C&D Z06 vs F430 vs 997TT

  • Thread starter Thread starter Poverty
  • 220 comments
  • 7,702 views
Your always going to get differences like this, so many variables are involved that something as simple as a different track surface or temperature can switch the results around when cars are this closely matched.

I wouldn't feel too bad for Ferrari amyway, remember the Z06 and 911 Turbo are currently the 'best' these two manufacturers have to offer, the 430 is the 'entry' level model in the Ferrari range. When it takes the best others have to offer to match your base model things are not that bad at all.

👍

Scaff

I agree with the top portion. Tires are always a major factor, so I take that into account when see these figures in magazines. The other obvious one is the type of track.

Now the bottom, that is certainly a weird take on it. The other car Ferrari makes is more of a GT and the supercar costs way more. You could also look at the other side and see that the company that makes the Z06, also makes ordinary SUVs and trucks.
 
Lap times,
F430 F1 : 1'17.4
Z06 : 1'19.5
Turbo : 1'20.0

0-100 mph,
F430 : 8.3
Z06 : 8.9
Turbo : 9.5

0-100-0,
F430 : 12.5
Z06 : 13.1
Turbo : 13.4

I would have to argue that those figures must be off somehow. Was it really the 997 turbo that got these poor results as I would expect it to win the 0-100-0 and be neck and neck with z06 for the 0-100 leaving the ferrari to eat dust.

I wouldn't feel too bad for Ferrari amyway, remember the Z06 and 911 Turbo are currently the 'best' these two manufacturers have to offer
I would argue that the 997 GT3 RS is much better.
 
I have to wonder what track they were at to have the Z06 trumped by the F430, or who the hell was driving the thing.

But every magazine seems to get different results, the biggest differences comming from the opposite sides of the Atlantic.
 
Just wanted to show that different tracks show different results.

Im a little sceptical of the cars myself. The pictures showed the rear end of the F430 being the one I thought was supposed to be the one for the CS. Also, the specs gave a weight of 3150lbs. To counter this, the power was the standard 483bhp (not 520) and the articles were creamed with F430 F1, no mention of CS. The test was done at Vairano in conjunction with Quattroruote (which has to be a good magazine since my uncle reads it). I dont regularly read R&T, my subscriptions are to MT and C/D. I only have this issue since I was at Pearson in Toronto and needed reading material for my flight home (and they didnt have the August CAR yet :( ).
 
Like Scaff said, it's all in track layout. Bumpiness, twistiness and the length of the straights all play a part in good lap times.

Like I said in regards to the test where the Lamborghini Gallardo creamed the other cars, it can even come down to low traction surfaces or dusty or damp conditions. which would handicap some cars more than others.
 
I would argue that the 997 GT3 RS is much better.

That might be the case if the GT3 RS was actually in the production model range, but its not at present, the GT3 is.

However (on paper) its not as fast as the Turbo, nor do Porsche position it as the 'top' model.

Does that make the Turbo a better car? Well thats a far more open question, but at £18,000 more in the UK, Porsche are certainly suggesting that they would consider it to be.

Regards

Scaff
 
That might be the case if the GT3 RS was actually in the production model range, but its not at present, the GT3 is.

However (on paper) its not as fast as the Turbo, nor do Porsche position it as the 'top' model.

Does that make the Turbo a better car? Well thats a far more open question, but at £18,000 more in the UK, Porsche are certainly suggesting that they would consider it to be.

Regards

Scaff

Walter Rohl recons the GT3 to be a faster track car than the Turbo (he more than anyone would know) He also says the GT3 RS will be around only 6-8 seconds slower around the ring than the Carrera GT!

But i'm sure you read EVO and know this too!
 
That might be the case if the GT3 RS was actually in the production model range, but its not at present, the GT3 is.

This explains why I cant find any articles or track tests for the GT3 RS :crazy:

I thought maybe people didnt care about it.:indiff:
 
I'd still call the GT3 better than the Turbo, but thats based on my taste in Porsches. Maybe once the outrageous GT2 hits the streets my opinion could change, but I prefer the "natural" way the GT3 goes about it's business.
 
The Turbo is faster, more powerful and they arn't far apart on the track. The Turbo also has a nicer interior and is far more suitable for road use in all weather conditions compared to the GT3. But it depends on what your basing a car as better on. Personally I like both a lot, if I could afford to own and live with one or the other as a second car, I'd probably choose the GT3.
 
Walter Rohl recons the GT3 to be a faster track car than the Turbo (he more than anyone would know) He also says the GT3 RS will be around only 6-8 seconds slower around the ring than the Carrera GT!

But i'm sure you read EVO and know this too!
I do indeed, and certainly would not disagree with Mr Rohl when it comes to driving and in particular driving Porsche's.

My (rather tounge in cheek) comment about the Turbo being the 'best' offered by Porsche, is based on how Porsche position the Turbo. Its, as I said, on paper the top of the range in terms of all round qualities.


This explains why I cant find any articles or track tests for the GT3 RS :crazy:

I thought maybe people didnt care about it.:indiff:
Not care about a GT3 RS, personally I can't wait.


I'd still call the GT3 better than the Turbo, but thats based on my taste in Porsches. Maybe once the outrageous GT2 hits the streets my opinion could change, but I prefer the "natural" way the GT3 goes about it's business.
I would not disagree with you're comments, the GT3 is closer to what I would want from a 911. However in terms of which one sits at the head of the 911 range then its most certainly the Turbo.

Regards

Scaff
 
Back