OldZR-1Guy

To clarify, the car was mechanically sound. It had been checked and I have no reason to doubt it's maintenance. As for who said stock, I did. Figures were quoted for the Callaway car from magazines and I assume these figures came from machines as they were produced at Old Lyme. I made that clear in my post. I don't pretend to know what someone's modified car can do, so I have no reason to doubt your friend's '89 with 600 HP can do 200. As for my "torque peak" line it's just a mistatement on my part. Got my terms mixed up. In any event, from the time the car was brand new to when I sold it, that was pretty much where the car needed a gear change. In my ZR-1 I can rev past 7 grand with no problem, but the Sweet spot for horsepower is right around 6200. The difference is the that the ZR-1 will pull hard right to the rev limiter while the TT really started to run out of breath above 4200. I'm aware of the purpose of the AeroBody since I have one on my car. My only claim is that I don't believe an un-modified '88-'89 TT will do 192. Not in fifth. Not in sixth. Plenty of guys who drive ZR-1s will testify that it isn't easy to crack 180. And the ZR-1(at 375-405 HP, roughly equal to the TT) is more suited for high speed runs than the TwinTurbos given the LT5's higher rpm range. Maybe someone who gets a radar trap speed in an ORR will prove me wrong, but I doubt it.

USAZR1

FWIW,if any of you LT5 Registry members are wondering about OldZR-1Guy's car,it's on the cover of our latest KOTH magazine. Steve's been around the block a few times,too. :D

RatRacer

And his polished LT-5 is shweeet!

90Callaway

If you read the page I posted above... comparing stock to stock... you will see the following. That's why I posted it in the first place. Since no one seems to want to squint to read it, I'll summarize some of the stats below.

Callaway TT (Non-Aerobody I assume)-

HP - 390@4250rpms
Trq - 562 lbs. ft.@2500

0-60 - 4.79sec.
0-100 - 10.58sec.
1/4 mile - 13.11@112.0mph
Top speed of 172mph in 6th @ 4200rpms

ZR1 -

HP - 375@5800rpms
Trq - 370 lbs. ft.@4800

0-60 - 4.8sec.
0-100 - 11.10sec.
1/4 mile - 13.28@109.8mph
Top speed of 170mph in 5th @ 6000rpms

These are both 1990 model cars. Truthfully I think they both came up short of their potential. Roughly about 8-10mph off on top speed and about .5 sec on time to speed and 1/4 mile. But they were tested on the same day with the same equipment by the same people. So it's a valid comparison. As I said before, stock to stock the Callaway TT is marginally quicker. The awesome torque and an aerobody is what will pull it to a higher top speed.

These cars are vastly different in the way they make power but produce similar results. Just for the record, I think they're both awesome and intend to buy a ZR1 in the near future.

Note: It says the final drive for both cars is 3.54:1. Is that a typo? Thought it should be 3.45:1.

OldZR1Guy - I based my underachievement comments about your TT on what you posted here relative to your performance. It just seems that it wasn't running up to it's potential. Callaway has told me optimal shift point for a TT is right at 4800rpms.

Now as for Matt's car, it's mostly stock. As far as I know all he's done is optimize the computer, exhaust, higher boost, maybe an air intake. Everything mechanical about the motor from the TB to the exhaust manifolds and everything in between is stock. These are mods commonly made by most Vette owners (higher boost excluded). With that he's putting down somewhere around 500rwhp 700rwtrq. That's the way a TT is supposed to run!

:cheers:

90 Corvette ZR-1

Some one once told me he didn't consider the B2K to be a stock Vette. I don't know why.

4cefed

Yeah, we went from a first gear roll. He was in OVERDRIVE 2 gear. When we took off he put a couple of car length's on me in a heart beat. He say's his car put down 580 hp and 700 lb/ft of torque. Fast car with lot's of boost.

