|
Originally Posted by gangajas
|
Originally Posted by nthfinity
7:42.9 NS time; blowing the doors off the Gallardo/Murcielago/SLR/Zonda S/M3CSL/911 GT3 RS (By .1 seconds with WR at the wheel)...
and doing it with GYSC F1 runflats! (not Pilot sports, or Corsa Rossa's, or other really agressive compounds)
|
They also said that the standard Corvette could lap the Nurburgring under 8 minutes and look what happened when Sport Auto tested it....
|
Originally Posted by nthfinity
you can't prove that  |
It's obvious that the Gallardo is easier to drive. All the tests I have read say that the Corvette has an uncommunicative chassis and that it can react badly at the limit. Anyway I don't understand those who say that the problem is the driver....the Ascari is a very powerful mid engine rwd car, with manual transmision and it is also faster than the Corvette. |
just the fact that you are comparing the uber expensive 500 hp Ascari vs. a blue collar Corvette
that is the fact; and the goal. nuf' said.
mid-ship cars that weigh less; and have as much/more power ought to be able to handle better... some do; others aren't up to snuff.
a lot of people have mis-quoted a lot about the vette....
the C5 Z06 lapped NS in 7:56; at a later time, Dave hill said that the C6 was largely based on the C5 Z... and somewhere, somebody took that out of context and suggested the C6 could lap NS in 7:56
wasn't it 8:15? not bad for the standard poofta car
I'm sure we'll have the first info about the Supertest of the Z06 in the coming months
what is funny to me is that so many of the guys i argue against the F1 being crap; say its a good thing for the F1, but a bad thing for the Corvette... dubble standard, or is it that you want a twitchy, torquey, handful to drive only when you spend a milllion bucks?
i'd say you can't have it both ways... the same argument can
almost be said for me... but since the Z06 only cost $70,000 i would accept that witchiness; handful... but definately not when i'm spending $1,000,000 on a road car!