Corvette ZR1 (Blue Devil) unveiled

[Dahak]

Then take a current Porsche, Maserati, Aston Martin, or Audi R8. They have performance and actually show quality inside.

Out performs the porche 311 GT and cost over 25k less...

Out performs the Maserati GranTurismo by a good measure and costs 10k less...

Out performs the Aston Martin V8 Vantage but for a fun change of pace costs less, only you're trading over 300hp and damned near 50mph for about 20k savings... For the same money as Aston martin I can buy a Viper SRT-10 and almost keep up with a Vette up to sixth gear.

Out performs the Audi R8 by a hell of lot and costs about 10k less...

Bang for the buck, Chevy has them beat.

If you only consider performance. If you consider overall package, which for me, also includes the quality (production and material) of the car, interior and outside, I don't think so.
And seeing how many people drive around in their sports cars in the cities around very public places so people can watch them do so, quality and style is also a factor for a lot of the potential buyers of "sports cars".

I don't care if it is pretty or not. It is tacky, which is caused by the massive use of cheap, tacky materials in the interior. I care, as mentioned earlier, about QUALITY. And when I spend $100,000 I expect at least a minimum of quality and not a reminiscence of an 1989-Korean car.

See, I look a tool and I don't say to myself "gee, this hammer drives a nail fine, but man it could sure look prettier..." Instead I say to myself "Gee, this hammer drives a nail better then that pretty one and costs less. Let's buy it."

Think there's a better performing car for the same money or less? Well, I grew up in Missouri so fucking show me. Yeah, the ZR-1 ain't a pretty car. It's not meant to be a pretty car, it's meant to kick massive amounts of ass on a track.

A hammer is a work tool, a fast sports car certainly not. I would buy it for fun purposes, and to enjoy it I would have to enjoy sitting in it. If it is a tacky, ugly thing, I cannot.
Woo Hoo, it's somewhat faster than other cars, but I'd still kick myself for having bought shitty interior quality.

[Mr. Coffee]

If you only consider performance. If you consider overall package, which for me, also includes the quality (production and material) of the car, interior and outside, I don't think so.
And seeing how many people drive around in their sports cars in the cities around very public places so people can watch them do so, quality and style is also a factor for a lot of the potential buyers of "sports cars".

To be fair, the picture I showed was from the test vehicle Chevy loaned to Car & Driver. The Production model's interior is probably going to be a little classier.

And I yeah, I'm one of those guys that really only considers performance when it comes to tools, and a vehicle is a tool.

A hammer is a work tool, a fast sports car certainly not. I would buy it for fun purposes, and to enjoy it I would have to enjoy sitting in it. If it is a tacky, ugly thing, I cannot.

A vehicle is a tool. It's a tool meant to go from point A to point B. A fast sports car is a tool designed to go from point A to point B really fast. To me, I wouldn't enjoy sitting behind the wheel of a ZR-1 because of it's looks. I'd enjoy it because I know I've got over 600bhp worth of high performance whoopass at my command.

Woo Hoo, it's somewhat faster than other cars, but I'd still kick myself for having bought shitty interior quality.

I'd kick myself for taking a lesser car to the track up against a ZR-1. And let's face facts, if you buy one of these it's not because you want a daily driver. You're are going to take it to the track and see what it can do.

[Dahak]

If you only consider performance. If you consider overall package, which for me, also includes the quality (production and material) of the car, interior and outside, I don't think so.
And seeing how many people drive around in their sports cars in the cities around very public places so people can watch them do so, quality and style is also a factor for a lot of the potential buyers of "sports cars".

To be fair, the picture I showed was from the test vehicle Chevy loaned to Car & Driver. The Production model's interior is probably going to be a little classier.

I hope so Given the right materials it is not rocket science.

And I yeah, I'm one of those guys that really only considers performance when it comes to tools, and a vehicle is a tool.

Oh come on, be serious. Maybe a pick-up or a sedan is "just" a tool. But a sports car is just a play thing for the rich(er) people. Apart from being FAST, what does it offer?

