[ANSWERED] The design philosophy on the C6 was correct, but wrong on the C7
05-29-2015, 04:43 PM
#1
Tech Contributor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 10,067
Received 3,809 Likes
on
1,146 Posts
"Ask Tadge" Producer
[ANSWERED] The design philosophy on the C6 was correct, but wrong on the C7
Original question is here.
grcor asked:
There is a segment of Corvette loyalists that want a track originated car. The C5 and C6 Z06’s are perfect examples. Unfortunately the C7 Z06 doesn’t follow the same design philosophy as the previous Z06’s. It’s much heavier, overheats, provides an open air experience, and has rpm limiting cylinder deactivation. You did succeed in broaden the appeal by adding an automatic transmission option, but by trying to broaden the appeal beyond the track, it is no longer the purely focused track car of previous generations. Why did you call it a Z06 and I hope you understand what we really want in a Corvette Z06?
There is a segment of Corvette loyalists that want a track originated car. The C5 and C6 Z06’s are perfect examples. Unfortunately the C7 Z06 doesn’t follow the same design philosophy as the previous Z06’s. It’s much heavier, overheats, provides an open air experience, and has rpm limiting cylinder deactivation. You did succeed in broaden the appeal by adding an automatic transmission option, but by trying to broaden the appeal beyond the track, it is no longer the purely focused track car of previous generations. Why did you call it a Z06 and I hope you understand what we really want in a Corvette Z06?
Tadge answered:
Whenever we design a new car, there are many things we have to take in to consideration, some of which are obvious to the public, but many are not. I understand exactly the sentiment behind this question because I was the principle engineer putting together the product plan and content for both the C5 and C6 Z06. I was working for Dave Hill as the assistant chief engineer and I took the lead in defining what could be done to create a more capable version of the standard Corvette. I was very proud that we introduced the C6 Z06 at 3132 lbs, by many measures the most mass efficient vehicle in the world. The only Corvette I have purchased for myself is a 2006 Z06.
On the C7, our original Z06 concept was much the same as the previous two generations except we did have very strong customer input that they would like an automatic and open air options. I assumed a naturally aspirated 7.0L with direct injection and variable valve timing would be the power train choice. The main reasons we ended up going to a charged solution had to do with regulatory changes and a strong desire to increase performance, not to stay the same or inch up only slightly. For performance, we knew the standard Stingray was going to be a pretty big upgrade over even the Grand Sport, so the Z06 had to be an even bigger step up.
On the regulatory side, on average, every business day, a new law governing the design of automobiles goes into effect somewhere in the world, and no space is more active than fuel economy and vehicle emissions. Porsche just announced an all turbo line up for the 911 in the future. Like it or not, regulators around the world are pushing manufacturers into lower displacements and charging to achieve higher output. With this reality, when we studied an LS7-like solution for the C7 Z06 we found only a very modest power boost would be possible while still meeting all the other new requirements. Cylinder de-activation played no role in constraining our choice. We only added it back in when we went to the supercharged solution where the rpm limiting was no longer an issue. You are right, charging brings mass, and cooling challenges, but it also brings a lot more horsepower.
I have heard comments that we shouldn't have added mass to go to open-air or improve our structure. However, the net mass penalty for open air is relatively small, as the added mass is attributed to many things. There are a bunch of regulations that either don't apply to convertibles or have delayed implementations, and meeting them adds mass. We knew chassis loads were going to go up with better aero and more capable tires, so we had to react those forces. If you read some of the media scrutiny of the C6 Z06, we were often criticized for not being as secure or confident at speed as our competitors, which had a lot to do with vehicle structure. We were relentlessly bashed for "floppy" seats on the C6. Each C7 seats weights about 10 pounds more than its C6 counterpart. My point is much of the mass increase has nothing to do with a change in philosophy, but rather improving the driving experience in many different areas (not just an open air top, or new seats).
Believe me, we are well aware of the very vocal group of customers that demand a more focused track vehicle. Although I hear claims that many people want that type of vehicle, it is not validated in the sales figures of cars like the Viper ACR or Porsche 911.
If you look at the Z06 (C6 or C7), hardly anybody orders the pure track car - no options but Z07 and maybe Competition seat. The vast majority (93% in 2015) are ordering their cars with uplevel option packages. This is not surprising, as every time we added features to the C5 and C6 Z06 (power seats, power column, heads up display, leather interior, magnetic ride control, to name a few), they quickly became incredibly popular.
