I have to give it to Chevy......
07-26-2013, 11:10 PM
#21
Melting Slicks
You do have to hand it to Chevy. They obviously have enough confidence in the car's overall improvement to allow it to be tested on a track that they chose and knew would not offer ideal conditions. Better times are ahead.
07-26-2013, 11:13 PM
#22
Race Director
Thread Starter
While I'm sure GM could have gotten more out of the LT1, they're not going to put out a C7 that's as fast as a C6Z for $52k (especially with how C6Z sales tanked the last few years).
IMO, once in owner's hands the C7's will routinely be running high-11's, maybe a touch quicker at a sea level track in the northeast...say...this November or December. I hope to have my car by late September, and it'll be at Atco right after that.
S.
IMO, once in owner's hands the C7's will routinely be running high-11's, maybe a touch quicker at a sea level track in the northeast...say...this November or December. I hope to have my car by late September, and it'll be at Atco right after that.
S.
07-26-2013, 11:15 PM
#23
Race Director
Thread Starter
Oh, and Snorman, I look forward to your track times and not just because they are at ATCO 
07-26-2013, 11:16 PM
#24
Race Director
Thread Starter
Exactly.
Take Road & Track for example. They ran a 12.2 at 117 in 77* air, 62% humidity, at an elevation of 994' and likely on an unprepped surface. They do NOT correct for weather/DA using NHRA correction factors.
Anybody who thinks these cars won't pick up a few tenths and a few mph at tracks like MIR, Etown, Atco, HRP, etc. in decent air is crazy.
S.
Take Road & Track for example. They ran a 12.2 at 117 in 77* air, 62% humidity, at an elevation of 994' and likely on an unprepped surface. They do NOT correct for weather/DA using NHRA correction factors.
Anybody who thinks these cars won't pick up a few tenths and a few mph at tracks like MIR, Etown, Atco, HRP, etc. in decent air is crazy.
S.
07-26-2013, 11:28 PM
#25
Race Director
Thread Starter
(sick) and I mean that in a good way because the brakes in my Grand Sport make me feel like I'm going to lose my lunch, can't imagine what it feels like stopping faster. 12.1 is fast but I was hoping with GM's claim of 12 flat that at least a few mags were going to crack into the 11s. I'm sure some individuals will relatively easy.
07-26-2013, 11:39 PM
#26
Burning Brakes
These are babies with tight engines - Car and Driver said there car had less than 800 miles on the clock.
The LS1/2/3 did not make rated output until it had 1500 miles on the clock, and I never revved mine above 4000 rpm until said mileage. These times will get better - maybe quite a bit better.
There is also a good chance that the A6 with the rev-matched shift logic will post better 0-60 and 1/4-mile times than the M7. Stay tuned.
The LS1/2/3 did not make rated output until it had 1500 miles on the clock, and I never revved mine above 4000 rpm until said mileage. These times will get better - maybe quite a bit better.
There is also a good chance that the A6 with the rev-matched shift logic will post better 0-60 and 1/4-mile times than the M7. Stay tuned.
07-26-2013, 11:40 PM
#27
Race Director
Thread Starter
1) 0-60 around 4 seconds is quick enough for 99% of the people who want this car, including me.
2) who cares about numbers? It's the driving experience that's important. If you want numbers, go to the aftermarket. That's what it's for. Personally, how the car performs in the grand scheme is what makes a car great or not. I couldn't care less about the "Godzilla" machine. It's not my cup of tea even if it went 0-60 in 1 sec.
2) who cares about numbers? It's the driving experience that's important. If you want numbers, go to the aftermarket. That's what it's for. Personally, how the car performs in the grand scheme is what makes a car great or not. I couldn't care less about the "Godzilla" machine. It's not my cup of tea even if it went 0-60 in 1 sec.
2)
Actually one of the only reasons I would want "the Godzilla machine" is for the 0-60. I love the feeling of hard acceleration. There was a roller coaster at Astroworld that would do 0-60 in under 4 seconds and I would ride it over and over and even pretend I was driving a car sometimes (I was waaayyy younger.... OK a little younger ). I guess I am addicted to that feeling. Only three cars I have been in have given me that feeling. A V8 I believe 2nd gen RX-7, a modded TA and my blown C5 Corvette. That feeling just makes me
07-26-2013, 11:42 PM
#28
Race Director
Thread Starter
Everything can be better. I wished I had designed it. I would have made it better looking IMO. You would probably disagree with my design because we all have different tastes and thoughts of what is and isn't great.
