C7 Zo6

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by jphughan

Because the Corvette now finally has a really nice interior, great seats, modern creature comforts and techno gadgets (Performance Data Recorder anyone??), better external styling, and solid build quality. GM delivered all that, and they did it without raising the price by much at all on the Stingray. And the new Z06 looks to be adding all of those perks AND a huge horsepower boost and STILL won't bump the price up much. That changes the game dramatically because the Corvette is no longer a "fantastic performance if you're willing to compromise on everything else" proposition.

Now the decision is between a top tier sports car with a fair amount of DD practicality (though still limited because of the two seats) or a very good sports car with lots of practicality. It just depends on which of those two elements you want/need to prioritize more. I didn't cross shop a Z06 when I bought my M3, but I absolutely would now.

I think there's also an element at play of expectations/hopes compared to what was delivered with each car. The new M3/4 doesn't immediately seem as special compared to the base cars as the E9x did, and to some the loss of the V8 means that the new car doesn't even seem as special as the previous M3 (though that may change post-launch judging by the impressions of people who went from an E60 M5 to an F10). But meanwhile, the new base Stingray SURPASSED expectations, turning out leagues better than people were expecting, and now the Z06 has surpassed expectations by an even greater margin, coming in significantly different both from the base car and the previous Z06.

The only things I really like about the new M3/4 are the weight reduction and the HUD, but I wouldn't trade my V8 for those even if it were free to upgrade, never mind paying to do so. I don't care how much more torque and speed the new M3/4 will have over mine, there's something sublime about a V8, especially on a track and especially when it's a high-revving unit. There's more to what makes a car enjoyable than how fast it can go.

Bravo !

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by jphughan

Because the Corvette now finally has a really nice interior, great seats, modern creature comforts and techno gadgets (Performance Data Recorder anyone??), better external styling, and solid build quality. GM delivered all that, and they did it without raising the price by much at all on the Stingray. And the new Z06 looks to be adding all of those perks AND a huge horsepower boost and STILL won't bump the price up much. That changes the game dramatically because the Corvette is no longer a "fantastic performance if you're willing to compromise on everything else" proposition.

Now the decision is between a top tier sports car with a fair amount of DD practicality (though still limited because of the two seats) or a very good sports car with lots of practicality. It just depends on which of those two elements you want/need to prioritize more. I didn't cross shop a Z06 when I bought my M3, but I absolutely would now.

I think there's also an element at play of expectations/hopes compared to what was delivered with each car. The new M3/4 doesn't immediately seem as special compared to the base cars as the E9x did, and to some the loss of the V8 means that the new car doesn't even seem as special as the previous M3 (though that may change post-launch judging by the impressions of people who went from an E60 M5 to an F10). But meanwhile, the new base Stingray SURPASSED expectations, turning out leagues better than people were expecting, and now the Z06 has surpassed expectations by an even greater margin, coming in significantly different both from the base car and the previous Z06.

The only things I really like about the new M3/4 are the weight reduction and the HUD, but I wouldn't trade my V8 for those even if it were free to upgrade, never mind paying to do so. I don't care how much more torque and speed the new M3/4 will have over mine, there's something sublime about a V8, especially on a track and especially when it's a high-revving unit. There's more to what makes a car enjoyable than how fast it can go.

Perfectly stated !!! I, too, would have never considered a Corvette previously, but at this point, it is also more apealing to me than the M4. Of course, I have driven neither car, so this is all armchair talk for now.

Also, FWIW, I don't think the V8 will ever die. It is too iconic of a performance design benchmark. It may have moved out of the M3, but it is alive and well in many performance cars.

[TrevorM3]

Originally Posted by LarThaL

Perfectly stated !!! I, too, would have never considered a Corvette previously, but at this point, it is also more apealing to me than the M4. Of course, I have driven neither car, so this is all armchair talk for now.

Also, FWIW, I don't think the V8 will ever die. It is too iconic of a performance design benchmark. It may have moved out of the M3, but it is alive and well in many performance cars.

i sure hope you're right. either way though, i'd still stick to v8's and graduate onto a 10 cylinder down the road

[Prince_of_Persia]

Originally Posted by jphughan

Because the Corvette now finally has a really nice interior, great seats, modern creature comforts and techno gadgets (Performance Data Recorder anyone??), better external styling, and solid build quality. GM delivered all that, and they did it without raising the price by much at all on the Stingray. And the new Z06 looks to be adding all of those perks AND a huge horsepower boost and STILL won't bump the price up much. That changes the game dramatically because the Corvette is no longer a "fantastic performance if you're willing to compromise on everything else" proposition.