Obviously, I am defending our choices for the C7. And our sales are very strong, ensuring we will have Corvettes for years to come. However, we take customer requests very seriously and usually find a way to incorporate them into our future plans. So don't lose faith. We are listening.
So why did we call it a Z06? Yes, it is a bit different formulation than the last few generations. It is however consistent in that it is the quickest car around the track we know how to make. That has been validated by numerous third parties. Last week, we were finally able to confirm the performance of the car on a continuous lap of the Nurburgring. We are putting together the press release and will have the lap time and video out shortly. I can tell you we were more than satisfied with the results.
Whenever we design a new car, there are many things we have to take in to consideration, some of which are obvious to the public, but many are not. I understand exactly the sentiment behind this question because I was the principle engineer putting together the product plan and content for both the C5 and C6 Z06. I was working for Dave Hill as the assistant chief engineer and I took the lead in defining what could be done to create a more capable version of the standard Corvette. I was very proud that we introduced the C6 Z06 at 3132 lbs, by many measures the most mass efficient vehicle in the world. The only Corvette I have purchased for myself is a 2006 Z06.
On the C7, our original Z06 concept was much the same as the previous two generations except we did have very strong customer input that they would like an automatic and open air options. I assumed a naturally aspirated 7.0L with direct injection and variable valve timing would be the power train choice. The main reasons we ended up going to a charged solution had to do with regulatory changes and a strong desire to increase performance, not to stay the same or inch up only slightly. For performance, we knew the standard Stingray was going to be a pretty big upgrade over even the Grand Sport, so the Z06 had to be an even bigger step up.
On the regulatory side, on average, every business day, a new law governing the design of automobiles goes into effect somewhere in the world, and no space is more active than fuel economy and vehicle emissions. Porsche just announced an all turbo line up for the 911 in the future. Like it or not, regulators around the world are pushing manufacturers into lower displacements and charging to achieve higher output. With this reality, when we studied an LS7-like solution for the C7 Z06 we found only a very modest power boost would be possible while still meeting all the other new requirements. Cylinder de-activation played no role in constraining our choice. We only added it back in when we went to the supercharged solution where the rpm limiting was no longer an issue. You are right, charging brings mass, and cooling challenges, but it also brings a lot more horsepower.
I have heard comments that we shouldn't have added mass to go to open-air or improve our structure. However, the net mass penalty for open air is relatively small, as the added mass is attributed to many things. There are a bunch of regulations that either don't apply to convertibles or have delayed implementations, and meeting them adds mass. We knew chassis loads were going to go up with better aero and more capable tires, so we had to react those forces. If you read some of the media scrutiny of the C6 Z06, we were often criticized for not being as secure or confident at speed as our competitors, which had a lot to do with vehicle structure. We were relentlessly bashed for "floppy" seats on the C6. Each C7 seats weights about 10 pounds more than its C6 counterpart. My point is much of the mass increase has nothing to do with a change in philosophy, but rather improving the driving experience in many different areas (not just an open air top, or new seats).
Believe me, we are well aware of the very vocal group of customers that demand a more focused track vehicle. Although I hear claims that many people want that type of vehicle, it is not validated in the sales figures of cars like the Viper ACR or Porsche 911.
If you look at the Z06 (C6 or C7), hardly anybody orders the pure track car - no options but Z07 and maybe Competition seat. The vast majority (93% in 2015) are ordering their cars with uplevel option packages. This is not surprising, as every time we added features to the C5 and C6 Z06 (power seats, power column, heads up display, leather interior, magnetic ride control, to name a few), they quickly became incredibly popular.
Obviously, I am defending our choices for the C7. And our sales are very strong, ensuring we will have Corvettes for years to come. However, we take customer requests very seriously and usually find a way to incorporate them into our future plans. So don't lose faith. We are listening.
So why did we call it a Z06? Yes, it is a bit different formulation than the last few generations. It is however consistent in that it is the quickest car around the track we know how to make. That has been validated by numerous third parties. Last week, we were finally able to confirm the performance of the car on a continuous lap of the Nurburgring. We are putting together the press release and will have the lap time and video out shortly. I can tell you we were more than satisfied with the results.
