Viper suck, rather have a vette

Home  \  Domestic Cars  \  Viper suck, rather have a vette

is it just me, or are Dodge Vipers overated. My buddy had one and the thing constantly broke. Not to mention there 80grand and the parts are a million bucks. 500hp big deal, for 30 less you could have a corvette with 400 that'll kick the shit outa it. i cant wait for the new ZO6 with 500, can you say Supercar for 75. Hell that same guy with the viper has a lingenfelter vette with 787 rwhp that has only broken an axle shaft after 28 runs on the dragstrip and countless hours of street driving, and this car runs 9's

posted by  2001 CamaroZ28

THis is me in my buddy's GTS. I've loved them since they first came out in '96.

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/cviper3.jpg

More exotic than the Vette, more exclusive than teh Vette, and simply more appealing to me. Don't get me wrong, I love Corvettes, especially the new Zo6 (and classics), but there just isnt' the emotional connection to them for me.

But then again, I don't have to show my support for one car by saying everything that isn't my favorites suck. Too bad you're so small minded you have to.

posted by  ChrisV

I like the Viper GTS...I dont like the new Viper GTS...and I am sure many will say that it's better...it seems like much hasnt changed...which to some is good...if it aint broke dont fix it...but the ZO6 jumped alot from 385, to 405, to now 505hp so...the Viper staying at 500hp and only jumping from its previous 450hp...is not that impressive to me.

It's almost the same interior and same exterior w/a few minor cues changed...

http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-2006-Dodge-Viper-SRT10-Coupe.htm

http://www.autoweek.nl/images/480/4976281.jpg

http://www.autogazeta.com/c/1/b/ch98vip2.jpg

the new ZO6 is more my taste...right now..and at almost 70k is almost as exclusive as the 85k Viper SRT10

http://www.fastcoolcars.com/images/2006_vette_zo6/06corvetteZO66.jpg

http://www.fastcoolcars.com/images/2006_vette_zo6/06corvetteZO613.jpg

posted by  NISSANSPDR

Someone with enough money to buy a Viper shouldnt have to worry about repair costs.

posted by  Oomba

Someone who shelled out that much money for a car shouldn't have to be concerned about it breaking...

posted by  Bino

Its just you. Take this into consideration:

The Dodge Viper GTS should not even be being compared to the Corvette Z06. Neither are supercars, especially the Corvette. If you put the 2 against eachother the Viper would win by a long shot in the quarter mile. Now in road racing it could possibly be a different story because the Dodge Viper is heavier and cant corner as well. As for reliability, the Viper has it hands down. The Corvette feels loose and rattley, it basically feels like your driving a tin can on wheels with alot of horsepower compared to the Viper. Also, the new Z06 even with its 100hp increase, will still be far from a supercar.

posted by  FordFromHell351

The ZO6 might be far from a supercar but it has supercar like performance and for half the price...it's beating out a 911 Turbo and other supercars...

posted by  NISSANSPDR

With half the reliability of the supercars.

posted by  FordFromHell351

And lack of name. I'd take any Porsche over a Ford GT for the name.

posted by  Oomba

I don't think I have to even name my support for this one...

ChrisV, I wish I had a friend like yours. Tell him its a sweet ride! :thumbs:

posted by  dodgerforlife

If I was given the choice between the two, I would take the Corvette, for its mileage, everything else is pretty similar. Also as a bonus, the Vette looks cooler, according to me...but the Viper does get more respect from the average joe on the street. Hell, I'd take whichever I could.

posted by  chris_knows

i see so many corvettes on the street, they arent even all that special anymore. hardly EVER see vipers...

if you wanna compare then... go ahead, fine...

might as well compare a hatch civic to a V6 VW GTI... its not doin anyone any good...

you should compare cars with similar popularity on the streets. corvette vs... actually, i cant even think of any cars in its league that are quite as popular... maybe a 350Z, boxter, one of the faster beamers...

posted by  pik_d

corvette vs mustang gt's possibly?

posted by  dodgerforlife

maybe the shelby gt500 version of the mustang that was recently (march?) unvailed...

