[ANSWERED] The design philosophy on the C6 was correct, but wrong on the C7
06-03-2015, 03:42 PM
#41
Originally Posted by Tadge
So why did we call it a Z06? Yes, it is a bit different formulation than he last few generations. It is however consistent in that it is the quickest car around the track we know how to make.
So why did we call it a Z06? Yes, it is a bit different formulation than he last few generations. It is however consistent in that it is the quickest car around the track we know how to make.
Bottom line I still think they should have called the C7 Z06 the C7 ZR1 and simply acknowledged that they don't currently have plans to make a track focused car.
06-03-2015, 11:52 PM
#42
Drifting
Member Since: Jan 2001
Location: palm harbor/murphy Fl/NC
Posts: 1,988
Received 184 Likes
on
137 Posts
C6 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
St. Jude Donor '11, '14
I don't think engineering runs GM. The bean counters just try and figure out how to sell the most cars. The advertising dpt. I am sure takes care of all best ever newest greatest stuff to sell the cars.
I bet the car works for over 95% of everyone who buys one. Especially if our average age is 61 The small percent of Us Who track cars do not drive them to produce weekend warrior cars. They want the mass's to be happy so they can sell cars.
How many people care how fast the car is around the ring. Not many I bet. It's like the Z28 it's stupid over priced. I would buy one of those for the track except I can buy a Corvette cheaper.Not engineerings decision.
The bean counters do that. Why are small GM trucks more than large GM trucks. Bean counters. The object is to sell cars to the mass's not to the small group who of us who drive them.
GM knows all this stuff. They tested the car. They picked the radiator cooling capacity. I bet it works for the 95%. We are just the cry babies to them. They need to sell 30,000 vette a year. That's their job.
I bet the car works for over 95% of everyone who buys one. Especially if our average age is 61 The small percent of Us Who track cars do not drive them to produce weekend warrior cars. They want the mass's to be happy so they can sell cars.
How many people care how fast the car is around the ring. Not many I bet. It's like the Z28 it's stupid over priced. I would buy one of those for the track except I can buy a Corvette cheaper.Not engineerings decision.
The bean counters do that. Why are small GM trucks more than large GM trucks. Bean counters. The object is to sell cars to the mass's not to the small group who of us who drive them.
GM knows all this stuff. They tested the car. They picked the radiator cooling capacity. I bet it works for the 95%. We are just the cry babies to them. They need to sell 30,000 vette a year. That's their job.
06-04-2015, 03:08 PM
#43
One thing folks are missing is the definition of a "track car".
I have driving/instructing/racing with Porsche club since 1992.
Novice HPDE students routinely use stock cars for their first few events with no problems, but no serious track driver uses a "stock" car on the track... a "dual-use" street/track car does not exist.
A "track" car is a dedicated, trailered car with full cage, racing seats, harnesses, nets, racing suspension, tires and brakes.
I have friends with Porsche GT3s and C5/C6 z06 track cars and all of them have been extensively modified for track use... to expect Corvette, Porsche, Ferrari etc to create a street car that is also a full race car is unrealistic.
I ordered a 2016 Z51, and intend to do some light track duty with it... taking students out on instructional rides and such, but this is not running full out with the Red Group.
I'm surprised that there is an overheating issue with the Z06... several of the top Corvette engineers are experienced racers, and the cars have received extensive track development work... if the car couldn't do 3 laps at the 'ring without overheating, I would think they'd notice... but we'll see. I'm sure the aftermarket, or GM racing department will offer "off-road" only fixes for the track.
But IMHO a stock Z06 is not, and was not intended to be a "track car"...anybody who would drive one at more than 7/10s on the track without full, professional quality safety equipment, and other modifications will eventually prove Darwin's theory.
I have driving/instructing/racing with Porsche club since 1992.
Novice HPDE students routinely use stock cars for their first few events with no problems, but no serious track driver uses a "stock" car on the track... a "dual-use" street/track car does not exist.
A "track" car is a dedicated, trailered car with full cage, racing seats, harnesses, nets, racing suspension, tires and brakes.