Now the decision is between a top tier sports car with a fair amount of DD practicality (though still limited because of the two seats) or a very good sports car with lots of practicality. It just depends on which of those two elements you want/need to prioritize more. I didn't cross shop a Z06 when I bought my M3, but I absolutely would now.

I think there's also an element at play of expectations/hopes compared to what was delivered with each car. The new M3/4 doesn't immediately seem as special compared to the base cars as the E9x did, and to some the loss of the V8 means that the new car doesn't even seem as special as the previous M3 (though that may change post-launch judging by the impressions of people who went from an E60 M5 to an F10). But meanwhile, the new base Stingray SURPASSED expectations, turning out leagues better than people were expecting, and now the Z06 has surpassed expectations by an even greater margin, coming in significantly different both from the base car and the previous Z06.

The only things I really like about the new M3/4 are the weight reduction and the HUD, but I wouldn't trade my V8 for those even if it were free to upgrade, never mind paying to do so. I don't care how much more torque and speed the new M3/4 will have over mine, there's something sublime about a V8, especially on a track and especially when it's a high-revving unit. There's more to what makes a car enjoyable than how fast it can go.

+1, well said. When I bought my M3, I did not even consider an american car as an alternative. However, with my needs, if I was in the market for a new car, this Corvette most likely would be the best choice. The other part is that we keep hearing excuses from BMW about the features we were hoping for in the new M3/M4 (e.g. going from V8 to 6 cylinder because of environment restrictions, ugly front hood because of pedestrians, M3->M4 naming etc.). So everyone was saying that this new 3-4 series and M3 and M4 will grow on you eventually like all previous generations. However, this Corvette Z06 has done everything perfect, from looks, power, engine, exhaust sound, etc. I am sure they faced the same restrictions as BMW, but they developed a masterpiece that overcame all of these, and that is the important part.

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by Prince_of_Persia

+1, well said. When I bought my M3, I did not even consider an american car as an alternative. However, with my needs, if I was in the market for a new car, this Corvette most likely would be the best choice. The other part is that we keep hearing excuses from BMW about the features we were hoping for in the new M3/M4 (e.g. going from V8 to V6 because of environment restrictions, ugly front hood because of pedestrians, M3->M4 naming etc.). So everyone was saying that this new 3-4 series and M3 and M4 will grow on you eventually like all previous generations. However, this Corvette Z06 has done everything perfect, from looks, power, engine, exhaust sound, etc. I am sure they face the same restrictions as BMW, but they developed a masterpiece that overcame all of these, and that is the important part.

Agreed. Wish the new M3/4 could have stayed with a V8 of like 4.2-4.4 liters with cylinder decativation, a higher top gear for low rpm cruising and a few hundred lbs lighter weight. Look at even the Porsche GT3 motor. 3.8L and 475hp normally aspirated with a 9000 rpm redline and 16/24 mpg.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by LarThaL

Agreed. Wish the new M3/4 could have stayed with a V8 of like 4.2-.4.4 liters with cylinder decativation, a higher top gear for low rpm cruising and a few hundred lbs lighter weight. Look at even the Porsche GT3 motor. 3.8L and 475hp normally aspirated with a 9000 rpm redline and 16/24 mpg.

i think even with producing a more efficient engine. BMW was ditching bespoke engines. so a rework on the S65 was out of the question.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Prince_of_Persia

+1, well said. When I bought my M3, I did not even consider an american car as an alternative. However, with my needs, if I was in the market for a new car, this Corvette most likely would be the best choice. The other part is that we keep hearing excuses from BMW about the features we were hoping for in the new M3/M4 (e.g. going from V8 to 6 cylinder because of environment restrictions, ugly front hood because of pedestrians, M3->M4 naming etc.). So everyone was saying that this new 3-4 series and M3 and M4 will grow on you eventually like all previous generations. However, this Corvette Z06 has done everything perfect, from looks, power, engine, exhaust sound, etc. I am sure they face the same restrictions as BMW, but they developed a masterpiece that overcame all of these, and that is the important part.

i read a comment like this and totally agree.

I don't understand how people do not see this about the E9x. The car was built with little compromise. the F80 IS A CAR of compromise.

[phrozen06]

Originally Posted by Ezio

i read a comment like this and totally agree.

I don't understand how people do not see this about the E9x. The car was built with little compromise. the F80 IS A CAR of compromise.

Why couldn't BMW have just shoehorned a detuned twin turbo V8 from the M5/M6 in the F8X M? We all know that a tuner will get this done.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by phrozen06

Why couldn't BMW have just shoehorned a detuned twin turbo V8 from the M5/M6 in the F8X M? We all know that a tuner will get this done.

