Is top speed of Grand Sport 186 MPH?
01-18-2012, 03:35 PM
#41
the web site below lists gs top speed as 186 mph, and as far as i remember, car and driver also listed it as 186 mph; is this correct? I remember a debate here at the forum where the top speed of the gs models was not listed in gm's own corvette brochures...
http://www.carbuzz.com/chevrolet/201...d-sport-coupe/
http://www.carbuzz.com/chevrolet/201...d-sport-coupe/
01-18-2012, 04:00 PM
#42
Team Owner
the limiting factor there is driver's skill level. most people can't really utilize the full potential of the base car, no matter how great they "think" they are 
it's funny how the GS, Z06 and ZR1 owners dish out the extra money for something they will never ever utilize... but that wide bootie sure looks awesome 
it's funny how the GS, Z06 and ZR1 owners dish out the extra money for something they will never ever utilize... but that wide bootie sure looks awesome tom
01-18-2012, 04:34 PM
#44
Team Owner
Why 0.4? Just using your logic when you claim GM fudged their number. Or are you saying that Cd for all vettes is the same? ).05 is what sets base from widebody, seems reasonable to bump up that number by 0.05. Chrysler may be a shoe box but seems like it has less turbulence than wide body. Also, are you quoting an independent Cd for Chrysler and Volt or are these the manuf numbers? You just mentioned GM fudged their numbers.
When I posted the independent numbers one point I was trying to make was that the C6 has worse numbers then the C5. GM had posted the .29 for the C5 since 1997. They had to make the C6 look better so the magically????? came up with a .286 number. Independent test shows the C6 has a higher Cd the the C5, but GM didn't want you to know that, IMHO.
Read all the press releases on the Z06 when it was released in 2005. GM said the Cd was .31. Fast forward, and GM now says the Cd of the Z06 is .34. I know of not one thing that was changed on the Z06 over the past 7 years that would increase the Cd. Every body panel is the same size and shape, size of the tires, etc are all the same.
My point. We don't have a clue as to how terrible the Cd is on the wide bodies as GM seems to make the numbers up to fit their marketing.
It could be the same as a base C6, or better then a base C6 or it could be that of a Mack truck. But, what ever the true Cd, is, the aero of the widebodies is functional. It gives more downforce front and rear, and it moves more air through the brakes, front and rear. Whatever the Cd, the widebodies will out perform the narrow bodies.
Which is more aerodynamic, driving a pickup truck at 60 MPH with the tailgate up or the tailgate down?
Kinda like how they use to do the horsepower claims in the past. They made up numbers to fit what marketing dictated.
Just as GM said the V8 engine used in the early 1960's Pontiac Tempest was 326 cu in when it was really 336 cu in. They couldn't have a compact car with a larger engine then the Corvettes 327, so they "fudged" the numbers, claiming 326 cu in.
Last edited by JoesC5; 01-18-2012 at 04:49 PM.
01-18-2012, 04:49 PM
#45
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Aug 2009
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 5,504
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The numbers for the Chrysler and the Volt are manufactures numbers. Who knows what the GS/Z06/ZR1 numbers are? Just eyeballing a car, you can't possibly know what the Cd is.
When I posted the independent numbers one point I was trying to make was that the C6 has worse numbers then the C5. GM had posted the .29 for the C5 since 1997. They had to make the C6 look better so the magically????? came up with a .286 number. Independent test shows the C6 has a higher Cd the the C5, but GM didn't want you to know that, IMHO.
Read all the press releases on the Z06 when it was released in 2005. GM said the Cd was .31. Fast forward, and GM now says the Cd of the Z06 is .34. I know of not one thing that was changed on the Z06 over the past 7 years that would increase the Cd. Every body panel is the same size and shape, size of the tires, etc are all the same.
My point. We don't have a clue as to how terrible the Cd is on the wide bodies as GM seems to make the numbers up to fit their marketing.
It could be the same as a base C6, or better then a base C6 or it could be that of a Mack truck. But, what ever the true Cd, is, the aero of the widebodies is functional. It gives more downforce front and rear, and it moves more air through the brakes, front and rear. Whatever the Cd, the widebodies will out perform the narrow bodies.
Kinda like how they use to do the horsepower claims in the past. They made up numbers to fit what marketing dictated.
Just as GM said the V8 engine used in the early 1960's Pontiac Tempest was 326 cu in when it was really 336 cu in. They couldn't have a compact car with a larger engine then the Corvettes 327, so they "fudged" the numbers, claiming 326 cu in.
When I posted the independent numbers one point I was trying to make was that the C6 has worse numbers then the C5. GM had posted the .29 for the C5 since 1997. They had to make the C6 look better so the magically????? came up with a .286 number. Independent test shows the C6 has a higher Cd the the C5, but GM didn't want you to know that, IMHO.
Read all the press releases on the Z06 when it was released in 2005. GM said the Cd was .31. Fast forward, and GM now says the Cd of the Z06 is .34. I know of not one thing that was changed on the Z06 over the past 7 years that would increase the Cd. Every body panel is the same size and shape, size of the tires, etc are all the same.
My point. We don't have a clue as to how terrible the Cd is on the wide bodies as GM seems to make the numbers up to fit their marketing.
