Corvette ZO6 vs Porsche 997 GT3 RS

[LonghornTX]

In the days of old perhaps, but V6s and V8s what with dynamic engine mounts and a whole host of other NVH mitigation techniques have matched an in-line 6's smoothness, and eliminatied the inherent packaging and crank strength issues of in-line 6 (and 8) configurations. This is a legacy hold-over of the history kind. (read: "What, a BMW V6?!").

Eh, not really.  Other than pedestrian crash safety (which, honestly, who cares about here in the states?), V6's offer no real benefits versus an inline 6 in a RWD application. In addition, I6's are naturally smoother, less complex (two camshafts instead of four in a DOHC application and no need for a balance shaft), and cheaper to manufacture (one head instead of two), ceteris paribus of course.

[GoCougs]

Eh, not really.? Other than pedestrian crash safety (which, honestly, who cares about here in the states?), V6's offer no real benefits versus an inline 6 in a RWD application. In addition, I6's are naturally smoother, less complex (two camshafts instead of four in a DOHC application and no need for a balance shaft), and cheaper to manufacture (one head instead of two), ceteris paribus of course.

The primary reason is indeed packaging (I was thinking of design actually), even for RWD vehicles. Try styling an X3 or 3 series with a 3.5 - 4.0L I6 under the hood. I don't thing it would look right. This is why IMO we see the advent of the twin turbo 3.0L. They wanted 300hp to keep pace with the Japanese premium brands' 300hp 3.5L - 3.7L V6s, but a larger I6 would've made BMW's smaller vehicles look goofy(ier).

[LonghornTX]

All emotions aside, I gotta agree with ChrisV on this.  Tires make a huge difference, and im sorry, but any car that has RFTs would benefit GREATLY from switching to regular tires of the same caliber, much less semi-slick  tires.  Trust me, I know this from experience.  Not only do RFTs kill the ride (which matters little in this test), but they are also heavier (more unsprung weight), and IMO numb the steering feel (probably the weight issue).

Also, even with as little experience as I have (helping friends out at autocrosses), I know how much difference a simple switch from a max performance tire (like the supercars, except in my case it was Pilot sports) to a DOT semi-slick makes, and yes, Chris is right on the money.  Especially on a dry, clean track.  There is no comparison between the two.

[LonghornTX]

The primary reason is indeed packaging (I was thinking of design actually), even for RWD vehicles. Try styling an X3 or 3 series with a 3.5 - 4.0L I6 under the hood. I don't thing it would look right. This is why IMO we see the advent of the twin turbo 3.0L. They wanted 300hp to keep pace with the Japanese premium brands' 300hp 3.5L - 3.7L V6s, but a larger I6 would've made BMW's smaller vehicles look goofy(ier).

Well, we can speculate all we want and we will never know the truth.  Personally, I think BMW went with turbos not for packaging sake (many say that a 3.5L version of the R6 design was in consideration), but rather for the power potential they can provide.  And remember, increasing the displacement of the engine does not necesarily mean the physical size of the engine will increase greatly, especially in heigth (which is really the only dimension that would have any affect on the car's looks).  As it is, BMW's I6s are undersquare in design, so plausibly they could have simply increased the bore.  Who knows, but it is certainly a dis-service to treat the I6 as some sort of anachronism.....

[LonghornTX]

Ok, so I just realized that this topic had pretty much reached it's peak already (I decided to post before reading the whole thing).  Oops  .  I guess that is what I get for going away for awhile  .