lotus esprit twin turbo vs Z06 corvette

[Jimster]

Originally Posted by Mr Payne

"USing width as a reason not to bring a Camaro to European raods is a cop-out- FIAT Multiplas and S Classes can fit, so Camaros can as well."

That's not the point, it's that Camaros aren't sold over in Europe extensively (less than 100 a year for the whole continent, I'd imagine). How do you know that Camaros handle poorly?

"And I'm shocked that most people can't comprehend that I was saying that European roads are twisty and windy- and due to us facing these roads reguarly, our cars must be designed to take on these roads, hence why a Peugeot 4O6 handles like a Sports car, while a Buick Regal handles like a wafty luxury car, same thing with 5-Series and Cadillac STS- it contributes to why chassis engineering in Europe is so greatly required, while in America it isn't- the only American cars that are decently designed are ones with the race track in mind- the Corvette does fall under this catagorey and is hence a capable-handling car, but I still feel it falls short of Europes best."

The Corvette is a street car through and through, a Z06 was designed for the track. So you say it falls short of Europe's best..........please define "Europe's best".......

Sorry to tell you this, but the Z06 and standard Corvette are the same chassis- the Corvette is a street car, sure that is true- but evidently- the design brief was clearly "If they may want to take it to the track.............."

Europes best- simply the vast range of exotic cars offered by European makers- the Vette beats each and everyone for Bang for buck, but it simply doesn't make it a better car over all.

and I've driven a small selection of Camaros

one V6 Auto in the US of A
one RHD Z28 (Convertible) Auto in New Zealand
and a Z28 Coupe manual in the USA.

and all failed to do anything for me- the cars are extremely crude- the V6 rating amongst the worst cars I've ever driven, I seriously don't understand why people place the words competent and Camaro in the same sentence. But the Camaro has nothing to do with this thread, so we won't discuss it any further- I simply used it as a supporting reference.

[Mr Payne]

Originally Posted by Jimster

Sorry to tell you this, but the Z06 and standard Corvette are the same chassis- the Corvette is a street car, sure that is true- but evidently- the design brief was clearly "If they may want to take it to the track.............."

Europes best- simply the vast range of exotic cars offered by European makers- the Vette beats each and everyone for Bang for buck, but it simply doesn't make it a better car over all.

Of course a Z06 and C5 Coupe they are the same chassis, the same way a 996 Carrera and Porsche GT2/GT3 are the same chassis. The same way an E36 330 or E46 330 compare to the E36 M3 or E46 M3.

The performance spread between a base C5 and a Z06 is very large, especially in the handling department. Hell, you could even argue that the Chassis is different simply because the Z06 is a hardtop while the base coupe is a targa(is that the right term?). Aside from the chassis itself, the suspension tuning is arguably much better than the standard Corvette. How else could it be as fast a 911 Turbo on the track?

If Lotus is such a god of chassis/suspension tuning, what would explain this article? I thought it would wipe the floor with a Z06.....it looks like it can't even beat a base C5.

http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/rt9906.htm

[Moppie]

Originally Posted by Mr Payne

http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Media/magazines/rt9906.htm

That article is sadly floored, and Iv only read the second paragraph.
The Esprit V8 is claimed to use the same chassis as all the other models, yet having work on more of them than you have probobly seen in your life I can tell you that the only part it shares in common with the lesser modesl is the upper frount suspension ball joint. The rest of the chassis is totaly new.

Being an American Article you have to admit that it shows more than just a little bit of Biasis.

[Jimster]

don't you mean the article is flawed Evidently it is- and as you- being the experienced Lotus technician you are, have pointed out the starting point of flaws

[Mr Payne]

I'm getting a little bit confused on what you(Moppie and Jimster) consider the chassis. Can you elaborate to what pieces of the suspension are included with the chassis(if any at all).....please educate me.

You understand my point with the article, right?

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by FYRHWK1

I'm not arguing either of your first 2 points, as on a whole, as you said, you're completely right. I'm arguing Jimsters notion that all american roads and cars are built for wide open highways without a single turn in there anywhere. While there are fewer of them, there are still plenty of small, tight, windy mountain roads to be found here in NY, and many more in arizona & california, the rocky mountains are reknown for them.

As to your camaro jab, I'll chalk that up to simply not knowing enough about them, which is understandable since I doubt any were shipped over there. I'm not being pompous when I say that my camaro will perform with most any car you can throw at it on a track, and I only say this because I've seen it done and know what the car is capable of. But, believe what you like, I'm not going to make this into another comparison, just be careful about what you say of cars you haven't seen run yourself.