*89x2*

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 90 Callaway< I am going to agree with you on this one here...My friends 87 Twin Turbo Callaway would go 165 (and hold that speed for a period)the 88's got better and 89 "unofficially" got "improvements". The quotes that you have from the magazine MUST be (and if I recall the mag, are) for a NON aerobody car would've added appx.10+ mph to the top speed . Would an 89 Twin Turbo go 192? Yes, I think so... A 245 hp 89 coupe would run 158 (I have personally seen 154 with headlights up "somewhere") so with 137 extra "advertised" HP and a TON more Torque I would think that between that, and an AEROBODY it would do what it says... It does not sound like OldZR1Guy had an aerobody Callaway (just a hunch) or maybe his car was trully off (no flame there) but please, 137 extra Hp and the Torque...geez...the numbers speak for themselves...
Ohh yeah, the topic.....They are close in 0-60 and 1/4 mi stock but "roll ons and high speed go to a Callaway TT HANDS DOWN :D
Later *89x2*

OldZR-1Guy

I think I already said I didn't have the AeroBody, they weren't produced until the last half of '89 and I got mine in April. Your post is indicative of the myth and legend around these cars. You say you "think" the car would do 192. All I say is that my car would not and was in perfect mechanical order. Furthermore, the numbers posted by '90 Callaway are right in line with what I suggested. Maybe I could have gone 170 or so with another mile or two of road, but I did take good long runs at it on a number of occasions. As for what a stock '89 coupe would with 245 HP, that is really irrelevant.Any number of cars will do 150, but it takes a tremendous amount of horsepower for each 10 mph above 150. The AeroBody is not really a speed enhancement so much as a stability aid. It provides a bit of downforce and makes the car feel a lot more secure at high speeds. Aerodynamically, the car has a large frontal area and is rather slab sided, so it isn't really slicing through the air so much as displacing it in a way that aids high speed handling. Short story: speed isn't free and the body won't get you 10 mph. I don't doubt that a modified TT,such as '90 Callaway has described could 192 and beyond, but that is my point: modified. If someone who owns an untouched '88-'89 TT posts that his car can do 175, 180 then maybe they had a nice long road. But the cars weren't capable of their claimed top end. All that the big torque enabled the car to do was pull 6th gear...to a point. But there wasn't enough power to pull 6th to redline, which is where you'd need to be to get close to 190. I don't know why that concept is hard to accept. Just to cite again a comparison: The Ferrari Modena. About 200 pounds lighter than the TT with 400 HP and a redline of 8 grand. Honed for hundreds of hours in a wind tunnel for top end and appropriate downforce without the aid of spoiler add-ons. It does not go 190. And top gear is not overdrive as in the Vettes. Look again at the stats from '90 Callaway and read Clint's post on calculating top end. All this matches up pretty well with my experience of driving the '89 to top end.


[Modified by OldZR-1Guy, 9:23 AM 8/12/2001]

USAZR1

Rob,stop by the LT5 Registry tent at Carlisle and say hello,if you get the chance. Looking forward to meeting you there.
Clint Hooper
LT5 Registry #001

SurfnSun

WAAAYYY OFF....As stated above redline in 6th gear would be 244mph. No one ever said they could redline sixth.

Do you wanna know why a 360 won't pull to 190? What is the peak torque # for the car? Theres your answer.

SurfnSun

How did you know your car was in peak mechanical condition? Did you ever have it dynoed? What were the #'s?

Even if a Callaway was running off, it could be 100lb/ft down on torque and still feel like a earth mover. My point is you might never know it.

I drove an 88 Callaway TT this week. The car had brutal acceleration. Way faster than any C5(which have all been stock) Ive driven, especially above 70 mph.


[Modified by SurfnSun, 12:39 AM 8/13/2001]

OldZR-1Guy

So you drove an '88 and it felt fast. I don't doubt it. They are fast cars and I really enjoyed mine. Did you drive 192 mph? I suppose you would have said so. Bench racing is fine and can be fun, but your opinion won't make the car go faster. As for the car's condition, give it a rest. It was perfect. It ran the same from the day I got it to when I sold it. Yes, I bought the car new. Dyno #? Do you know a lot of guys who were doing chassis dyno runs back in '89? I don't. Never did one, nor did I have a reason to do so. If anyone can say that they have personally driven an '88-89 TT 192 mph, I'd be happy to say I'm wrong. Until then, this is all :bs


[Modified by OldZR-1Guy, 9:48 AM 8/13/2001]

