[Z06] C6 Z06 vs. Veryon vs. 997 TT vs. LP640 vs. etc..
10-25-2006, 12:11 PM
#1
Drifting
Thread Starter
C6 Z06 vs. Veryon vs. 997 TT vs. LP640 vs. etc..
Top Speeds:
Vanquish S: 317 km/h
Veyron: 402 km/h
Corvette C6 Z06: 315 km/h
SRT-10: 298 km/h
559 GTB: 335 km/h
Ford GT: 330 km/h
LP640: 340 km/h
SLR: 324 km/h
997 Turbo: 310 km/h
997 TT beats the Z06 at the 300 Km/h mark..
Vanquish S: 317 km/h
Veyron: 402 km/h
Corvette C6 Z06: 315 km/h
SRT-10: 298 km/h
559 GTB: 335 km/h
Ford GT: 330 km/h
LP640: 340 km/h
SLR: 324 km/h
997 Turbo: 310 km/h
997 TT beats the Z06 at the 300 Km/h mark..
10-25-2006, 12:30 PM
#3
Drifting
Member Since: Nov 2005
Location: Palatine(ChicagoLand) IL
Posts: 1,733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
come on you are shocked at that?
I am shocked how the hell the SLR did so poorly..its a beast at high speeds.. it seems like LP 640 and GT and 599 beat it to the 300 mark???
I am shocked how the hell the SLR did so poorly..its a beast at high speeds.. it seems like LP 640 and GT and 599 beat it to the 300 mark???
10-25-2006, 12:43 PM
#4
Instructor
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: ATLANTA GEORGIA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Zlicious
I know the Z06 kinda falls on its face at 160 when one has to shift into 5th gear, but DAMN, 41.8 secs to 186 mph??..
10-25-2006, 01:11 PM
#7
The Z06's acceleration doesn't seem as good as it could be. The 0 - 60 time is a good .3 of a second off. 11.9 seconds to 124 mph isn't way off for those unfamiliar with the car, but it could certainly be better. The guys here that run mid 11's at 126 - 127 mph in the quarter (or quicker) would probably run to 124 mph in the low 11's (if not 11 flat), a good .6 - .7 quicker that the magazine got.
I would like to see how a Z06 with a rear would perform above 100.
The Ford GT looks off, too.
The Ferrari put in the run of its life. 10.3 to 124 mph, that's .7 of a second quicker than Ferrari's official time (I believe)... and Ferrari's not usually conservative when quoting performance figures.
The Bugatti is ridiculous.
Can't blame the magazine too much, though. Getting traction's hard as we all know. The quicker cars did have some help... the Ferrari's got LC (not to mention the new Super-Fast F1 box) - some of the other cars are AWD. Not making excuses, but, when testing unfamiliar cars, those aids often do help.
Looks like a good article, though. Those guys must have had a ball.
I would like to see how a Z06 with a rear would perform above 100.
The Ford GT looks off, too.
The Ferrari put in the run of its life. 10.3 to 124 mph, that's .7 of a second quicker than Ferrari's official time (I believe)... and Ferrari's not usually conservative when quoting performance figures.
The Bugatti is ridiculous.
Can't blame the magazine too much, though. Getting traction's hard as we all know. The quicker cars did have some help... the Ferrari's got LC (not to mention the new Super-Fast F1 box) - some of the other cars are AWD. Not making excuses, but, when testing unfamiliar cars, those aids often do help.
Looks like a good article, though. Those guys must have had a ball.
10-25-2006, 03:11 PM
#10
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Sep 2005
Location: Detroit, MI USA
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VY427
The Z06's acceleration doesn't seem as good as it could be. The 0 - 60 time is a good .3 of a second off. 11.9 seconds to 124 mph isn't way off for those unfamiliar with the car, but it could certainly be better. The guys here that run mid 11's at 126 - 127 mph in the quarter (or quicker) would probably run to 124 mph in the low 11's (if not 11 flat), a good .6 - .7 quicker that the magazine got.
I would like to see how a Z06 with a rear would perform above 100.
The Ford GT looks off, too.