Dont assume i havent seen American cars run. Once upon a time i got on a plane and flew over to the US of A to visit family. Interestingly for me, my uncle that lives out there owns a dealership. Do you see where this is going? I was far from impressed with the Camaro, though i have to say it wasnt me driving it, and it wasnt an SS (as far as i remember). Add to that the fact that the Camaro got some of the worst reviews ive ever seen / read over here, not kicking it down - like i say, its great at demolishing straights, but it wasnt built for twisty roads.

[flylwsi]

this is wild.
the vette base and zo6 share a chassis. yes.

the vette base and zo6 have different suspensions, however.
consider that people like john lingenfelter upgrade the c5 suspension to zo6 parts for their suspension packages.

there is some major bs floating around in here.

people simply don't like the vette, and are putting it down.

the lotus is by no means (the esprit tt) a narrow car for country roads, any more than a vette is.

put them both on a race track. same track. who will win?

you guys get so damn deep in your technical bs and namecalling that you forget the main purpose of why the thread was started. it wasn't started to dispute facts about a car, it was started to figure out which is, in your opinion, the better car.

for the price, and by the numbers, i'll take the zo6.

why is this so difficult?

so much strutting of technological knowledge, which, sadly, is pretty much irrelevant in most cases.

you guys end up whoring up a thread with these posts that could double as tech articles. yay.

[FYRHWK1]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

Dont assume i havent seen American cars run. Once upon a time i got on a plane and flew over to the US of A to visit family. Interestingly for me, my uncle that lives out there owns a dealership. Do you see where this is going? I was far from impressed with the Camaro, though i have to say it wasnt me driving it, and it wasnt an SS (as far as i remember). Add to that the fact that the Camaro got some of the worst reviews ive ever seen / read over here, not kicking it down - like i say, its great at demolishing straights, but it wasnt built for twisty roads.

One visit and you say you can tell me how a built and tuned camaro will run? Just like the Lotus article above, you don't have the time nor experience with the cars to determine that. No, a stock camaro isn't built for turns, it really isn't built for the dragstrip either, the only thing that leads people to that is the large engine. If it were built for the dragstrip it would share the mustangs 4 link rear suspension, which plants the rear tires better on straight acceleration, or at least would have a tubular or boxed rear suspension.

The system it does use is a 3 link with stamped steel control arms, panhard bars and such, which is inferior for straight line performance and terrible in strength for roadracing. It also uses a unibody design without any kind of solid connector for the front & rear subframe, anyone who's had my year camaro and put a set of those on can attest to the difference they & a new rear suspension make. Yes it's a good bit of work, but you also have to remember (or learn, whichever) that these cars were built for a market where modifying your own car is the thing, and often the only way to please everyone is to set a low pricetag and allow them to do what they like with it. That causes the cheap setup stock, considering it has the potential to run with corvettes, and thus many other sportscars, when built, the low tag is a fairly good argain if you can modify your car yourself.

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by FYRHWK1

One visit and you say you can tell me how a built and tuned camaro will run? Just like the Lotus article above, you don't have the time nor experience with the cars to determine that.

What do you want me to do? live in the damned thing? Besides, we're talking stock, not tuned. Good tuners can work miracles. I mean christ, someone turned the Rover 45 into a good car (MG ZS) give the man a medal!
So lets stick to stock please.

Originally Posted by FYRHWK1

No, a stock camaro isn't built for turns,

I know... thats what i was saying...

Originally Posted by FYRHWK1

it really isn't built for the dragstrip either, the only thing that leads people to that is the large engine. If it were built for the dragstrip it would share the mustangs 4 link rear suspension, which plants the rear tires better on straight acceleration, or at least would have a tubular or boxed rear suspension.

The system it does use is a 3 link...

I appreciate your technical knowledge but whether or not it was "built for the dragstrip" (what kind of factory car is built for dragging anyway, what a waste of time, resources, hell, waste of everything..) the camaro has straight line speed in abundance. And so you'd expect it to corner. Well I would anyway, regardless or not of tuning potential.

Originally Posted by FYRHWK1

you also have to remember (or learn, whichever) that these cars were built for a market where modifying your own car is the thing, and often the only way to please everyone is to set a low pricetag and allow them to do what they like with it.

