Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 vs Porsche 911 Turbo

@racerns/FastestLaps
10.66 was a record. :)

ZR1 0-300 is much faster, but that should be the least relevant, since almost nowhere is that stat important. 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mile is what 99% of people care. The Porsche does beat the ZR1 pretty much 99% of the time in those 3 areas.

Besides, those acceleration times for the Porsche are modest. The car has been shown to do 0-60mph in 2.7seconds.

zr1 has much better 0-300 time and top speed,and still gets less straight line speed points.

@FastestLaps

No, accelerationtimes relies on trustworthy acceleration times that were obtained by automotive press. In other words, if ZR1 does 100 in 3.2, 160 in 6.9, 0-200 in 10.3 etc. IT CAN\'t PHYSICALLY DO 10.74 1/4! That is mathematically proven by accelerationtimes. Either 1/4 time of 10.74 is wrong or all those acceleration figures are wrong. But they can\'t both be right.

You keep saying that, but there have been multiple ZR1s run 10s in the hands of private individuals. Why is it a surprise to you that a car with 604 ft-lb of torque and manual tranny might get better times with more experienced drivers (with a ZR1) and better traction than the mag tester have? Yes, accelerationtimes is wrong because it does not take into consideration that you might be able to get a better launch than the magazine testers can. In drag racing the launch is gauged by the 60\' time. A 0.1sec 60’ improvement is usually good for a .15-.25 sec improvement in your 1/4 time. The mag times seem to correlate with >2.0 60\' times while the 10 sec ZR1 times have been done with 1.7 -1.8 sec 60\' times.

So of course the rest of the acceleration numbers on the sight are not going to match up the 10.74 1/4 time because they were from a different run where they did not have the type of launch the 10.7 run did. All those split times would be better. My 10.85 ZR1 run that had a 1.70 60’ time works out to a 0-60mph time of ~2.8 sec.

I say just let them get over it. There is no point in having data biased to one side.

i totally agree
when you want to have a site based on reality this is the price to pay
i'm one of the biggest corvette fans here and i really like it to compette with real times ..not fake times

A lie is published here only because if I removed it, several people would go nuts in comments pages

I don\'t run the site, and I wouldn\'t have to deal with these people, but I say just let them get over it. There is no point in having data biased to one side.

If there are two things I\'d like to see implimented here, it\'s zero tolerance for these special condition tests and the return of source listing for lap times.

i hope we don\'t find out that it was wrong some time later!
and pleeeeaaase change all the times according to that site cuz sometimes it makes some people look like idiots

No, accelerationtimes relies on trustworthy acceleration times that were obtained by automotive press.

In other words, if ZR1 does 100 in 3.2, 160 in 6.9, 0-200 in 10.3 etc. IT CAN't PHYSICALLY DO 10.74 1/4!

That is mathematically proven by accelerationtimes.

Either 1/4 time of 10.74 is wrong or all those acceleration figures are wrong. But they can't both be right.

i realy didn\'t get you on that one
you mean that accelerationtimes has tested all those cars?!

The 1/4 of 10.74 that's listed here is a lie. A lie is published here only because if I removed it, several people would go nuts in comments pages. That would be even worse.

No car media test has showed results anywhere near that. There hasn't been a single serious test where ZR1 went under 11 seconds. So in this case, trust accelerationtimes because 11.1 is in sync with real life tests and that figure is calculated based on real life acceleration figures we have here on fastestlaps.com

i didn't check that cuz i trust your site and your quarter mile for these cars aren't the same with acceltimes
i was talking about
Quarter mile time 10.74 @ 133.2mph 10.8
and in that ZR1 has passed 997
so which one to trust?

No that\'s simply wrong.

It means by the time Turbo reaches 200, ZR1 is moving faster than the Turbo. But Turbo is still ahead because it pulled a great distance from the start.

As I said, please check accelerationtimes.com and select standing start race between those two cars. You will see that even at 1 km mark when both cars are above 250, ZR1 hasn\'t really passed Turbo. It is about to pass it.

well you can check first then say i'm wrong
150kph
1. Porsche 997 Turbo facelift 6.1 s
2. Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 6.2 s

at 200
1. Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 10.3 s
2. Porsche 997 Turbo facelift 10.4 s

so as you can see and as i said by 200 it passes the 997
okay?

but as soon as you get to 150 ZR1 starts to get it and by 200 it passes the 997

Wrong! Even at 250 they are neck and neck.

911 Turbo has the ZR1 beaten in acceleration, no question about that.

I would suggest using accelerationtimes.com before you make any conclusions about straight line performance.

In terms of the better car to live with on a daily basis, it is the Porsche.

The hp advantage and price advantage of the Chevy is hard to ignore, though.

because 997 has more acceleration in low speeds but as soon as you get to 150 ZR1 starts to get it and by 200 it passes the 997
so basically a 135k$ car loses to a 118k$ car:D badlyyy:))

depends who is driving

ZR1 vs 997 Turbo PDK. Very close! But the ZR1 can't quite beat the 997 Turbo even with 50 km/h rolling start. Imagine what would happen if it was a standing start race :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCw88BNJAPM&feature=channel