Ask the Car People.SM


Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion

531 messages,  Last post on Dec 08, 2007 at 6:35 PM

You are in the Coupes & Convertibles Forum.

What is this discussion about? Porsche 911, Chevrolet Corvette, Ferrari F430, Lotus Exige, Lotus Elise, Coupe

Messages Page 21 of 54

#197 of 531 Re: Wanna Bet, ultimatedriver?? [habitat1] by xkss

May 23, 2005 (5:42 pm)

Replying to: habitat1 (May 15, 2005 7:37 am)
It's probably against Town Hall rules, but I'll give you even odds on any amount of money up to $100k (enough to buy you two Corvettes, if you win), that the factory Corvette will not beat the Ferrari 430 in a one mile straight run. If you are so sure the result will be the same as 2001, seems like you should take my offer.
  
Before you do, however, you might want to consider just how much more powerful the 430 is than the outgoing 360. According to Edmunds, the Corvette and 430 are within 20 lbs of each other in weight. The 430's 4.3 liter engine puts out 490 horsepower, 90 more than the Corvette's 6 liter. The Corvette does have 57 more foot lbs of torque, but, given the Ferrari's 8,500 rpm redline, it has a lot more room to wind out, before shifts. The lower torque is also easier to control off the line. I'm sure you are aware that the average Formula 1 car has less torque than the 430.
  
Edmund's lists the current Corvette's 0-60 time at 5.2 seconds. If that's correct, that's about 0.4 seconds behind a $50k M3 and a 4,000 lb M5. And light years behind the couple of early 430 tests I've read that were in the 3.8 second range. Even the Porsche 911 S which I am considering, at only 355 horsepower, beat the Corvette in a recent head to head acceleration test by one of the car magazines. The gobs of torque advantage that the Corvette had could not be put to the ground with nearly the efficiency and effectiveness of the rear engine 911. When it came to handling the twists and turns, the Corvette was even further behind the 911.
  
The Ferrari 360 was, IMO, a great car. But the 430 is leaps and bounds above it in power. My friend with a 360 has test driven a 430 and admitted the difference is astounding. If any $190k car can be considered a a good deal, the mere 10-15% more that the 430 costs than the former 360 is indeed a relative bargain.
  
So, take my bet if you remian confident. But be assured, I wouldn't be wagering the price of a 911S if I wasn't equally confident and had done some research to back it up. I would also accept a friendly wager of a couple of beers, if that is more appropriate to the spirit of Town Hall rules.
  
P.S. On a sad note, I don't think any of the top 100 executives at GM care about our debate. They are desperately trying to keep the company afloat. As Jim Cramer of CNBC's "Mad Money" said, if Kirk Kerkorian hadn't stepped in, the next call from GM would have been Dr. Kevorkian. From my business associates who know Ferrari, they claim that everyone there is passionate about one thing - building the best race cars and sports cars in the world. Their management doesn't have unfunded pension liabilities or skyrocketing employee health care costs occupying 90% of their workday. I feel somewhat sorry for the pickle GM finds itself in, but I predicted it nearly 30 years ago when I bought my first Datsun while my parents' hard earned money was being pissed away on excessive repairs and maintenance on GM products.
 
The Corvette's base price is around $45,000 while the 911 S starts at around $80,000.
 
The new Corvette Z06 will obviously cost less than a 911 S and it has DRY-SUMP LUBRICATION which every 997 lacks.
 
Car & Driver has tested a new Corvette at 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. I've
 
Fiat owns Ferrari and Fiat isn't doing too well right now. Fiat whined and complained until GM gave them $2,000,000,000.

#198 of 531 Re: Shifty [rorr] by MrShift@Edmunds HOST

May 23, 2005 (6:00 pm)

Replying to: rorr (May 23, 2005 3:51 pm)
I always liked torquey motors---even the MGB was torquey for its displacement...not sure how they did that, but....what I don't like is the "light flywheel" type of motor, which is why I never drove Japanese motorcycles, as excellent and fast as they are. I felt more flexible with British and German and Italian bikes. Harleys had torque but didn't handle at all (I often checked if the Harley steering was actually welded to only go in a straight line, but noooooo that wasn't the problem).
 
