Z06 rear gear ratio
 

Chevrolet says the new Z06 will hit 60mph in 3.7 seconds...in 1st gear. Anyone know what the rear end gear ratio is?????

Specs say it's 3.42.

Ranger

First gear must be pretty tall!!!

Same tranny ratio's as the MN6 :cheers: 2.66 first gear
:cheers:

:withstupid:

2.66
1.7
1.3
1
.74
.5

It's not the gear ratios allowing 60 in first - it's the rev range. LS7 revs up to a little over 7000 RPM.

Well, technically it is all of that and more. The previous Z06 had the 2.97 first gear, so the 2.66 is part of the equation. And the previous Z06 had a redline of 6,600 so the new redline is also a small part of the equation. And I suspect taller tires...

:cheers:

It's a combination of 3.42 rear, MN6 ratios, 7100 RPM fuel shutoff and 19" rear wheels.

And the TQ of the 7 litre engine allowing you to keep the tires at/near 1Gs of acceleration up through 60 MPH.

That is really the magic of 7 litres, traction limited up into the mid-high 50's and no shifting before the magical 60 MPH mark.

As I've been researching drag wheel/tire combos for my forthcoming C6-Z06, I clipped these from some previous posts:

Ratio..... Final MPH @ 7000 RPM
1st 2.66.....61.1

2nd 1.78.....91.3

3rd 1.30.....125.0

4th 1.00.....162.6

5th 0.74.....219.7 (math says, but it will be drag limited)

The C5 Z06 rear tires were 26.1" diameter.
The C6 Z06 rears are said to be 26.7".

Ranger

Sounds like trapping higher than 125 mph will be
difficult with that gearing.

Pat

In the Beech Bend video, we saw a stock C6 Z06 with less than 100 miles on the OD, trap at 123+ (on about the fourth pass) with an off-idle launch and granny shifting, less than ideal techniques...to be sure.

I think we'll see traps at 126-127 within a couple months of the 2006 Z06 hitting the track. With sticky tires and good conditions (1000' or better DA), someone may do a little better than 127.

The central concern I have about max runs is torque management. Here is a clip from the C6 Tech/Perf board:

Here is the link to the thread: C6 LS2 Dyno Tuning.

What will be the "torque management" settings, if any, for the C6Z and how will they effect performance?

I've never had any of my cars "tuned" or "chipped" because I like to stay stock. If tq mgmt rears its head, guess I'll have to learn to drive around it. Other likely will choose an LS2-Edit tune.

The only reason I said it might be hard to get a trap speed
over 125 mph is that you'll need a shift right at 125 mph,
which is almost at the end of the 1/4 mile. At 125mph,
you are travelling 183 feet per second. If the shift and
clutch engagement takes 0.3 seconds, you've eaten up
60+ feet right at the end of the 1/4.

You might be right - we might see someone getting a mph
or so above 125 but they'll need a great run to do so.

Pat

Ranger I suspect your assumptions are right about the 127mph traps stock.
I also hope you end up getting one of these cars to show everyone what they're capable of.
I'd bet with you behind the wheel in -500 to -1000 DA conditions you could put one of these cars stock into the 10's.
So please tell me you plan to buy one :flag:

I respectfully disagree. The rev limiter in the LS7 is set for 7100 RPM. At 7100 third is good for 127 MPH. Consider it done with a well hooked-up launch.

I started first on my dealers list last year. MSRP, with no deposit. Just awaiting word on an allocation.

I'll be picking the car up and driving it 1050 miles home. With any luck on timing, I'll have track times to post the first weekend. Just don't know if that will be August or September.

With some seat time to figure out how to minimize spin on launch and the shifts, I estimate the car should run 11.25-11.35 stock on stock tires. We'll see if torque management is an issue. Might not be with the stoutness that's said to be designed into the drive-train.

Hardest part will be the 11.50 lower limit on drag strip race days. So the fast times can only occur at track rentals. With sticky tires and absent a rollcage, the car should be quick enough to get you banned. :smash:

Ranger

Good point. I never thought about taking it to 7100 rpm.

Pat

Going to be interesting to see the launch techniques. Somewhere between blazing the tires or blazing the clutch with be a 3.7 sec 0 - 60.

That's a heck of an advertiseable number. But I would've voted for lower ratios to save the clutch at the low end and top it out at 200 in 5th. Having to shift during 0 - 60 might cost 1 or 2 tenths. Would a 3.9 be that bad?

Problem is...at 7100 you meet the fuel cut-off (rev limiter).

Doing that costs time.

Getting the shift right at 7000 and shifting fast seems like a prudent approach. And I believe you can bang shifts faster than the 3 tenths duration specified by an earlier poster.

Ranger

i dont think he meant that it would take 3/10ths of a second to shift.just saying that if it did, it would eat up the last little bit of the 1/4 mile