I have friends with Porsche GT3s and C5/C6 z06 track cars and all of them have been extensively modified for track use... to expect Corvette, Porsche, Ferrari etc to create a street car that is also a full race car is unrealistic.
I ordered a 2016 Z51, and intend to do some light track duty with it... taking students out on instructional rides and such, but this is not running full out with the Red Group.
I'm surprised that there is an overheating issue with the Z06... several of the top Corvette engineers are experienced racers, and the cars have received extensive track development work... if the car couldn't do 3 laps at the 'ring without overheating, I would think they'd notice... but we'll see. I'm sure the aftermarket, or GM racing department will offer "off-road" only fixes for the track.
But IMHO a stock Z06 is not, and was not intended to be a "track car"...anybody who would drive one at more than 7/10s on the track without full, professional quality safety equipment, and other modifications will eventually prove Darwin's theory.
06-05-2015, 11:03 AM
#44
Le Mans Master
I use my sports car for the occasional track day as it's the only opportunity to really run a modern car good and hard.
I feel that the base Stingray with the Z51 just makes for a better all around track day car.
I feel that the base Stingray with the Z51 just makes for a better all around track day car.
06-05-2015, 03:43 PM
#45
Taking them to the track to "stretch their legs" at fast street speeds in a safe environment is what I'm talking about... drive to the track, drive the car, drive home...
That's really what these cars were designed for.
06-05-2015, 04:10 PM
#46
Safety Car
One thing folks are missing is the definition of a "track car".
I have driving/instructing/racing with Porsche club since 1992.
Novice HPDE students routinely use stock cars for their first few events with no problems, but no serious track driver uses a "stock" car on the track... a "dual-use" street/track car does not exist.
A "track" car is a dedicated, trailered car with full cage, racing seats, harnesses, nets, racing suspension, tires and brakes.
I have friends with Porsche GT3s and C5/C6 z06 track cars and all of them have been extensively modified for track use... to expect Corvette, Porsche, Ferrari etc to create a street car that is also a full race car is unrealistic.
I ordered a 2016 Z51, and intend to do some light track duty with it... taking students out on instructional rides and such, but this is not running full out with the Red Group.
I'm surprised that there is an overheating issue with the Z06... several of the top Corvette engineers are experienced racers, and the cars have received extensive track development work... if the car couldn't do 3 laps at the 'ring without overheating, I would think they'd notice... but we'll see. I'm sure the aftermarket, or GM racing department will offer "off-road" only fixes for the track.
But IMHO a stock Z06 is not, and was not intended to be a "track car"...anybody who would drive one at more than 7/10s on the track without full, professional quality safety equipment, and other modifications will eventually prove Darwin's theory.
I have driving/instructing/racing with Porsche club since 1992.
Novice HPDE students routinely use stock cars for their first few events with no problems, but no serious track driver uses a "stock" car on the track... a "dual-use" street/track car does not exist.
A "track" car is a dedicated, trailered car with full cage, racing seats, harnesses, nets, racing suspension, tires and brakes.
I have friends with Porsche GT3s and C5/C6 z06 track cars and all of them have been extensively modified for track use... to expect Corvette, Porsche, Ferrari etc to create a street car that is also a full race car is unrealistic.
I ordered a 2016 Z51, and intend to do some light track duty with it... taking students out on instructional rides and such, but this is not running full out with the Red Group.
I'm surprised that there is an overheating issue with the Z06... several of the top Corvette engineers are experienced racers, and the cars have received extensive track development work... if the car couldn't do 3 laps at the 'ring without overheating, I would think they'd notice... but we'll see. I'm sure the aftermarket, or GM racing department will offer "off-road" only fixes for the track.
But IMHO a stock Z06 is not, and was not intended to be a "track car"...anybody who would drive one at more than 7/10s on the track without full, professional quality safety equipment, and other modifications will eventually prove Darwin's theory.
Statistically, on average, the average car that tracks is driven to the track and back. It is not trailered.
1. Technically, all you need to track a car is to satisfy the safety sheet requirements: minimum rollover protection, 3 point belts, min pad thickness, etc. Only some Corvettes, like the convertible versions are not track cars because they fail the broomstick test.
