Dano1945
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2010
- Messages
- 80
Quaralane said:Ace, I'll see your Vette, and raise you the Ferrari Testarossa!
Long time Vette fan myself, but THIS was the car of my dreams back in high school.
Koenig Bodied Ferrari Testarossa Twin Turbo Start and Accelerate
Ferrari Testarossa HARD revving (Fuchs exhaust w/ race pipes!!) 1080p HD
Ferrari Testarossa Twin Turbo
ferrari testarossa donut/burnout @ cars and coffee NL
Elm City Hobbies said:FERRARI
Isn't as hand built as they once were. Not automated to the extreme like GM, Ford, etc, but not totally hand built like they were at one time. That being said....much of the assembly is still handbuilt to a certain extent.
As far as comparing cars....really can't compare a suped up ZR1 to a base Testarossa, kind of like comparing apples to oranges.
A stock Testarossa vs a stock vette of the same year......all the vette is going to see are the tail lights of the Testarossa ahead, getting smaller and smaller.
Take a full on suped up Koenzig Testarossa against a ZR1....the Ferrari is still going to leave the vette chewing its wake. I will admit that the ZR1 was a bad ass car, but has never been a match for anything GM has thrown at them, not even in the same league.
Performance of a ZR1 was in fact only slightly better than a stock Testarossa, 0-60 times were 4.4 for the vette, 5.3 for the Ferrari, so a little faster, top speed for both about the same.
13aceofspades13 said:Elm City Hobbies said:FERRARI
Isn't as hand built as they once were. Not automated to the extreme like GM, Ford, etc, but not totally hand built like they were at one time. That being said....much of the assembly is still handbuilt to a certain extent.
As far as comparing cars....really can't compare a suped up ZR1 to a base Testarossa, kind of like comparing apples to oranges.
A stock Testarossa vs a stock vette of the same year......all the vette is going to see are the tail lights of the Testarossa ahead, getting smaller and smaller.
Take a full on suped up Koenzig Testarossa against a ZR1....the Ferrari is still going to leave the vette chewing its wake. I will admit that the ZR1 was a bad ass car, but has never been a match for anything GM has thrown at them, not even in the same league.
Performance of a ZR1 was in fact only slightly better than a stock Testarossa, 0-60 times were 4.4 for the vette, 5.3 for the Ferrari, so a little faster, top speed for both about the same.
The Corvette ZR1 is not a souped up Corvette, its not even after market, it is a production Corvette... so to compare it to the Testerosa, would be compleetly fair. Corvette has usually offered several options too there customers, there was the standard, after 1990 the ZR1 was a standard car but had different engine options, you had the LT-1 350 which created 300HP, then you had the LT-4 which where equipped in a few Corvettes, and the 1996 Corvette grandsport which sported a special paint scheme of blue with a white stripe, the LT-4 created about 320 or so horsepower, then you had the LT-5 which earlier versions created 375HP, and later versions 405HP.
they even have a after market corvette even faster, the Corvette Sledgehammer, it was built between 1987 and 1988, and has a twin turbocharged 850+HP V8, and had a top speed of 254MPH, but this car would have cost some $400,000US
Elm City Hobbies said:13aceofspades13 said:Elm City Hobbies said:FERRARI
Isn't as hand built as they once were. Not automated to the extreme like GM, Ford, etc, but not totally hand built like they were at one time. That being said....much of the assembly is still handbuilt to a certain extent.
As far as comparing cars....really can't compare a suped up ZR1 to a base Testarossa, kind of like comparing apples to oranges.
A stock Testarossa vs a stock vette of the same year......all the vette is going to see are the tail lights of the Testarossa ahead, getting smaller and smaller.
Take a full on suped up Koenzig Testarossa against a ZR1....the Ferrari is still going to leave the vette chewing its wake. I will admit that the ZR1 was a bad ass car, but has never been a match for anything GM has thrown at them, not even in the same league.
Performance of a ZR1 was in fact only slightly better than a stock Testarossa, 0-60 times were 4.4 for the vette, 5.3 for the Ferrari, so a little faster, top speed for both about the same.
The Corvette ZR1 is not a souped up Corvette, its not even after market, it is a production Corvette... so to compare it to the Testerosa, would be compleetly fair. Corvette has usually offered several options too there customers, there was the standard, after 1990 the ZR1 was a standard car but had different engine options, you had the LT-1 350 which created 300HP, then you had the LT-4 which where equipped in a few Corvettes, and the 1996 Corvette grandsport which sported a special paint scheme of blue with a white stripe, the LT-4 created about 320 or so horsepower, then you had the LT-5 which earlier versions created 375HP, and later versions 405HP.
they even have a after market corvette even faster, the Corvette Sledgehammer, it was built between 1987 and 1988, and has a twin turbocharged 850+HP V8, and had a top speed of 254MPH, but this car would have cost some $400,000US
My point being, that the Corvette ZR1, wasn't your run of the mill "normal" Vette....sure it was built in the GM factory, but was essentially a factory "suped up" vette. No different than a Mustang Cobra, still built by Ford, but far from a regular GT Mustang. So you can't really compare a ZR1 which was a Factory built suped up vette to a normal Testerossa. Would be like comparing my well used Honda CRV to a Porsche Cayanne....not really much of a comparison.