But I digress...yes, I am presently on a torque binge, but I draw the line around 5 liters...bigger 'n that and I find them too much work. Turbo motors also can be an issue for me, depending on how well the turbo is engineered. But a supercharger certainly changes the overall character of the S2000. They won't let me drive it however, which hurts my feelings as you can well imagine.

#199 of 531 Don't knock Honda, Shifty by ultimatedriver

May 23, 2005 (6:36 pm)

There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that if Honda wanted to go head to head, spec to spec, number to number with Ferrari, it could and would. There's also no doubt in my mind that Honda would do it in a more user friendly package given their standing with the general consumer.
 
Fortunately for said consumer, the F20 inline four delivered the highest specific output for a naturally aspirated production engine (forget about the lack of low-end, I'm on a roll here), in automotive history. Clickety typewriter engine? You've gotta be kidding me. I've driven most performance cars. That car was meant to be on a tight track judging by the gear ratios alone. I'll let that one go seeing be that this is a forum and everyone's entitled to their own opinion.
 
Let's not forget that Honda has just as many resources at their disposal as Ferrari when it comes to racing. Flat crank engine? Yep. Titanium valves and valve springs? The S2K's already running with them. V8, V10, V12? No problem.
 
However, because the company as a whole isn't as completely defined by racing as Ferrari is, the aforementioned contender hasn't surfaced (yet). But make no doubt that Honda is just as serious about it's racing programs as Ferrari is it's racing program. And provided I'm still in the "Definitive Discussion" racing definitely improves the breed.
 
The S2000 is built by a company that knows racing. It's also built by a company that cares about it's consumers. Not that Ferrari doesn't, mind you. If they didn't then their cars would not have become so much more user friendly in the past 8 or so years. But to say that the Honda is loaded with compromise is a fallacy. If you'd stated that the NSX is loaded with compromise, I may have agreed with you. The S2000 takes the high output engine/small chassis concept in the right direction. If they wanted to incorporate more low end, it would have been in there, but there's a compromise that has be met. There was definitely more balance present than other attempts at the formula when the MkI debuted. The MkII is that much better despite having to bring the redline down to Ferrari levels.
 
All apologies to you that Honda doesn't have the cachet that Ferrari or Porsche do.

#200 of 531 Re: Ferrari vs. Chevy?? [spiritinthesky] by xkss

May 23, 2005 (9:01 pm)

Replying to: spiritinthesky (May 15, 2005 4:51 pm)
The fact that GM needs 7 liters of displacement to get 500 hp is not something I find impressive and certainly wouldn't brag about. Hand Ferrari 7 liters and they would be pushing 800 horsepower. Hand Honda's S2000 engineers 7 liters and they would be at 840 horsepower. Even the new BMW M5 I am eyeballing achieves 500 horsepower in less than 5 liters.
 
The new LS7 is now rated at 505 hp and 470 lb-ft of torque. The LS7 weighs less most other high-performance OHC engines. It has a low height. The Cadillac CTS-V uses an LS6 because Cadillac's 4.6 liter DOHC 320 hp V-8.
 
The current BMW M3's I-6 has over 100 hp/liter but check this link
 
BMW M3's engine

#201 of 531 Some S2000 comparision info, if you're willing to look by starrow68

May 23, 2005 (10:24 pm)

http://www.speedventures.net/event_results.asp
Go to the Sears Point event for 4-3-05 and look at the class 7. Mostly
S2000's with a C4 Corvette trying to keep up. Sidney is a very good driver
but the S2000's on Race tires are really amazing for 240hp. Now they
probably have a few more than that with modest bolt on's but not much.
Consider that the Z06 is in class 6 and the times for S2000's show some
of the drivers are getting out about what's available, it's a very nice package.

#202 of 531 Re: Some S2000 comparision info, if you're willing to look [starrow68] by MrShift@Edmunds HOST

May 24, 2005 (9:33 am)

Replying to: starrow68 (May 23, 2005 10:24 pm)
I would never "knock" Honda. I've always had the highest respect for their products. All I'm saying is that an S2000 sounds, drives, feels and looks like a Honda, regardless of its performance numbers. Just like a Corvette feels like an American car. And why shouldn't it? After all, a company's products reflect its identity and "genetics". From the sound of the starter motor to the sound of the exhaust, an S2000 is a Honda true blue.
 
