|
|
 |
Corvette Forum Archive (German Ver.)
|
Thema:
Edmunds.com-ERSTER Vergleichstest von GTR Spezifikt.-v gegen ZR1.
Von: Salz <jackwhite200(at)yahoo.com>
Thema: Edmunds.com-ERSTER Vergleichstest von GTR Spezifikt.-v gegen ZR1.
Datum: Sat, 28. März 2009-17:06: 28 -0700 (PDT)
Linien: 19
NNTP-Aufgabe-Wirt: 71.225.112.128
posting-account=m2VpjAoAAACklgiaMXy2ejVr5mKmzhF1
2.0.50727), gzip (gfe), gzip (gfe)
Bytes: 2223
______________________________________________
Ihr Test ZR1 ergab ZR1 auf Null einstellt zu 60 MPH in 3.8 Sekunden (3.5
Sekunden mit 1 Fuß von Rollout) und erhält durch die Viertelmeile innen
11.5 Sekunden.
Das Nissan 2009 GT-R SpecV entfernt sofort mit praktisch keinem Gummireifen
und die Autokatapulte zu 60 MPH von einem Stillstand in 3.7 Sekunden spinnen
(3.3 Sekunden mit 1 Fuß von Rollout), während die Viertelmeile vorbei fliegt
in 11.5 Sekunden. Die 1/4 Meile sollte das BESTE ZR1 sein
Vorteil und sogar dort es sind eine Wäsche, und acutally SCHLäGT Spezifikt.-v
ZR1 mit einem 1 Fuß Rollout mögen in einem dragstrip HAHAHAHAHAHA. Auch
SPEC-V hatte auch das 2. beste timefor EDMUNDS mit einer 74.7 MPH-Slalom
hinter dem GT3RS. ZR1 erhaltenes 1.06Gs auf Edmunds Test auf dem skidpad und
Spezifikt.-v erhielt 1.16Gs
ZR1=disappearing Fleck im Spiegel Spezifikt.-V.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA, kann ich nicht bis das SPEC-V PWNS das ZR1 warten am RING
IM NäCHSTEN MONAT.
Die lustige Sache ist, dass GTR Spezifikt.-v NICHT sogar die Höhe ist
Leistungsversion von GTR.
Sie ist nicht sogar wie ein Z06 ist zu einer Korvette. Die Spezifikt. NUR sein
comprable zum ZO6.
From: McHoogilan <edu(at)com.net.org>
Subject: Re: Edmunds.com FIRST comparison test of GTR Spec-V vs ZR1.
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:13:39 -0700
Lines: 91
Bytes: 4761
________________________________________________
Sal (short for saliva) wrote:
>Their ZR1 test resulted in ZR1 does zero to 60 mph in 3.8 seconds (3.5
>seconds with 1 foot of rollout) and gets through the quarter-mile in
>11.5 seconds.
Hey, slimeball, didn`t you leave out some rather important information, for
example, this quote from the Edmonds ZR1 test:
"..The corrected results (which are slightly slower than the numbers the car
actually runs..."
And from the GT-R SpecV test:
"...And we`ve brought along our VBOX to record some performance data..."
And this:
"...This is a different testing venue than we have in the U.S. (not to mention
a different test driver)..."
So, you compare two acceleration tests, on different days, with different
drivers, on different tracks, on different continents -- and one conducted
with an accelerometer-baseed test instrument instead of a real test setup?
And you think it proves something? Well, if doesn`t, plant boy. All it does
is demonstrate the pathetic and tenuous grasp you have on the real world.
> ...Also, the SPEC-V also had the 2nd best timefor EDMUNDS with a 74.7 MPH Slalom
>behind the GT3RS...
Oh sure. Here is what the test report actually says:
"...Unfortunately there are issues with our data-logging technique, but help
from some VBOX experts in Japan seems to peg our speed at 74.7 mph..."
Yeah, the speed seems to be guessed as having been EXACTLY the same as the
ZR1, but we don`t really know now do we? Compare that obvious bit of
guesswork and finagling to the ZR1 test:
" ...the ZR1 is stable, communicative and easy to control on its way to a
74.7-mph pass through the slalom. This is the second-fastest slalom speed
we`ve recorded from a production car, behind only the Porsche 911 GT3 RS at
75.3 mph..."
