Good and Bad Review of ZO6
#1
10-07-2006, 09:30 PM
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Central North Carolina
Posts: 2,105
Good and Bad Review of ZO6
I have the new Car and Driver (November 2006) with its "Lightning Lap" comparison test of 17 performance cars around Virginia International Raceway. It is an intersting concept -- a course like that really takes a lot of everything, so it is a good test of who is "best overall." But the article itself is one of the worst written pieces I've seen in Car and Driver - very hard to figure out which car is fastest overall, lots of comments but little hard data, etc.
Still, it becomes clear: fastest overall, regardless of price, Ford GT; second, ZO6; third, Viper. Among $50,000 cars, the standard C6 beat the Porsche Cayman by more than I would have expected given the Cayman's proven superb balance and handling, but both got eaten -- just killed -- by the Lotus Elise, which dominated everything under $70K (I have to go look at that, I've sort of ignored it up to now).
THE GOOD: I think it is remarkable that the Z06 was not only so much faster than anything else but nearly the equal of the twice as pricey Ford GT.
The BAD: I've commented a couple of times before on the surprising (to me) comments many magazines and on-line testers have made about the tricky handling of the C6 ZO6 - surprising because the C5s, even C5s with a lot more power than a stock ZO6 (i.e., mine) don't handle like that. Comments from Car and Driver (page 74) - "The Corvette ZO6 . . . was brutal and tricky to drive at the limit . . . " - - - ". . . driving it fast was spooky, if oversteer makes you nervous. Mastering this car was challenging and satisfying, but drivers need to be on their game." This is from professional drivers, too, -- guys who kow how to drive tough cars, remember. By contrast, the Viper (which I always took to be a handful to drive fast,) " . . . the most planted and confidence inspiring of the bunch." Wow, how things have changed, when the Viper is not the brute but the "balanced" sports car among the group.
Still, it becomes clear: fastest overall, regardless of price, Ford GT; second, ZO6; third, Viper. Among $50,000 cars, the standard C6 beat the Porsche Cayman by more than I would have expected given the Cayman's proven superb balance and handling, but both got eaten -- just killed -- by the Lotus Elise, which dominated everything under $70K (I have to go look at that, I've sort of ignored it up to now).
THE GOOD: I think it is remarkable that the Z06 was not only so much faster than anything else but nearly the equal of the twice as pricey Ford GT.
The BAD: I've commented a couple of times before on the surprising (to me) comments many magazines and on-line testers have made about the tricky handling of the C6 ZO6 - surprising because the C5s, even C5s with a lot more power than a stock ZO6 (i.e., mine) don't handle like that. Comments from Car and Driver (page 74) - "The Corvette ZO6 . . . was brutal and tricky to drive at the limit . . . " - - - ". . . driving it fast was spooky, if oversteer makes you nervous. Mastering this car was challenging and satisfying, but drivers need to be on their game." This is from professional drivers, too, -- guys who kow how to drive tough cars, remember. By contrast, the Viper (which I always took to be a handful to drive fast,) " . . . the most planted and confidence inspiring of the bunch." Wow, how things have changed, when the Viper is not the brute but the "balanced" sports car among the group.
#2
10-07-2006, 10:26 PM
RE: Good and Bad Review of ZO6
ORIGINAL: Lee Willis
I have the new Car and Driver (November 2006) with its "Lightning Lap" comparison test of 17 performance cars around Virginia International Raceway. It is an intersting concept -- a course like that really takes a lot of everything, so it is a good test of who is "best overall." But the article itself is one of the worst written pieces I've seen in Car and Driver - very hard to figure out which car is fastest overall, lots of comments but little hard data, etc.
Still, it becomes clear: fastest overall, regardless of price, Ford GT; second, ZO6; third, Viper. Among $50,000 cars, the standard C6 beat the Porsche Cayman by more than I would have expected given the Cayman's proven superb balance and handling, but both got eaten -- just killed -- by the Lotus Elise, which dominated everything under $70K (I have to go look at that, I've sort of ignored it up to now).
THE GOOD: I think it is remarkable that the Z06 was not only so much faster than anything else but nearly the equal of the twice as pricey Ford GT.