It could be the same as a base C6, or better then a base C6 or it could be that of a Mack truck. But, what ever the true Cd, is, the aero of the widebodies is functional. It gives more downforce front and rear, and it moves more air through the brakes, front and rear. Whatever the Cd, the widebodies will out perform the narrow bodies.
Kinda like how they use to do the horsepower claims in the past. They made up numbers to fit what marketing dictated.
Just as GM said the V8 engine used in the early 1960's Pontiac Tempest was 326 cu in when it was really 336 cu in. They couldn't have a compact car with a larger engine then the Corvettes 327, so they "fudged" the numbers, claiming 326 cu in.
Also, think about one thing: the top speed is drag limited on all vettes, if high speed stability would be an issue with the base, it would have a limiter, wouldn't it? I do not deny the widebody has certain appeal but would certainly question the approach GM took to allegedly reduce the front end lift then those front splash guards/deflectors. When I put the Z06 next to the base, base seems considerably cleaner and more elegant. I am not biased because I have both Z and base...
01-18-2012, 05:14 PM
#47
Team Owner
LOL, we can make a wager, a big one too if you think Cd of widebody is just not right down aweful when compared to the base due to increase in drag.
Also, think about one thing: the top speed is drag limited on all vettes, if high speed stability would be an issue with the base, it would have a limiter, wouldn't it? I do not deny the widebody has certain appeal but would certainly question the approach GM took to allegedly reduce the front end lift then those front splash guards/deflectors. When I put the Z06 next to the base, base seems considerably cleaner and more elegant. I am not biased because I have both Z and base...
Also, think about one thing: the top speed is drag limited on all vettes, if high speed stability would be an issue with the base, it would have a limiter, wouldn't it? I do not deny the widebody has certain appeal but would certainly question the approach GM took to allegedly reduce the front end lift then those front splash guards/deflectors. When I put the Z06 next to the base, base seems considerably cleaner and more elegant. I am not biased because I have both Z and base...
What is the Cd of a...
C1
C2
C3
C4
01-18-2012, 05:39 PM
#49
i have a 2012 gs.the dvd that comes with the car says your gs will do 190mph on a racetrack.
01-18-2012, 06:02 PM
#50
Team Owner
01-18-2012, 06:07 PM
#51
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Aug 2009
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 5,504
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
LOL you crack me up... I would have to guess they are all within 30's with first ones in upper 30s and later ones going down the scale. Except for grille areas, vettes have been impressive in this regard. I think C4 cd should be about the same as current widebody
01-18-2012, 06:49 PM
#52
Team Owner
The C1 = .459
The C2 = .431
The C3 = .456
The C4 = .387
Aren't you surprised how close the C1 and the C3 are?
And the C6 at .343 isn't that far off the C4's .387.
Oh, and on the pickup truck aero question...it's more aero with the tailgate up, then down. But some will agrue that because they see the huge upright rear spoiler on a NASCAR car and think it's areo should also be the same as with a truck.
01-18-2012, 07:25 PM
#54
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jul 2010
Location: Tacoma, Wa/Surprise, Az
Posts: 2,849
Received 193 Likes
on
166 Posts
Hi Ozer,
Its a head game.
What really matters is if the GS can get around the track faster than a base model and that pretty much depends upon the driver.
Mike
Its a head game.
What really matters is if the GS can get around the track faster than a base model and that pretty much depends upon the driver.
Mike
01-18-2012, 09:36 PM
#55
Instructor
Really, who cares. 185, 190, I will never come close to that speed just like 99% of owners.
All reviews like the GS stability over the base, more controllable, one of the reasons it is the hottest selling Corvette in these tough times. Lots of great stuff for just $4000, bargain IMO.
All reviews like the GS stability over the base, more controllable, one of the reasons it is the hottest selling Corvette in these tough times. Lots of great stuff for just $4000, bargain IMO.
01-18-2012, 09:39 PM
#56
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Aug 2009
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 5,504
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My point was that just looking at a car, you might guess that one is more areo then another, but necessarily true.
The C1 = .459
The C2 = .431
The C3 = .456
The C4 = .387
Aren't you surprised how close the C1 and the C3 are?
And the C6 at .343 isn't that far off the C4's .387.
Oh, and on the pickup truck aero question...it's more aero with the tailgate up, then down. But some will agrue that because they see the huge upright rear spoiler on a NASCAR car and think it's areo should also be the same as with a truck.
The C1 = .459
The C2 = .431
The C3 = .456
The C4 = .387
Aren't you surprised how close the C1 and the C3 are?
And the C6 at .343 isn't that far off the C4's .387.
Oh, and on the pickup truck aero question...it's more aero with the tailgate up, then down. But some will agrue that because they see the huge upright rear spoiler on a NASCAR car and think it's areo should also be the same as with a truck.
01-18-2012, 09:45 PM
#57
Safety Car
Member Since: Jan 2009
Location: Mooresville (Race City USA) NC
Posts: 4,681
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car and Driver tested it and said the top speed is 182 MPH, drag limited:
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...e-cayman-s.pdf
http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...e-cayman-s.pdf
The G/S has a top speed of 182 mph, the base Vette 190 mph, the Z06 198 mph, and the ZR1 205 mph.
01-18-2012, 09:53 PM
#58
Instructor
Member Since: Nov 2010
Location: The Woodlands Texas
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently cannot hold a candle to Cayman S on the track either