But, I didn't design it and every car is a compromise. Is the C7 great? I don't know yet as I haven't driven it. I sure like what I see though.
I can tell you I don't think the Ferrari 458 is great either. Life is full of compromises, even for a car costing a quarter million.
If you want perfection, you have to make your own car from scratch -- and probably never make it street legal. Otherwise, work to appreciate what others have done to solve the problems you never faced.
But, I didn't design it and every car is a compromise. Is the C7 great? I don't know yet as I haven't driven it. I sure like what I see though.
I can tell you I don't think the Ferrari 458 is great either. Life is full of compromises, even for a car costing a quarter million.
If you want perfection, you have to make your own car from scratch -- and probably never make it street legal. Otherwise, work to appreciate what others have done to solve the problems you never faced.
07-26-2013, 11:53 PM
#29
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,657
Received 4,116 Likes
on
1,470 Posts
2020 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Do you know where I have to give it to Chevy?
That they even MADE this car at all. I would have thought with all the financial problems, political correctness out there, new regulations and restrictions, fuel mileage fleet standards, and the amount of effort and investment it would take to make a new 2 seat sports car that only 900 dealers will sell about 20,000 units a year, someone must have said "are you freakin' crazy?"
Luckily, someone at Chevy stood up and said "yes I am and we are building this car -- and building it right".
That they even MADE this car at all. I would have thought with all the financial problems, political correctness out there, new regulations and restrictions, fuel mileage fleet standards, and the amount of effort and investment it would take to make a new 2 seat sports car that only 900 dealers will sell about 20,000 units a year, someone must have said "are you freakin' crazy?"
Luckily, someone at Chevy stood up and said "yes I am and we are building this car -- and building it right".
Last edited by Sin City; 07-26-2013 at 11:56 PM.
07-26-2013, 11:57 PM
#30
But that's just it. What is GM afraid of? Why not go ba!!s out on an entry level Corvette. If they are really going to have just one HIPO version (and it is that much better than the base model) then let 'em hang! I didn't see Ford giving a crap that the 2011 V6 mustang made darn near the power of the prior years GT. Did they 'tune it down' so not to hurt anyones feelings? Nope, instead, they upped the ante on the V8 and gave the new 5.0 liter engine 412 horsepower (and 444 on the Boss if I recall). It's like GM is playing chess and wants to see the other guys move first. To me, that is disappointing.
The Corvette has increased base hp at a pretty consistent basis since the C5.
C5: 345hp
C6: 400hp
C7: 455hp
That's pretty good considering the main target for the Corvette team, the 911, has gone from 296hp to 345hp in the same time span from 996 to 991.
It's not a Mustang and doesn't need to follow those type of increases. You could argue that the power increase for the Mustang was exaggerated as that's where it should've been all along.
So going for broke on a base car doesn't make much sense to me. Reduces the degree to which they go above and beyond that for the hi-po model.
07-27-2013, 12:09 AM
#31
Instructor
Member Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In your opinion, exactly how fast should a base C7 have been to be acceptable?
They have already tested a few tenths faster than the outgoing C6's. While I'm sure GM could have gotten more out of the LT1, they're not going to put out a C7 that's as fast as a C6Z for $52k (especially with how C6Z sales tanked the last few years).
IMO, once in owner's hands the C7's will routinely be running high-11's, maybe a touch quicker at a sea level track in the northeast...say...this November or December. I hope to have my car by late September, and it'll be at Atco right after that.
S.
They have already tested a few tenths faster than the outgoing C6's. While I'm sure GM could have gotten more out of the LT1, they're not going to put out a C7 that's as fast as a C6Z for $52k (especially with how C6Z sales tanked the last few years).
IMO, once in owner's hands the C7's will routinely be running high-11's, maybe a touch quicker at a sea level track in the northeast...say...this November or December. I hope to have my car by late September, and it'll be at Atco right after that.
