Oh god, and you call me the fanboy? I'm not the one that is arguing with everyone and using conflicting points in order to drill home so called 'facts'.

In fact you know someone's argument is weak when they begin by saying they are definitely not biased towards something, and then go on to fully support the opposite direction.

Originally Posted by TurkishDelight

Just so you all know, I have only owned German cars my whole life, so I am not some American car aficionado.....

Like that...

The Radical's lap time means nothing to me. No matter how much you want to think otherwise, the Radical is a RACE car. Purebred and everything. There is not comparing an ACR or ZR1 to that machine. Might as well compare the Radical to Indy car, it would be a better comparison. I can guarantee you 100% that the Radical was at least on DOT style race rubber, if not a full slick.

Completely agree on this point - crazy to have such a car in the list. Just because something is technically a production vehicle doesn't mean it is not fully designed to be a race car. It's a bit like an Italian supercar's ugly sister crossed with a 1960's F1 car and a licorice allsort.

To the GT-R fanboy, get over it. I could turn around and say that a 3.8L Twin Turbo V6 making 480HP is the epitome of retarded. I wouldn't necessarily be that wrong either. It really doesn't matter though, ZR1 makes much more power in every way, everywhere. Not to mention pulls a lot more lateral G's on the skidpad

Well this is just designed to be rude, and to try an 'undo' any threat to your argument by labelling the post as purely blind with the fanboy comment. The thing about Nurbergring is that it is not a pure power circuit. It tests handling and exit acceleration (ie not just how much power you have but how quickly you can apply it). Yes the ZR1 has more power in every way, and has 180hp more. Yes it pulls more lateral G's on the skidpad. Yes after a 1/4m it's doing around 20mph more. Yes it's around 500lbs lighter. So explain to me why it only just beats the lap time of the GT-R if it is so much better?

You claim making the GT-R engine 480hp the epitome of retarded, and then second your own claim, but again no evidence to say why it is retarded. I don't think it is retarded. I think that if you can get your engineering so good that you can get such great performance from such a smaller engine then that's bloody fantastic.

I have ridden/driven some incredibly fast cars, and honestly I find it hard for someone to dismiss the handling prowess of the two American monsters. Don't worry, I have seen what a 450hp Turbo Lotus Elise can do too....

I'm not dismissing them, in fact I am a huge fan of the Viper, less so of chevrolet who have not produced a car I've really liked the look of. But these cars should be in a completely different class to the GT-R so much so that we should not even be having this discussion. And I agree on the handling point - the ZR1 has some hugely impressive slalom results that deliver a swift kick in the balls to porshe's as well.

Another thing we haven't discussed is cost. The American machines are ousting cars 3-4x times the price. Just something to consider....

I am happy to discuss cost. An admittedly very brief 5 minute check on the internet and I found the ACR at around $95k. The ZR1 was a bit pricier at around $100k. The GT-R was around $70k - considerably cheaper. Add to this that it has a similar lap time around Nurberg, and a similar 1/4m time (tho not speed), and that it is a 4 seater saloon how can you not be impressed by it?