Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site edison.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!edison!dca
From: dca@edison.UUCP (David C. Albrecht)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: Re: big block vs 4-bangers
Message-ID: <442@edison.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Mar-85 09:41:17 EST
Article-I.D.: edison.442
Posted: Tue Mar 12 09:41:17 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Mar-85 22:42:17 EST
References: <285@oblio.UUCP>
Organization: General Electric Company, Charlottesville, VA
Lines: 60

> 
> You are right.  Why argue over things which are subjective, like 
> whether or not a cockpit is nice?  But you are mistaken about the
> Car & Driver test comparing the Z28 to the '84 Corvette.  The tests
> they performed proved the Corvette far superior to the Z in terms of
> handling.  The Corvette did much better on the skidpad and went faster
> in the slalom.  They said it leaned less in the corners and had "knife-edge"
> steering response.  No such compliments for the Camaro.  They said it
> had "asphalt wrinkling" road holding ability, again, Camaro road holding
> not as good.  All the parameters that define good handling came out in favor
> of the Corvette, a fact which few readers overlooked.  I do seem to remember
> an out-of-place statement in which something was said about the Camaro
> handling being better.  This was obviously a misprint since all tests
> and subjective opinions about road feel and steering response favored the
> Corvette.  I tried to find a catagory in which the Z28 was superior
> and I seem to remember that the seats were more comfortable.  Also,
> I think it had a softer suspension which again proved the Corvettes' handling
> superiority.  If the article had been entitled "Worlds most comfortable
> riding car" then the Camaro would have possibly won.  
> 
> As far as comparing the Porsche to the '84 Corvette in terms of handling,
> I just wish I had a nickel for every car magazine that ran both cars on
> a skidpad and slalom course, and always showed the Corvette blowing away
> the Porsche (not to mention the Ferrari, 300ZX, etc.).  Even the
> $100,000 Lambrogini was inferior in the handling department (.86 g's
> vs .89 g's on the skidpad, the best measure of road holding ability,
> re: Road & Track magazine).
> 
> OK, Tom, now tell me about all those tests you've seen that showed
> a Porsche could hold onto the skidpad better than an '84 Corvette.
> 			     Jeff

The problem with this whole evaluation is that the Car and Driver staff
were trying cars more for drivability rather than handling.  I will put
some words in their mouths and say that I believe that they were looking
for a car that was truly pleasant to handle as well as performing well.
Objectively measured, few people can find fault with the '84 vette and
in my opinion those that do are nit-picking.

True the '84 corvette has near race car performance but it also has
near race car attention requirements i.e. the use of the word knife-
edged was a criticism, not praise.  This kind of performance is fine
if you want to always be sitting on the edge of the seat anytime you
drive the car but I have the feeling the staff of Car and Driver wanted
to have their cake and eat it too i.e. the excellent handling yet maintaining
the ability to drive the car without constant seat of the pants alertness
when you're not seat of the pants driving.

One review of the '84 vette even invented a vocabulary of words
to describe various tendencies of the car to take to the weeds
if the driver loses attention to the chassis.
This is why the car though clearly superior in the objective ratings
was not similarly superior in the subjective ratings.  The '84 vette
seems to sponsor somewhat of a love hate relationship among car
magazine people they love some aspects of the handling and hate
others, most seem to think it was in need of refinement and the
reviews of the '85 I have seen seem to indicate that it is much
improved.

David Albrecht