2. In practice, it just has to drive for 30 minutes, in average temps, at a proper speed while sastisfing no. 1 above. Here, all C7s fail to complete if driven 9/10ths in 90 degree weather, except for the Z51-manual-coupe.
By the definitions that make sense, as I listed them above, the only C7 that's a track car is the Z51-manual-coupe.
Basic track upgrades are just pads and brake fluid. When upgraded in this minor way, most 2015 sports cars can drive an average session.
Viper
911's with center radiator
Most Mazdas
Non supercharged manual Camaro
Non supercharged manual Mustang
Lancer Evo
Subaru wrx sti
M4 and smaller M BMWs
Last edited by SBC_and_a_stick; 06-05-2015 at 04:13 PM.
06-05-2015, 05:54 PM
#47
You're not the first to impose such rigid requirements for a car that hits the track. However, I think the reality of it is that the Z06 in general is sold as a track ready car. I think the Z07 pack is sold as an additional track pack. Furthermore, these descriptions of a track car are really no different than those of a race car, so I'd say no, you are not defining a track car.
Statistically, on average, the average car that tracks is driven to the track and back. It is not trailered.
1. Technically, all you need to track a car is to satisfy the safety sheet requirements: minimum rollover protection, 3 point belts, min pad thickness, etc. Only some Corvettes, like the convertible versions are not track cars because they fail the broomstick test.
2. In practice, it just has to drive for 30 minutes, in average temps, at a proper speed while sastisfing no. 1 above. Here, all C7s fail to complete if driven 9/10ths in 90 degree weather, except for the Z51-manual-coupe.
By the definitions that make sense, as I listed them above, the only C7 that's a track car is the Z51-manual-coupe.
Basic track upgrades are just pads and brake fluid. When upgraded in this minor way, most 2015 sports cars can drive an average session.
Viper
911's with center radiator
Most Mazdas
Non supercharged manual Camaro
Non supercharged manual Mustang
Lancer Evo
Subaru wrx sti
M4 and smaller M BMWs
Statistically, on average, the average car that tracks is driven to the track and back. It is not trailered.
1. Technically, all you need to track a car is to satisfy the safety sheet requirements: minimum rollover protection, 3 point belts, min pad thickness, etc. Only some Corvettes, like the convertible versions are not track cars because they fail the broomstick test.
2. In practice, it just has to drive for 30 minutes, in average temps, at a proper speed while sastisfing no. 1 above. Here, all C7s fail to complete if driven 9/10ths in 90 degree weather, except for the Z51-manual-coupe.
By the definitions that make sense, as I listed them above, the only C7 that's a track car is the Z51-manual-coupe.
Basic track upgrades are just pads and brake fluid. When upgraded in this minor way, most 2015 sports cars can drive an average session.
Viper
911's with center radiator
Most Mazdas
Non supercharged manual Camaro
Non supercharged manual Mustang
Lancer Evo
Subaru wrx sti
M4 and smaller M BMWs
I am totally in agreement with you about your response to the post above relating to full safety gear and Darwin's theory. That is just nonsense. I have been to hundreds and hundreds of track events, with BMW, Porsche and other manufacturer clubs, private full-open track days, various local and national driving schools, and track cars are just regular cars 90% of the time. No roll-cage, no 5-6 point belts, and they are just not testing the Darwin theory, and lots and lots of them are driven at 90-100% of what the cars can do. A GT3 for example is a road car that is a track car. My GT-R is a road car that is a fine track car. Both can be driven all day long on track and all they need are fuel, brakes and tires. Now if one is talking racing, then that is not the same at all. Full safety equipment and licensed drivers are the only possible way to do it, it is not even an option. But track driving, lapping, HPDE, etc and racing are totally different.
As for the Z51 M7, that is what I have. It is not track ready. I drove mine once on track last year and the AFM valve actuators failed from overheating, and my manual transmission runs above 300 degrees F, in the red zone all the time. I parked it all year relating to track and drove my GT-R on track. So this year I decided to give it another go. After a total of 45 minutes on track a CEL comes up and dealer says the AFM actuators have failed again, and there is no upgraded part to prevent it from happening again every time I go on track. My transmission was in the red zone every session as last year. Manager of Ron Fellows school confirms exact same issues when their Z51's are driven hard by their instructors. So it's just not track ready in my mind. There is currently no solution to fix the problems either. I want GM to come up with a fix. I bought this Corvette to be a track car that I can drive on the street. I am parking it again and back into my GT-R and off to the Glen.