And I'm sorry, but Honda could never build a Ferrari for regular production, but even if it did and I was totally wrong, it would cost as much as a Ferrari anyway. Why? Because of the type of components needed to go flat out at redline for 24 hours, the limited production necessary to maintain the "cache", and the enormous cost of customized lightweight castings for multi-cylinder engines and transmissions--to say nothing of paying a design team to make an outrageously good--looking supercar, which Honda has yet to do.
 
Honda motorcycles are quite up to snuff with the Italian superbikes, but their cars aren't. An S2000 is a Miata with guts. That's why it costs as little as it does.
 
Clever car and a great little sports car. I bow in homage to Honda's efforts with this car.

#203 of 531 PS by MrShift@Edmunds HOST

May 24, 2005 (10:39 am)

here's the Edmunds road test on the 2004 S2200 (as I like to call it).
 
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=100600
 
I think I'd like this car more than the earlier ones, for the reasons stated in the article. But I'm afraid I still find the styling uninspiring. I'd love to put an S2200 driveline into an RX-7 twin turbo coupe, black on black...oh, momma.....

#204 of 531 Thanks for the link by starrow68

May 24, 2005 (12:14 pm)

Loved the understatement of:
" ... and a new ABS system incorporating "yaw control logic." "
 
Stability Control without telling you that it might save your bacon!
 
If I can fit in it, I just might take one for a test drive after the initial interest wanes.

#205 of 531 Re: That's just the problem, price ... [Mr_Shiftright] by spiritinthesky

May 24, 2005 (12:21 pm)

Replying to: MrShift@Edmunds (May 23, 2005 3:31 pm)
At the risk of sounding argumentative, I respect your right to personal preferences, but you I can't agree with your assessments. They make me think you've dreamed of Ferraris, but have never actually driven a modern one. May have never driven a Honda S2000 or Bosxter S or 911 TT for that matter.
 
There are only two cars in the aforementioned group or, for that matter, sold in America, that are meant to be driven at between 7,000 and 8,500+ rpm - the Ferrari 360/430 and the (pre 2004 model) S2000. And, although the Ferrari is rear engine, both of those cars are among the most nimble handling and steering in their peer groups. Driven at 8,000+ rpm, the Honda sounds exactly what I would expect a 2.0 liter Ferrari engine to sound like, based upon my experience in 308's, 328's and a 360. IMO, the innovative chassis and in-wheel suspension system of the Honda is better than the more traditional Boxster design in terms of structural rigidity and lack of cowl shake.
 
I should point out that I have never personally owned a Honda. Probably never will. I have no axe to grind or personal agenda. But when I see comments suggesting that the Honda S2000's closest cousin is a Mazda Miata, I can't help but call a spade a spade. That comment smacks of snobbery, or engineering ignorance, take your pick. Would be like me stating that a 911 or Boxster S is nothing more than a gussied up Toyota MR2, simply because they are all mid/rear engine layouts.
 
Porsche makes some of the finest cars in the world. As does Ferrari. But the Honda S2000 is perhaps the best sports car ever to come out of Japan. If you are anti-Japanese, that's your perogative. But as much as I am a BMW owner and fan, I'd have to go back to the 1972 M1 to find something that could compete with the S2000 in innovation and engineering. Certainly the Z3, Z4 and even $130k Z8 don't.
 
So the fact that I could comfortably pay cash for a 360 or 430 doesn't cause me to thumb my nose at a 9,000 rpm Honda S2000 that costs a mere $32,000. And I will take the Honda 2.0 liter 4 cylinder engine over the Lotus Elise's Toyota Celica borrowed engine anyday. Sorry "Honda" doesn't sound sexy to you, but in Formula One, they need to make no apologies.

#206 of 531 Shifty by rorr

May 24, 2005 (12:30 pm)

"I'd love to put an S2200 driveline into an RX-7 twin turbo coupe....."
 
Actually, I REALLY want one of these:
 
http://www.wcmultralite.com
 
S2000 drivetrain in a 1400 lb. Lotus 7. Now THAT'S a sportscar.......

Messages Page 21 of 54

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement