone/buick_gsx.htm</a>
Still, very impressive with 13.4 quarter mile times.
Monday Night Football starts; go Bears!
<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~jfgalbraith/qtimes.html" target="_blank">http://home.earthlink.net/~jfgalbraith/qtimes.html</a>
Looks like a draw to me.
You have no argument from me regarding the Corvettes of the 80’s and early 90’s. It wasn’t until the ZR-1 came along that I became only mildly interested in them. I do not like the C4 body at all.
When the C5 came out, I liked the body style right away, but still, I was indifferent.
Then I heard about the Z06 and took one for a test drive; as the saying goes, the rest is history. If you ever get the opportunity to drive one, do it!
The interior is not the best, but as John noted, for someone like me it’s good enough since my main concerns are performance and sharp styling. I just wish it had better seats. The dash layout is perfect.
There’s no comparison to my Dad’s $5,000 full red leather option in his 993 (..actually, the color is more of a dark rose). The stitching everywhere on that car is pin-point perfect, and has to be seen to be believed...
If a quality interior is the utmost importance to you, then stay away from the C5 (..obviously).
However, if you want that quality interior along with the uncompromising performance of the Z06, then you’ll have to shell out an additional $70,000 to buy the Porsche Twin Turbo.
Is it worth it? I’m sure it is to the people who bought them. I’ll tell you what though, that $70k difference can buy me some pretty nice seats!
Bcdavis,
Don’t forget, I own one of those old, inexpensive, used Porsche’s. This whole debate started because even though Drew conceded he’d lose to a Z06, he was under the impression it wouldn’t be by much. I do know better, and was merely trying to help him understand what he’s really up against.
Drewster,
Your Buick numbers seemed slightly optimistic so I did a quick search:
<a href="http://www.impactsites2000.com/autozone/buick_gsx.htm" target="_blank">http://www.impactsites2000.com/autozone/buick_gsx.htm</a>
Still, very impressive with 13.4 quarter mile times.
Monday Night Football starts; go Bears!
11-19-2002, 11:08 AM
#39
Nordschleife Master
SRV - Sometimes my fingers cannot keep up with my Brain. The Buick GNX not GSX. From what I remember, the GNX was the Father of the Grand National; but it had a few extra goodies.
<a href="http://www.buickgnx.com/" target="_blank">http://www.buickgnx.com/</a>
I like the editors remarks - The factory rating is 276hp@4400 and 360ft-lbs@2600 of torque, but in reality those figures are conservative. God bless America.
Circa 1987, the Buick GNX was GM's fastest production sedan ever and remains among Detroit's quickest and most collectible vehicles of all time. It was created to commemorate the final production run of the Buick Grand National. It's a little bolder in appearance and it has considerable mechanical improvements. 1987 was the only production year and 547 were made, all optioned identically with a serialized plaque on the dash.
Check Out the Link!
<a href="http://www.buickgnx.com/" target="_blank">http://www.buickgnx.com/</a>
I like the editors remarks - The factory rating is 276hp@4400 and 360ft-lbs@2600 of torque, but in reality those figures are conservative. God bless America.
Circa 1987, the Buick GNX was GM's fastest production sedan ever and remains among Detroit's quickest and most collectible vehicles of all time. It was created to commemorate the final production run of the Buick Grand National. It's a little bolder in appearance and it has considerable mechanical improvements. 1987 was the only production year and 547 were made, all optioned identically with a serialized plaque on the dash.
Check Out the Link!
11-19-2002, 11:13 AM
#40
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chattanooga TN
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boy is it nice to see some rationale return. My issue arose not in defense of Corvetttes but relating to ridiculous performance claims by uninformed Porsche people. 928s are great. I love mine. I thoroughly enjoy driving it. None of those subjective emotional statements enhance its performance. Bottom line, if your 928 will go 13.5, its a bad 928. If your C5 goes 13.5, its average at best. Notice I didnt say better built, better looking, longer lasting or anything else, just faster. If you think your wife is good looking that doesnt require you to think that Catherine Zeta Jones is a pig.