A hammer is a work tool, a fast sports car certainly not. I would buy it for fun purposes, and to enjoy it I would have to enjoy sitting in it. If it is a tacky, ugly thing, I cannot.

A vehicle is a tool. It's a tool meant to go from point A to point B. A fast sports car is a tool designed to go from point A to point B really fast. To me, I wouldn't enjoy sitting behind the wheel of a ZR-1 because of it's looks. I'd enjoy it because I know I've got over 600bhp worth of high performance whoopass at my command.

See above.
This car will be either bought by a) men in their midlife-crisis, b) sport car freaks, or c) rich people who just don't know what to do with money.
Would you go on holidays for long distances with it? With family? Go shopping, moving? I doubt so, and there it stops to be a tool and becomes a play thing (or compensation for lack of self-esteem or the like).
If I want "whoopass" I go for whoopass that has some additional benefits. Scoff at the BMW M5 or Audi RS6 as you want, but they actually offer something besides being fast. (Or in my case, a 530xd as vehicle of dreams).

Woo Hoo, it's somewhat faster than other cars, but I'd still kick myself for having bought shitty interior quality.

I'd kick myself for taking a lesser car to the track up against a ZR-1. And let's face facts, if you buy one of these it's not because you want a daily driver. You're are going to take it to the track and see what it can do.

So, it's not a tool as of your definition (go from A to B)?

[LapsedPacifist]

This whole conversation is worthless without some pictures of $100k german sportscar interiors to show this supposed superiority (and no, sedans don't count). The most recent sportscar interior that I can recall actually had "coachwork" was the 928.

I've owned a two 80s Porsches and the interiors weren't anything to write home about, except maybe the seats. They were driver's cars, like the corvette is now.

I haven't driven the C6 corvette, but have some time in a C5, and really the only offensive thing about the interior is that the wheel is too big. But hey, I like German sportscars.

EDIT:

On reflection I think that arguing about interiors is stupid in the extreme given that there's a bunch of different priorities when designing cars and choosing what you like as a drive. I value driving pleasure first, performance second, ergonomics, exterior design, and frankly I don't care if they didn't finish the interior... They didn't on most of the 911s they ever made.

[Starglider]

Mr. Coffee's idea of performance appears to be solely based on peak horsepower, possibly with some consideration of top speed and 0-60 time.

I'm not really qualified for a technical debate on supercar performance, but handling (e.g. static and aerodynamic grip, weight distribution, differential setup, frame rigidity, stopping distances) is certainly critical, as are shift times, engine lag and the shape of the power curve. It does not strike me as reasonable to say 'better performing' without considering those; historically US cars have been very good at going fast in a straight line but rather horrible at negotiating anything resembling a corner. They may have caught up by now, I'm not sure, but the impression I get from the motoring press is 'no'.

Historically this may be due to the massively greater popularity of drag racing in the US compared to Europe.

[LapsedPacifist]

The last two generations of Corvette have been tremendous performers in ever stat you quoted. They are very fast around a racetrack, and they are a very very good GT car.

[Mr. Coffee]

Mr. Coffee's idea of performance appears to be solely based on peak horsepower, possibly with some consideration of top speed and 0-60 time.

Don't forget handling, top speed, braking, ect...

When I say "performance" I'm not just talking about it's 1/4 mile time.

I'm not really qualified for a technical debate on supercar performance, but handling (e.g. static and aerodynamic grip, weight distribution, differential setup, frame rigidity, stopping distances) is certainly critical, as are shift times, engine lag and the shape of the power curve. It does not strike me as reasonable to say 'better performing' without considering those; historically US cars have been very good at going fast in a straight line but rather horrible at negotiating anything resembling a corner.

Which is why the Z06 Corvette has one of the faster lap times on the Nurburgring of a stock production sports car, consistently places high in every damned racing circuit its entered into, and has won award after award from everyone from JD Power to fucking Car & Driver... Because it can only go fact in a straight line.

