Mike Murphy

I've loved cars since I could ever remember. When I was 2, I recall looking into the engine bay of my Dad's 1977 Chevy Caprice Classic 305 V8. When I was 7, my father brought home his dad's original 1949 Chevy 1/2-ton pickup truck and that's what I maintained and drove in high school. In college, I picked up a Chevy Nova SS and swapped out the 350 V8 for a home-built 400 smallblock.

I picked up a pristine 1974 Triumph TR6 on my first real job, and 5 years later, I finally bought a Porsche, only recently, after 20 years of day dreaming...

You tend to like what you grow up with, and Chevy will always be special, but there is no denying that Porsche, IMO, is the best production sports car ever made.

Mike Murphy

That's what I thought too, but read the following "998" thread. Everyone wants weight reduction, but there are some good arguments as to why that is difficult, if not unlikely for Porsche: https://rennlist.com/forums/997-forum/324363-998-evolution-or-revolution.html

Mike Murphy

I hold the opinion that GMNA's answer to their serious financial issues would be to start making expensive, high-quality cars (ranging from $80k-$220k). Some things made in America are simply the best, and GM could actually produce a car that beats BMW and Mercedes hands down. I believe that Americans would pay a premium for such a car. The Vette is underpriced, but GM is doing that on purpose to prove a point.

Tahoe M3

If they went to a smaller displacement engine they would lose a lot of the torque that makes it so impressive and fast...the M5 and M6 for example make 500 hp from a 5L engine but have much less torque, same with the R8 and RS4.

With the big V8, getting to 7000rpms is a feat as it is...it's the highest redline ever for a production pushrod engine. Being in the right gear is less of an issue because of the huge flat torque curve. If you've ever driven one of these, you'd know that you can pull from a stop in 4th gear.

Getting 500 hp from a smaller displacement engine would require changing configurations and going to a much more expensive DOHC setup. Not gonna happen. But despite that, they're really not far off the numbers put up by naturally-aspirated DOHC V8 engines. The new MB AMG models get 500 hp from a 6.3. Not much difference, except the AMG engines weigh much more, get worse fuel economy, and don't have a dry sump lubrication system.

Oh and then there's the obvious point that the 427 is a classic corvette engine size.

TT Gasman

It actually comes out to 428 cid......which is a classic Ford size!

Carrera GT

Okay, so there are even more embarrassing engines out there. And AMG is no exception.
Why Chev thinks push rod engines should exist, I don't know. Then again, why Porsche (and their customers) think a flat six rear-engine should exist, is a similar case of "because."

RS 197

I would pay an extra $43K for a GT3 before I would drive a Vette.

No comparison IMHO!!!

Give me a break. Have you ever driven a Corvette. Have you ever driven a GT3????? How much track time have you had in either car. Sounds to me like you have been bit by the C/D bug.

I will give them there due. They are a fast peice of crap that would never hold up on the track. They have almost twice the displacement and less weight and are only slightly faster. They may both depreciate $30k in 3 years. What about 10 years form now??

The Corvette is a great AMERICAN sports car. Not a German sports car. The USA is still a long way away from competing with the Germans.

I drove the Corvette, no comparison. Felt bulky and mechanical. The interior is crap, the fit and finish is crap, the wheels look stupid and the seats are cheesy.

Keep in mind I am a big Porsche fan . The Vette has come a long way but still has a long way to go.

Nordschleife

One of the things that I do like about 'vettes is how cheap it is to get a lot more power out of the engine. The latest engine appears to be a tuners dream, being greatly over spec-ed.

I cannot reconcile myself to interiors full of cheap plastic and terminally badly styled bits and pieces.

I was at Geneva with a leading US car person when the 'vette was featured and there was one stripped down to the chassis and drive train, my American friend whispered behind his hand 'its embarrassiing, its so primative'. I do feel its time for the racing suspension design to move across to the prodction car.

R+C

Mike Murphy

I'll tell you the reason: the customers want it that way. There are millions of NASCAR fans who would rather have a pushrod engine than anything else. Same arguments goes for Porsche fans: If Porsche started putting V-6s in their 911s, people would scream to high heaven.