06-05-2015, 06:24 PM
#48
Safety Car
I am totally in agreement with you about your response to the post above relating to full safety gear and Darwin's theory. That is just nonsense. I have been to hundreds and hundreds of track events, with BMW, Porsche and other manufacturer clubs, private full-open track days, various local and national driving schools, and track cars are just regular cars 90% of the time. No roll-cage, no 5-6 point belts, and they are just not testing the Darwin theory, and lots and lots of them are driven at 90-100% of what the cars can do. A GT3 for example is a road car that is a track car. My GT-R is a road car that is a fine track car. Both can be driven all day long on track and all they need are fuel, brakes and tires. Now if one is talking racing, then that is not the same at all. Full safety equipment and licensed drivers are the only possible way to do it, it is not even an option. But track driving, lapping, HPDE, etc and racing are totally different.
As for the Z51 M7, that is what I have. It is not track ready. I drove mine once on track last year and the AFM valve actuators failed from overheating, and my manual transmission runs above 300 degrees F, in the red zone all the time. I parked it all year relating to track and drove my GT-R on track. So this year I decided to give it another go. After a total of 45 minutes on track a CEL comes up and dealer says the AFM actuators have failed again, and there is no upgraded part to prevent it from happening again every time I go on track. My transmission was in the red zone every session as last year. Manager of Ron Fellows school confirms exact same issues when their Z51's are driven hard by their instructors. So it's just not track ready in my mind. There is currently no solution to fix the problems either. I want GM to come up with a fix. I bought this Corvette to be a track car that I can drive on the street. I am parking it again and back into my GT-R and off to the Glen.
As for the Z51 M7, that is what I have. It is not track ready. I drove mine once on track last year and the AFM valve actuators failed from overheating, and my manual transmission runs above 300 degrees F, in the red zone all the time. I parked it all year relating to track and drove my GT-R on track. So this year I decided to give it another go. After a total of 45 minutes on track a CEL comes up and dealer says the AFM actuators have failed again, and there is no upgraded part to prevent it from happening again every time I go on track. My transmission was in the red zone every session as last year. Manager of Ron Fellows school confirms exact same issues when their Z51's are driven hard by their instructors. So it's just not track ready in my mind. There is currently no solution to fix the problems either. I want GM to come up with a fix. I bought this Corvette to be a track car that I can drive on the street. I am parking it again and back into my GT-R and off to the Glen.
BTW the C7 is nuts in that I haven't heard of EPS or manual transmissions overheating in sports cars before this generation.
06-05-2015, 08:13 PM
#49
Instructor
Member Since: Jan 2015
Location: Fairfield California
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Thunderhill 2 mile I lay the accelerator down 100% coming out of the hairpin (turn 7) at 40 mph in 2nd without traction control or stability control assistance into a fairly tight right hander. That's a balanced chassis. That is 600+tq at 40mph. Good luck doing that in a rear wheel drive 911 if you manage to boost it to that amount.
06-05-2015, 08:53 PM
#50
Unfortunately, yeah the Z51 does seem to have some challenges. I think you can solve both of those by adopting whatever improvements the manual Z06 has seen. The fender scoops and larger radiator should fix the transmission overheating. What about the actuators? Do we not have any in the Z06? Do we have additional heat shielding?
BTW the C7 is nuts in that I haven't heard of EPS or manual transmissions overheating in sports cars before this generation.
BTW the C7 is nuts in that I haven't heard of EPS or manual transmissions overheating in sports cars before this generation.
Last edited by descartesfool; 06-05-2015 at 08:59 PM.
06-07-2015, 07:54 AM
#52
Burning Brakes
Jimmy - Car and Drive magazine must have tested the C6 Z06 at least 12 times over the years, half the reviews said it handled great and the half would say it was twitchy and a handful at the limit. I always wondered why there was such a difference of opinion. Was it just the different driving styles of the reviewers or was it something about the cars?