Probably because the M5/6 owners would question paying the premium over an M3/4 if the two cars had the same engine with simply different tuning which as you say could be undone by a tuner. Right or wrong, BMW has to maintain its hierarchy, it seems. I doubt even a smaller displacement V8 would have been enough of a differentiation, not to mention that that would essentially be another bespoke engine, which we know BMW and even Porsche are shying away from these days.

[Someone?]

IMO they shoulda chopped 2 cylinders of the 4L and made a 3L V6 twin turbo that reved like hell, I mean the 4L is just a 5L v10 minus two cylinders.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by ibmike

IMO they shoulda chopped 2 cylinders of the 4L and made a 3L V6 twin turbo that reved like hell, I mean the 4L is just a 5L v10 minus two cylinders.

That was one of the considered designs, mostly because a V6 would have allowed for a shorter block (and thus better weight distribution), but obviously they decided against it in the end. I'm guessing some of the reasons were that a V6 doesn't run as smoothly as a straight six, such an engine would again have the M3 using a bespoke engine design which BMW clearly wants to avoid for cost reasons these days, and I think a lot of enthusiasts would have cried heresy at a V6 BMW. Then again, BMW is about to launch three-cylinder engines....

[gymtime]

Originally Posted by LarThaL

Agreed. Wish the new M3/4 could have stayed with a V8 of like 4.2-4.4 liters with cylinder decativation, a higher top gear for low rpm cruising and a few hundred lbs lighter weight. Look at even the Porsche GT3 motor. 3.8L and 475hp normally aspirated with a 9000 rpm redline and 16/24 mpg.

This new Z06 is what enthusiasts like and are looking for. The new M3/M4 appears to have been softened in my opinion (sure, it may have better performance numbers) but when it comes to the engine, looks, sound, and the overall feel of the car you can't even compare to the Z06. They made a bad decision in focusing on being more "eco friendly" with the new M3/M4 instead of appealing to enthusiasts. Like you said, they should have kept and tweaked the V8. I can certainly say the new Z06 gets me more excited, and I'm far from a Corvette guy

[Someone?]

And from what ive read the M3/4 arent even built in the special M car department, there built on the 4 series line in the regular factory, and to boot the brake upgrade is probably 3 to 4k option, dam its a shame.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by ibmike

And from what ive read the M3/4 arent even built in the special M car department, there built on the 4 series line in the regular factory, and to boot the brake upgrade is probably 3 to 4k option, dam its a shame.

$3-4K? Try 6-7K at least. The M5/6 upgrade costs $9250. Sure the M3's rotors might be smaller and they can spread costs over a larger sales volume, but no way will the upgrade be that little. And that's the cost to UPGRADE from regular brakes, so it doesn't even factor in maintenance costs for the carbon ceramic cars that are tracked or get a rotor chip rather than enjoying lifetime service life by being strictly babied on roads and freeways. Even if the upgrade were only $3-4K, I'd rather spend that on a front BBK (if needed) and leave the rear alone.

At least the new M3/4 has fixed calipers front and rear rather than sliding calipers this time though -- 6/4 piston setup with ceramics and 4/2 with regular.

[checkmate]

///M is truly dead with the departure of N/A engines.

The new M5 is a turkey with the E63 AMG being the better and more 'nimble' (surprise) alternative out there.

M3/M4's have become grand tourers of epic proportions with a small drizzle of track worthiness.

Ask any real circuit racer, given the choice- N/A > Turbo all day every day!+

[TexasSpartan]

I saw and sat in the M4 at the Detroit Auto Show and have to say I did not like it.



However, the Vette? Another story. loved it.

[JasonTDude]

The CCBs will be a $7,500 option that is not covered under BMW maintenance plan. The warranty does cover them in the event they fail, but based on my conversation in Detroit with various people, the pads in CCBs are not decent enough to last tens of track days. You still need better pads and better brake fluid and if you end up needing replacements to these items due to track use, BMW will not replace them under maintenance because they think these items don't need replacement within the 50,000 mile/4 year period.

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by JasonTDude

The CCBs will be a $7,500 option that is not covered under BMW maintenance plan. The warranty does cover them in the event they fail, but based on my conversation in Detroit with various people, the pads in CCBs are not decent enough to last tens of track days. You still need better pads and better brake fluid and if you end up needing replacements to these items due to track use, BMW will not replace them under maintenance because they think these items don't need replacement within the 50,000 mile/4 year period.

