1/4 Mile Times for my new ride -->
10-14-2004, 05:17 PM
#141
Navigator
Member Since: Sep 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Relax
Originally Posted by Tom Steele
Comments like this upset me at first, because they don't help me with my problem. But maybe the reason that I am not getting help is that I am not communicating my situation well. So let me try.
1. I am not made of money. I have a decent income and can afford a new Corvette from time to time.
2. Power and handling are extremely important to me. I drive my cars aggressively and enjoy doing so.
3. I am very concerned about the pricing of the 2006 Z06 from the threads here and on other Corvette boards. If it is above $60k, I'm starting to get priced out. I could afford it, but it is just not the best use of my money anymore.
4. I am in a unique situation. I have pulled some strings and tugged at a friendship and may have the opportunity to get a C6 Z51 at a VERY nice price. Note: If that weren't the case, oddly enough, I wouldn't be in this quandry. I'd just buy a 2004 Z06 and sit back and watch the show and see what 2006 brings us.
5. I did #4 based on the early reports of the Z51 C6. 400hp and the same transmission as the Z06 and it seemed to me that there shouldn't have been more that 0.1-0.2 difference in 1/4 mile times. Plus, with the torque kicking in lower - by my thinking - the car might even have FELT faster than a Z06. That is starting not to be the case at all.
I have no idea why, but the C6 Z51 is not coming in anywhere near my expectations for performance. I really thought it would be very close to the Z06. The RWHP isn't far off. Makes me wonder what they are doing with the computer...
So, my point in entering these discussions is because I am sweating it out right now, with a Z51 C6 on the way that I may not want if it is significantly slower than the Z06 I have now. And the new Z06 may be priced in to Supercar territory. I would have already bought a used Viper if I wanted to spend $65-$70k on a car. I don't.
I wanted to see some 12.6-12.7 e.t.s in the C6 Z51 and I would have been pleased. So far, we're not seeing that.
1. I am not made of money. I have a decent income and can afford a new Corvette from time to time.
2. Power and handling are extremely important to me. I drive my cars aggressively and enjoy doing so.
3. I am very concerned about the pricing of the 2006 Z06 from the threads here and on other Corvette boards. If it is above $60k, I'm starting to get priced out. I could afford it, but it is just not the best use of my money anymore.
4. I am in a unique situation. I have pulled some strings and tugged at a friendship and may have the opportunity to get a C6 Z51 at a VERY nice price. Note: If that weren't the case, oddly enough, I wouldn't be in this quandry. I'd just buy a 2004 Z06 and sit back and watch the show and see what 2006 brings us.
5. I did #4 based on the early reports of the Z51 C6. 400hp and the same transmission as the Z06 and it seemed to me that there shouldn't have been more that 0.1-0.2 difference in 1/4 mile times. Plus, with the torque kicking in lower - by my thinking - the car might even have FELT faster than a Z06. That is starting not to be the case at all.
I have no idea why, but the C6 Z51 is not coming in anywhere near my expectations for performance. I really thought it would be very close to the Z06. The RWHP isn't far off. Makes me wonder what they are doing with the computer...
So, my point in entering these discussions is because I am sweating it out right now, with a Z51 C6 on the way that I may not want if it is significantly slower than the Z06 I have now. And the new Z06 may be priced in to Supercar territory. I would have already bought a used Viper if I wanted to spend $65-$70k on a car. I don't.
I wanted to see some 12.6-12.7 e.t.s in the C6 Z51 and I would have been pleased. So far, we're not seeing that.
You should relax...unless you are racing for pink slips. GM never claimed the base C6 was faster than C5 Z06. They claimed that it would be 80% of C5 Z06. However, it will have fuel economy and idle quality of a base C5. It will also be available with an auto trans, open roof, nav, improved noise isolation and the additional security of run flats. The added horsepower, smaller rear tires section width, stiffer side walls and increased weight will conspire against base C6 matching C5 Z06 (BTW the increased weight is in areas that compound...tire/wheel assemblies, brake rotors and fly wheel are heavier, this has a huge impact on rotational energy at redline shifts.) All this said the C6 will be an improvement in 95% of your time in it with only a minor reduction in performance. Buy the C6...your significant other will be much more satisfied.
10-15-2004, 08:43 AM
#142
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Tom Steele
Lance
10-15-2004, 10:41 AM
#143
Drifting
Member Since: May 2003
Location: BALTIMORE MD
Posts: 1,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
advice
may I suggest running the car at fantasy Island the air is perfect the track surface is perfect and the timing computer is -.4 tenths off.That's where gm runs all there cars. 
