Skip to main content

Chevy Corvette Z06 or Nissan GT-R Nismo




Inevitably, comparisons between the new +Chevrolet Corvette Z06 and the +Nissan GT-R Nismo are being made. Before I get to any discussion, here are the performance numbers for each:


Corvette Z06 (manual)Corvette Z06 (auto)Nissan GT-R Nismo
0-30 mph1.5 sec1.3 sec1.2 sec
0-40 mph2.1 sec1.7 sec1.7 sec
0-50 mph2.6 sec2.3 sec2.2 sec
0-60 mph3.2 sec3.0 sec2.9 sec
0-70 mph4.1 sec3.8 sec3.7 sec
0-80 mph4.9 sec4.7 sec4.7 sec
0-90 mph5.9 sec5.6 sec5.8 sec
0-100 mph7.2 sec6.8 sec7.0 sec
1/4 mile11.3 sec @ 126.2 mph11.1 sec @ 127 mph11.2 sec @ 125 mph
braking 60-0 mph91 ft91 ft97 ft
braking 70-0 mph128 ft128 ft145 ft
figure 822.5 sec @ 0.98 g (avg)22.5 sec @ 0.98 g (avg)22.9 sec @ 0.91 g (avg)

The manual Z06 acceleration numbers are based on Motor Trend's test because they tested a manual and the auto's numbers are based on Car and Driver's test because they tested an auto. The GT-R Nismo acceleration numbers are based on Car and Driver's numbers because they published full acceleration tests although it is worth noting that Motor Trend got a tenth (0.1) sec better 14 mile time of 11.1 sec. 60-0 mph braking and figure 8 numbers came from Motor Trend tests and 70-0 mph braking are from Car and Driver's test. 




The GT-R obviously has a small launch advantage but the 8-speed automatic Vette catches up by 80 mph. The manual loses too much time shifting, though, and never catches up based on test numbers although I expect the power advantage of the Vette to come into play beyond the test numbers (once speed is further into the triple digit range). The Corvette has a clear handling advantage, though. A lot of people would probably credit the handling advantage to the Michelin Cup 2 tires but Nismo could have easily spec'ed similar tires for the GT-R plus they aren't nearly as extreme as the Cup tires use on the last generation ZR1. The GT-R is even more of a limited edition than the Vette so it would be more justified. I'm not sure why Nissan didn't use grippier tires to be honest. If I had to guess, I would say that it's to protect drivetrain components.

I know that many owners who track their GT-R's use slicks or DOT track tires but if something breaks out there, Nissan doesn't have to foot the bill for the repair but if you're on the road with grippy tires and something breaks before the warranty is out, it's on Nissan. I don't see any other possible reason. At about $150,000 a piece, cost wasn't an issue during development and judging by how hardcore and limited this version is, being street friendly was not a priority - only performance. I think a remote possibility could be bragging rights - to say that the car is capable of certain lap times on very street friendly tires. With that said, I would like to see the GT-R on similar tires go up against the Vette. I do expect the Corvette to be faster around a track by a good margin, probably 2-3 seconds faster around VIR than the GT-R.

During its brief stay with Motor Trend, Randy Pobst laid down a lap time of 1:30.2 around Road Atlanta in the Vette. A track prepped Nissan GT-R laid down a lap time of 1:29.9 on Michelin Pilot Super Sports. The car is the Forged Performance FP800 GT-R which should have nearly 800 hp at the crank with turbo upgrades and supporting modifications as well as suspension work that was set up for NASA trials. For reference (regarding tires), the C6 Corvette ZR1 had a best lap time of 2:51.8 on the standard Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 tires (basically the last generation Pilot Super Sports) and 2:50.7 on the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires, both at VIR during Car and Driver's Lightning Lap features. These Cup tires are actually less aggressive than the Sport Cup 2 tires used on this Z06 and the Pilot Super Sports used on the GT-R are better than the Pilot Sport PS2 tires used on the ZR1. All this means that the better tires (Sport Cup 2) on the Vette are worth less than a second compared to the more streetable Pilot Super Sports used on the FP800 GT-R yet it only managed to be 0.3 seconds quicker with less practice in the Vette by its driver. The GT-R Nismo should have a power disadvantage of nearly 200 hp so it should be considerably slower than that. Don't expect it to be that easy to get those lap times in the GT-R. either

One thing that a lot of people accuse the GT-R of is being too easy to drive and anyone can go and put down a hero lap time. This can be a compliment since it is easy to be fast or a criticism since it takes less skill and does the work for you. I think it is untrue all together. I haven't driven a GT-R but here's what I think. Based on reviews and personal experience with advanced AWD cars and track driving, that won't be the case. AWD can't fix lack of skill. If you brake early or late, the car can't help you. If you apex early or late, the car can't help you. Sir Jackie Stewart once said in an interview with FHM that when he started driving, he thought there were three parts to a corner - corner entry, apex (mid corner) and corner exit. Now, he realizes that there are eight. That's right, eight parts. Here they are:

1 - Getting off the gas/accelerator
2 - Getting on the brakes
3 - Getting off the brakes
4 - Turn in
5 - Wait for apex
6 - Roll in the gas/accelerator
7 - Unwind steering
8 - Corner exit

AWD can help you with turn in if the car differentials are tuned to purposely channel torque to the outside wheel to help the car rotate but that doesn't make the car easier to drive IMO, just different. The only point that AWD would help you with is number 6, where AWD gives you a lot more room for error. You don't have to be as careful with throttle roll in, you can put a lot more power down and you don't have to worry about the car doing something unpredictable. Getting this part right has a huge effect on lap times, though. To quote Sir Jackie once again, the avid Top Gear (UK) fans might remember the episode where James May took some coaching from him and I remember him saying that the exit of the corner is far more important than the entry of the car with regards to speed. That's where the GT-R shines. The added stability also applies to car behaviour under power in general and gives you more confidence to push the car harder. Other than that, you're on your own.

