As long as the tires are normally inflated, the size of the contact patch has nothing to do with the size of the tires, and depends only on the weight of the car and the pressure in the tires. For example, if you have a car weighing 3024 pounds and the tires are inflated to 36 pounds per square inch, the size of the four contact patches will total 84 square inches. That number applies regardless of whether the tires are 335-treadwidth steamrollers or 195-treadwidth skinnies. The shape of the contact patch is different - wider tires have a wider contact patch side-to-side, narrower front-to-rear - but the size is the same.
I did not know this but it makes sense when the car is at rest. From what I've been able to read on the internet (insert rolleyes here), while your comment is technically true in terms of the size of the contact patch, the jist of my statement regarding handling/cornering ability being positively impacted by the wider tires still holds true. Also from what I've read, the lower sidewall will also improve handling/cornering ability further.
What stood out to me were your affinity for the LS7 and bigger brakes. This makes me wonder how you would have felt if you bought your 2003 NSX back but with upgraded brakes and with a Supercharger installed.
Actually, what has surprised me most about this car is not the performance. That was expected. It is that the knocks against it have mostly turned out to be based on old and/or inaccurate information and conventional wisdom. If I throw $15-20k into a SC and BBK, then they are no longer equivalent financially, and I have to consider what $10-15k in mods on the Vette would do in order to make the comparison equal again. I'm sure that is heading down a road that the NSX will lose. I would even go so far as to take a stock Z06 over a SC/BBK NSX. It will still have the performance edge on the NSX and be better in all of the other aspects as explained in the original post above.
However, I respectfully disagree on the interior evaluation. Having driven both cars, I still think the interior in the NSX is better simply from an ergonomics aspect.
Couple things about the Z06 I didn't much like, and C6's in general:
- shifter is the worst among sports cars
- vague on center steering and handling
- rough suspension on the Z06
But the engine, oh the engine...magnificent. Really, for someone just looking for an awesome sports car w/o any brand allegiances there's nothing equal to the C6 Z06 and especially so when price is a consideration.
Fair enough... I can't really think of anything that is ergonomically that much different in the cars. The only thing I wish for is a cancel button for the cruise control, but the NSX didn't have that either. I do like how the DIC tells me what speed I've set the cruise to.
I have read that the shifter is notchy into second on the pre-08 years. I've also read the same about the NSX as well. I haven't had any issues with my '08, which has a different manufacturer.
The suspension is at worst as rough as the NSX.
The Z06 is a bargain to some degree and you can mod the Hell out of them to get lots of power and stopping. Most Vettes just need a set of coilovers that are well adjusted to do well at a road track.
Here is my problem. For the price of a C6Z06 you could get a used 911 turbo instead that is water cooled. The car is allwheel drive and the engine sits over the wheels too. A don't see too many Z06 cars passing the Carrera turbos at my track. In fact those cars are some of the toughest to beat. A stock Z06 car is fast but not that fast. I would also say wait another 4 years before we see how many creaks and rattles the C6 vette has. Right now they are too new to decide on that.
Anway, I am getting away from my point. Which is I agree with you to most of your points and a lot of NSX owners would be amazed if they drove a new corvette or any new car for that matter. The NSX is a bit dated and that is why I have modified mine to hold more power and stop better. That being said there just sooo many Corvettes out there and the average joe doesn't know which ones are Z06 and base C6 vettes.
You don't need to mod it for power and stopping. They are world class when they leave the factory. Regarding the 911 turbo, if you do the research you'll see that they don't perform to the same level. I have never owned one so I can't comment in detail about the other aspects, but from a pure performance standpoint, they are heavier and less powerful. The only thing they have that would be a significant advantage at the track is AWD.
For accuracy's sake, the engine isn't over the wheels, as the Z06's is. It hangs out over the ass end. Don't lift going around that corner.
I couldn't care less about whether the average Joe can recognize my car as a Z06 or a base.
I agree with you on the Z06 depreciation comment. A year ago I was walking around at a car gathering and came across a '06 Z06 with 40k miles. Mint condition, clear bra in the front. Asking price was $38k. Too bad it wasn't yellow, or else I would have called the owner and start from there.
I think vettes and vipers are front mid-engine cars like BMW, FD, and a few others. According to Enzo, it was what he preferred over the rear mid.
Uh oh, BATMANs is here... thread over. You can get lower mileage for $38k if you're patient. Vette's are indeed front-mid engined.
Liquid, I would have to disagree about the interior evaluation also. Other than that you made great points that cannot really be argued, but they were pretty obvious.
This is a review from more purely a performance/function standpoint and if that whats all cars were about, then everyone would own a STi, EVO, SRT-4, or Cobalt some other recent, inexpensive turbo vehicle because they can go fast and be made to be faster, have great interior "space" and have "cool gauges". Even a Nissan Altima coupe has cooler gauges but the interior is still poo.
So in your argument, if overall performance is superior, it's a greater car? So the STi, EVO, and any recent car with better horsepower to weight ratio is indeed superior to NSX? Yes, in the realm of technology and performance, but that is not what cars are solely about. Had that been the case, then why are their still people that could buy these cars instead buy the NSX? You exaggerated the winning victory, but in reality all you said was that the Corvette performs better? Go figure, no one saw that coming. In reality your review was on "what makes a car vastly superior in my eyes."
Again, I think if you are looking for pure performance/function, just pick any recent sports car and the deciding factor would be personal style and price if that's all you care about. Pretty soon you could probably pick up a used C6 Z06 for the price of a new Cobalt, so it's a win, win victory lol. I mean, it's an amazement that there are still many comparisons with modern technology vs. a 20 year old designed car in essence. The reality is that the NSX is still holding it own.
Could you see a C4 or C5 vette being compared with a sports car of today? It would not stand a chance. The truest and fariest evaluation would be a C4 or C5 vs NSX. The C4 was getting put up with and beat by the 300ZXTT all day, nuff said. The C5 still fell behind the NSX in every category especially when you introduced the NA2 which is fair because they were both from a similar time.
Your stance for the Z06 is appreciated, but I think most people here appreciate it for what it is. There is no need to bash the Z06, but there is no need to get sensitive and offended when its flaws are pointed out. It is a monster perfomer for very reasonable dollars, but it sacrifices pretty much all of the other non performance fields to acheive this price, of which you overlooked or flew by in your review.
My argument is if you take a really fresh, clear look at the car, much like NSX owners of 20 years ago did when comparing it against the Ferraris of that day, overall it is superior. A lot of that for me boils down to the driving experience. That is my main criteria. I don't care about marque, getting all the attention at cars and coffee, or any of that ego stuff.
The NSX is 20 years old and has held up as well as could be expected, but the reality is it is NOT holding its own against the modern sports cars of today. Comparing a C4 or C5 against the NSX is not the right comparison. As I stated in my original post, my critieria are pretty simple: (1) were they designed to do the same thing and (2) do they cost about the same? Why should I, as a free market consumer, pay extra for the same thing (or pay the same and get less) just because a company chose not to continue to upgrade their technology? That baffles me.
I'm certainly not getting sensitive about the comparison. I don't know where you would have picked up that impression. And the point of my review is that when you actually look at the Z06 closely, you'll find that it doesn't sacrifice nearly as much as the NSX to acheive much greater performance.