10-15-2004, 01:35 PM
#144
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jul 2001
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 3,284
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I think the Z06 versus C6 timeslip issue is an interesting one. Everyone seems to be looking for a single answer to pinpoint the reason that the C6's are not close to or equal to the Z06 in straight line acceleration. I believe the problem here is that there is no single cause for the C6 being slower than the spec sheet would suggest. There are many factors that add up here.
First, the LS2 does appear to be a more powerful engine than the LS6. From several overlayed dynos I've seen here, the LS2 appears to be putting down more torque in a flatter curve than the LS6 and the LS6 gets an advantage on the max numbers simply because the curves cross and the LS6 has very slightly more power above about 6200 RPM. Due to the LS2 having more torque over about 95% of the RPM band, I believe the LS2 is actually a more powerful engine overall than the LS6. Given the dyno results that I've seen (and most have been quite consistent), you would expect the C6 to be faster than the Z06.
Problem 1: the Z06 is over 200 pounds lighter than a C6. I have not been able to verify this and quite frankly I find it hard to believe, but those in the know here say it is so. The Z06 having a 200 pound advantage over the C6 is the same as having a 25 HP advantage!
Problem 2: C6 wheels/tires are 13.43 inches in radius while the Z06 is 13.07 inches. The smaller radius will account for another 11 HP in first gear, although as you go through the gears, things start to average out since higher gears convey less "thrust" but you can also carry them to a higher speed.
The bottom line here is that just due to the way the cars are set up, the Z06 will have a 25 - 35 HP advantage over the C6, and about the same amount of torque. The weight difference and wheel size therefore more than make up for the extra 5-10 lb/ft of torque that the LS2 generates throughout the power band which is why the Z06 is still faster.
Having said that, I do think there is room for improvement and the LS2 may indeed gain some power over time as they are broken in. Even after this "back of the envelope" analysis, I do think the two cars should be closer than they appear to be in reality, probably within 2 to 3 tenths in the 1/4. I think if you average all the Z06 times and all the C6 times, you'll probably be within 3 to 4 tenths, but I'm not sure. Has anyone done that? It's difficult to compare using all these "look at what this guy did" threads.
Mike
First, the LS2 does appear to be a more powerful engine than the LS6. From several overlayed dynos I've seen here, the LS2 appears to be putting down more torque in a flatter curve than the LS6 and the LS6 gets an advantage on the max numbers simply because the curves cross and the LS6 has very slightly more power above about 6200 RPM. Due to the LS2 having more torque over about 95% of the RPM band, I believe the LS2 is actually a more powerful engine overall than the LS6. Given the dyno results that I've seen (and most have been quite consistent), you would expect the C6 to be faster than the Z06.
Problem 1: the Z06 is over 200 pounds lighter than a C6. I have not been able to verify this and quite frankly I find it hard to believe, but those in the know here say it is so. The Z06 having a 200 pound advantage over the C6 is the same as having a 25 HP advantage!
Problem 2: C6 wheels/tires are 13.43 inches in radius while the Z06 is 13.07 inches. The smaller radius will account for another 11 HP in first gear, although as you go through the gears, things start to average out since higher gears convey less "thrust" but you can also carry them to a higher speed.
The bottom line here is that just due to the way the cars are set up, the Z06 will have a 25 - 35 HP advantage over the C6, and about the same amount of torque. The weight difference and wheel size therefore more than make up for the extra 5-10 lb/ft of torque that the LS2 generates throughout the power band which is why the Z06 is still faster.
Having said that, I do think there is room for improvement and the LS2 may indeed gain some power over time as they are broken in. Even after this "back of the envelope" analysis, I do think the two cars should be closer than they appear to be in reality, probably within 2 to 3 tenths in the 1/4. I think if you average all the Z06 times and all the C6 times, you'll probably be within 3 to 4 tenths, but I'm not sure. Has anyone done that? It's difficult to compare using all these "look at what this guy did" threads.
Mike
10-15-2004, 05:27 PM
#145
Le Mans Master
Some of you make some good points. Personally I don't need to hear the part about the psychology of the whole thing, but I do value the facts and guesses about what is going on. (BTW, I don't mean that rudely, and can see that it might appear to be rude. My point is simply that I "get it" about performance. But at the end of the day, I'm confident I would beat about 99% of C6 Z51 drivers right now in my Z06 if we drag raced. I was hoping the C6 would be closer to the Z06 than it is in accelleration performance.)
Unsprung weight could be a factor. And I can fix that to some degree. I don't want runflats on my second set of tires anyway. I'll just put together a version of the current Z06 flat kit and carry a cell phone like I do now.