but not a gt.... which is $30,000. ;) the mustang may have the power, but unlikely it could keep up on a circuit. the mustang is also a fair bit heavier.

posted by  pik_d

i was putting that out as a comparison according to similar street popularity...

posted by  dodgerforlife

Definately the SRT-10. I also do like the GTS, beautiful car in my opinion. I dont really like Corvettes, they just dont really appeal to me. Niether are supercars, and I would say that the Viper is more of one than the Corvette. Both are good cars, but I like the Viper more. :thumbs:

posted by  StiMan

ah, maybe then. in that case the vette obviously wins...

maybe it should be cost then. $10k difference between the gt and the vette.

posted by  pik_d

You must not be talking about the "new" Z06. The 2006 Z06 will have a better power to weight ratio than the Dodge Viper...so there is a good chance that the Z06 will win in a drag race between the two. Also, the Viper has excellent cornering ability. It exceeds 1.00 g on the skidpad and does over 70 mph through the slaloms.



From my personal experiences, I believe the Vette to have the less "rattley" ride of the two. The Viper feels like a loud, hot, tin can on wheels. The Vette's ride, especially the new one, is way more civilized than the Viper.

Where are you getting your opinions from son...


I'd prefer to own a post-2003 Viper GTS over any Vette though. But I'd take the new Z06's over a new Viper.

posted by  -What-

Sorry, that attitude is simply silly.

All cars can break, even McLaren F1s. How much you spend on it doesn't matter, ever. Even real expensive, highly engineered items can break. From helicopters to top race cars, to the space shuttle.

That's why there are authorized Porsche and Ferrari service centers...

posted by  ChrisV

I think he meant that the person would be able to pay for the expenses of it breaking. I think he knew that everything breaks.

posted by  StiMan

Obviously things break, that wasn't my point, sometimes the people on this board take things too literally. If I purchased a Viper, and had to take it in more than once a year for anything actually broken (not general maintenance), I'd be very angry. If you're going to charge that much for a product, it'd better perform. My pickup has never required anything but general maintenance and common wear items. If something actually fritzed out and stopped working... I'd be pissed about that too... vehicles aren't cheap.

posted by  Bino

Why do you thik 4-5 year old Ferraris still only have like 10k miles on them or less? No one wants to drive them very far because they break easily. NONE of these cars should be used as daily drivers as they are far more delicate than your basic beater. Vipers tend, like Corvettes, to be driven a LOT more than Ferraris or exotics, as they ARE more durable. But, like any performance car, they tend to be driven harder which can break things easier.

If you tried to drive a $200k race car on teh street like a daily driver, you'd break things on it within the first year, if not sooner. You aren't buying daily driver reliability for that money.

Do you understand this concept yet?




They DO perform. But there is more to high cost than performance. A lot of it has to do with limited production numbers. You think a one off streed rod costs $100k+ because it's as fast or handles as good as a Ferrari? the Viper has very little amortization ability and it's costs are spread over a much smaller number of vehicles, so the cost is higher just for that reason!

Do you think a prototype cost so much more than a production car because it performs that much better than a production example? Or because it's the only one?





I really don't think you have a grasp on production tolerances, useage, and amortization costs. YOu pickup was one of a few hundred thousand of that model. the PROTOTPE for that truck, with all the tooling costs, would ahve run a few million dollars. By the time the hundred thousandth example rolls off the line, the costs have been amortized out for the tooling and the facilities, and each example bears a MUCH smaller portion of the costs of building ALL of them.

posted by  ChrisV

WOW ChrisV, thanks for the lesson. Congratulations on precisely missing the point of my post, not many people could have side stepped it so well. I will agree with the Supercar example, but everything else you were just listening to yourself talk.

posted by  Bino

Both are nice cars...and both cars are fast...

posted by  nissanTFsx

So if your point was so easily missed, maybe it wasn't stated very well.

Grow up.

posted by  ChrisV

again, im surprised chrisv didnt just swear at a whole lot of people in this thread.......


im impressed how people actually dare insult the viper in some areas without even taking into consideration its specs.


the viper might not be the best fuel economical car out there in the world, but for a freaking 8.3 liter V10, it does more than good enough.

viper weighs too much? the new SRT-10 has a base curb weight of just above 3,300lbs.

