This is the C8 mid-engine Chevy Corvette

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

Having ridden more than a few fairly fast motorcycles (CBRs, Ducs, CBRs, and GSXRs) in my younger days I will swear on my own grave that the following is gold plated truth:


It is MUCH more fun to ride a slow motorcycle fast than a fast motorcycle slow.

I've always called this Schilling's Law (after the late Phil Schilling). I don't know if Schilling coined the term and I don't care. I though a lot of him.

I have not driven all than many really fast cars, but I cannot imagine they are exempt from that law.

Why are you only riding the fast bike slow and the slow bike fast?

[BigHugeFatGuy]

Originally Posted by PulsarBeeerz

Le Cayman and Boxster?

MR2 and Fiero!

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Stephen W.

huh... Why, what ever for??? Does anyone even make steel rotors???

A lot of people that track high end cars pull the CC rotors off and run steel rotors for track days. The performance difference is not worth the cost and they would rather be able to show their bling on the street. I have only seen a dozen or so cars on track with CC rotors in the past 6 years or so.

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Why are you only riding the fast bike slow and the slow bike fast?

Did I say that?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

It can’t. Even if it’s faster than all of them, it’ll still be a corvette with an interior that’s behind even the cheapest euro supercar interior. The refinement just isn’t there, it’s just not a priority for the corvette.

I think they really increased the quality and options of their interiors. They have carbon fiber bucket seat options, lots of leather options, lots of interior details and design elements. They modeled Porsche and Ferrari with expanding their choices. Seat belts, stitching, dash, inlays, etc are all customizable.

Plus, Ferrari really isn't known for their interior build quality. A 30k mile Ferrari interior looks like a 90k mile interior on any normal car, despite being owned by rich people. The stitching comes undone, the panels can grow gaps. Some of the carbon pieces look very aftermarket and stuck on. In fact, much of the Ferrari interiors have always been lamented to be plagued with wiring gremlins. Interior pieces may fade like the carbon fiber. It is why the NSX was so successful and celebrated because it offered interiors that were functional and ergonomically laid out with quality/mass produced parts versus sketchy bespoke pieces or borrowed components from different OEMs and stitched together in an indecisive and incomprehensible way. Besides that, which Ferrari's are we talking about? Here is a 2010ish Corvette and F430 and a current Tributo mid-engine V8 versus the C8. Are they really so far apart. I've sat in a few supercars enough to know the interiors sometimes are much better in photos than in rear life. My bubble was burst a few times.

Opinions on interior aesthetics will be subjective, but I think the Corvette has done a lot to close the gap on Porsche and Ferrari and other exotics. If someone wanted to choose between a used Ferrari or a new Corvette Z06, the choice is much more clear, especially when looking at the interiors on older Ferraris and the bloated prices.












The GTR and current NSX at the end of their production run, but these are their interiors:

[ZDan]

C7 and C8 interiors are certainly a *vast* improvement over C5/C6. I would have bought a C6 a LONG time ago but for the craptastic interior. I'm not a big stickler over "soft touch surfaces", I really kinda don't get that fetish, but the C6 interior just looks BLAND a.f. That Malibu steering wheel, DAMN. And stock seats look and feel like they're designed for widebodies only. I got back in my S2000 and never looked at another one...

Unfortunately the C6 was the last Corvette where they gave a damn about weight. C7 went from ~3300 to 3440 up to pushing 3600 lb., new C8 is 3600+ minimum. Lame...

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Why are you only riding the fast bike slow and the slow bike fast?

My last response was kind of flippant, my apologies. As I noted earlier, context makes a big difference. Riding/driving a fast vehicle fast requires some very specific conditions. Those conditions are difficult to meet so if you have a very fast bike/car and you want to ride/drive it you will have to do so slowly or risk incarceration, serious injury or death. So you putt around folded up trying to control your right wrist/foot. And you still have to feed the machinery a steady diet of expensive maintenance.