05-29-2015, 05:10 PM
#2
Melting Slicks
Blah blah blah... but that last sentence!!!!!!! 
05-29-2015, 05:16 PM
#3
Melting Slicks
Believe me, we are well aware of the very vocal group of customers that demand a more focused track vehicle. Although I hear claims that many people want that type of vehicle, it is not validated in the sales figures of cars like the Viper ACR or Porsche 911.
If you look at the Z06 (C6 or C7), hardly anybody orders the pure track car - no options but Z07 and maybe Competition seat. The vast majority (93% in 2015) are ordering their cars with uplevel option packages. This is not surprising, as every time we added features to the C5 and C6 Z06 (power seats, power column, heads up display, leather interior, magnetic ride control, to name a few), they quickly became incredibly popular.
So why did we call it a Z06? Yes, it is a bit different formulation than the last few generations. It is however consistent in that it is the quickest car around the track we know how to make. That has been validated by numerous third parties. Last week, we were finally able to confirm the performance of the car on a continuous lap of the Nurburgring. We are putting together the press release and will have the lap time and video out shortly. I can tell you we were more than satisfied with the results.
As I have said numerous times here, speed costs money. I have a feeling a number of overpriced competitors are about to get their feelings badly hurt.
05-29-2015, 05:45 PM
#5
Advanced
Obviously, I am defending our choices for the C7. And our sales are very strong, ensuring we will have Corvettes for years to come. However, we take customer requests very seriously and usually find a way to incorporate them into our future plans. So don't lose faith. We are listening.
I'm sure it's just me getting excited, but this kinda sounds like lawyer-restricted, engineer speak for: "I wanna build a ZR-1"
Looking forward to that 'ring lap time, tho.
05-29-2015, 05:50 PM
#6
Safety Car
2015 1LZ Z07 Z06 owner no-nonsense track car buyer here. I even got the coupe and manual. While I agree with Tadge that many of the weight additions improve the driving experience, they should have really thought out the supercharged engine more.
I hope folks don't turn a blind eye to the car's actual track usability for track speeds. A track car is first and foremost reliable under load. I can't care less what it will do at the Nurburgring while it is proving to be a dud after a few laps when we drive it here in the US. How can we talk about performance without a car that can perform in normal conditions? Is performance a time slip or a car built out of high performance parts?
The real question is not whether people buy 911s and Vipers, but whether they would have been happier with a more track focused Z06. Furthermore, the 911 line offers track focused cars as well as more traditional GTs whereas the 'Vette line doesn't really offer a GT3 competitor at this time.
We gained a second at the track and lost half the track time with this generation. This is not a move upwards in performance but a lateral one.
A few eye popping comments from Tadge:
1. The NA 7 liter option would have deleted AFM
2. The NA 7 liter option was dropped due to having too little power.
3. Supercharging brings cooling challenges.
My read of this is that Tadge thought buyers would open their pouches for peak power and not for the raw feel and potential of a trackable car. An executive decision was made that pivoted on this choice.
I hope folks don't turn a blind eye to the car's actual track usability for track speeds. A track car is first and foremost reliable under load. I can't care less what it will do at the Nurburgring while it is proving to be a dud after a few laps when we drive it here in the US. How can we talk about performance without a car that can perform in normal conditions? Is performance a time slip or a car built out of high performance parts?
The real question is not whether people buy 911s and Vipers, but whether they would have been happier with a more track focused Z06. Furthermore, the 911 line offers track focused cars as well as more traditional GTs whereas the 'Vette line doesn't really offer a GT3 competitor at this time.
We gained a second at the track and lost half the track time with this generation. This is not a move upwards in performance but a lateral one.
A few eye popping comments from Tadge:
1. The NA 7 liter option would have deleted AFM
2. The NA 7 liter option was dropped due to having too little power.
3. Supercharging brings cooling challenges.
My read of this is that Tadge thought buyers would open their pouches for peak power and not for the raw feel and potential of a trackable car. An executive decision was made that pivoted on this choice.
05-29-2015, 07:32 PM
#7
2015 1LZ Z07 Z06 owner no-nonsense track car buyer here. I even got the coupe and manual. While I agree with Tadge that many of the weight additions improve the driving experience, they should have really thought out the supercharged engine more.