Besides? Wasn't the ZR1 supercharged? Not even a fair comparison with that. So even with all that increase in power to the ZR1, it was still only marginally faster than the Testerrosa 0-60.
Elm City Hobbies said:13aceofspades13 said:Elm City Hobbies said:FERRARI
Isn't as hand built as they once were. Not automated to the extreme like GM, Ford, etc, but not totally hand built like they were at one time. That being said....much of the assembly is still handbuilt to a certain extent.
As far as comparing cars....really can't compare a suped up ZR1 to a base Testarossa, kind of like comparing apples to oranges.
A stock Testarossa vs a stock vette of the same year......all the vette is going to see are the tail lights of the Testarossa ahead, getting smaller and smaller.
Take a full on suped up Koenzig Testarossa against a ZR1....the Ferrari is still going to leave the vette chewing its wake. I will admit that the ZR1 was a bad ass car, but has never been a match for anything GM has thrown at them, not even in the same league.
Performance of a ZR1 was in fact only slightly better than a stock Testarossa, 0-60 times were 4.4 for the vette, 5.3 for the Ferrari, so a little faster, top speed for both about the same.
The Corvette ZR1 is not a souped up Corvette, its not even after market, it is a production Corvette... so to compare it to the Testerosa, would be compleetly fair. Corvette has usually offered several options too there customers, there was the standard, after 1990 the ZR1 was a standard car but had different engine options, you had the LT-1 350 which created 300HP, then you had the LT-4 which where equipped in a few Corvettes, and the 1996 Corvette grandsport which sported a special paint scheme of blue with a white stripe, the LT-4 created about 320 or so horsepower, then you had the LT-5 which earlier versions created 375HP, and later versions 405HP.
they even have a after market corvette even faster, the Corvette Sledgehammer, it was built between 1987 and 1988, and has a twin turbocharged 850+HP V8, and had a top speed of 254MPH, but this car would have cost some $400,000US
My point being, that the Corvette ZR1, wasn't your run of the mill "normal" Vette....sure it was built in the GM factory, but was essentially a factory "suped up" vette. No different than a Mustang Cobra, still built by Ford, but far from a regular GT Mustang. So you can't really compare a ZR1 which was a Factory built suped up vette to a normal Testerossa. Would be like comparing my well used Honda CRV to a Porsche Cayanne....not really much of a comparison.
Besides? Wasn't the ZR1 supercharged? Not even a fair comparison with that. So even with all that increase in power to the ZR1, it was still only marginally faster than the Testerrosa 0-60.
Jingles said:We never did get a clear decision on where posts like this should go...
It isn't a model thread, so shouldn't really be in a modeling section...
Nobody's building anything, so it shouldn't really be in the ' WHATCHA BUILDIN'?' section...
I'll see what Scott says.
Jingles.
KeiserSoze said:Personally can't stand vettes. Has nothing to do with performance. I worked front services at a Casino hotel for a few years while in school (Bellman and Valet). I refused to park vettes simply because they are soooooo uncomfortable. Seats are made for skinny kids.
Mustang fo life!!!! ;D
Quaralane said:And I should have moved it at the start. --facepalms--
Always liked the lines of the Testarossa.
And, unlike the Corvette, when Ferrari decides to build a vehicle with totally new lines, they call it what it is....a new car.
13aceofspades13 said:Quaralane said:And I should have moved it at the start. --facepalms--
Always liked the lines of the Testarossa.
And, unlike the Corvette, when Ferrari decides to build a vehicle with totally new lines, they call it what it is....a new car.
Farrari can afford to make different stiles beacuse thats really all Farrari makes is performance Vehicles. Corvette is a Chevy, and Chevy also makes the Camaro... trucks, passenger cars, ect...
and Corvette makes new Corvettes all the time, i cant even list all the different types of corvettes, not every Corvette is the same buy any means, a Corvette ZR-1 has a completely different chassis, than the Z-51, and the Zo6. the body stiles may have some similar lines, but there are major differences.
Grendels said:I would love to own a Ferrari, but I don't have the time nor the patience to maintain one. I live in a small town, and getting parts would not be that easy of a task.
Now a Corvette, I could get. In fact last year I could have purchased one, but did not. I bought a BMW instead. (They basically offered me $15,000 off the price on a new BMW, I couldn't resist that.) This is not the only reason I didn't buy the Vette. One is that resale value with Vette's is not that great. After four or five years, when GM has a new model out, the value just drops. My last BMW held it's value really well. Second, GM is not known for quality. Well, not recently anyhow. My last GM just fell apart on me while under warranty. It was in the shop at least once a month, getting something done. That just drove me nuts! Both BMW's have not done that to me.
My car is not as fast as a Vette, but it will be there in 5 years, looking much as it does now. The fun part is that it may handle as well as a Vette. Here is what I did buy: