Has anyone here on this Forum Ever Owned and Driven a Callaway Twin Turbo Corvette on a daily basis and to their Top End Limit ?

Are they Truly Torque Monsters when Unleashed in stock form ?

How did they run against the 1990-1995 ZR-1's ?

Has anyone ever raced a Callaway TT against a Strong Running 1987 Buick GNX Grand National ?

The Outcome? Winner?

How would they compare, run against the New C6 ZR-1 Corvettes?

I personally love the 1987 Callaway TT Corvette.

I have also Heard the 1989 Callaway TT Corvette was the best year to own and had the greatest power potential with 10 minutes of under hood tuning tricks and a tankfull off 110 Motor octane race fuel. Is that true?

Just How reliable are these 1987 - 1991 Callaway TT Vettes to drive around town ?

Or are they tempermental beasts like some have told me ?

I have taken rides Shotgun in my buddies Heavily Modded 1987 Buick GNX Grand National that would run low 10's on the strip with slicks.

On the street with no chance of ever hooking up under 25lbs full boost and blowing the rear tires off for at least 500 Feet on the streets of Joliet , Il. Pure fun and a memorable rides.

 

I believe the '91s probably have the edge in power potential. They changed up the ducting for the intercoolers, and changed the air intake.

I think if you think that they are some monster that can take on any car ever made (C6 ZR1??), all while getting 25mpg and 200,000 mile reliability, you are delusional. But they are fast cars and seem like a lot of fun. I've never owned one though, but have driven a few.

'87s are the most common year, and the cheapest on the used car market. Would be a neat car to pick up if they interest you.

I ran my stock car against a stock GNX and a stockish '87 (was upgraded to '88+ trim) B2K at the same track for a magazine. The GNX was not faster than the 'vettes. I don't know what "strong running" means to you, but it was a low miler.

 

A Callaway TT does interest me. Some day.

They are non existent in this area of Illinois to my knowledge.

Only know what I read about the Callaway TT.

Previous owners or drivers of these cars like you would know best.

 

An '87 popped up recently in the for sale area: http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c4s-...-callaway.html

If it's more daydreaming type conversation, there is an owner's group for Callaways:
http://www.callawayownersgroup.com/

They might have more stories to tell, videos, that sort of thing about owning and driving one.

 

Yes they are torque monsters for sure They will pin you back in your seat and leave you gasping for air If you get the Corvette enthusist magazine 10/09 Callaway vs ZR1. I have had a Callaway 1989 for over eight years and it has been a blast to drive and ownI have had mine well into three digits Top speed on an aerobody car with a 3.54 rear ratio is 191 mph per Callaway testing.If you do general maintanence you will have no problem Callaways have been driven over 100K

 

I got to drive Pete's car for like 8 minutes, and it was a blast for sure!

To the OP, your locations says Illinois, I would bet there will be some Callaways at Bloomington. You can probably get all your questions answered there, plus seeing those aerobody cars, and the Callaway craftsmanship in person is much more impressive than in photos.

 

The CTTC is truly a unique car and piece of Corvette history. I've had my '87 for a few years now and can give my impression.

In stock form, it is a torque monster. They were set up to feel like the old big-blocks, and do when they're on the boost (except for those funny noises!). The '87 had 460-something lb-ft of torque while the '88+ had 560+. Even the new LS-series motors don't have that kind of torque. Off-boost, though, it's a little weaker than the std L-98 since the compression ratio is low (7.5:1).

I've driven ZR-1's (90-95), and the CTTC is totally different. The ZR-1 is, ehem, more like a Porsche. Very smooth and refined, and REV happy. It doesn't have the low-mid-range punch that the CTTC has, but makes its power up high where the CTTC falls flat.

The '87 is more common and a little lower priced, but it has those cool hood ducts (see my avatar) which went away in '88. The '87 also used small IHI turbos, which are pretty much maxed out with the 350. In '88, they switched to slightly larger Rotomaster turbos and improved the intake breathing. The Rotomasters are very hard to get parts for while you can still buy new IHI turbos (and upgrade to their ball-bearing models). Opening up the exhaust on these cars does wonders. People have also made crazy power by increasing boost, but get the fueling right or you'll still grenade the engine (ouch $$$).

In either case, I wouldn't get one of these as a daily driver. They're not all that tempermental, but the rubber parts in all that 20-year old turbo plumbing needs to be just right, or it'll run like crap and give you oil leaks.

 

My racing buddy has an 89 aerobody and a (91?) Speedster (I think only 8 were made). He races the 89 and runs 10.70s. They are great cars but couldn't beat a stock C6Z06 (mine runs mid 11's with street tires) let alone a ZR1. A lot happends in 20 years.

 

10.70's that's impressive!! That won't beat a stock C6Z06?

 

That one is not stock. Race motor, bigger cam and turbos, afr heads, 4l80e and a 9 inch rear. I meant a stock Callaway would not beat a stock Z06.

 

Hmmm I know of a handful of b2k's with exhaust that pull the same rwhp number as a Z06 with an additional 150-175rwtq.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think the Callaway TT is a great car, but at the strip, horsepower wins. Although they had massive torque, they were only rated at around 390 hp. http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/ca...turbo-corvette

This Road and Track test had a TT running 13.4@107. I know he was probably a crummy driver and you or I could do better, but the Z06 was clocked in the 11's with by the same magazine.

 

 

Im just saying they could have been a tad under rated or were severely handicapped in pure stock form. I don't put much stock in magazines...I have a mag with a 91 b2k running a 12.6 at 115mph.

My car laid down 406 at the wheels thru the stock mufflers just by cutting the cats off. That number jumped to 440 at the wheels in a florida summer with a Power Effects exhaust system. That C6 Z land easy. Factor in some cool air over the intercoolers and add another 15-20rwhp.

From a roll i believe my b2k would give a Z all it could handle and then some. The weight advantage would play to the Z in the quarter. It would take slicks to harness the b2k and then you start breaking stuff.

There is a guy in my town with an 87 b2k with 88 spec turbos who ran his car to mid 11s in 88 stock form with slicks and exhaust. Ive seen his slip for a few 10.20s at 136mph It's had a little bit of work done since then.

Back to the topic of this thread...Ive been in a lot of powerful cars in my life. Many faster than my b2k, but none have been more of a rush to drive simply due to the torque delivery. I can't wait to by another one.

 

I talked to a guy at Carlisle a few years ago who was thinking of selling his silver 87 B2K. I think he goes by the handle of Majikdraggin on the Callaway Forum. Last I knew he still owned the car.