I hope folks don't turn a blind eye to the car's actual track usability for track speeds. A track car is first and foremost reliable under load. I can't care less what it will do at the Nurburgring while it is proving to be a dud after a few laps when we drive it here in the US. How can we talk about performance without a car that can perform in normal conditions? Is performance a time slip or a car built out of high performance parts?
The real question is not whether people buy 911s and Vipers, but whether they would have been happier with a more track focused Z06. Furthermore, the 911 line offers track focused cars as well as more traditional GTs whereas the 'Vette line doesn't really offer a GT3 competitor at this time.
We gained a second at the track and lost half the track time with this generation. This is not a move upwards in performance but a lateral one.
A few eye popping comments from Tadge:
1. The NA 7 liter option would have deleted AFM
2. The NA 7 liter option was dropped due to having too little power.
3. Supercharging brings cooling challenges.
My read of this is that Tadge thought buyers would open their pouches for peak power and not for the raw feel and potential of a trackable car. An executive decision was made that pivoted on this choice.
I hope folks don't turn a blind eye to the car's actual track usability for track speeds. A track car is first and foremost reliable under load. I can't care less what it will do at the Nurburgring while it is proving to be a dud after a few laps when we drive it here in the US. How can we talk about performance without a car that can perform in normal conditions? Is performance a time slip or a car built out of high performance parts?
The real question is not whether people buy 911s and Vipers, but whether they would have been happier with a more track focused Z06. Furthermore, the 911 line offers track focused cars as well as more traditional GTs whereas the 'Vette line doesn't really offer a GT3 competitor at this time.
We gained a second at the track and lost half the track time with this generation. This is not a move upwards in performance but a lateral one.
A few eye popping comments from Tadge:
1. The NA 7 liter option would have deleted AFM
2. The NA 7 liter option was dropped due to having too little power.
3. Supercharging brings cooling challenges.
My read of this is that Tadge thought buyers would open their pouches for peak power and not for the raw feel and potential of a trackable car. An executive decision was made that pivoted on this choice.
05-29-2015, 07:47 PM
#8
Safety Car
I'm assuming and can only assume that Tadge wanted to do more but couldn't given his limitations by regulations and top dogs. The C7Z is still at the end of the day a really great car. I feel for you track guys but it surely seems once the pennies are rolling in thats all that matters. He probably made reference to the ACR and 911 because their sales more than likely sucks on that type of car.
As to regulations being binding, I'm not buying that argument from Tadge. I take his response and common sense to mean that a naturally aspirated high performance block wouldn't make enough power to sell cars. He made a decision to supercharge in order to sell more cars. Whether or not he was right, and he is selling more cars than he would otherwise with a 7.0 engine is tough to say. But he did have a choice. No doubt in my mind.
The new top dog 911 GT3 RS has the same power and torque as the old top dog 911. In fact it is also 30 lbs heavier than the old model and looks nearly identical. Why couldn't we get a 535hp 500lb/ft 3,300lb Z06? People buy a nearly identical 911 every time. A slight bump in power for the Z06 with all the C7 generation goodies is more than worth it.
There is more than one way to skin the cat. We just need cooling packs. The 911 has 3 radiators in the top dog cars. We at least need a second to make this platform work, c'mon GM.
05-29-2015, 08:47 PM
#9
Drifting
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Delray beach FL
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, fair enough he did say ACR even though he didn't say GT3. Those don't sell in high numbers. A better analysis would establish a but-for world. What would a naturally aspirated Z06 buyer do if he didn't have a track Corvette to purchase? Would he buy an ACR or a GT3 instead? If so, Tadge is losing customers. Is he also losing future customers that see the challenges of driving a supercharged C7 hard? Probably. 911's come in 5 states of engine tune. Why can't the Corvette get 3?
As to regulations being binding, I'm not buying that argument from Tadge. I take his response and common sense to mean that a naturally aspirated high performance block wouldn't make enough power to sell cars. He made a decision to supercharge in order to sell more cars. Whether or not he was right, and he is selling more cars than he would otherwise with a 7.0 engine is tough to say. But he did have a choice. No doubt in my mind.