In my mind pads aren't the problem, it's rotors. Sure they may last longer than standard rotors even on the track, but I seriously doubt that the added life is enough to mean they offer lower cost per mile -- even if we assume you don't ruin your rotor early by chipping it during an off-road excursion or a simple wheel swap. For reference, the M5's CC front rotors are $3173 EACH on Turner Motorsport, compared to $480 for the M5 standard rotor. So at that point the question becomes whether the other benefits of carbon ceramics like increased fade resistance and very low dust are worth the added cost. CC fade resistance can be matched with a good BBK (which would still be cheaper than upgrading to CC), and you can buy a lot of wheel cleanings for the cash you'd be saving by avoiding CC to handle brake dust.

I honestly don't get the point of carbon ceramics. I can't fault automakers for offering them (at a handsome profit, no doubt) if people will buy them, but as near as I can tell, they're not an ideal solution for the track (look at all the Porsche people who buy used cars with PCCB and go back to regular brakes), and the increased fade resistance isn't noticed on the road -- so the only benefits are long road life and no dust? Seems like a pure vanity option, and a really expensive one at that.

[Groundpilot]

Originally Posted by TexasSpartan

I saw and sat in the M4 at the Detroit Auto Show and have to say I did not like it.



However, the Vette? Another story. loved it.

Grey looks boring on z06 imo. I am not a fan of yellow, but it may be the first time i will consider it. It looks like a race car and contrast with all cf pieces is impressive. Need to see more color options in person.

[Groundpilot]

Originally Posted by jphughan

In my mind pads aren't the problem, it's rotors. Sure they may last longer than standard rotors even on the track, but I seriously doubt that the added life is enough to mean they offer lower cost per mile -- even if we assume you don't ruin your rotor early by chipping it during an off-road excursion or a simple wheel swap. For reference, the M5's CC front rotors are $3173 EACH on Turner Motorsport, compared to $480 for the M5 standard rotor. So at that point the question becomes whether the other benefits of carbon ceramics like increased fade resistance and very low dust are worth the added cost. CC fade resistance can be matched with a good BBK (which would still be cheaper than upgrading to CC), and you can buy a lot of wheel cleanings for the cash you'd be saving by avoiding CC to handle brake dust.

I honestly don't get the point of carbon ceramics. I can't fault automakers for offering them (at a handsome profit, no doubt) if people will buy them, but as near as I can tell, they're not an ideal solution for the track (look at all the Porsche people who buy used cars with PCCB and go back to regular brakes), and the increased fade resistance isn't noticed on the road -- so the only benefits are long road life and no dust? Seems like a pure vanity option, and a really expensive one at that.

What about c7 z06 carbon ceramic brakes? CC rotors are huge and they will dissipate heat much better than steel rotors, and of course they are much lighter in similar size.

[checkmate]

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by Groundpilot

What about c7 z06 carbon ceramic brakes? CC rotors are huge and they will dissipate heat much better than steel rotors, and of course they are much lighter in similar size.

Not owning or seriously being in the market for a Z06 (yet ), I haven't researched them in detail, but from what little I've already found, the same advice seems to prevail there that's found in the BMW and Porsche forums: Carbon ceramics are way more expensive than their benefits justify, and if you have heat issues with the steel brakes then invest in a good BBK. That advice consistency is what you'd expect since the physics are the same; the only difference is that GM doesn't seem to have QUITE as large a price markup on their CC rotors as BMW and Porsche (despite all three automakers apparently sourcing them from Brembo in similar sizes), but it's still a huge difference from standard brakes.

Yes, the CC rotors are larger (which is why they require the larger wheels), and on the M3 apparently the CC option will get you calipers with two extra pistons on all four corners -- but you can achieve that with a BBK if the base brakes don't cut it. Even if you don't offset your costs by selling the stock brake setup, you'll still have spent less cash to buy two brake setups (stock and BBK) compared to what you'd have spent to upgrade from the standard brakes to CC -- not to mention the huge savings you'll have in ongoing replacement costs. And you can also choose to upgrade only the front axle to a BBK (which is what I've done) because front-engine cars pretty much never have heat issues on rear brakes. StopTech actually has an article on their site arguing AGAINST rear brake upgrades, which I take as credible given that they'd make money by selling those extra upgrades.

Yes, CC rotors are lighter, and I suppose if your skills are on a level where you'd notice that, they can be worth it. But if you're at that level you'd most likely have a sponsor paying for your brakes anyway.

And yes, CC rotors may dissipate heat better than even equally sized BBK steel rotors -- but if the BBK steel rotors can dissipate heat adequately to cover your track needs (which seems to be the case across BMW, Porsche, and Corvette forums), then any extra heat dissipation capacity above that is purely academic. I'm not willing to pay extra cash and deal with the extra headaches of CC (risk of chipping one) for an academic benefit I'll never experience in the real world.