Ok, im certain many many owners modify their camaros, but does that mean the manufacturer shouldnt be bothered to give the car a set-up that at least matches its engine? What does that say about Chevy? There are lots of sorted (handling wise), affordable cars that have a large tuning following. Why doesnt Chevy do it in this case? Now these are just my thoughts: cutting costs, of course, and the fact that most buyers will be satisfied with the stock product. I dont have any numbers, i dont know who will, but a lot of people (probably the majority) wont bother messing around with the chassis of this "sports car". If certain parts are so weak, and the car is aimed at tuning freaks, most of these people will upgrade them immediately. Yes, different people have different tastes, but why not use parts of a high standard for those who dont want to mod the car? As you say, the main point of attraction to the camaro is the engine. So why dont they just supply that? Saves them the bother of building the rest of the thing...

Dont get me wrong, I dont hate the car, hell i dream of cheap American performance (corvettes for the price of a full gas tank here in the UK) but with the development of the camaro and many other american cars there just seems to be a laziness and ineptitude that is inexcusable from the 'giants of the global auto sector'.

[Kurtdg19]

crazyjay i do understand where your coming from, but I think you've kinda answered your own question as to why these cars can't be tuned with parts of higher standard. The main key im thinking is the fact that its built in an economy which has the highest number of automobiles being built and driven than every other economy in the world. Do you think for one second that if the European market could handle as many cars as the american market handles that the quality would still remain the same?
But if your not satisfied for the base Z28 camaro than you could always buy the SS, or even the Trans Am with WS6 suspension package. A little better as far as using a higher standard of parts, that provides much more stability than the base model. I do belive they put down a skidpad of over .9g's which is pretty impressive if you ask me. Skidpad isn't much of anything these days (although as widley its used you would think otherwise) but its still a comparitive measurment that all cars can be compared to.
But it does all come down to the consumers choice. You can buy a 25k american sports car, or spend at least 50k on a comparable (performance wise) european sports car.

[FYRHWK1]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

What do you want me to do? live in the damned thing? Besides, we're talking stock, not tuned. Good tuners can work miracles. I mean christ, someone turned the Rover 45 into a good car (MG ZS) give the man a medal!
So lets stick to stock please.


I know... thats what i was saying...


I appreciate your technical knowledge but whether or not it was "built for the dragstrip" (what kind of factory car is built for dragging anyway, what a waste of time, resources, hell, waste of everything..) the camaro has straight line speed in abundance. And so you'd expect it to corner. Well I would anyway, regardless or not of tuning potential.



Ok, im certain many many owners modify their camaros, but does that mean the manufacturer shouldnt be bothered to give the car a set-up that at least matches its engine? What does that say about Chevy? There are lots of sorted (handling wise), affordable cars that have a large tuning following. Why doesnt Chevy do it in this case? Now these are just my thoughts: cutting costs, of course, and the fact that most buyers will be satisfied with the stock product. I dont have any numbers, i dont know who will, but a lot of people (probably the majority) wont bother messing around with the chassis of this "sports car". If certain parts are so weak, and the car is aimed at tuning freaks, most of these people will upgrade them immediately. Yes, different people have different tastes, but why not use parts of a high standard for those who dont want to mod the car? As you say, the main point of attraction to the camaro is the engine. So why dont they just supply that? Saves them the bother of building the rest of the thing...

Dont get me wrong, I dont hate the car, hell i dream of cheap American performance (corvettes for the price of a full gas tank here in the UK) but with the development of the camaro and many other american cars there just seems to be a laziness and ineptitude that is inexcusable from the 'giants of the global auto sector'.

well, I agree that it could be better, and it should be, but considering that it costs less then half of a corvette at roughly 22K (for those smart enough to buy the Z28 or Formula and not the overpriced SS or TA) you're not going to get much more then a decent modding platform. I suppose you could compare stock to stock, but that'd be eliminating the whole point of the car so of course it won't do as well. You won't get a car built as well as a corvette for half the price, the parts will cost too much.

If you don't want to mod your car, then the F body is definitly not for you. That, unfortunatly, is why the japanese sportscars of the 80s & 90's got so popular, they were built better from the factory, people didn't care they cost more, it was easier to do. It's not the chassis, it's the suspension hard pieces, the control arms, the torque arm, the panhard ar and such. Cheap pieces in themselves, and it only takes bolts to install new ones, or a fairly small sum for a shop to od it, but its still extra effort on their part, and god forbid they actually mod their car themselves.