The answer is 3 easy adjustments in order of importance.
1. Have your alignment checked. Cars came from the factory with rear camber set at -1 degree. Setting it to -1.5 degrees will have a big effect of settling down the rear end and will not adversely effect tire wear. The C6 owners manual makes no mention of alignment settings, but the C7 owners manual talks about -2 degrees camber for competitive driving.
2. Get rid of the Goodyear tires. As you mention the handling got better in later years, this practical due to the switch to Michelin tires in 2011.
3. Install a set of DRM shocks.
The C6 seats are not horrible. They are comfortable on long drives, but if you want to track your car they do not provide enough support. Fixed by modifying the seats or replacing them.
The valve train issue is still on going, but thanks to this forum, members are checking their heads and having them fixed when necessary.
Z06 cars are being marketed as track ready cars. If the majority of the buyers of Z06 cars are never going to track them, then they are buying them for the performance and image that the car represents. The C5 Z06 and the C6 Z06 built that image by being "REAL" track ready cars that you could take from the show room to the track and run without issues. The C7 Z06 is destroying the image/reputation of what a Z06 is suppose to be by overheating after only a few laps on the track.
The answer is 3 easy adjustments in order of importance.
1. Have your alignment checked. Cars came from the factory with rear camber set at -1 degree. Setting it to -1.5 degrees will have a big effect of settling down the rear end and will not adversely effect tire wear. The C6 owners manual makes no mention of alignment settings, but the C7 owners manual talks about -2 degrees camber for competitive driving.
2. Get rid of the Goodyear tires. As you mention the handling got better in later years, this practical due to the switch to Michelin tires in 2011.
3. Install a set of DRM shocks.
The C6 seats are not horrible. They are comfortable on long drives, but if you want to track your car they do not provide enough support. Fixed by modifying the seats or replacing them.
The valve train issue is still on going, but thanks to this forum, members are checking their heads and having them fixed when necessary.
Z06 cars are being marketed as track ready cars. If the majority of the buyers of Z06 cars are never going to track them, then they are buying them for the performance and image that the car represents. The C5 Z06 and the C6 Z06 built that image by being "REAL" track ready cars that you could take from the show room to the track and run without issues. The C7 Z06 is destroying the image/reputation of what a Z06 is suppose to be by overheating after only a few laps on the track.
06-07-2015, 04:11 PM
#53
You're not the first to impose such rigid requirements for a car that hits the track. However, I think the reality of it is that the Z06 in general is sold as a track ready car. I think the Z07 pack is sold as an additional track pack. Furthermore, these descriptions of a track car are really no different than those of a race car, so I'd say no, you are not defining a track car.
Statistically, on average, the average car that tracks is driven to the track and back. It is not trailered.
1. Technically, all you need to track a car is to satisfy the safety sheet requirements: minimum rollover protection, 3 point belts, min pad thickness, etc. Only some Corvettes, like the convertible versions are not track cars because they fail the broomstick test.
2. In practice, it just has to drive for 30 minutes, in average temps, at a proper speed while sastisfing no. 1 above. Here, all C7s fail to complete if driven 9/10ths in 90 degree weather, except for the Z51-manual-coupe.
By the definitions that make sense, as I listed them above, the only C7 that's a track car is the Z51-manual-coupe.
Basic track upgrades are just pads and brake fluid. When upgraded in this minor way, most 2015 sports cars can drive an average session.
Viper
911's with center radiator
Most Mazdas
Non supercharged manual Camaro
Non supercharged manual Mustang
Lancer Evo
Subaru wrx sti
M4 and smaller M BMWs
Statistically, on average, the average car that tracks is driven to the track and back. It is not trailered.
1. Technically, all you need to track a car is to satisfy the safety sheet requirements: minimum rollover protection, 3 point belts, min pad thickness, etc. Only some Corvettes, like the convertible versions are not track cars because they fail the broomstick test.
2. In practice, it just has to drive for 30 minutes, in average temps, at a proper speed while sastisfing no. 1 above. Here, all C7s fail to complete if driven 9/10ths in 90 degree weather, except for the Z51-manual-coupe.
