NJCRUISER

For the record, I had an 02 Z06 with 453 rwhp. Rather then tear it apart, I found a buyer right here on the forums and we traded cars. Mine for his bone stock 02 plus cash for the mods. This became my T1 car. Catch - My car was pristine with 3000 mi. His was 9k and good condition. Wrote it as as straight up trade and paid no taxes.

boerio

From what I understand from SBW and Cindi, they ran threw all sorts of stuff when they were running Corvettes. No Vipers to speak of, really, back then. So if they were burning through parts, it was to stay in front of ......... other Corvettes.

Has The General been known for making resiliant parts that can survive hard driving? Has DaimlerChrysler? It just sounds to me like the Viper holds its liquor a little better than the Corvette.

- Jeff

boerio

Welcome to the "crowd"

But I question your math. Is CJ going to run something else in T1? If Scotty and Cindi leave, then that's -2. So at best, T1 is actually going to drop by 1 unless someone else joins in. And if CJ is out, then it's a -2. And for a region of this country, to only have a handful of national T1 drivers, that's pretty bad.

- Jeff

jfaphoenix32

I own both Corvettes and Vipers...

The Corvette tends to use more parts in T1 trim since it has to be driven hardedr to keep up with the Viper...

The Viper just loafs along at 5500 rpms and never seems tohave to strain.

We wind the c5's up to 7200 and hustle them pretty hard from curb to curb to keep it., so the damage to tie rod ends, ball joints, abs sensors trans and rears gets a lot higher than the viper.

In the nd, there is no replacement for the power and torque that more cubic inches give...

Mikelly

That's exactly the info I wanted...

That's also exactly why the Viper needs to be slowed... This just seems like common sense. Why can't we all just agree to that?

Mike

varkwso

I am with the mayor.....

racetex

You can take the Viper out of T1 and the vettes are gonna use up the same amount of parts running each other hard.

jasonberkeley

The Vettes brakes are consumables because they are not real race brakes. The Vipers have a proper Brembo brake-set-up. At Road America, Corvettes throw away front rotors after EVERY SESSION. At June Sprints this year I went through two sets of front calipers (melted pistons, spread caliper housings) that got thrown in the garbage, four sets of front rotors, two sets of rear rotors, three sets of front pads, and two sets of rear pads. This is standard for a place that is hard on brakes like Road America. I know that all of the T1 Vette guys go through the same. Some tracks that are easier on brakes, you may get up to three or four sessions for a set of front rotors and pads. No more.

All of the heat the brakes generate in this non-race designed configuration, along with all of the cornering forces from the current generation of DOT rubber (Hoosier A6, Kumho V710), also causes-the hub-bearing assemblies and tie-rod ends to crap-out every every few races. So we are all constantly replacing those.

Engines get pulled and replaced for most national guys every 1-2 seasons. I will use a motor for two seasons. Guys like Lance buy a fresh engine every season. The motors are in no danger of braking, however, they lose 10-12 horsepower after the first season of racing, and you can't compete up front if you are down by 10+ rwhp.

Transmissions and rear-differentials are replaced every 2-3 years. Some will switch back and forth between the MN12 and MN6 gearboxes between races, depending on the track configuration to try and get the most out of everything.

The list goes on and on...

The Vipers are more robust in terms of suspension and brake parts and don't have to go through all of this expense / effort during the season (though they have to right a much bigger check up-front). Also, as Joe says, the rate of friction wear on internal engine components grows exponentially with engine speed, so a Viper motor lumbering at 5500rpm wears (and thus loses power) at a much slower rate than a bone-stock Vette engine spinning to 7200rpm.

96CollectorSport

Danny,
So I'm not the only one that would like to see you in a T1 car. Until NASA really gets the car counts up T1 looks like a good playground for you.
Plus they could use the numbers, but then again so could NASA.

Well I guess you'll just have to run both! You didn't want to work or sleep in the summer anyway did you.

96CollectorSport

The Viper is twice the price of the Vette so it is still cheaper to run a Vette with all of the replacement parts in a season than to buy and run a Viper. Now sooner or later the Vette will catch up cost wise to the Viper but it would take at least 2 seasons to do so.

As Racetex says though, even if the Viper was taken out of T1 the Vettes would still push each other just as hard.

HPDE's aren't much better at RA, rotors last a day and pads last maybe a weekend, it's never cheap to run at RA!

Hey Jason are you still driving the car to work?

LVKnupp

To answer a lot of the wear and tear problems you are seeing on the T1 cars you need to look at some of the other factors that guys have not address.