20mpg on open roads = big success, even if it gets 12mpg otherwise (but other fast cars dont do that much better).

a skidpad of 1.05g's? thats damn good for a "heavy car". PS: FD3S's did a skidpad of around 0.95 (or 0.98, i cant remember atm).

corvette handling better than the viper? even the new Z06 still has its joke of a leaf spring suspension. when will chevy finally decide to get rid of that suspension on their #1 sports car?

this is just to get things going a bit. i hope some people educate themselves before posting next time.

posted by  Inygknok

Speaking of educating yourself...

1st... the Corvette uses an extremely lightweight composite monoleaf that is about as high tech as suspension components get. By mounting it on the car in the center of the "leaf," the spring actually carries it's own weight, which is better for suspension response. It weights A LOT LESS than coil springs. One leaf replaces two coils. The two coil springs weigh 3 times as much as the one leaf. Additionally the leaf is placed at the bottom of the car so that in addition to removing weight you lower the CG.

2nd...traditional buggy leave springs were multi leaves and were used as suspension arms as well as springs, which was bad due to being inherently flexible. Plus they had friction as the leaves rubbed against each other. The Corvette's monoleaf only has olne job to do: be a spring. That's what makes it unlike any other leaf spring suspension of old cars.

3rd... you really think coil springs are some sort of new development?

Why doesn't everyone use it?

-Engineers like to stick with what they know. Lots of suspension engineers are familiar with using coil springs. They could experiment with leaves if they wanted or they could stick with coils and get the job done.

-Perception. Just like pushrods, the leaf spring as a stigma attached to it. The reasons for the stigma are legit (key component to heavy and typically poor handling suspension). However the reality is the sum of the older parts was the problem, not a specific part of it. In the older buggy spring type setups (liek the rears of older cars) the leafe spring was not just the spring, but all of the suspension. the Corvette is actually a doal A arm suspension that has one half of a high tech composite leaf as the spring, and that's all teh leaf does.

Coil race springs are not car specific. You select rates, diameters, length etc but you don’t have a specific spring for a specific car. If you want to order a custom spring Hypercoil will wind it to your specifications on the same machine they use for the next custom spring. A custom Porsche, Formula Ford and LMP car spring can all be made on the same machine. By the time the C6 evolves into a C6-R (they don’t start off with a production Corvette) the suspension geometry is so different that they couldn’t just mount a C6 leaf spring. It’s far too expensive to have a few custom leaf springs tooled up (you would have to buy the tooling as well as the springs) so they use readily available coil springs.

This type of universal tooling isn’t availible for the composite leaf spring. Only the Vette currently uses the spring so you are making a Vette only part. This seriously reduces the market for aftermarket composite leaf springs (still there are after market leaf springs available for the Vette). The business case for custom equipment to make Vette springs is harder to justify since it’s a smaller market.

In reviews, such as between the Corvette and the Porsche, the reviewers are using the stigma as fact. They still equate the leaf with old style buggy leaf suspension and look for reasons to call it out, even if they have to make up those reasons. The differences in the car's "feel" have nothing to do with the spring material, but with shock/spring rates and with car layout (the Porsche is heavily rear biased, the Corvette is evenly balanced, but heavy). But since the dual A arms of the Corvette have a single composite monoleaf half attached to it at the outer end, those reviewers think that the "stoneage leaf spring suspension" is sub par in comparison,and to blame for the differences in feel. It could be tires and tire pressures. It could be in alignment specs, or A arm geometry, or in the bushings in the steering. Assuming it's the composite monoleaf because you equate it with old style buggy springs is ludicrous, but magazine reviewers will do that.

posted by  ChrisV

My friend had a 1996 Corvette, he now has a 98' Cobra SVT loves that so much more, overall from what i have heard from dealers, (my best friend's dad OWNS a dealership) most of them speak more bad than good about the vette's

posted by  Pythias

I had a big post here, but I decided it's just not worth it.