*89x2*

I know you think that this is "All BS" and you're presumably thinking that a Callaway TT isn't all that (since you traded for a ZR1 :confused: ) but I have to say, we have come a LONG way since 89. I can recall when dyno's were seldom seen (the local one was hundreds of dollars and they had to pull your engine to test it out) so I will agree with you on the idea of why you never "dynoed" your Callaway TT. I do have an idea....you could contact whoever bought it and see if the have or will dyno the car to settle this once and for all :rolleyes: Or, you could concede to the fact that a ZR 1 is just one step behind a Callaway Twin Turbo Corvette in all aspects of performance :yesnod: .
Bench racing is big time fun!!! And I trully enjoy listening to people lay claims to their cars that could never be true (barring a drop off a steep cliff) in fact, most muscle cars and Mustangs amuse me regularly :lol:
Thank you for adding to my daily dose of this Later *89x2*
BTW...why did you buy a ZR1????And are you satisfied? (no flame meant by?)

callaway95

When I had the AeroBody installed on my Vette, I was told that I would see an increase in top speed of 5 mph, or 192 with my engine combination... it's highly unlikely that I'll ever get a chance to run it into those numbers....... I think 192 is VERY optimistic with my car, but I'd like to try one day...... so far, just a tad over 150mph (which was very easy), but there's not much room on these roads in Jersey to let it all out........

I'll just say the the ZR1 motor sounds the best at high speed!

Dave

OldZR-1Guy

I didn't sell my '89 TT until 1995 when I was in Arizona. They have what's called a personal property tax out there, which meant it cost me almost $900 to get the car registered in the state. I aso had my '92 Callaway SuperNatural ZR-1 by then and that was about a grand. So something had to give and I sold the TT. Didn't really want to sell, but since I'm not in Bill Gates' social stratum that was that. I bought the SuperNatural ZR-1 because it was the next great thing, just as the TTs were when they first came out. Hard to believe my car's almost ten years old.

*89x2*

Thats cool! You weren't by chance near Tucson in the early-mid 90's???
Take it easy... *89x2* (I know all about that tax.... we are getting rid of that finally!!!!)
...any chance on getting that TT dynoed????..nevermind :D

8388

Hi guys 8388 here, its been a long time since I've posted, but I just could'nt
resist. As some of you guys know I own a few vettes among them 2 TT and
a ZR1, all of them are great performers, as far as a TT not able to go beyond
155 mph, I suppose its posible if the right conditions are present, there are
a few variables that would keep the TT from running at uptimum, one very
important one is loose or faulty hoses, since boost is what makes these cars
run , a loose hose would defintely kill performance, both of my TT required
hose maintance when I bought them in order for them to run right.
My 88 TT as well as Ultra Slow's TT had the wonder bar installed this is 90%
of the improved performance, stock TT don't have them, my 91 TT has a
different air intake setup much more effiecient than the 88 or 89 TT's.
As far as running one of these to a stock ZR1 is not something I would ever
recommened, on the other hand the ZR1 can do things that I would never
dream of doing with my TT's, and that is prolonged thrashing, and especially
in this 100 + degrees that we experiance in Texas.
As far as top speed capability is concerened, me and Ultra Slow are always
looking for new competition.

SurfnSun

:D :D :D :D

*89x2*

>
>>8388, what was wrong w/ the hoses when you bought yours?
> Isn't the "wonderbar" how Callaway's got their air through the frame member? (in between the radiator and pullies)
>How fast do you suppose your Callaway's are/were?
thanks *89x2*

8388

89x2 The hoses on TT tend to losen up from time to time all of the air(boost)travels thru them, a leak would cause the car to run well below its full potential one of my TT's had a hole burnt thru one of the hoses since on the driver side the hose right off the turbo sits about 1/8" from the exhaust. The
wonderbar that we installed is one that Callaway has re-designed in order
to make air delivery more efficient, it installs in the same location.
The difference is incredible, the 90's and 91's by design had a much more efficient set up than the 88/89 stock models.
As far as top speed is concerned both of my TT's are convertible one has the
Aero body and the other is stock, and I'll just say that they are faster than
I care to go ! ( disclaimer in the event my wife reads this.)