You're dead on with many customers being satisfied, because the majority don't know handling from the hole in their head, but that doesn't mean it's a poor platform either, it's actually fairly good on a decently smooth track. It simply suffers from bean counters and cost cutting, with those few pieces added it turns into a very competent track car.

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by Kurtdg19

crazyjay i do understand where your coming from, but I think you've kinda answered your own question as to why these cars can't be tuned with parts of higher standard. The main key im thinking is the fact that its built in an economy which has the highest number of automobiles being built and driven than every other economy in the world. Do you think for one second that if the European market could handle as many cars as the american market handles that the quality would still remain the same?

I'm sorry, i dont buy that. #1, you underestimate how many cars are sold and driven throughout Europe. The population of the EU is almost 400m, thats more than the US. That doesnt necessarily mean more cars, in fact probably not, but its still a very sizeable market.
And #2, look at japanese companies, they sell staggering amounts of cars all over the world and the quality of their cars (generally speaking) is none the worse for it. It's quite the opposite. With economies of scale you make more cost savings which should be at least be partly invested into your product. I do appreciate that cars are cheap in the US but a lot of these cheap cars are cheap for a reason. I guess there are certain issues troubling US auto comps, such as health care and what have you, but still, a sub-standard product is a sub-standard product.

Originally Posted by Kurtdg19

But it does all come down to the consumers choice. You can buy a 25k american sports car, or spend at least 50k on a comparable (performance wise) european sports car.

And long may there be choice. I simply dont consider many of these american "sports cars" sports cars, if you see what i mean. But hey, if i lived in the US and couldnt stump up 50k, then id be glad to have the american alternatives available. But i wouldnt call them comparable. The emphasis on power i like, but I'd certainly be aware of their shortcomings.

[Chris]

I dont really like most American sports cars...they are just too big/heavy. Even the corvette isnt small.
And Camaros/Firebirds/Mustangs, even though they are extremely fast, are big, and heavy. They handle OK, and get good track times, but, its all about the power.
But then again, most of the cars from Europe that I really do like, arent available here. Take the Elise, for example. No car with 120hp in America can run to 60 in the low 5's. .

And American sedans/average cars, forget about it. Malibum, Taurus, Intrepid, these dont exactly scream excitement.

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

I'm sorry, i dont buy that. #1, you underestimate how many cars are sold and driven throughout Europe. The population of the EU is almost 400m, thats more than the US. That doesnt necessarily mean more cars, in fact probably not, but its still a very sizeable market.
And #2, look at japanese companies, they sell staggering amounts of cars all over the world and the quality of their cars (generally speaking) is none the worse for it. It's quite the opposite. With economies of scale you make more cost savings which should be at least be partly invested into your product. I do appreciate that cars are cheap in the US but a lot of these cheap cars are cheap for a reason. I guess there are certain issues troubling US auto comps, such as health care and what have you, but still, a sub-standard product is a sub-standard product.


And long may there be choice. I simply dont consider many of these american "sports cars" sports cars, if you see what i mean. But hey, if i lived in the US and couldnt stump up 50k, then id be glad to have the american alternatives available. But i wouldnt call them comparable. The emphasis on power i like, but I'd certainly be aware of their shortcomings.

$22k = approx £13k, which wont get you much in the UK. Ok, so at 22k its good VFM. But only for the idiots who “don’t know handling from the hole in their head”. As we've agreed these people are the majority so surely, from the bean-counting factory’s POV, modding potential isn’t the whole point of the car.. Call me a cynic but I find it hard to understand / believe that only a few cheap parts transform the whole car. Why wouldn’t they be fitted from the start? Then you’d have a $23k car that handles and goes well. Surely the bargain of all bargains...

[Chris]

Many aftermarket type mods arent fitted for a number of reasons;
1) Cost: they are usually more expensive, and they have a price point to meat
2) Emissions: The parts often increase emissions, thereby making it harder for the manufactures to get the car certified.
3) Fuel economy: In some (most cases), it will degrade fuel economy. Since automakers have to meet CAFE numbers, and they cut it pretty close already, so, that presents another problem.
4) Noise: Most high performance parts are noiser. They might sound 'better' to most of us, but, carmakers are burecratic, and they want to keep a certain level of quiet.
5) Manufacturing considerations; It might be much harder to mass produce a car by using interestingly shaped parts, rather than standard fare.
6) Aftermarket tuners have time to tune their specialty parts. Big manufactures do to a certain extent to, but, they have other considerations to.