Notices

Do the NSX beat the Corvette??

Thread Tools
 
Old Apr 10, 2004 | 09:59 AM
  #151  
g2tegls's Avatar
g2tegls
MR, ftw
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,757
Likes: 0
From: Broomfield, CO
Default

This thread went from zero to retarded in 1.5 years! People seem to think that the more a car costs, the faster it should be. As if it's a linear scale. That just isn't the case. How does a 360 Modena cost 3 times as much as a Z06 when it's just *barely* faster? That seems to be a horrible performance per dollar value but hell I'd still rather drive a Ferrari.
Old Apr 10, 2004 | 11:43 AM
  #152  
fastball's Avatar
fastball
A little chin music
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio - Rock 'n Roll capitol of the World
Default

Originally Posted by g2tegls
This thread went from zero to retarded in 1.5 years! People seem to think that the more a car costs, the faster it should be. As if it's a linear scale. That just isn't the case. How does a 360 Modena cost 3 times as much as a Z06 when it's just *barely* faster? That seems to be a horrible performance per dollar value but hell I'd still rather drive a Ferrari.

Anyone can make a car fast. I could make my Mom's Buick LeSabre fast. What makes cars like an NSX, or Ferrari, or any high dollar exotic worth the sticker price is panache, pedigree, and the way it's built. Would you like a car slapped together on an assembly line with parts from a Cavalier (Corvette), or would you like a car meticulously hand built from the chasis up. Each engine part honed and polished to exact specifiactions, and a paint process for the body that could be confused with a priceless work of art (Ferrari, NSX, etc). To some people that's more important. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, it's just the differences that make an NSX what an NSX is and a Corvette what a Corvette is.
Old Apr 10, 2004 | 01:19 PM
  #153  
g2tegls's Avatar
g2tegls
MR, ftw
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,757
Likes: 0
From: Broomfield, CO
Default

exactly
Old Apr 10, 2004 | 06:22 PM
  #154  
cwood1388's Avatar
cwood1388
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
From: Columbia,sc,USA
Default

couldn't have been put any sweeter
Old Apr 10, 2004 | 09:28 PM
  #155  
twin3037's Avatar
twin3037
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 823
Likes: 0
From: mckinney texas
Default

i bow down to you because honestlly that was the best put statment ever
Old Apr 11, 2004 | 08:37 AM
  #156  
SilverTransAm's Avatar
SilverTransAm
That's Dirté
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
Default

Originally Posted by twin3037
tkae the same engine make it dohvc and it would make more power and have better mpg that
it would also be larger and heavier - it's a tradeoff. gm chose smaller and lighter, and can still make a hell of a lot of power.

if you get car and driver, check out the editorial in the latest issue. i don't konw how long it's been out, less than two weeks.

Originally Posted by fastball
Anyone can make a car fast. I could make my Mom's Buick LeSabre fast. What makes cars like an NSX, or Ferrari, or any high dollar exotic worth the sticker price is panache, pedigree, and the way it's built. Would you like a car slapped together on an assembly line with parts from a Cavalier (Corvette), or would you like a car meticulously hand built from the chasis up. Each engine part honed and polished to exact specifiactions, and a paint process for the body that could be confused with a priceless work of art (Ferrari, NSX, etc). To some people that's more important. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, it's just the differences that make an NSX what an NSX is and a Corvette what a Corvette is.
when you buy porches, lambo's, and ferraris, you're also paying for the symbol on the hood. car and driver made the same point i'm trying to make, except on a different scale. they said that the NSX is a much better all around value than some of the high dollar exotics, yet people still choose the bigger name. it's all about personal preference. if you want to pay more for a car that performs and looks marginally better, i don't have a problem with that.

also, comparing the nsx and corvette is not exactly apples to apples. same thing can be said about viper vs corvette. the vette is a high volume car that gm actually makes a profit on. i know that chrysler takes a loss every time they sell a viper, and i'm sure honda doesn't make too much (if anything) by selling nsx's.

also, look at the production number. for the money, the corvette is one hell of a deal, but the tradeoff is it has the same problems as any other regular production car that isn't completely hand assembled.

and finally, the corvette is one of the few american cars left that is actually assembled in america, and some of the assembly is done by actual people, at the assembly plant in bowling green, kentucky.

sorry for the novel, hope i made a good point.
Old Apr 11, 2004 | 09:57 AM
  #157  
cwood1388's Avatar
cwood1388
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
From: Columbia,sc,USA
Default

excellent point made.
Old Apr 11, 2004 | 11:07 AM
  #158  
fastball's Avatar
fastball
A little chin music
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio - Rock 'n Roll capitol of the World
Default

But I think that GM has gotten away with murder on the Corvette nameplate for the last 40 years. Untill the C6 came out this year, the Vette was just a fast, light, 2 seater....... not the premire sports car it was when Duntov put the 283 in it in '55. From 1955-1966, the Corvette really was widely renowned as a great touring car. They really did have the attention of the people at Ferrari, Porsche, and Lamborghini. Britains conceeded that the Corvette was far superior in handling, refinement, and panache than anything their own marques produced (Aston Martin, Jaguar) at the time. The 1963-67 models were the absolute finest roadsters on the market, and people in the States and even in Europe are willing to pay six figures for a Stingray 427. They were the best. But GM got lazy in the late '60s and the car became too corporatized to be a true pedigree. Even the biggest Corvette enthusiasts would agree that a 1980's Corvette was a sloppy luxury car, and not much more. They fixed some of those issues with the C5, but not untill the C6 this year was the Corvette nameplate truly worthy of being applied to the vehicle.
Old Apr 16, 2004 | 11:57 PM
  #159  
Jkan2001's Avatar
Jkan2001
S2000 Pilot
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,457
Likes: 0
From: 9000 RPMS
Default

I will take a lingenfelter twin turbo corvette thank you very much...and no even a blown NSX won't keep up with the 9 second C5.
Old Apr 17, 2004 | 08:13 AM
  #160  
g2tegls's Avatar
g2tegls
MR, ftw
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,757
Likes: 0
From: Broomfield, CO
Default

Originally Posted by Jkan2001
I will take a lingenfelter twin turbo corvette thank you very much...and no even a blown NSX won't keep up with the 9 second C5.
yay and once again we are arguing the shear straight line speed of two cars. Cause I'm sure that's why people buy NSX's.



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:35 AM.