1. The DOT tires that we now run are incredible and really stick the car anywhere you want it on the track. The tire technology has offered up increased lap times of about 4 seconds over the last 4 years. Keeping this in mind the car other than brakes pads is the same technology as it was back in 02 and is being stressed out by a ton.

2. The brake pads. In 2003 – 2004 the pads were not anywhere near this good. Now with pads you are seeing cars breaking much deeper and more aggressively than before thus not only improving times, stress out parts but also putting a tremendous amount of heat into wheel bearings. These days and this is the truth if I go out and run as hard as I possible can there is a very good chance (75%) that I will destroy a front wheel bearing in 1 session. By destroy I mean that the heat gets so intense that the ABS system will fault and the bearing will need to be replaced.

Now the Vipers come with very good brakes and this is one of the discussions that have been addressed for the Corvettes to receive a better brake package. Obviously GM is not going to reinvent the wheel and go back to the 02 Z06 and make new brakes for an old car. Now some will say put the Z06 C5 to rest and bring on the new models but the plan fact is the majority of the class is the C5’s and that should be taken into consideration. Most of us have a ton of spares and the cars are still very good. Plus the Corvette is an awesome car for the $$$ and we can’t afford to go and buy a Viper like the Naykid Vipers. I will assure you and I don’t care how much you see the Vipers for sale from anyone or anywhere that a Viper like the front ones at the Runoffs will run you close to $200,000.00, you may as well race GT1.

BuckeyeZ06

Mike,

I didn't mean to ignore your question, and Lance I stand partially corrected.

It is true the Viper spins at a lower RPM that the Corvette; I shift at 5,500 RPM while in my C5 at 6,800 at Nationals, higher at the Run Offs. I think C5 motors lose a bit of their edge after 6-8 races while the Viper doesn't seem to do so. RPMs I think have something to do with this fact.

The Viper has better and bigger brakes, but this does come at a cost (you can buy alot of brakes and rotors for the $50K+ difference in the two cars). I wouldn't oppose a brake upgrade for the C5/C6s, in fact would lobby for it.

It is a fact that for some reason (not being an engineer I don't know how to articulate one) the tie rod ends and wheel bearing do seem to last longer in the Viper.

One needs to remember that the first Gen 111 Viper is a 2003 model, while the last C5 is a 2004. The first C5 was a 1997 model, there have been lots of little engineering changes in cars over the years.

The Corvette and Viper are driven in a different manner. I don't know how to explain that because I obviously haven't mastered either. I can tell you numerous people have told me not to drive the Viper like a Vette. I interprete that as the Vette needs to be "hustled" more while the Viper doesn't respond as well to that style. But I could be wrong.

My issue is trying to keep the Viper in the class. I acknowledge that at least from what I can see Jason is not lobbying for the car to be removed from T1. However their are people who are trying to do just so. My stance from the very start of this thread has been that the cars are not far off performance-wise.

While some people feal that the solution is to create a new class for the Viper and other supercars (and end this controversy), that leaves me with nothing. This new class, while National race eligible, will not be represented at the 2007 Run Offs, and most likely not in 2008 either. While some people may have a stable of alternative cars, I do not. This fight is ultimately for my continued participation in SCCA racing.

All I ask is for those in charge to look at results as well as technical specifications. I cannot (and don't want to) dispute HP/weight and torque/weight ratios. However if those numbers are being used (and they should be!) then the affect of rear axle ratios have to be consider. I have enough in-car video to show people that Vipers (at least mine) just don't pull Corvetts in a straight line like some people say. Why with a power/weight ratio advantage? The rear gear has something to do with it.

Looking at results shows that a Viper did have the pole. A Ferrari was second, and the highest qualifying Corvette was sixth. Sure looks like Viper domination to me.

However, the race results show that a Corvette won and was second fastest, a Viper set fastest lap by 4/10s of a second. The top six was 2 Corvettes and three Vipers; Top Ten was 4 Vipers and 5 Corvettes (one Ferrari). The average fastest lap time of the top three Vipers was less than 5/10s faster than the top three Corvettes. Even to an outsider it doesn't look like Viper domination.

Again, my point is that the Corvette and Viper are not that far off. Close enough to keep the class intact. I have second-guessed myself quite a bit (those who know me know that is my nature) and have asked people around me if I am thinking wrong. Most don't. They look at results and come to the same conclusion(and these are people who don't necassarily agree with me all the time).

Ultimately I think I may just be "collateral damage" in this whole debate. I suspect there are additional motivations than just vehicle specifications and performance in this Viper/Vette (seperate of this thread) discussion at SCCA. What I am speculating about would also be justified; but that doesn't help me much.