The BAD: I've commented a couple of times before on the surprising (to me) comments many magazines and on-line testers have made about the tricky handling of the C6 ZO6 - surprising because the C5s, even C5s with a lot more power than a stock ZO6 (i.e., mine) don't handle like that. Comments from Car and Driver (page 74) - "The Corvette ZO6 . . . was brutal and tricky to drive at the limit . . . " - - - ". . . driving it fast was spooky, if oversteer makes you nervous. Mastering this car was challenging and satisfying, but drivers need to be on their game." This is from professional drivers, too, -- guys who kow how to drive tough cars, remember. By contrast, the Viper (which I always took to be a handful to drive fast,) " . . . the most planted and confidence inspiring of the bunch." Wow, how things have changed, when the Viper is not the brute but the "balanced" sports car among the group.
I have the new Car and Driver (November 2006) with its "Lightning Lap" comparison test of 17 performance cars around Virginia International Raceway. It is an intersting concept -- a course like that really takes a lot of everything, so it is a good test of who is "best overall." But the article itself is one of the worst written pieces I've seen in Car and Driver - very hard to figure out which car is fastest overall, lots of comments but little hard data, etc.
Still, it becomes clear: fastest overall, regardless of price, Ford GT; second, ZO6; third, Viper. Among $50,000 cars, the standard C6 beat the Porsche Cayman by more than I would have expected given the Cayman's proven superb balance and handling, but both got eaten -- just killed -- by the Lotus Elise, which dominated everything under $70K (I have to go look at that, I've sort of ignored it up to now).
THE GOOD: I think it is remarkable that the Z06 was not only so much faster than anything else but nearly the equal of the twice as pricey Ford GT.
The BAD: I've commented a couple of times before on the surprising (to me) comments many magazines and on-line testers have made about the tricky handling of the C6 ZO6 - surprising because the C5s, even C5s with a lot more power than a stock ZO6 (i.e., mine) don't handle like that. Comments from Car and Driver (page 74) - "The Corvette ZO6 . . . was brutal and tricky to drive at the limit . . . " - - - ". . . driving it fast was spooky, if oversteer makes you nervous. Mastering this car was challenging and satisfying, but drivers need to be on their game." This is from professional drivers, too, -- guys who kow how to drive tough cars, remember. By contrast, the Viper (which I always took to be a handful to drive fast,) " . . . the most planted and confidence inspiring of the bunch." Wow, how things have changed, when the Viper is not the brute but the "balanced" sports car among the group.
#3
10-08-2006, 01:25 PM
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Central North Carolina
Posts: 2,105
RE: Good and Bad Review of ZO6
Glad you like it. I have not driven a C6-ZO6 at ten/tenths, only a friends around town and I am not going to push someone elses car hard, so I can't comment personally. But over the years I have come to respect the opinions of Car & Driver and Road & Track particularly, and the nearly unanimous comments from other mags too have convinced me there is some issue there. Its mainly the engineer in me that is intrigued - the C6 frame and suspension are based on and nearly identical to the C5's, so I wonder what small change made the difference, and again, it can't be the power alone because I have driven my car and other 500+ RW C5s at ten tenths and they aren't squirrely, and of course C&D and R&T tested Lingenfelter and MTI cars and did not comment that they were tricky at the limit. The only thing I can think of is the narrowed rear A- arms and the slightly stiffer spring and sharper aspect ratio for it in the C6, but the change (just 2 inches) seems small to make any noticeable effect.
It may simply be the rear tires - I was never impressed with the Goodyear F1s that came stock on mine and with only 325s on the rear the ZO6 may just not have enough rubber at the rear. One point of of interest is that the fellow I raced against back in December (see link below) returned our spare set of 345 drag radials a week later and commented that his car handled so much better with them, with the rear "hanging out" much less at the limit, that he bought a set, and, like me was going to run them all the time. Wider and software rubber will obviously plant the rear end better.
https://www.corvetteforums.com/m_3501/tm.htm
It may simply be the rear tires - I was never impressed with the Goodyear F1s that came stock on mine and with only 325s on the rear the ZO6 may just not have enough rubber at the rear. One point of of interest is that the fellow I raced against back in December (see link below) returned our spare set of 345 drag radials a week later and commented that his car handled so much better with them, with the rear "hanging out" much less at the limit, that he bought a set, and, like me was going to run them all the time. Wider and software rubber will obviously plant the rear end better.
https://www.corvetteforums.com/m_3501/tm.htm
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Boba Vette
New Member Area
2
06-24-2007 12:16 AM
