Exactly, the ZR1 is the pinnacle of the Corvette, they've got the regular 'Vette, the Z06 and the ZR1. The difference between the 3 is pretty extreme. I'd vote that the regular Vette would be like a Carrera or possibly Carrera S, then the Turbo or GT3 would be comparable to the Z06, and then the GT2 (pinnacle of the 911) would be comparable to the ZR1 (pinnacle of the 'vette).

When the S2000 first came out, it had a 9000rpm redline. They've since increased the size of the engine, increased the low-end torque and decreased the redline. It's still pretty impressive.

Of course, the current GT3 redlines at 8500 or greater, doesn't it? And it's also got more than 100hp/liter.

I kind of think of it like the early 911 lineup...T E S

"...Cadillac CTS....Stunned..."

As well you should be, back to RWD and finally catching up with my '92 LS400. With the DFI V6 available, stellar FE, why would anyone choose the non-DFI V6...?

"..building cars we can be proud of..."

Which one(s..??) might that be? The only one I know of is only yet on the horizon, the 2012 Mercury Mariner hybrid with R/awd. And if it doesn't come with DFI and Toyota's new e/VVT-i technique then I've lost interest.

So R&T thinks the 'vette is better. Whatever, that's their opinion. I'd still opt for the 911 turbo any day.

Don't get me wrong, the Z06 is a fantastic car with a lot of great features and stunning numbers. However I cannot in good conscience buy a car that helps to prop up the parasitic institution known as the UAW, which is forcing American taxpayers to keep their "host" alive though mandatory tax subsidies. I also do not and will not ever forgive GM for their past sins. They built a lot of garbage in the 70s and 80s and flat-out exploited the hell out of their customers, taking them for granted and treating them like morons, all while the Japanese (and Europeans) bled away their market share. They then had the gall to repeat this sin earlier this decade with junk like the Hummer H2 (rebodied Yukon) and Cadillac Escalade (rebodied Yukon) - clearly focusing on short-term profit rather than long-term brand integrity.

And to whomever brought up the fact of too much electronic luxury junk going into the cars - spot-freeking-on.

I cannot STAND the BMWs of today for exactly this reason. They have WAY too much crap in them. Wasn't it Jeremy Clarkson who pointed out that the new M5 has something like 12 different transmission settings? This is just stupidity - more junk to go wrong and that ultimately nobody except a few engineers in Germany (who have evidently become bored with contests to see who has the bigger slide ruler) cares about. It's NOT what I want in a car. I don't need a fuse block with 80+ fuses. I need about five. Maybe ten at the outside. I don't need a display screen, moving map GPS, real-time traction control readout, wifi, bluetooth, DVD movie player, satellite radio, OnStar, 3-speed dick massager or any of that other nonsense that manufacturers seem to be so obsessed with.

I want simple, raw, viceral driving pleasure. If you must have computer-controlled thingamabobs, I want their functionality to be transparent and in service of the driving experience. And to the Corvette Z06's credit, it does this well - most of the really good techno-stuff operates quietly and behind-the-scenes rather than up-front, in-your-face and brash, like a ricer (or BMW).

I do like the 'vette. It's unfortunate that due to my unwavering loathe for the UAW (and GM to some extent) I'll never buy one.

I haven't read the R&T article, but Car & Driver did the same test in its April 10' edition where the Turbo out performed the ZR1 in all facets except top speed and one second slower around Laguna Seca. They went on to say the Turbo was much more liveable, as well, and was their easy pick between the two of them. Funny, how R&T has a different view/opinion of the two

Out performed in all facets? Read the article again. The only metric where the Porsche beat the ZR1 was in a straight line (acceleration). The ZR1 beat the Porsche in slalom, skidpad, braking, and road course. And one full second at Laguna Seca is forever.

The results difference between R&T and C+D is transmission choice. Road & Track used the 6 speed manual versions of both cars. Car and Driver chose the PDK, which is significantly quicker.

And don't forget that the Porsche is all-wheel-drive which finds traction and digs hard. Fitting a PDK-type trans to a Vette would not benefit quite as much as traction is already limited. Shifting faster or harder fom 1-2 or 2-3 or 3-4 would just break the tires loose.