Oh well, the Advisory Committee met last night; maybe some direction will soon follow.

jasonberkeley

Dave,

I AM an engineer, and I have worked professionally as a race engineer, so let me, for the eight time, attempt to break it down for you.

The race pace doesn't mean $hi*. The qualifying times represents the drivers attempt to get the most out of the car in terms of pure speed. Scotty CRUSHED everyone by 2.5 seconds in his first qualifying attempt. I truly believe, as do 90% of all of the other drivers in the class, that Scotty was surprised at how much he smoked everyone by, and sand-bagged (as he has been known to do) for the last three qualifying sessions, becuase he already had pole, had no reason to push and possibly hurt the car, and DIDN"T WANT PEOPLE TO THINK THE CAR IS THAT FAST SO THAT THOSE BAD CORVETTE PEOPLE TRY TO SLOW IT DOWN.

He had no reason in the race, to push any harder than he was, because he had already opened a ten second lead in a few laps, and there was no reason for him to push harder, open a massive gap, so THOSE BAD CORVETTE PEOPLE TRY TO SLOW THE CAR DOWN. Look at Lance's in-car video from the start of the race. SBW had gapped back to Lance the entire length of the straight between turns 2 and 3 as a result of being able to start a clean race from the front row. He never really had to push. Dave- do you really think that Scotty suddenly slowed by 2.5 seconds from Monday to Saturday by accident? Do you think his car was broken, or that he forgot how to drive that fast?

You have bought into his sand-bagging, and overall strategy to conceal the car's performance hook, line, and sinker. Scotty's one flaw all week, was turning too fast of a time too soon.

SO- I will repeat this. Help you own cause, and admit that the Viper needs to be slowed significantly (more than 1.5 seconds per lap), or you are helping to end your own racing career, as you put it. Plain and simple fact. Nothing personal- as I WANT THE CARS TO STAY TOO, but you need to face reality.

jasonberkeley

Nah- it came off the street as my daily-driver a coule of years ago! That was good fun driving that thing in the winter in Wisconsin with snow tires and all, up to work in Sheboygan from Milwaukee, in 6" of snow, with the race numbers and stuff on the car!

BuckeyeZ06

We are racing, not doing time trials, are aren't we?

For the ninth time, my dear friend, I am not throwing out the qualifying time data. But I also am asking not to disregard the race times.

I know as well as you the SCW driven Viper developed a flat while having an 8 second lead. I also know that the other equally (or reasonable assumed to be) prepared Naykid Viper was caught by Lance and also turned slower laps times than him. She had no reason to sand bag it, in fact every reason to go all out.

As I stated before, there are many instances where someonethrows down a "flyer" lap that cannot be replicated in a race, or for an extended period. Lance's '05 June Sprints is an example (albeit not a dramatic as I initially thought and remember). Even if SBW did win the race, if the race lap times were the same as we have now the argument would be the same. You have too much of a body of evidence (2005 & 2006 Run Offs) to justify 1-1/2 or more seconds of change in performance. Period.

Peace my brother.

jasonberkeley

Dave- I guess that we will all just have to agree to disagree. The unfortunate thing about that end result, is that we will end-up playing in different sand-boxes next year.

BuckeyeZ06

Slowing the Viper would put me (race lap time-wise) at the back of the back. I think my skill level is higher than that (and I know you are not impuning my abilities...just putting things in perspective).

Ya know, if SCCA would develop an alternative that allows my car to race in an established class (GT2 maybe?) rather than a new one with no Run Offs eligibility (that's what this is all about) then this debate wouldn't even occur between you and I.

Making a class quasi-regional when it is brand new is the wrong decision, IMHO. I supported the "waiver" of T3 for 2007 because of this very reason. You have to give a new class some time and in National racing the Run Offs is the carrot. Without the Run Offs our events are just big regionals or NASA races.

wtknght1

Quit Jason...it won't do any good.

LVKnupp

You are part correct Dave but you should be able to run without any problem within 1 second of that time or close. You need to figure the following when comparing what I did at the Sprints.

1. After I went off at the Sprints I came back on in 8th place in traffic, this cost lap times.

2. The cars usually turn the fast laps the first few laps.

3. I screwed up the rear tow of the car going off and hitting stuff so it was not as good as it was in the race.

4. When I did that time of 2:24.9 it was on only 4 gals of fuel and the temps were only in the 50's at 9 am. During the race I was on a full fuel load way heavier (this is not a problem for the Vipers to meet weight they need to run fuel loads) & it was 90 plus degrees out.

racetex

Jason the car is still classed in T1. You are acting as if you make the call. Time will tell.