By the definitions that make sense, as I listed them above, the only C7 that's a track car is the Z51-manual-coupe.
Basic track upgrades are just pads and brake fluid. When upgraded in this minor way, most 2015 sports cars can drive an average session.
Viper
911's with center radiator
Most Mazdas
Non supercharged manual Camaro
Non supercharged manual Mustang
Lancer Evo
Subaru wrx sti
M4 and smaller M BMWs
I'll explain my "statistical" methodology... instructing 2 students per weekend 5-6 weekends per year for almost 20 years... so do the math... (it's a valid sample +/- 5% at three standard deviations..)
Now, explain the "broom-stick test"... is this like putting white shoe-polish on your tires to check pressures?
06-09-2015, 01:22 PM
#55
06-09-2015, 04:36 PM
#56
Safety Car
I am not trying to be a track ****... but "statistically" 80-90% of the cars that come to our events are track modified, and in the upper three run groups, virtually 100% of them are dedicated, trailered race-prepared cars, that are driven as close to "full race" speed as the driver is capable of.
I'll explain my "statistical" methodology... instructing 2 students per weekend 5-6 weekends per year for almost 20 years... so do the math... (it's a valid sample +/- 5% at three standard deviations..)
Now, explain the "broom-stick test"... is this like putting white shoe-polish on your tires to check pressures?
I'll explain my "statistical" methodology... instructing 2 students per weekend 5-6 weekends per year for almost 20 years... so do the math... (it's a valid sample +/- 5% at three standard deviations..)
Now, explain the "broom-stick test"... is this like putting white shoe-polish on your tires to check pressures?
I've tracked with most groups in North Cal:
NCRC
CFRA
HOD
Speed Ventures
TMR
Speed SF
and several private events.
My bias is that I track on weekends for the most part. If you track with a specific group for a specific class where everyone needs a roll cage fire extinguisher, and slicks then yeah, we are going to two separate types of events. Arguably if you need a roll cage for your class then you need a race car. That's not HPDE but a full blown race event.
Broomstick test:
http://www.ncracing.org/car-requirements.php
Count the trailers:
Laguna Seca
Last edited by SBC_and_a_stick; 06-09-2015 at 04:41 PM.
06-09-2015, 10:09 PM
#57
Instructor
I'm learning a lot about Corvette's in general through this web site and I really want to say thanks to everyone for voicing their opinions, experience, knowledge and content expertise. It feels great to have finally been able to join the Corvette family 7 weeks ago with a 99' C5. From what I have read on this thread C5's and C6's seem to have been better than what is going on with the C7 regarding not being able to finish a 30 minute session without overheating. That's a good thing because I want to take my car for a track session to either Joliet or Black Hawk and an Autocross before the summer is over. I'll only drive around 50-60% because this is one of the wife and I's daily driver's. I sure hope Chevy gets the overheating issues fixed on the C7 in a hurry. They built a reputation starting with the LS1 for making engines, and Corvette's, that can run well past 200K miles. I don't want that trend to stop.
Some quick thoughts about the "what is a track car" debate and the idea of sample sizes.... umm, this (sample sizes) happens waaaay later in the research process and should not really be part of a discussion regarding operational definitions. Operational definitions are found/established based upon in-depth literature reviews that start with Seminole authors which then span forward to include present day scholarship. Literature reviews create a broad survey of the topic, and the research question(s) that are associated with it. These topical points are then framed within a point/counterpoint sub-topic framework that acknowledges the research that has been found both for and against each sub-topic within the overall research project.
The point/counterpoint framework yields the ability to highlight the validity of the logic/algorithm framework that undergirds the research project's investigation of the research question(s). The logic/algorithm paradigm came from the intensive research methodology that LEAD to the clarification of the research question(s) and project in the first place. It THEN informs the selection of the appropriate research approach and statistical analysis method(s) to be used. Only then do you get to talk about research procedures. Sample size and operational definitions are parts of the research procedure framework. Sample size may not even be part of the discussion if you are not doing either a quantitative or mixed method approach, but operational definitions will be regardless of the research approach chosen. They (sample size & operational definitions) of course, must be based upon the parameters of the statistical analysis and industry standards, which you highlighted throughout the introduction/overview and the literature review that you performed.