Seriously, do you pay any attention at all to motorsports or do you just like to talk out of your ass for shit and giggle?

Historically this may be due to the massively greater popularity of drag racing in the US compared to Europe.

Yeah, it's because Vettes were mean to just go straight and fast, *I'm a smarmy asshole*...

[Ma Deuce]

On the argument of interior quality, maybe if European automakers didn't blow so much money giving their cars "high quality" interiors, they could make cars that actually had decent reliability. Some of the least reliable cars I have ever known have been European (especially Volkswagen, which you would sooner convince me to commit suicide than own one), and the the most aggravating thing about these problems were that they tended to be electrical problems, which are about the hardest automotive problems to diagnose and fix. Both Mercedes and BMW are well known among mechanics for their numerous glitches (to BMW's credit, they do clean up their shit after a few model years, but Mercedes? ...let's just say they don't make em' like my 190E anymore. Audi=Volkswagen, and I've already stated how I feel about them).

Of all the talk about American cars being unreliable, they've got nothing on Europeans. My family has only ever owned American cars, and the only one that ever had serious issues or left us stranded on the road was that piece of shit '88 Dodge Aires, and my dad always drove his cars hard while skimping on proper maintenance.

This is almost like a paradox: European automakers build unreliable cars because they focus so much on "interior quality", and European drivers care so much about interior quality, because they have so much time to admire the interiors of their cars when they break down on the side of the road .

[LapsedPacifist]

To be fair I owned an UNOPTIONED 96 ford ranger for a while and the electrics sucked. How you can make a bad electrical system with lights and a tape deck, I dunno, but Ford did it.

[Ma Deuce]

To be fair I owned an UNOPTIONED 96 ford ranger for a while and the electrics sucked. How you can make a bad electrical system with lights and a tape deck, I dunno, but Ford did it.

Well, we've had a few electrical problems on our cars, but they tended to be minor, non essential stuff like interior lights and power door locks. On the other hand, many of the electrical faults I've seen on Volkswagens (i.e ignition system or alternator or ECU failures) have literally crippled the cars.

[Bounty]

My family's been driving Opels, VWs and Audis for three generations, and there hasn't been a serious design fault yet. I'd mention how my Ford had electrical issues from day one, but that was a used car, so I guess it doesn't count.

All anecdotal, of course.

[Ma Deuce]

My veiw that European cars are unreliable isn't just anecdotal however, it is backed by every major organization over here that tracks automotive reliability (Consumer Reports, JD Power, etc), with European models usually dominating the "least reliable" lists. The general consensus is that European cars have great performance and style, but fall flat when it comes to reliability.

Here is one example:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17385761/

Excerpt:

When it comes to comparing new cars by nationality, one trend stood out: European automakers continue to lag Asian and North American manufacturers when it comes to reliability.

The big Japanese and the South Korean automakers have, on average, only 11 problems per 100 vehicles, the magazine said. U.S. automakers follow with 16 problems per 100, while European manufacturers have 19 problems per 100 cars.

In fact, European automakers have consistently fared poorly in recent years in Consumer Reports’ reliability surveys. Mercedes-Benz, in particular, has seen its reliability ranking decline sharply — this year, the German luxury brand placed last in the reliability list of 36 automobile brands, its reliability level 123 percent below the average for the whole industry, said Paul.

“We have seen lows in recent years for European carmakers, but this was a particularly bad year for Mercedes-Benz — it surprised a lot of people,” said Paul.

Consumer Reports placed the Mercedes-Benz CLS, M-Class and R-Class on its “Not Recommended” list because of declining reliability. A third of survey respondents who owned the 2001 Mercedes-Benz C-Class V6 owners “griped about serious electrical problems,” the magazine report said.

And while the American cars are still less reliable than the Japanese on average, they've actually closed the gap considerably in the last few years alone.

[Dahak]

How they still call BMW and Mercedes-Benk "luxury brands" is really amazing...