Mike Murphy

Yes, I absolutely prefer German cars than American cars. But the USA is not as far back as you think. In fact, if you see a Corvette in your rear-view, chances are, he'll either catch up, or he's lapping you

frayed

Speed is only part of the equation. The entire ownership experience is what counts, and for gear heads, that is mainly driven by how the car feels. This is why folks who can afford the Z06, still opt for slower but more feelsome cars like Miatas and Elises.

I've driven the C5 Z06 a lot. It's a piece of crap. Correction, it drives and feels like a piece of crap. It's fast though.

I've driven the C6 (but not the Z06). Much better, but still obviously Chevy. A fast car does not make one an engaging car. Utlimately, we drive what is the most interesting/compelling/feelsome/visceral car that you can afford, which may or may not coincide with what's the fastest. I have no problems admitting and fully appreciating the Chevy is fast as *****, capable of scorching performance. It, however, will not find a place in my garage b/c it lacks feel. The way these porsches drive relative to a chevy did not happen by accident; it happened through years of engineering. The level of engineering in the car is certainly a function of the engineers behind the work. The fact is, Porsche is far more exacting than Chevy and it shows in the final product.

Even using the silly CD article as a guidline, it is clear that price independent, the GT3 is the better car. So if you got the means, the choice is clear.

Also note that every poster in this thread is NOT making their living driving fast laps in a vette or gt3 street car. Nobody is making money on the laptimes these cars pull. What we are buying is the ownership experience, not a laptime 2 seconds quicker.

cobrien

Been reading through this thread, and I feel compelled to reply. Let me start by saying I'm neither a "Corvette guy" nor a "Porsche guy". I'm basically a "sports car guy"...I don't care who the manufacturer is as long as they produce a car that works for me (i.e. performs well, is reliable, etc.).

That said, at present I have both an '06 Z06 and an '06 997S (hopefully with a 997 GT3 on order, I'll be finding that out this week! ).

I've seen a lot of good information and opinion in this thread, and also a bunch of "facts"/opinions which, based on my personal experience, are ridiculous. So to answer several of the points I've seen raised here (apologies, I've got a feeling this could get long):

- I tracked my Z about 15 days last summer. Absolultely NO problems whatsoever. Those who state that the new Z won't hold up at the track: are you speaking from personal experience, or guessing? The car is rock solid through track days, even days in Chicago with 95+ degree temperatures and 95%+ humidity. I never saw an oil temp above 245. The engine was strong throughout. The only issue was brakes (specifcally brake pads), which I'll get to in a second.

- The stock brake pads are an issue. The rest of the braking system was phenominal...strong, fade-free stops all day long. The problem, though, is GM's ridiculous "padlet" brake pads, where you get an individual "padlet" per piston. I have no idea why they went with this design, but the problem is a complete lack of selection for suitable track pads. The stock pads are absolutely street-only. They at least worked at the track even after they were heated to some pretty extreme temperatures, but I burned through an entire set in less than one track day. For that reason, and for ease of pad replacement, I've since gone with Stoptech calipers which allow me to use a much wider range of pads. Having driven with both the Stoptech and stock brakes, I'm convinced that the stock brake setup stops as hard as the Stoptech kit. Both have no fade. I'm also not the only one who thought this...I let several people drive my car (Porsche guys, Lotus guys, you name it) and without exception they were amazed by how well the new Z stops. The stock Z also stops much better than my stock 997S....though in the case of the 997S I think part of this is a pad issue. Not sure what kind of pads ship stock on that car, but it needs something else, even for the street.

- For those who quote braking distances, lap times, skid pad numbers, etc., for the new Z: keep in mind those are usually on the stock run-flat tires. I ran one track day on the run-flats before switching to some R compound tires. The difference is night and day. While the run-flats were not as bad as I expected them to be, there's no comparison between the two. Braking distances are much shorter, grip in turns in much better...as you'd expect.