What I’d like to do is find a seniors’ carting series. Or better still, a freakishly tall seniors’ carting series. I think that would be a hoot and a holler. @humfrz, you up for that?

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

My last response was kind of flippant, my apologies. As I noted earlier, context makes a big difference. Riding/driving a fast vehicle fast requires some very specific conditions. Those conditions are difficult to meet so if you have a very fast bike/car and you want to ride/drive it you will have to do so slowly or risk incarceration, serious injury or death. So you putt around folded up trying to control your right wrist/foot. And you still have to feed the machinery a steady diet of expensive maintenance.

What I’d like to do is find a seniors’ carting series. Or better still, a freakishly tall seniors’ carting series. I think that would be a hoot and a holler. @humfrz, you up for that?

I don't think a lot of people, even car people, understand the performance of bikes. My bike is SLOW by bike standards at a 0-60 of 3.3 and it's measly 73hp.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

I don't think a lot of people, even car people, understand the performance of bikes. My bike is SLOW by bike standards at a 0-60 of 3.3 and it's measly 73hp.

What bike? I'm still on my '00 SV650, but it might become a track bike over the winter (sold FZR400 race bike).

In 1990, yeah, bikes were way way WAY quicker than even the quickest cars. My '86 Yamaha Radian 600, not *at all* a fast bike, was good for 12.8 @ 108 in the 1/4, while a '90 Ferrari Testarossa of the era was 13.3 @ 107. Ha!

Kind of a different situation today, bikes have gotten faster but cars have gotten MUCH faster... The quickest bikes are still generally gonna be quicker, but more middle-weight bikes are going to get beat by the faster cars, unlike yesteryear when literally NO (stock) car of the era stood a chance against my budget, air-cooled, 2-valve/cylinder 600...

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by ZDan

What bike? I'm still on my '00 SV650, but it might become a track bike over the winter (sold FZR400 race bike).

In 1990, yeah, bikes were way way WAY quicker than even the quickest cars. My '86 Yamaha Radian 600, not *at all* a fast bike, was good for 12.8 @ 108 in the 1/4, while a '90 Ferrari Testarossa of the era was 13.3 @ 107. Ha!

Kind of a different situation today, bikes have gotten faster but cars have gotten MUCH faster... The quickest bikes are still generally gonna be quicker, but more middle-weight bikes are going to get beat by the faster cars, unlike yesteryear when literally NO (stock) car of the era stood a chance against my budget, air-cooled, 8-valve 600...

17' KTM 690 Duke. I'd love to get an SV650 for a track bike but my hobbies are outpacing my budget

[Wally86]

The 86 reminds me a lot of the SV and it makes funny to me to see others who are also SV havers.

I just gave away my 07 N in the middle of covid with 70k miles on her. Just helped a buddy grab an 05 S recently too.

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

.............
What I’d like to do is find a seniors’ carting series. Or better still, a freakishly tall seniors’ carting series. I think that would be a hoot and a holler. @humfrz, you up for that?

Oh yes, I'm up for one last race. However, before anyone places any bets, be advised that I have a long history of building and racing go Karts. -

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

I don't think a lot of people, even car people, understand the performance of bikes. My bike is SLOW by bike standards at a 0-60 of 3.3 and it's measly 73hp.

I don’t recall when I read this, but some time back one of the bike mags noted that a ZX-10 could accelerate from 0 to 100 mph and the brake back to 0 in something like 14 seconds. That’s 0-100-0 in under 15 seconds. The 0 to 100 time was a hair over 5 seconds. A BMW S1000RR’s 0 to 180mph time is 16 seconds flat. It would be significantly quicker except for insisting on wheelieing at 140.

That’s hair bending. And not really useable by mortal humans. But, nothing exceeds like excess.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

17' KTM 690 Duke. I'd love to get an SV650 for a track bike but my hobbies are outpacing my budget

690 Duke, sweeeet! If SV becomes track/race bike, I'm either getting a Street Triple or Aprilia 660 (either RS or Tuono) next year...