And how the hell is horsepower per liter a metric that means anything to anyone?? Seriously, that is ridiculous.

Even horsepower itself is pretty worthless. Horsepower is a function of TORQUE over time. So the faster you spin an engine (and the higher you shift peak torque), the more horsepower it can make.

I wish manufacturers and the SAE would start advertising 'area under the curve' rather than peak numbers.

The S2000 motor is a great example. Nothing happens under 4000rpm, it is slow as a Civic. You need to wring the snot out of that motor, shifting constantly to keep it on boil. By comparison, a BMW 335i squirts from corner to corner HARD, even at 2500rpm. And still pulls hard at 6500rpm. I can tell you which is faster and more enjoyable.

Peak horsepower, and hp/L is almost irrelevant to the real world.

The S2000 is a pain in the butt. One drive and it was off my list.

Total dog below 5k rpm. Almost undriveable in town.

It's been discontinued, I think. Didn't sell.

I had my 1989 944S2 out on the track this past weekend -- pasted quite a few newer cars including Mustangs, a Nismo 370, and a Vette or two.

I wonder if today's ZR1 will be able to hold up to a weekend of track driving 20 years from now... I think that is the key to why I drive a Porsche, and while I will someday replace my Porsche with another Porsche. P-cars are engineered like no other car on the road. They are built with the enthusiast in mind. And no amount of horsepower can replace that type of engineering.

Sure, the Vette has come a long way, and it is a true contender in the near-supercar category. But I question if the car's design under the body is as effective as a Porsche's design is. And will it last? I know that a Vette's brakes are not as effective as a Porsches, despite the Road and Track article. I don't know if the drivetrain is able to harness all that power for any length of time. They may very well last, but with Porsche, I know they WILL last.

Yep - I've gotten around slowly driven 'Vettes as well. Problem with that car, as well as 911 Turbos, 370Z's, Mustang Cobra's, and other high HP cars is the driver - many of them are 'point and shoot' drivers who tend to crawl around the corners and goose it after the apex.

For me -- I live in the corners -- getting the right entry speed, maybe some trail braking and throttle steering -- that's what is fun for me.

-Z-man.

For me, it isn't about being the fastest around track corners, or much of anywhere. I wanted a good "500 mile car"....meaning drive in rapid but not crazy fast comfort for 500 miles...arrive at a destination refreshed enough to enjoy the rest of the day.

The Mustang fills that need nicely...without beating me to death like the beefed suspension of the old 911S did.

The 'Vette? A very nice ride indeed, superior performance to a turbo Porsche...but neither is on my "500 mile car" list.

It really all boils down to what you want...

I honestly don't know if I would buy either car. You have to be searching for something that has "ZR1" or "Turbo" on it I guess. There are plenty of cars more to my liking and these 2. They wouldn't even make my top 10 list. Big heavy cars with huge horsepower. Modern day muscle cars I guess.

So, a 911 got its pee-pee slapped by an American car.
Like dad always said. " No matter how tough you think you are, theres always somebody tougher."

Put on your big girl panties and suck it up! :p

You're touching on something here. Thinking about it, most of today's cars are porkers. Mandatory safety & smog stuff is a lot of it, but also the "comfort" items...power windows & mirrors, power seats, etc. I could live without those.

But don't touch my cold blowing air conditioning! Ditto my multi speaker stereo! ;)

I agree, if they would get rid of all the comfort/driving aid/ wipe your azz for you options, newer cars might be more enjoyable.

3350 pounds is heavy?

My stock '72 S was 2440...and earlier S cars even less than that.

For a high performance track car...Yes. For a cruising car that you want to roll down the boulevard and impress...No. It can easily add another ton of electronics.

Yeah...weight. I recall driving a friends then new '87 Carrera. Having just emerged from my '72, it felt like a Buick...

My Mustang is 3400 or so...it feels heavy...comfortable, but heavy!

Only "sad" in that, for the last several decades, Porsche has been ahead of GM. I'd hate to see their performance drop.