[MichaelFerrariF1]

How they still call BMW and Mercedes-Benk "luxury brands" is really amazing...

And you don't? I guess with you a car has to have the interior of a mansion to look good.

[Dahak]

How they still call BMW and Mercedes-Benk "luxury brands" is really amazing...

And you don't? I guess with you a car has to have the interior of a mansion to look good.

Luxury car is one (for me) that I don't see quite regularly on the streets and is not affordable for normal-working people.
I couldn't throw a stone here without hitting a BMW, Mercedes, Audi. They are among the top spots in the registration statistics here...
And price-wise, a normal mid-class BMW would be within my financial grasp.
A Porsche, Rolls-Royce, Bentley isn't by a huge margin.

[LapsedPacifist]

So in Germany what does a 911 GT3, the Corvette Z06, and lets say the V8 M3 all cost?

Just so I have an idea what you're comparing.

[Mr. Coffee]

Luxury car is one (for me) that I don't see quite regularly on the streets and is not affordable for normal-working people.
I couldn't throw a stone here without hitting a BMW, Mercedes, Audi. They are among the top spots in the registration statistics here...

So basically a "luxury" car to you is "anything that isn't made in Germany, except for Porsche" even though Porsche doesn't even make luxury cars to begin with?

And price-wise, a normal mid-class BMW would be within my financial grasp. A Porsche, Rolls-Royce, Bentley isn't by a huge margin.

Ok, so you can afford an M5 (US MSRP of $82,900 for the base model), but you can't afford a fucking Porsche? Ok, you're so full shit it's goddamned retarded.

[MichaelFerrariF1]

Luxury car is one (for me) that I don't see quite regularly on the streets and is not affordable for normal-working people.
I couldn't throw a stone here without hitting a BMW, Mercedes, Audi. They are among the top spots in the registration statistics here...
And price-wise, a normal mid-class BMW would be within my financial grasp.
A Porsche, Rolls-Royce, Bentley isn't by a huge margin.

Have you ever heard of the debating fallacy called "moving the goal-posts?"

[salm]

Ok, so you can afford an M5 (US MSRP of $82,900 for the base model), but you can't afford a fucking Porsche? Ok, you're so full shit it's goddamned retarded.

I don´t know much about cars but since when is an M5 a midclass BMW?
A midclass is more like something with a 3 in it not the ones with the 5s.

[aerius]

I don´t know much about cars but since when is an M5 a midclass BMW?
A midclass is more like something with a 3 in it not the ones with the 5s.

BMW has a 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 series, so 5 series cars would be in the midclass.

[Mr. Coffee]

I don´t know much about cars but since when is an M5 a midclass BMW?
A midclass is more like something with a 3 in it not the ones with the 5s.

Because dinbgleberry brought the M5 earlier. And honestly, yeah, it is kind of a mid-class for them.

[MKSheppard]

Honestly, who the hell cares about a car's interior? As long as it's not a death trap of sharp edges, and is reasonably built, and won't fall apart over the next ten years from normal use.....

[Napoleon the Clown]

Let's name all the "cheap" parts on the ZR1, shall we? It has cheap ass 15.5" carbon fiber breaks in front, and 15" in back (FYI, the Enzo FXX, a track car, has the same as the FRONT BREAKS). These cheap-ass breaks are guaranteed for the life of the car, under normal driving. God, Porsche would guarantee them for eternity, right? Oh, and that cheap-ass magnetic suspension (that Ferrari uses, fucker). And all that carbon fiber? They used it because it's cheap and always comes out perfect, eliminating waste. The wheels and tires? Totally fucking cheap. I mean, only ten inches wide on the front? Totally cheap. Having a completely redesigned supercharger that offers thermal efficiency on par with turbochargers and no lag? Those fuckers cheaped out on all the important stuff! Hey, wait! They actually are the only ones to offer all that for ~$100k! Well fuck me sideways! I guess it is about feeling like the interior of your car is a five-star hotel!