The new top dog 911 GT3 RS has the same power and torque as the old top dog 911. In fact it is also 30 lbs heavier than the old model and looks nearly identical. Why couldn't we get a 535hp 500lb/ft 3,300lb Z06? People buy a nearly identical 911 every time. A slight bump in power for the Z06 with all the C7 generation goodies is more than worth it.
There is more than one way to skin the cat. We just need cooling packs. The 911 has 3 radiators in the top dog cars. We at least need a second to make this platform work, c'mon GM.
As to regulations being binding, I'm not buying that argument from Tadge. I take his response and common sense to mean that a naturally aspirated high performance block wouldn't make enough power to sell cars. He made a decision to supercharge in order to sell more cars. Whether or not he was right, and he is selling more cars than he would otherwise with a 7.0 engine is tough to say. But he did have a choice. No doubt in my mind.
The new top dog 911 GT3 RS has the same power and torque as the old top dog 911. In fact it is also 30 lbs heavier than the old model and looks nearly identical. Why couldn't we get a 535hp 500lb/ft 3,300lb Z06? People buy a nearly identical 911 every time. A slight bump in power for the Z06 with all the C7 generation goodies is more than worth it.
There is more than one way to skin the cat. We just need cooling packs. The 911 has 3 radiators in the top dog cars. We at least need a second to make this platform work, c'mon GM.
Dont expect the Z06 to be a super car. It s not.
In fact it s designed for older people, comfortable, 'fully loaded' and etc.
It s anything but a race car. Ok if you consider drag as racing, but as soon as turns are coming, forget about it. It is not balanced for corners, neither the power and torque is properly managed for such discipline.
He is talking about nubergring. I am sure the car they used is far from being the one you buy.
05-29-2015, 09:07 PM
#10
Safety Car
A GT3 rs costs about twice the C7 Z06 price.
Dont expect the Z06 to be a super car. It s not.
In fact it s designed for older people, comfortable, 'fully loaded' and etc.
It s anything but a race car. Ok if you consider drag as racing, but as soon as turns are coming, forget about it. It is not balanced for corners, neither the power and torque is properly managed for such discipline.
He is talking about nubergring. I am sure the car they used is far from being the one you buy.
Dont expect the Z06 to be a super car. It s not.
In fact it s designed for older people, comfortable, 'fully loaded' and etc.
It s anything but a race car. Ok if you consider drag as racing, but as soon as turns are coming, forget about it. It is not balanced for corners, neither the power and torque is properly managed for such discipline.
He is talking about nubergring. I am sure the car they used is far from being the one you buy.
The RS has its roots in a VW Beetle. It rides on McPherson struts for God's sake. The 'Vette is a clean sheet sports car design sharing only auxiliary systems with other production cars.
The chassis is one of the best balanced designs in production. It's up there with all the exotic FMR platforms. The eLSD is so potent it's outlawed in many racing series. I can tell you from first hand experience it is as composed or better composed than almost any RWD sports cars coming out of turns.
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.
05-29-2015, 10:04 PM
#11
Tech Contributor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 10,067
Received 3,809 Likes
on
1,146 Posts
"Ask Tadge" Producer
One hundred percent incorrect, save for the required restraints and fire suppression system. Any time GM runs a car at the track, it's factory spec right down to the air pressure in the tires, alignment, etc.
05-29-2015, 10:28 PM
#12
Racer
Member Since: Jun 2014
Location: Panama City Florida
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 43 Likes
on
35 Posts
A GT3 rs costs about twice the C7 Z06 price.
Dont expect the Z06 to be a super car. It s not.
In fact it s designed for older people, comfortable, 'fully loaded' and etc.
It s anything but a race car. Ok if you consider drag as racing, but as soon as turns are coming, forget about it. It is not balanced for corners, neither the power and torque is properly managed for such discipline.
He is talking about nubergring. I am sure the car they used is far from being the one you buy.
Dont expect the Z06 to be a super car. It s not.
In fact it s designed for older people, comfortable, 'fully loaded' and etc.
It s anything but a race car. Ok if you consider drag as racing, but as soon as turns are coming, forget about it. It is not balanced for corners, neither the power and torque is properly managed for such discipline.
He is talking about nubergring. I am sure the car they used is far from being the one you buy.
05-29-2015, 11:47 PM
#13
Racer
Tadge mention's that a desire for a more dedicated track vehicle is not demonstrated by the sales figures of Viper ACR and Porsche 911.