Peace
Peace
11-19-2002, 02:32 PM
#41
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 1,446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carlos,
Could it be that the Purists nave agreed with the Chevy fans? I'm not really either (honest), because my 928 is far from pure as white snow, that's why it is called the Bastard, because Porsche and Callaway were never married.
The older guy (60+) I work with just bought a Camaro V8 with attached 6-speed he is going to scab into his 1988 RX-7 convert. Crazy I tell you, crazy!
Actually I worked for a guy one summer who did Austin Healey restorations, well sort of. We took a 375 HP crate engine (new one) and scabbed it into a Healey 100-4. The thing was incredibly fast, but hard to cool and keep on the road. 1st high speed run, it spun at over 80 MPH because my boss wouldn't lay off the throttle.
Now I have a "serious" desk job and come on to Rennlist to get my fill of car stuff.
Could it be that the Purists nave agreed with the Chevy fans? I'm not really either (honest), because my 928 is far from pure as white snow, that's why it is called the Bastard, because Porsche and Callaway were never married.
The older guy (60+) I work with just bought a Camaro V8 with attached 6-speed he is going to scab into his 1988 RX-7 convert. Crazy I tell you, crazy!
Actually I worked for a guy one summer who did Austin Healey restorations, well sort of. We took a 375 HP crate engine (new one) and scabbed it into a Healey 100-4. The thing was incredibly fast, but hard to cool and keep on the road. 1st high speed run, it spun at over 80 MPH because my boss wouldn't lay off the throttle.
Now I have a "serious" desk job and come on to Rennlist to get my fill of car stuff.
11-19-2002, 06:32 PM
#42
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think cars like "The Bastard" and all those "Frankenstein" creations you described, are very cool, because they are really fast, and all of them are far from stock, and they make people think. When people race something they think is slow, they get quite a surprise. I think "sleepers" are cool.
11-19-2002, 10:40 PM
#43
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Hey John, I'm sittin' here in Louisville this evening sippin' a bit of Woodford Reserve after a visit to Morton's...a nice evening in Kentucky.
11-21-2002, 10:11 PM
#44
In Your Face, Ace
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Check out this Audi S4 and ZO6 go at it. The begining is goofy, but the two races are interesting.
<a href="http://videos.imolas4.com/zerin/jul_20_02/APRSTG3S4_vs_Z06.wmv" target="_blank">http://videos.imolas4.com/zerin/jul_20_02/APRSTG3S4_vs_Z06.wmv</a>
<a href="http://videos.imolas4.com/zerin/jul_20_02/APRSTG3S4_vs_Z06.wmv" target="_blank">http://videos.imolas4.com/zerin/jul_20_02/APRSTG3S4_vs_Z06.wmv</a>
11-22-2002, 12:29 AM
#45
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel I can speak firsthand since I own a 2003 Z06. I've had a 993, 944Turbo, S2, and 968. I have always wanted a 928 so I hang out on this board.
I can tell you that the Z06 is a complete monster. I've had a Viper GTS also and they are pretty much in the same range. The Z's power to weight ratio is incredible. THe torque and reving potential of that old school pushrod is quite impressive. I don't think any stock 928 will be close. I'm guessing about 7 tenths or car lengths for a newer GTS.
Nonetheless the 928 is a menacing beast that is timeless. I will eventually own one. BTW, where can I find a 5 speed.
I can tell you that the Z06 is a complete monster. I've had a Viper GTS also and they are pretty much in the same range. The Z's power to weight ratio is incredible. THe torque and reving potential of that old school pushrod is quite impressive. I don't think any stock 928 will be close. I'm guessing about 7 tenths or car lengths for a newer GTS.
Nonetheless the 928 is a menacing beast that is timeless. I will eventually own one. BTW, where can I find a 5 speed.