ChrisV, you just have lower expectations from a vehicle than I do. I expect to drive a vehicle for 50K miles and change the oil and replace tires and brakes, that's it. If I take it to the sand dunes or off-roading, perhaps I'll need to replace a ball joint or a CV boot. If I take it to the racetrack perhaps I'll need to bleed the brakes, change the oil, repack the wheel bearings, etc.

I don't tolerate stuff just "breaking".

posted by  Bino

Ok you Prob dont own a viper or a corvette....prob never will....and prob never even rode in either so who cares wat you think. ME on the other hand HAS and yes the best zo6 corvette prob is better in most ways then the cheapest viper that you are compairing it to. so try compairing the best corvette to the best viper or the cheapest vette to the cheapest viper. the viper always comes out on top. not say i dont like corvettes my dad has one and i love it

posted by  83transam

I think chrisV knows alot more about cars than you

posted by  83transam

I touched a Ford GT last week :drool: :mrgreen: :thumbs: :laughing:
According to Car and Driver, GM is considering a Corvette SS ... Yep, SS. They say it would probably have at least 575bhp so it can compete with the Ford GT. I can't get a pic of it so just check it out in the june issue of car and driver. They made 1 corvette SS back in '57, heres a pic http://www.seriouswheels.com/1950-1959/1957-Chevrolet-Corvette-SS-Speed-102 4x768.htm http://www.seriouswheels.com/1950-1959/1957-Chevrolet-Corvette-SS-Speed-102 4x768.htm

In a nutshell, I doubt they'll make the SS, I hope they do but doubt they will. If they don't I would probably still take the Z06

ChrisV: You can't be right all the time. But in case you can, What ever happened to amelia earhart? or my dads z28? I think you just like to prove others wrong and hear yourself talk or perhaps you just have an authority issue! :2cents: :screwy:

posted by  TurboLag

Any vette would blow away a 350z, boxster, and probably most beamers

posted by  TurboLag

The corvette is actually a car, rather than jsut a jet engine strapped to a shoppign cart.

"Any vette would blow away a 350z, boxster, and probably most beamers"
what? how? in the quarter mile? Roads do have turns though and anyone can go fast in a straight line. SO you are trying to say that a corvette can outhandle a boxster? ALso, why are you comparing cars in completely different classes?

posted by  Jay-G

"Anyone can go fast in a straight line" -Yeah, but can they go as fast as a Vette? A Corvette would beat any of those cars top end, except some BMWs.
I was commenting on "pik d". So tell him not me.


Get back at me on that when you know what you're talking about. I know a guy who has 25-30 Vette's, I think I would know.

posted by  TurboLag

Amelia Earheart? Are we on an aviation forum? Do I talk about things I don't know about or even have an interest in (like your dad's Z2/8)? No. Unlike a lot of morons here, I don't just make sh!t up to post on a board. I ONLY discuss things I already know about. I don't go to naval ship spotting forums and discuss the differences between a frigate and a destroyer. Or argue the merits of different anti-fouling paints on boats at a boating forum. I don't go to a quantum physics forum and make unsubstantiated stamtnes of opinion on the behavior of quarks.

But people like you think that because you know the difference between a Sentra and an Eclipse, you can form, state and ARGUE any f*cking opinion on cars that comes to your mind, and ANYONE with experience and facts to prove your opinion the mistaken pile of dog sh!t it is, MUST be a "know-it-all who only likes to hear themselves talk."

Well, I'd rather be considered a know-it-all about a subject I like than a dumbass about EVERY subject. Like you.

So why don't you get a f*cking clue or get the f*ck out?

When your only argument to me in rebuttal to facts I'v ebrought up is whining about "liking to hear myself talk" it's proof that YOU don't have anything to back up your side and are just a whiny bitch. But I guess when you're good at something, why quit. So keep on being the bitch. I'm sure that the real world will give you a prize somewhere for not knowing anything.