In 2014 Porsche sold 203,097 vehicles. This figure, is according to the Porsche 2014 annual report, p.72. Report Available for download at this link:
http://www.porsche.com/usa/aboutpors.../dataandfacts/
73% of all Porsche car sales are high performance SUV's and a four passenger sports car. The Cayenne, 66,005 units. The Macan 59,363 units. Panemera 22,383 units.
So Tadge should be working on a new SUV that flies around the Nurburgring. My .02.
In 2014 Porsche sold 203,097 vehicles. This figure, is according to the Porsche 2014 annual report, p.72. Report Available for download at this link:
http://www.porsche.com/usa/aboutpors.../dataandfacts/
73% of all Porsche car sales are high performance SUV's and a four passenger sports car. The Cayenne, 66,005 units. The Macan 59,363 units. Panemera 22,383 units.
So Tadge should be working on a new SUV that flies around the Nurburgring. My .02.
05-30-2015, 09:04 AM
#14
Instructor
The actual Corvette demographics show a buyer who is now 61 years old, and that has risen 7 years of average age over the last 10 years. Most Corvette buyers are NOT young boy-racers.
These quotes from Yahoo Finance:
"The median age of a Corvette owner has risen from 54 to 61 during the past 10 years, according to research firm Strategic Vision."
More important in selling Corvettes is: style.
"GM developed the new Corvette, which just went on sale, determined to break the mold on what had become staid, conservative styling. Engineers in their 20s and early 30s worked ... key elements of the car, to help incorporate the sensibilities of the millennial generation into the vehicle. To market the car, GM is holding invitation-only events with trendsetters in “coastal cultural centers” such as New York, Miami and Los Angeles, hoping hipsters will help create buzz..."
and...
"What GM hopes to do is broaden the appeal of the car beyond the blue-collar, middle-America demographic that forms the Corvette’s core fan base. The target customer for the C7 is a Porsche 911 buyer, along with people who might buy a Porsche Cayman, an Audi TT or R8, a BMW Z4 or 6 series coupe, or a Mercedes SLK or AMG coupe."
"... the import buyers GM is aiming for tend to be wealthier, more professional, more urban and more influential than Corvette owners, a challenge GM faces in many segments of its product lineup."
A "track-ready" Corvette at, say, 3100 lbs. is still too heavy to be a race car. I believe the C5R was 2500 lbs., with 570 HP. Just jacking up the HP on a 3500 lb. car does not make it a race car, either.
These quotes from Yahoo Finance:
"The median age of a Corvette owner has risen from 54 to 61 during the past 10 years, according to research firm Strategic Vision."
More important in selling Corvettes is: style.
"GM developed the new Corvette, which just went on sale, determined to break the mold on what had become staid, conservative styling. Engineers in their 20s and early 30s worked ... key elements of the car, to help incorporate the sensibilities of the millennial generation into the vehicle. To market the car, GM is holding invitation-only events with trendsetters in “coastal cultural centers” such as New York, Miami and Los Angeles, hoping hipsters will help create buzz..."
and...
"What GM hopes to do is broaden the appeal of the car beyond the blue-collar, middle-America demographic that forms the Corvette’s core fan base. The target customer for the C7 is a Porsche 911 buyer, along with people who might buy a Porsche Cayman, an Audi TT or R8, a BMW Z4 or 6 series coupe, or a Mercedes SLK or AMG coupe."
"... the import buyers GM is aiming for tend to be wealthier, more professional, more urban and more influential than Corvette owners, a challenge GM faces in many segments of its product lineup."
A "track-ready" Corvette at, say, 3100 lbs. is still too heavy to be a race car. I believe the C5R was 2500 lbs., with 570 HP. Just jacking up the HP on a 3500 lb. car does not make it a race car, either.
Last edited by MikeWyatt; 05-30-2015 at 09:07 AM.
05-30-2015, 09:51 AM
#15
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Dec 2009
Location: Smallingerland Friesland, Netherlands
Posts: 3,421
Received 39 Likes
on
27 Posts
Last week, we were finally able to confirm the performance of the car on a continuous lap of the Nurburgring. We are putting together the press release and will have the lap time and video out shortly. I can tell you we were more than satisfied with the results.
Was this the car?
Was this the car?