Look up the McLaren F1, for instance. It's interior is even less aesthetically pleasing. It doesn't have AC! And when it came out, it was a $1 million car. Why don't I hear you complaining about the interior of it? Or how about the Koenigsegg CCR? Cheap-ass looking interior.

As far as "GUEG ENGINE RAWR!" goes, the ZR1 is only .2 liters bigger than the Enzo. The same displacement as the baseline Murciélago. And it's smaller than the Bugatti Veyron's engine. Or the SSC Aero TT. Or the Pagani Zonda. Or the Lamborghini Reventón. Need I go on? Shut the fuck up about big engines. Europe has tons of supercars with bigger engines. Ever heard the phrase "There's no replacement for displacement"? It's referring to the fact that increasing engine displacement increases torque and horsepower across the entire powerband. Variable valve timing, twin overhead cam, etc. all require higher engine revs to start getting that power. Oh, right, and increasing displacement doesn't increase mechanical complexity nearly as much as the other methods of increasing power output. But hey, make your vehicle more prone to breakdown. Whatever makes you feel superior.


So can we just be honest now and admit that you can't help but realize that the only thing that anything Europe has to offer (for up to three times the price) only "wins" in a purely subjective field? The ZR1 has straight line acceleration, cornering, breaking, etc. But hey, I'm not gonna stop you from spending twice as much for half the performance. I honestly find it amusing that the only thing you can find against this car is that it doesn't have an interior that looks like it came from a five star hotel. Just keep telling yourself that Europe is the best because it's old. Engineers never go where the money is.

[Dahak]

Luxury car is one (for me) that I don't see quite regularly on the streets and is not affordable for normal-working people.
I couldn't throw a stone here without hitting a BMW, Mercedes, Audi. They are among the top spots in the registration statistics here...

So basically a "luxury" car to you is "anything that isn't made in Germany, except for Porsche" even though Porsche doesn't even make luxury cars to begin with?

A luxury car is one that not every idiot on the streets buys and drives. Given the scores of people driving BMW, Mercedes, Audis here, they are not luxury. And sorry if it hurts your feelings, but German cars are among the top-selling ones here, being Germany, not much of American cars. French upper-class cars never seemed to get much following, and bigger Asians ones are also not solidly in the top-selling list; they sell more compact and middle-sized cars here.
And ignoring the fact that I mentioned for instance Rolly-Royce or Bentley as luxury car just a few centimeters below that, which certainly aren't following German car traditions...
It is not my problem that you seem to fight against a perceived minority complex or something when it comes down to other car "countries" than the USA...

And price-wise, a normal mid-class BMW would be within my financial grasp. A Porsche, Rolls-Royce, Bentley isn't by a huge margin.

Ok, so you can afford an M5 (US MSRP of $82,900 for the base model), but you can't afford a fucking Porsche? Ok, you're so full shit it's goddamned retarded.

And an M5 is not middle-sized. I could have said Mercedes C-class, but well...
BMW 1 is the compact class, competing with the Audi A3 or other "upscale" compacts, BMW 3 is sold, marketed and accepted as an upper middle class car, while a BMW 5 and 7 are upper class with the 7 touching "luxury" cars. The X3 is something of the middle-class SUV, the X5 and X6 are the upper-class SUVs, whith the X6 marketed more to sporty drivers.
And a BMW 318 or 320 with good extras can be had for around 38-40k €. Not ecactly out of reach or luxurious. Trying to get a Bentley for around 200k € on the other hand, is way out of league.

[Dahak]

I don´t know much about cars but since when is an M5 a midclass BMW?
A midclass is more like something with a 3 in it not the ones with the 5s.

Because dinbgleberry brought the M5 earlier. And honestly, yeah, it is kind of a mid-class for them.

Which I brought up in a comparison between high-powered, über-designed super sport sedans/car (or station wagon). When you showed me where I said it to be a middle-class, please do so. Otherwise shut up.