In other words...we are not conducting true research here so we should really stay away from misused terminologies as ways to try to prove our points when it's not even necessary to begin with. Experiences = data; and data is data. It is what it is but that doesn't mean that it's everything. LOL.
So I think we see a broad sampling of information that hopefully is helping all of us to get a better idea of what people see and do at the track....around the country, and not just at particular events or tracks. This is a very good thing everyone. Please continue to inform us, as it is very fruitful to see how different areas/people do things, and what they need/require from their Corvettes. Like I said, I'm learning a lot. Viva friendly debate and tons of helpful information.
Thanks again.
Some quick thoughts about the "what is a track car" debate and the idea of sample sizes.... umm, this (sample sizes) happens waaaay later in the research process and should not really be part of a discussion regarding operational definitions. Operational definitions are found/established based upon in-depth literature reviews that start with Seminole authors which then span forward to include present day scholarship. Literature reviews create a broad survey of the topic, and the research question(s) that are associated with it. These topical points are then framed within a point/counterpoint sub-topic framework that acknowledges the research that has been found both for and against each sub-topic within the overall research project.
The point/counterpoint framework yields the ability to highlight the validity of the logic/algorithm framework that undergirds the research project's investigation of the research question(s). The logic/algorithm paradigm came from the intensive research methodology that LEAD to the clarification of the research question(s) and project in the first place. It THEN informs the selection of the appropriate research approach and statistical analysis method(s) to be used. Only then do you get to talk about research procedures. Sample size and operational definitions are parts of the research procedure framework. Sample size may not even be part of the discussion if you are not doing either a quantitative or mixed method approach, but operational definitions will be regardless of the research approach chosen. They (sample size & operational definitions) of course, must be based upon the parameters of the statistical analysis and industry standards, which you highlighted throughout the introduction/overview and the literature review that you performed.
In other words...we are not conducting true research here so we should really stay away from misused terminologies as ways to try to prove our points when it's not even necessary to begin with. Experiences = data; and data is data. It is what it is but that doesn't mean that it's everything. LOL.
So I think we see a broad sampling of information that hopefully is helping all of us to get a better idea of what people see and do at the track....around the country, and not just at particular events or tracks. This is a very good thing everyone. Please continue to inform us, as it is very fruitful to see how different areas/people do things, and what they need/require from their Corvettes. Like I said, I'm learning a lot. Viva friendly debate and tons of helpful information.
Thanks again.
Last edited by darnold; 06-10-2015 at 10:31 AM.
06-11-2015, 01:51 PM
#58
I'm learning a lot about Corvette's in general through this web site and I really want to say thanks to everyone for voicing their opinions, experience, knowledge and content expertise. It feels great to have finally been able to join the Corvette family 7 weeks ago with a 99' C5. From what I have read on this thread C5's and C6's seem to have been better than what is going on with the C7 regarding not being able to finish a 30 minute session without overheating. That's a good thing because I want to take my car for a track session to either Joliet or Black Hawk and an Autocross before the summer is over. I'll only drive around 50-60% because this is one of the wife and I's daily driver's. I sure hope Chevy gets the overheating issues fixed on the C7 in a hurry. They built a reputation starting with the LS1 for making engines, and Corvette's, that can run well past 200K miles. I don't want that trend to stop.
Some quick thoughts about the "what is a track car" debate and the idea of sample sizes.... umm, this (sample sizes) happens waaaay later in the research process and should not really be part of a discussion regarding operational definitions. Operational definitions are found/established based upon in-depth literature reviews that start with Seminole authors which then span forward to include present day scholarship. Literature reviews create a broad survey of the topic, and the research question(s) that are associated with it. These topical points are then framed within a point/counterpoint sub-topic framework that acknowledges the research that has been found both for and against each sub-topic within the overall research project.