With that said, I still would take the Vette. There are three main reasons for that: a good V8 in the front, manual transmission in the middle and RWD in the back. The definition of a proper sports car in my opinion. Beyond that, I'm also using my experience with my car (a 2012 Mustang Boss 302) versus my experience driving a 2011 Mitsubishi EVO GSR. The EVO felt too clinical. I wish I could use a term less abused by auto journalists but I can't think of a bette word. Going on power had no drama, no emotion. It felt like a simulator, your only indication of increasing speed is the building of g-forces and the outside world moving. The Boss was a completely different beast and I suspect that the difference between the GT-R Nismo and the Corvette Z06 is similar to that between the EVO and the Boss. Being a long time Corvette fan doesn't help either. I do hope I get to drive both or at least one of each at one point or another, though.

Which would you take, a C7 Corvette Z06 or a Nissan GT-R Nismo?
C7 Corvette Z06
Nissan GT-R Nismo


Popular posts from this blog

550 hp V8 Cadillac CT6 V Coming in 2019

Cadillac's largest car - the not-quite-a-flagship CT6 - is becoming a little more flagship-y by getting the full V treatment like you can get on the CTS and ATS (for just one more year before they're axed in anticipation of replacements, so grab them while you can). Cadillac calls the CT6 top-of-the-range but won't call it a flagship, clearly wanting to leave that distinction to a larger and/or more grandiose vehicle in the future. It was previously announced in March earlier this year to be getting a high dose of performance enhancements, the highlight of which is a new twin-turbo V8, and was going to join the line-up as Cadillac's skim-V models called V-sport. Think of it like M-performance packages from BMW vs full fledged M models, the only difference being V-sport models typically get unique (and much more powerful) engines. But just a couple of weeks ago, Cadillac announced that it will make it a full-fledged V line model, making the car inch a bit higher in pre…

2020 Mid-engine Corvette C8 - What You Need to Know

Rumours of a mid-engine Corvette have been around basically since the C2 Corvette, the first Stingray. I've heard some people argue that the Corvette is already mid engine because the engine sits almost entirely behind the front axle, making it mounted midship. But everyone knows that the classic definition of a midengined car is that of an engine mounted between the seats and the rear axle, not the front axle. That's what everyone pictures if you say "mid-engine". Worse still (for the Corvette), a true midengined layout has a lot more traction - all else being equal - than a front-midship mounted engine like the current Corvette, no matter how far back it is mounted. Chevy knows this, and there has been no shortage of Corvette mid-engine concepts for decades. This time, however, it's different.

For one, manufacturers these days tend to keep very special/high performance models under wraps for a very long time during development, only revealing them when they a…

2007 Saleen Mustang S281 SC Super Shaker Track Review

"Who's your green student today?" asked a friend and instructor at the BMW Club Atlantic Advanced Driver Training (HPDE) weekend in June this year. I said: "The Saleen." The response was: "Oh, boy." Mustangs, generally, have a reputation for being more power than chassis. Mustang drivers have quite the reputation for.. how to put this nicely? Taking advantage of said power/chassis imbalance. To make matters worse, this particular Mustang was a supercharged Saleen, with a honkin' Shaker scoop sticking out of its hood. Did I mention it was also a convertible? And the owner was someone who's never been on track before but clearly has the speed bug.

Having had a Mustang for years and driven a few on track, they don't scare me - generally speaking - but the combination of being convertible and supercharged with a new and excited owner worried me a little. Nevertheless, I shrugged it off and got excited about chatting with the owner to find out…

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track loads. Combine that with the fact that I drive a good amount on the street during the summer, and I was very worried that they wouldn't last more than a handful of…

Michelin PSS vs Firestone Indy 500 - Track Review

A couple of weeks ago, I posted my first impressions of Michelin's PSS vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 tires. I've run PSS's for several years on the Boss, but I'm trying the Indy 500's for the first time. In short, I was worried about the narrower tires (I was running 285/35/18 PSS but could only find the Indy 500 in 275/35/18) and tread squirm, but I was happy with them up to that point just driving on the street. I had the chance to drive on them for three track days now. So what were they like? After my first session, they made an impression that basically persisted for the rest of track sessions on them. Phenomenal, unmatched value. Now, if value is something that stands out above all else, it typically means the compromise between qualities you want and those you don't is less than ideal, but the value is attractive. This is no different. I'll start with the bad, which really boil down to two: ultimate grip and grip longevity.

Grip is noticeably lowe…

2014 BMW 335i xDrive M Sport Review

Post-refresh 2015 F30 3-series pictured. 
Which is better, an F30 3-series or an E46? The F30 has certainly taken its fair share of heat. But if you thought I was going to say the E46, you'd be dead wrong. The F30 3-series is better. Far better. It is quicker, faster, safer, more practical, more efficient, more refined, quieter.. the list goes on. A lot of reviews and people I talk to consider the F30 to be an abomination. Frankly, I don't see it. You'd have to be mad to think the E46 is better. Completely out to lunch. I don't know who in their right mind would prefer the E46..  Trouble is, since when were people buying sports cars in their right minds? Here, lies the real problem.

"Raw rather than refined in its noises, pounding ride, heavy clutch, 50 grand and cloth seats?"
".. and not at all shy about its performance compromises. It always acts like the automotive jock it is, every mile of every day."
"Raw and quite loud.. And sometimes ru…