Gearing with the tires is still a guess. Anyone actually measure them yet?
As for weight, that was my first thought but I have been lectured that the C6 is not 200# heavier than the Z06. I guess according to the specs the C6 is supposed to be 3179# and the Z06 3114#. I would think that options would increase the weight though and the 3179 would be on a 1SX car. Others have argued this with me though.
I think the computer may be a factor too. I've heard stories that make me think the C6 may have more aggressive torque management routines.
As for the "GM never promised me a Z06" theme. I know that, and I didn't expect C6 Z51's to be beating Z06's. I did expect it to be very close though.
I think the original quote was for 75% of a Z06, which is looking more accurate. But with the hp numbers I was expecting closer in the 1/4 mile than we are seeing.
Unsprung weight could be a factor. And I can fix that to some degree. I don't want runflats on my second set of tires anyway. I'll just put together a version of the current Z06 flat kit and carry a cell phone like I do now.
Gearing with the tires is still a guess. Anyone actually measure them yet?
As for weight, that was my first thought but I have been lectured that the C6 is not 200# heavier than the Z06. I guess according to the specs the C6 is supposed to be 3179# and the Z06 3114#. I would think that options would increase the weight though and the 3179 would be on a 1SX car. Others have argued this with me though.
I think the computer may be a factor too. I've heard stories that make me think the C6 may have more aggressive torque management routines.
As for the "GM never promised me a Z06" theme. I know that, and I didn't expect C6 Z51's to be beating Z06's. I did expect it to be very close though.
I think the original quote was for 75% of a Z06, which is looking more accurate. But with the hp numbers I was expecting closer in the 1/4 mile than we are seeing.
Last edited by Tom Steele; 10-15-2004 at 05:30 PM.
10-17-2004, 08:41 AM
#146
Advanced
Member Since: Jan 2003
Location: Cypress TX
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jimwood
The Z06 owners arent going to like the fact that GM made the new C6 so capable as to be able drive by it, so easily. Good runs!!! This car should easily be trapping 120's.
Why would anyone buy a z06 now? Makes that purchase seem questionable, since this car is so much faster. Awesome!
Why would anyone buy a z06 now? Makes that purchase seem questionable, since this car is so much faster. Awesome!
10-18-2004, 08:10 AM
#147
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by vipersaint
You're dreaming. Drove a C6 yesterday. Looks nice but don't get carried away with performance stories. I've yet to see anywhere where pros are driving that says the C6 will outperform the ZO6. In fact, some of the early times I've seen put the C6 at as much as 1/2 second slower 0-60 and the quarter. Also the C6 comes up short with lower g's in the turns. Higher tech? Yea; As fun to drive? Don't go there. I'll stay with the ZO6...until the new version comes out, then I'll have one of those.
Lance
10-18-2004, 09:32 PM
#148
Advanced
Member Since: Jan 2003
Location: Cypress TX
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by racelance
That's what is so great about life - we can all make our own choices! I love my C6 for the car it is & I love my '95 ZR1 for the car it is - I'll wave to any other Corvette owner because I know he's just as happy with the car as I am... they are a great car in every aspect. Life is good & so is the Corvette.
Lance
Lance
10-19-2004, 02:53 AM
#149
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Aug 2000
Location: Miami Fl
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a great thread! I can't believe I read the whole thing! I used to own a 01 Z06 with a couple of mods- put down 349 or so to the wheels, thats what my C6 put down. Both cars feels AWESOME!
I hate to point out the obvious, but - a highly modded Subaru STI would probably smoke both my old Z and my new C. Thats what mods are for.
The C6 is a really, really nice car.
Lance, the Callaway stuff on your ride is sweeeeet!
I hate to point out the obvious, but - a highly modded Subaru STI would probably smoke both my old Z and my new C. Thats what mods are for.
The C6 is a really, really nice car.
Lance, the Callaway stuff on your ride is sweeeeet!
10-19-2004, 08:03 AM
#150
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Pio
What a great thread! I can't believe I read the whole thing! I used to own a 01 Z06 with a couple of mods- put down 349 or so to the wheels, thats what my C6 put down. Both cars feels AWESOME!
I hate to point out the obvious, but - a highly modded Subaru STI would probably smoke both my old Z and my new C. Thats what mods are for.
The C6 is a really, really nice car.
Lance, the Callaway stuff on your ride is sweeeeet!
I hate to point out the obvious, but - a highly modded Subaru STI would probably smoke both my old Z and my new C. Thats what mods are for.
The C6 is a really, really nice car.
Lance, the Callaway stuff on your ride is sweeeeet!
Heck, I'll take both cars...
Life is good...
Lance