The Ferrari put in the run of its life. 10.3 to 124 mph, that's .7 of a second quicker than Ferrari's official time (I believe)... and Ferrari's not usually conservative when quoting performance figures.
The Bugatti is ridiculous.
Can't blame the magazine too much, though. Getting traction's hard as we all know. The quicker cars did have some help... the Ferrari's got LC (not to mention the new Super-Fast F1 box) - some of the other cars are AWD. Not making excuses, but, when testing unfamiliar cars, those aids often do help.
Looks like a good article, though. Those guys must have had a ball.
I would like to see how a Z06 with a rear would perform above 100.
The Ford GT looks off, too.
The Ferrari put in the run of its life. 10.3 to 124 mph, that's .7 of a second quicker than Ferrari's official time (I believe)... and Ferrari's not usually conservative when quoting performance figures.
The Bugatti is ridiculous.
Can't blame the magazine too much, though. Getting traction's hard as we all know. The quicker cars did have some help... the Ferrari's got LC (not to mention the new Super-Fast F1 box) - some of the other cars are AWD. Not making excuses, but, when testing unfamiliar cars, those aids often do help.
Looks like a good article, though. Those guys must have had a ball.
10-25-2006, 04:07 PM
#12
Originally Posted by Verrückt
It looks right to me. 100 km/h is actually 62 mph which requires a shift to 2nd gear.
In any event, the 0 - 124 mph (200 km/h) time is not as fast as it ultimately could be. A few of the other cars gave, I would say, their best performance.
If that particular 599 GTB's not a freak or a ringer, the new Ferrari's a heck of a car. The LP 640 ran well, too.
10-25-2006, 05:37 PM
#14
As usual the times for the Z06 are supsiciously low. The first time I ever timed my Z 0-60 I did it in 3.6. I've done 3.3 on street tires and 2.9 on sticky tire and I am not the worlds best driver or anything. I think my 0-125 wasin the mid 10s to 11.0.
Jesus take a look at how fast the Veyron gets to 180mph. Less than half the time it takes the Z06.
Jesus take a look at how fast the Veyron gets to 180mph. Less than half the time it takes the Z06.
10-25-2006, 06:39 PM
#16
Pro
Member Since: Mar 2005
Location: orange county CA
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 355Spider
As usual the times for the Z06 are supsiciously low.
I wish I could read that article......someone should spend the rest of the day translating that for our enjoyment.
10-25-2006, 06:39 PM
#17
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Sep 2005
Location: Detroit, MI USA
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VY427
You're right Verruckt, I forgot to account for the extra 2 mph. If you subtract 0.2 for the extra 2 mph, they're at 3.8 to sixty. That's pretty quick, but a good run is likely 0.2 - 0.3 quicker.
In any event, the 0 - 124 mph (200 km/h) time is not as fast as it ultimately could be. A few of the other cars gave, I would say, their best performance.
If that particular 599 GTB's not a freak or a ringer, the new Ferrari's a heck of a car. The LP 640 ran well, too.
In any event, the 0 - 124 mph (200 km/h) time is not as fast as it ultimately could be. A few of the other cars gave, I would say, their best performance.
If that particular 599 GTB's not a freak or a ringer, the new Ferrari's a heck of a car. The LP 640 ran well, too.
10-25-2006, 06:42 PM
#18
Pro
Member Since: Mar 2005
Location: orange county CA
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VY427
The Ferrari put in the run of its life. 10.3 to 124 mph, that's .7 of a second quicker than Ferrari's official time (I believe)... and Ferrari's not usually conservative when quoting performance figures.
10-25-2006, 09:57 PM
#19
Originally Posted by 32valves
does the article state if ferrari supplied the car? Those numbers look suspiciously fast.
"Ferrari full support power-driven with a works team."
Better picture of it here:
The 100-200 time for the 599 in this test is slightly better than the numbers from Quattroruote. After Auto Motor und Sport's test showed slower numbers, a rumor surfaced saying AMS used 95 (RON) octane fuel, while QR used 100 RON; QR normally uses 95 RON, and I seem to recall that is the fuel specified for use in the 599. Auto Zeitung has since tested a 599 and duplicated AMS's times to the tenth of a second at 100, 160, 200kmh, and 100-200.
Info ..