Ditto ... a friend of mine is heavily involved in racing (has been for years and years now) and he's raced pretty much everything under the sun ... Camaros, Hondas, BMW's, Volvos, VW's, Porsche, etc., etc. Well, he's sworn off of German products because he's had too many parts (including the transmission within the last year) fail on the Porsche . I don't know ... not trying to knock Porsche, but maybe only their "top" models get the best-of-the-best???

And in terms of the Z06 on a road course? Well, I've had the privilege of seeing one on a track a couple times this year (including just this past weekend) and it is an absolute beast out there!! The only car(s) which have managed to post better times than it (on the days which I've been there and seen it run) have been a modified Lotus "Super 7" (I think that's what it's called? ) that's an open-wheel, frame with 4 wheels, rotary powered RACE CAR , and one VERY FAST Subaru WRX STi that has been significantly faster than any of the other STi's out there. AND to top it off, the Z06 is STILL running the factory Goodyear Eagle "Supercar" tires! The owner himself can't believe how well they've been working on the track .

IMO, GM has really raised the bar with the Z06 .

 

Only 2.5 seconds? Must of been a short track...

 

Some magazine definitely commented on how ragged the ZO6 was on the track ... I think it was Car and Driver

 

I have not driven one - I have driven a late-ish model 911 and a C5 Z06 though and my feelings are definitely reflected there. BTW... the 911 turbo is AWD so hopefully it'd be a little less tail-happy.

The 1st gen Viper is much more difficult to tame than any of the cars in question here, though - I was just using it as an extreme example of what I was talking about... a car with a hell of a lot of potential that won't get driven hard by most owners because it's just not confidence-inspiring and will "bite" hard if pushed even a little past its limits.

 

BTW, Porsche did snag the #1 initial quality rating from Lexus in the 2006 IQS survey from JD Power. Though, with that said, it improved leaps and bounds when they 'expanded' the definition of quality this year, so who knows why that is.

And furthermore just about any part that breaks on the Z06 is probably going to cost a small fraction of what it would cost to replace on the Porsche.

 

This test more than anything simply solidifies the fact that

Porsche guys will always be Porsche guys.

Corvette guys will always be Corvette guys.

It's like chearing for your hometown team. You're always going to, even if your rival gets the best of you on that particular day. No track tests or media reviews are going to change anyone's opinions about these two great brands.

 

FWIW I'd love to drive a Porsche but I'd never want to own one. Give me a 70k dollar budget for a sports car and I'm not even going to bother visiting my local Porsche dealer.

 

Humph... I keep reading about "spooky" handling at the limit, unlike the regular vette which consistantly gets high marks for its handling. I'm willing to bet that if GM would trash the aluminum chassis for the regular steel unit, the "spooky" handling issues would disappear much to the chagrin of diehards everywhere.

 

yah but that studdy is a little miss leading thats the first 90 days of ownership.

in the long term quality they came in 22

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...DATE/608090446

 

You may not buy one but I sure bet you would lease one!

 

yup that what it's called.

 

If the rates weren't a ridiculous rip-off like all the ones I've seen are.. then maybe.

 

Not as much "misleading" as "indicating different things".

The IQS represents the "honeymoon" period of a car, and is important. It sets the tone for the ownership experience, and if a pleasant experience it would have a lot to do with later purchases.

The long-term durability survey is a bit different in that it gives an indication of the true reliability of the car - at least as far as an owner's survey can.

Neither is terribly scientific, but still important.

 

I too have read several articles about the Vette being more challenging to drive, however, that's the way it should be. IMO, when you start taming a car down so the "average joe" Sunday driver can drive it fast, the car slows down in the hands of an experienced and quality driver. Normally what makes a car feel tame is a neutral to understeering chassis. If you have actually ever driving fast, you know that a understeering chassis is not. I say kudos to GM for keeping the Vette true to what it is and not dumbing it down for the masses.

 

90 days = initial defects in the build and possibly the design
3 years = reliability issues
10 years = durability issues and potentially high maintenance costs

I wish JD would do a 10 year survey, too... I'll bet the results are far different from the 3-year, especially if they factor in excessive maintenance costs and such.