- For all the comments on the Z engine...I don't even know where to start. Looking at bhp/liter is certainly useful. So is looking at torque/liter, torque/hp curve for the motor, torque or hp/lb of engine weight, overall engine weight, engine size, and engine complexity. I'd argue that the Z motor is in fact better engineered and more impressive than the GT3 motor. It's a pushrod engine that will rev to 7000 RPM (for comparison, the 3.8L motor in my 997S redlines at 7200!!). The torque comparison between the Z and new GT3 motor is unpleasant at best...the Z produces 350+ lbft of torque from 2500 RPM up, to a max of 470 lbft. That makes a huge difference on the track. The GT3 engine needs a close-ratio transmission and shorter ratios overall so that you can stay in the peak torque band. The Z doesn't have that issue; its torque band is so wide it doesn't matter. And the Z motor is less complex than the GT3 motor, which means cheaper to maintain, easier to maintain, and more reliable since there are less places for things to go wrong. In engineering terms, simpler is always better if you can achieve the same (or in this case better) result. This is not to take anything away from the GT3 motor: Porsche has done a great job getting everything they can from that motor, which is certainly impressive. But in an absolute sense I think the Z06 motor is better.

- For those who asked, the Z06 is very modifiable. Everything from intake, exhaust, suspension, heads, cam, superchargers, turbos, etc. My "winter project" includes coilovers to get better handling, plus headers, a high-flow air filter, and computer tune. I expect to pick up somewhere around 50hp from the headers/filter/tune - probably half of it from the tune because the stock GM tune is extremely tame. Cost will be about $3K or so, fairly cheap horsepower. For those who want to, a head/cam package will usually cost about $5K plus installation, and will probably pick up 150+ horsepower. This is obviously much less than modifying a Porsche. At the same time, modifying a Porsche is cheaper than modifying a Ferrari, and I'm sure I could add 150 horsepower to a Civic much more cheaply than I could a Z06. So those comparisons are somewhat meaningless. The more expensive and rarer a car is, the more it costs to modify it.

- I only got to track the 997S a couple of times last year, so comparisons to the Z are tough, and also have no bearing on a GT3 comparison anyway. IMO one of the advantages of the 911 is its ability to get power down coming out of a turn because of the rear engine layout. You need to be much more judicious with the throttle in the Z. It's also easier to slide the back end out in the 911 than it is in the Z. Other advantages of the Porsche are that its seats are much better for the track (the Z's seats are terrible; without a harness, you spend a lot of time sliding sideways on the seat, under the steering wheel, you name it...). Pedal position for heel/toe also is much better, at least for me. I also agree that the 911 interior is a notch above the Z, but that's not something I particularly care about.

Again, this is all based on my personal experience...YMMV.

LastMezger

I agree in part with what you are saying. I've driven C6Z06s extensively on road and track and it's an incredible engine. I don't much care that it is 7.0-litres nor that it is a pushrod design.

I wouldn't go so far, however, to say that it is 'better' than the GT3 engine. Both are exhilarating powerplants and, as it pertains to this comparison, the fact that the GT3 was but .5 seconds slower around this track is a testament to the efficacy of a balanced package.

I'd like to comment on the perception that OHV engines are somehow antiquated technology. The OHC design dates back just as far as OHV. OHC is more efficient but the durability and cost benefits of OHV cannot be ignored.

cobrien

I agree completely with what you've stated above. This is more than a discussion of engines, it's about the entire car. And the GT3 is a fantastic package all around. I think the Z06 might have better than a .5 edge on R-compound tires, but even that doesn't matter. It all comes down to the driver in the end anyway (if it's me in the Z06, a guy on a mountain bike would probably win ).

My comments were primarily directed at those who automatically assume OHV engines are old technology and simple to design/build, while OHC engines are intrinsically superior and newer technology. As you said, both designs have been around forever. Both have advantages and disadvantages in general. In these particular cases, we have an implentation of each that is impressive.

LastMezger

We are definitely on the same page then.

I'll probably get banned for this but imagine a GT3 with a Z06 motor...duck!