You're a complete pile of shite. But it's "my opinion" so you have to accept it and you can't be mad. :2cents:

damn. There goes another 2 1/2 minutes of lunch break I'll never get back...

posted by  ChrisV

Then why do you even waste your time on a "complete pile of shite"? If I'm not worth it, why bother? That's what I'm talking about! Is it really necessary to try and put down everyone who disagrees with you? Theres your authority issue.

I would say we should take this to off-topic, but I'm not gunna be the one wasting my time and "lunch break". Argue all you want with me, but I'm done here and don't see the point of this useless argument.

Now excuse me, I have a wedding to attend

posted by  TurboLag

That's great, I think you're a 12 year old that found your daddy's motor trend and decided to jump on the coat tails of whoever makes the longest post.

posted by  Bino

Well ChrisV, I fail to see how your big ass long post about prototypes had anything to do with the cost and reliability of a production vehicle. Did anybody mention purchasing a prototype vehicle and driving it on the street? I don't recall that in any of the posts. But, it was still necessary for you to rant about prototypes. Which is where you completely missed the point of my post.

Also, hand built vehicles should not be any more or less reliable than a production line vehicle. If they are, then the manufacturing process is flawed. In which case I would unload that POS.

Don't go off ranting on a tangent, and then tell me to grow up when I point out that you weren't on subject. Every post tends to wander, but don't get pissed off when all I do is point it out.

posted by  Bino

it seems that he goes off-subject when he is proven wrong

posted by  Jay-G

it seems you randomly attack people when you realize no one likes you. just like a cornered animal.

posted by  pik_d

:laughing:

posted by  GreekWarrior

Rant on about prototypes? IT WAS ONE SENTENCE! Since when is one sentence "ranting on about?"

Get a f*cking CLUE.

And it had everything to do with your post! it's called a f*cking ANALOGY! Did you learn that word in school yet or have you yet to get that far?
You said someone paying that much money for a car shouldn't be concerned about it breaking. That's silly. How much money a car costs has zero bearing on how relaible it is. And some of the least relaible cars are the most expensive. How the f8ck that is that not germain to the thread?



And that's where you show how ****ing clueless you are. how many hand built cars have you ever DEALT with??? Even Ferrari makes test prototypes. and they break. Why do you think the magazines, when testing prototypes, have to comment that the flaws they find are typical for prototypes and probably won't show up in production? BECAUSE HAND BUILT CARS ARE NECESSARILY MORE DELICATE AND LESS RELIABLE! That's why prototype cars are not f*cking daily drivers!!!!! NOW there's a f*cking rant about prototypes!

God DAMN! You have ZERO experience in this matter and your opinion is based on flawed information.




IT WAS ON SUBJECT, YOU ASS! I get pissed because you can't tell that the response to you IS EXACTLY ON POINT. And then you argue about it as if you actually KNOW anything about it, which you've proven you DON'T!

The POINT is, cost is not indicative of daily driver reliability, and then I attempted to show WHY. You argued about all the points and then have the audacity to say it wasn't on subject, when it was EXACTLY responding to your rediculous assertation.

posted by  ChrisV

Nothing like a good ranting post early in the morning that maintains to be off topic. Again, I don't recall saying that prototype vehicles were designed to be reliable, or unreliable for that matter. I never mentioned anything about how reliable I expect a companies prototype vehicles to be. I recall saying something about how reliable I expect a PRODUCTION car to be.

And, I also recall saying that if I paid a wack-load of money for a car, I would expect it to be reliable, I didn't say that they were, I just said that I don't tolerate poor craftsmanship.

I appreciate you degrading my knowledge, since you obviously have no ****ING clue what I do for a living.

You're ranting about how much prototype vehicles cost, how unreliable vehicles are, and how that's OK no matter how much you spend on them.

I'm merely saying that... it's not OK for a $200K car to break down (general maintenance and wear/tear can be expected, and given the higher performance of these vehicles it can be expected that this will be more frequent, but "just breaking" is not OK). That's just bullshit.

I look forward to your next rant about how unreliable prototypes are and how I should have no problem with a Ferrari breaking down.

posted by  Bino

I apologize to all for the swearing in my previous post. I should not have let myself drop to that level.

posted by  Bino

Your Message