05-30-2015, 11:39 AM
#16
Pro
C7 z06
Original question is here.
I say Tadge is spot on. I am amazed at some of the dumb comments I read on this forum (usually by someone that doesn't even own a Corvette) I note one guy even mentioned that the Z06 doesn't corner???? Huh?
I'm surprised that GM doesn't surf this forum and hire some of the geniuses that comment here. They can build a complete Corvette with 1,000 horsepower, perfect everything, for under $10,000.
Here's another hint for the haters...........don't buy a Corvette if it doesn't meet your needs. Stick with your Lada or motor scooter.
It is the best value in the automotive market today. When I drive my corvette it is an event.....it isn't transportation. I live near the Milford Proving Grounds and it is always exciting to see new product out on the streets. Keep it up Tadge & GM!
05-30-2015, 01:17 PM
#17
Drifting
I think everything Tadge says makes perfect sense and was the right decision given everything involved. The Z06 (and even the Z51) are not supposed to be and are not marketed as "dedicated track cars" but "track capable street cars". Making that choice is the proper business decision, and the numbers back it up.
However, the one thing I fault him and the development team on are the cooling issues. This includes the Z06 engine, transmissions (including the Z51 A8), and even needing those stupid brake cooling rings on the Z51. If you really are promising a track capable street car then these issues are a serious problem. If solving them increases the cost of the car too much, then make those things an option which only those people that really need them will buy. I'd even accept add-on packages from the parts catalog that the dealer could install, as long as they don't void the warranty.
I'm not even saying that solving these issues is easy, or even possible, but to market the car as a "track ready/capable street car from the factory" then have these issues with no solution, I consider a failure since they haven't delivered what was promised. Perhaps they just shouldn't have promised it since otherwise it is still a great car.
However, the one thing I fault him and the development team on are the cooling issues. This includes the Z06 engine, transmissions (including the Z51 A8), and even needing those stupid brake cooling rings on the Z51. If you really are promising a track capable street car then these issues are a serious problem. If solving them increases the cost of the car too much, then make those things an option which only those people that really need them will buy. I'd even accept add-on packages from the parts catalog that the dealer could install, as long as they don't void the warranty.
I'm not even saying that solving these issues is easy, or even possible, but to market the car as a "track ready/capable street car from the factory" then have these issues with no solution, I consider a failure since they haven't delivered what was promised. Perhaps they just shouldn't have promised it since otherwise it is still a great car.
05-30-2015, 05:28 PM
#18
Race Director
Some of you guys need to work on your comprehension....
Tadge was asked a question and he answered it. In detail. Now, if it's not the answer YOU wanted, well, OK.
The cooling issue on the C7 Z06 must be addressed, I would hope they are working on that. Figures don't lie (but liars figure), for all the bluster on this forum, the OVERWHELMING majority of C7 Z06 BUYERS don't order 1LZ Z06's (the MOST track ready Z06).
Also, I would offer that all this love for the C6 Z06 is a little misplaced. The C6 Z06 had ONE thing in it's favor....low mass. Beyond that, it was a car that was a HANDFUL to drive fast (although it got better late in the model run), had HORRIBLE seats, had (and continues to have) valve train issues, etc.
Jimmy
Tadge was asked a question and he answered it. In detail. Now, if it's not the answer YOU wanted, well, OK.
The cooling issue on the C7 Z06 must be addressed, I would hope they are working on that. Figures don't lie (but liars figure), for all the bluster on this forum, the OVERWHELMING majority of C7 Z06 BUYERS don't order 1LZ Z06's (the MOST track ready Z06).
Also, I would offer that all this love for the C6 Z06 is a little misplaced. The C6 Z06 had ONE thing in it's favor....low mass. Beyond that, it was a car that was a HANDFUL to drive fast (although it got better late in the model run), had HORRIBLE seats, had (and continues to have) valve train issues, etc.
Jimmy
05-30-2015, 08:44 PM
#20
Also, I would offer that all this love for the C6 Z06 is a little misplaced. The C6 Z06 had ONE thing in it's favor....low mass. Beyond that, it was a car that was a HANDFUL to drive fast (although it got better late in the model run), had HORRIBLE seats, had (and continues to have) valve train issues, etc.
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.
Last edited by grcor; 06-01-2015 at 01:29 AM.