Now, let`s consider some real numbers:
ZR1 SpecV
==============================
HP 638 485
Weight 3,366 3,704
lbs/HP 5.28 7.64
Torque 604 448
lbs/ft-lb 5.57 8.28
60 - 0 ft. 96 106 <-- Uh-oh
Top speed 200+ 112 <-- Double uh-oh
Looks more like a flea killer than a `Vette killer to me. Edmonds agrees:
"...chassis dyno to see just how much power the Vette gets to the road. After
three dyno runs, power peaks of 505 hp at 6,200 rpm and 494 lb-ft of torque at
4,200-4,300 rpm were recorded. That`s right, it makes over 500 hp at the
wheels..."
Reiterating for the slow among us (That would be Sal, for the really slow,
which, once again, would be Sal.), The ZR1 weighs less, has gobs more torque,
almost double the top speed and more power at the rear wheels than the flea
killer has at the flywheel.
I suppose, at this point, I should comment on that speed. You see, Nissan
plans to build 30 SpecVs a month and offer them for sale at 8 dealerships in
Japan. All cars sold in Japan are speed limited to 180 KPH. Sorry, plant
boy, your killer couldn`t kill a squirrel with bad nuts.
Now before you drag out you X-box to gather more facts, go back and read the
Edmonds article on the SpecV again. Then click the link to the ZR1 embedded
therein, and ask yourself this question: Which car most impressed the
testers?
Here are the links for anyone caring to read both articles:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=144432
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=134347
Then consider that your big beef when you dragged your thoughtless and puerile
little joke of a self into this group and started slinging this GT-R bullshit
was that the flea killer offered more bang for the buck. It was an insane
pretense then. It is an entirely ludicrous one now. Not only does the ZR1
outperform your high-strung Japanese watch on steroids, but it is a true
production car, available for purchase in any country in the world and it
costs $60,000 less than the flea killer. And it can do massive burn-outs.
From: "Spud" <spud(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Edmunds.com FIRST comparison test of GTR Spec-V vs ZR1.
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 17:10:57 -0700
Lines: 5
NNTP-Posting-Host: p6696edc17f3ee8f2b1c81dcadf5a8742849eb04140e54b35.newsdawg.com
Bytes: 1011
________________________________________________
You are wasting way too much time responding to a high school kid.
>
Last "Cars" Post on Wordpress:
Title: THE MINI-BALLER LAND ROVER COMETH!!
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:03:07 +0000
Author: SyNaMATIQ
 TWO DOOR LANDROVER FOR THE MINI-BALLERS Land Rover has today confirmed what we’ve long expected – that the popular LRX Concept from the 2008 edition of the Detroit Auto Show is headed for production. The British-born automaker doesn’t actually say the new ‘ute will be called the LRX when it hits the market in 2011, but it definitely will be wearing the Range Rover moniker and will therefore likely be marketed as a premium vehicle.
No details are given about the coupelike SUV’s powertrain, but Land Rover does say the new vehicle “will be the smallest, lightest and most efficient vehicle the company has ever produced.” Previous reports have suggested the production LRX will share underpinnings with the LR2 (a.k.a. the Freelander) and will be offered with an optional all-wheel drive hybrid powertrain that may use an electric motor to power the rear wheels and a transverse engine underhood driving the front wheels.
Judging from the lone rendering released with this announcement, the basic shape from the LRX Concept should survive mostly intact, perhaps gaining a slightly more pronounced front fascia to go along with the production-necessary external door handles. Expect more details to filter out at the beginning of 2010, but in the meantime, click past the break for the press release.
Read more →
Via: Luxist
More on: http://synamatiq.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/the-mini-baller-land-rover-cometh/
____________________________________________
Title: 4-door mk2 on eta beta turbo's Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:58:55 +0000 Author: supermade More on: http://supermade.wordpress.com/2009/09/24/4-door-mk2-on-eta-beta-turbos/
| | |