S.
07-27-2013, 12:12 AM
#32
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,657
Received 4,116 Likes
on
1,470 Posts
2020 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
I would think for 52,000 if thats the walk out price lol, would get you atleast a legit 11sec car no matter which magazine tests it. All im saying is for a car that had this much hype about it and for it to come out looking the way it does and then for it to run the way does with the magazines testing means when the average driver gets one and goes to the drag strip hes not gunna get anywhere close to that high 11 you mentioned. I personally find that hard to deal with for 50+k. I mean i know this is not a apples to apples comparison but for 32 walk out you can get a 5.0 Gt and with $2000 in boltons and tune can be running high 11s as well if not better,and the same trap speed or better.
It's living up to the hype alright. Numbers are only one part of the story.
07-27-2013, 12:17 AM
#33
I would think for 52,000 if thats the walk out price lol, would get you atleast a legit 11sec car no matter which magazine tests it. All im saying is for a car that had this much hype about it and for it to come out looking the way it does and then for it to run the way does with the magazines testing means when the average driver gets one and goes to the drag strip hes not gunna get anywhere close to that high 11 you mentioned. I personally find that hard to deal with for 50+k. I mean i know this is not a apples to apples comparison but for 32 walk out you can get a 5.0 Gt and with $2000 in boltons and tune can be running high 11s as well if not better,and the same trap speed or better.
Chances are, even with that $20K you saved, it still won't happen.
07-27-2013, 12:22 AM
#34
Melting Slicks
Reliability, fuel economy, durability, headroom for future increases in no particular order.
The Corvette has increased base hp at a pretty consistent basis since the C5.
C5: 345hp
C6: 400hp
C7: 455hp
That's pretty good considering the main target for the Corvette team, the 911, has gone from 296hp to 345hp in the same time span from 996 to 991.
It's not a Mustang and doesn't need to follow those type of increases. You could argue that the power increase for the Mustang was exaggerated as that's where it should've been all along.
So going for broke on a base car doesn't make much sense to me. Reduces the degree to which they go above and beyond that for the hi-po model.
The Corvette has increased base hp at a pretty consistent basis since the C5.
C5: 345hp
C6: 400hp
C7: 455hp
That's pretty good considering the main target for the Corvette team, the 911, has gone from 296hp to 345hp in the same time span from 996 to 991.
It's not a Mustang and doesn't need to follow those type of increases. You could argue that the power increase for the Mustang was exaggerated as that's where it should've been all along.
So going for broke on a base car doesn't make much sense to me. Reduces the degree to which they go above and beyond that for the hi-po model.
...... when Edmunds tested the C6 GS they got a 0-60 in 4.2 and 12.5 Q-mile, now with the C7 it's 3.8 and 12.0, a five tenths improvement or about five car lengths at these speeds in the Q-mileThat's a substantial improvement, though i don't expect a certain group to admit it.
http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/cor...road-test.html
Last edited by DREAMERAK; 07-27-2013 at 12:30 AM.
07-27-2013, 12:24 AM
#35
Instructor
Member Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey i can see what your saying, but we are talking about strait line performance.
07-27-2013, 12:28 AM
#36
There's always going to be faster for cheaper when it comes to modifications. Mods really throw any arguement into an endless spiral.
07-27-2013, 12:29 AM
#37
Race Director
Thread Starter
07-27-2013, 12:31 AM
#38
Melting Slicks
Buyers are looking for more than just straight line numbers from the C7, I assume. I am. I don't drag race, I like to make runs through the local canyons and mountain passes and and sub 4/12 flat times are plenty, I'm more interested in keeping the car on the road through the curves. I like what I'm hearing from the reviews so far.
07-27-2013, 12:32 AM
#39
Race Director
Thread Starter
07-27-2013, 12:34 AM
#40
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,657
Received 4,116 Likes
on
1,470 Posts
2020 C8 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Buyers are looking for more than just straight line numbers from the C7, I assume. I am. I don't drag race, I like to make runs through the local canyons and mountain passes and and sub 4/12 flat times are plenty, I'm more interested in keeping the car on the road through the curves. I like what I'm hearing from the reviews so far.
It's the one thing that is completely different and unique from all the others.