The point/counterpoint framework yields the ability to highlight the validity of the logic/algorithm framework that undergirds the research project's investigation of the research question(s). The logic/algorithm paradigm came from the intensive research methodology that LEAD to the clarification of the research question(s) and project in the first place. It THEN informs the selection of the appropriate research approach and statistical analysis method(s) to be used. Only then do you get to talk about research procedures. Sample size and operational definitions are parts of the research procedure framework. Sample size may not even be part of the discussion if you are not doing either a quantitative or mixed method approach, but operational definitions will be regardless of the research approach chosen. They (sample size & operational definitions) of course, must be based upon the parameters of the statistical analysis and industry standards, which you highlighted throughout the introduction/overview and the literature review that you performed.
In other words...we are not conducting true research here so we should really stay away from misused terminologies as ways to try to prove our points when it's not even necessary to begin with. Experiences = data; and data is data. It is what it is but that doesn't mean that it's everything. LOL.
So I think we see a broad sampling of information that hopefully is helping all of us to get a better idea of what people see and do at the track....around the country, and not just at particular events or tracks. This is a very good thing everyone. Please continue to inform us, as it is very fruitful to see how different areas/people do things, and what they need/require from their Corvettes. Like I said, I'm learning a lot. Viva friendly debate and tons of helpful information.
Thanks again.
Some quick thoughts about the "what is a track car" debate and the idea of sample sizes.... umm, this (sample sizes) happens waaaay later in the research process and should not really be part of a discussion regarding operational definitions. Operational definitions are found/established based upon in-depth literature reviews that start with Seminole authors which then span forward to include present day scholarship. Literature reviews create a broad survey of the topic, and the research question(s) that are associated with it. These topical points are then framed within a point/counterpoint sub-topic framework that acknowledges the research that has been found both for and against each sub-topic within the overall research project.
The point/counterpoint framework yields the ability to highlight the validity of the logic/algorithm framework that undergirds the research project's investigation of the research question(s). The logic/algorithm paradigm came from the intensive research methodology that LEAD to the clarification of the research question(s) and project in the first place. It THEN informs the selection of the appropriate research approach and statistical analysis method(s) to be used. Only then do you get to talk about research procedures. Sample size and operational definitions are parts of the research procedure framework. Sample size may not even be part of the discussion if you are not doing either a quantitative or mixed method approach, but operational definitions will be regardless of the research approach chosen. They (sample size & operational definitions) of course, must be based upon the parameters of the statistical analysis and industry standards, which you highlighted throughout the introduction/overview and the literature review that you performed.
In other words...we are not conducting true research here so we should really stay away from misused terminologies as ways to try to prove our points when it's not even necessary to begin with. Experiences = data; and data is data. It is what it is but that doesn't mean that it's everything. LOL.
So I think we see a broad sampling of information that hopefully is helping all of us to get a better idea of what people see and do at the track....around the country, and not just at particular events or tracks. This is a very good thing everyone. Please continue to inform us, as it is very fruitful to see how different areas/people do things, and what they need/require from their Corvettes. Like I said, I'm learning a lot. Viva friendly debate and tons of helpful information.
Thanks again.
My point is simple... everybody has a different definition of a "track" car, and uses it differently.
Asking Tadge or any other engineer to design a street-legal usable car that is also capable of 10/10s track driving is impossible... these are mutually-exclusive missions.
Most of us who drive our cars on the track at racing speeds (whether it is HPDE or Racing) understand that significant modifications are required to even the best engineered street cars (e.g. Porsche GT3).
I know plenty of guys who have C5/C6 Z06's and they are all heavily modified for the track.
As far as safety equipment, almost every Instructor I know (including myself) has been involved in a track accident... some minor, some requiring hospitalization...
A stock Z06 is capable of speeds that would get you into the Daytona 24 hours a decade ago... anybody who has seen a car disintegrate, and the driver med-evaced out of the track appreciates this.
I stand by my statement that driving a car beyond 8/10s on the track without full safety equipment is foolish, and the "broomstick test" is not going to help you when the entire roof structure of the car is torn off. I have 20+ years of (purely anecdotal) driving experience to back this up.
06-11-2015, 02:45 PM
#59
[QUOTE=SBC_and_a_stick;1589804686]
Broomstick test:
http://www.ncracing.org/car-requirements.php
"So no cars with bumpers falling off...?"
Broomstick test:
http://www.ncracing.org/car-requirements.php
"So no cars with bumpers falling off...?"
