Look at ne new vette in person. I was less than thrilled with the pics until we got a few here at work.

So much detail in the body. Very VERY pretty.

 

You work at a Chevy dealer?
Sweet.

 

Its not that I hate the looks of the car... there are just things that I dislke. But as far as bang for the buck is concerned, there is really noting in the same class. So Im willing to sacrifice a little aesthetic's for performance.

 

It seems more than a few people(at my work) have said they don't like it in pictures but like it a lot more in person.
I have yet to get close to one. I felt the same way about the 350Z.

 

I have driven a couple of them(vettes), and was pleasantly suprised. The 350z on the other hand imho is worthless; ugly and heavy.

 

If I didn't need access to a rear seat, I'd have a base "cheap" 350z for a daily driver in a heart beat.

However, I have a daugher so I need good rear seat access (RX-8 coming after winter).

 

Took over ten years...

 

To each his own huh.. Mahjik? I just couldnt get into the way they drive. They feel heavy and kinda cumbersome. Not to mention that I dislike the styling. Why dont you get a G35 instead? IMHO they look much better, and I think they even have a back seat.

 

I guess I really need to drive a C5 Z06, or a C6, because i've driven a regular old C5, and wasn't impressed at all with the handling. Grip it had, but it felt just like all of the many corvettes, mustangs, camaros, firebirds, etc. i've driven... like a 2-seater malibu or fairmont with big tires.

Plus, at at 5'9" and 175 lbs, I always feel like a midget in american sports cars... I can't see over the dash, and the door latches are big enough to put your arm through... it's like that Fisher Price telephone i had as a toddler.

 

The vette also has a more mature crowd, generally speaking. I consider that a good thing in my book.

I doubt you are likely to see "Dude, how do I make my Vet louder" or "I picked up some hot chick in my vette" thread on the corvette forums. Older crowd = less crap to sift through. Corvettes have that way above us..

 

That's just wrong.

 

Vettes feel heavy too, however, we all know that it doesn't necessarily translate to bad handling (as you see the Vettes tearing up AutoX and road courses).

I'm not saying a 350z is in the same league has a Vette or FD for handling, but then again I'm not looking for track performance in a daily driver.

As far as the styling, you can't argue on that as it's a personal preference. But, I used to own a '94 300zx (7+ years ago). It was the perfect balance between sports/luxury car. One of the most trouble-free cars I've ever had.

 

I had a buddy that had one and he said the same thing. He really liked the balance between luxury and performance on it.
In fact, he actually been toying around the idea of getting one again.

 

Howard, I agree with most of what you wrote there, but you seem to have neglected one important thing: area under the curve. The new 'vette has 300ft/lbs torque at 1000 RPMs. That's a good amount more than the RX-7's peak torque, which isn't available until the secondary turbo kicks in.

Also, the Corvette has an insane amount of rubber putting all that power to the ground. These two things are the main reason that their otherwise inferior chassis can make it around an autocross course faster than a 3rd-Gen RX-7, assuming equal driver skill.

But, with modern advances in rotary engines (Renesis engine has much less overlap, and better combustion chamber sealing), turbochargers, and lightweight materials available at reasonable prices, there's no reason Mazda couldn't build a 350+HP, sub-2600lb FE3S RX-7. And it should sell in today's market, which seems to be finally gravitating back to sportscars.

-s-

C6 engine info taken from: http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=841425

 

How did you decide this?

 

I notice that nobody has brought up the issue of gas mileage...

The Z06 is heavier. Check.

The Z06 makes about 150 more hp. Check.

The Z06 has poorer aero numbers. Check.

The Z06 gets much better mileage than any FD could ever hope to acheive?

Hmmmmmm. Them old tech 2 valve pushrod motors must know something the rotary doesn't.

 

You don't have to tell me. I got 9 mpg on my last tank. All city driving (and sitting at idle) in between "playtime"

 

I saw a C6 in person in Michigan in May, at the college FSAE competition. Maybe it's because I was there with a bunch of miniature-sized, purpose-built Formula SAE cars, but the Corvette looked pretty big, even next to a Viper. The additional weight seems to be up high also, look at the size of the windshield, cabin, roof, hatch, and top-most portion of the hood and trunk. I'm sure they're more spacious and safer than our RX-7's in an accident, but "sportscar" and "portly" don't belong in the same sentence as far as I'm concerned, unless there's a "shouldn't be" in there somewhere...

-s-

 

[sarcasm]
When you decided to stick a Chevy engine into a Mazda chassis. You sure didn't pick it and go through all the work to put it in an inferior chassis did you?
[/sarcasm]

On a more serious note the FD chassis has much more potential for the reasons Howard described. I think a Vette would have a hard time competing in SM2 for autocross with a properly setup FD...We'll see soon here at nationals.

For road courses its really hard to say since a lot of the racing leagues don't allow forced induction (especially those the Vettes choose to run in). I expect that a JGTC setup FD would run better lap times than a GT Vette. Maybe with some JGTC races coming to the USA we'll get to see GT/JGTC cars run in mixed class events on the same track, same weekend so we can compare times.

For drag racing the chassis is lighter and has more weight on the rear....need I say more?

P.S. This is specifically just chassis, this is not engine, drivetrain, brakes, etc...

P.P.S. The Vette vs. FD here reminds me a lot of the Skyline vs. FD debate that went on in Japan, two different ways to get from point A to point B, both with merit and both get the job done.

 

It's those two little spinning things in the intake tract. Their appetite for fuel is pretty ravenous.

Also my post in the anti-det thread regarding "thermodynamic efficiency of various combustion chamber types"...

 

Howard, good points as usual. But the bottom line for me is that I'm getting 20 mpg stock - combined city and country driving. ANDDDDDDD, I can afford payments on an FD!

PS: One other benefit to the FD: Bloomington, IL (where I work) is the former home of Bloomington Gold, the Corvette equivalent to SevenStock. We have a few zillion Corvettes here in town. I think I've got the only drivable 3G within 40 miles and it really makes all those Vette driver nervous at stoplights. A very unique feeling. LOL.

 

Wrong! Sorry. My FD with the stock twins dynoing 340RWHP got me from Niagara Falls Canada to Columbus Ohio on 1 tank of gas. The whole tank that is, but whatever. As long as you are not boosting, you get pretty good gas mileage. NO WAY a small bock 350 Chevy with 400 horses will do that, no way. As a general rule of thumb, bigger cubes=worse gas mileage.
When a rotary is not under boost, it's a 79 c.i. motor(ported in my case).

 

And that's at 80MPH+ all the way there using Sunoco 94.

 

HMm.. good rear seats... I would go grab an STi or EVO .
4 door, econobox - with a damn stout engine. If I ever need a daily driver, I think Evo will be my first choice. Willl leave the luxury for the wife..er.. that si when I find one.

 

Seeing how the JGTC RX-7 is a tad over 300hp and the GTS Vette is 600hp, I doubt it would be much of a match.