[ZR1] We Are Not "Over Weight!"
12-06-2010, 12:49 PM
#21
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Mar 1999
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 10,063
Received 3,803 Likes
on
1,143 Posts
"Ask Tadge" Producer
It's a very solid chassis, and the Z06s have been proving that since they were released in '05. I'd say 5+ years of real-world testing is pretty good.
I'm sorry to say: your concerns are unfounded.
jas
12-06-2010, 01:03 PM
#22
Moderator
Member Since: Jul 2005
Location: West MI
Posts: 27,703
Received 3,622 Likes
on
1,741 Posts
CF Banner Relay Captain
West MI & JAX/NE Florida
Events Coordinator
St. Jude Donor '11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17, '21
I'm not sure what your concern is regarding the aluminum frame. The only downside of it is that it's much more difficult to repair should it get bent. But bending it will require the same amount of force, if not more, than the steel frame will.
It's a very solid chassis, and the Z06s have been proving that since they were released in '05. I'd say 5+ years of real-world testing is pretty good.
I'm sorry to say: your concerns are unfounded.
jas
It's a very solid chassis, and the Z06s have been proving that since they were released in '05. I'd say 5+ years of real-world testing is pretty good.
I'm sorry to say: your concerns are unfounded.
jas
Good to know b/c my ZR1 might start to get a complex. First it weighs too much and now a possible inferior frame. 
I guess I should have "weighed" these things before purchasing
12-06-2010, 01:12 PM
#23
I don't have a GS (just a Z06 and a ZR1), but I think it's FAR from just an appearance model!!!
It's performance may well be similar to the base C6, but when a Grand Sport coupe is ordered with the manual transmission the car gets a hand built forged crank LS3 on the same line as the LS7 and LS9. Dry sump is also included. It has the larger wheels/tires and the larger Z06 brakes.
It has the steel frame, and I think that if I were building a T1 track car that the GS would be an outstanding platform to start with!!
I think it's an excellent addition to the C6 lineup!!
Bob
It's performance may well be similar to the base C6, but when a Grand Sport coupe is ordered with the manual transmission the car gets a hand built forged crank LS3 on the same line as the LS7 and LS9. Dry sump is also included. It has the larger wheels/tires and the larger Z06 brakes.
It has the steel frame, and I think that if I were building a T1 track car that the GS would be an outstanding platform to start with!!
I think it's an excellent addition to the C6 lineup!!
Bob
The GS convinced many buyers to "move up" and spend considerably more than they would have spent for a "base" with or without Z-51 option. From a marketing product plan point of view this produced more profit per unit sold.
The GS also convinced many who might have opted for a Z06 to "move down" and buy the GS instead. I suppose there are those who might contest this assertion but I believe that the Z06 has a much higher manufacturer's cost of goods sold than the GS. There are lots of reason for this. Again, a brilliant marketing plan flawlessly executed since, most likely, a GS returns more profit per unit than a Z06.
Furthermore, while I'm talking about the outright brilliance of the GS concept and plan let's look at what you said: "It's performance may well be similar to the base C6, but when a Grand Sport coupe is ordered with the manual transmission the car gets a hand built forged crank LS3 on the same line as the LS7 and LS9. Dry sump is also included. It has the larger wheels/tires and the larger Z06 brakes."
1/ The GS performance is not possibly "similar" to the base C6 it is nearly identical and, in the auto is identical. The GS top speed is lower.
2/ The forged crank is a good thing. That it provides any measurable increase in performance OR reliability is unproven.
3/ The entire "hand built" marketing concept was itself brilliant in both the Z06 and the GS. It has never been claimed by the factory or proven in actual use that this "hand building" produces a car that is any higher performance or more reliable. In fact, looking at the Z06, one can see from failed roller rockers and valve stems that the hand assembly , apparently, did not prevent this from happening.
4/ The dry sump is also a marketing device. It adds weight and complexity to the vehicle yet only a very small percent of owners have any remote need for it. It provides bragging rights for most.
5/ The larger wheels and tires produce more rolling resistance ( see excellent analysis and graphs in this section ) than the base car. Whether the extra wheel width is needed with no hp change is debatable. On the GS this is mostly an appearance enhancement.
6/ The Z06 brakes are larger and do perform better. They also add weight due to their archaic one piece cast design. Read the Z06 section and you will see many examples of Z06 owners who cannot wait to remove these dinosaurs and thereby enhance the performance of their cars.
All six of these items you mention as reasons for superiority of the GS model themselves show how successful the GS marketing program has been! This is because you are "buying" them as major differences when they are not. The primary difference between a "base" C6 and a GS is appearance. While some buyers might protest otherwise I am certain that internal marketing research would show that 90% or more of GS buyers do so based upon appearance and not performance. However, all these items are "set pieces" that are in place to assist the buyer in making the purchase decision and convincing himself/herself that there are many more reasons to buy a GS than a base model.
These "reasons" are also useful after the buyer has purchased a GS for use as "purchase justification" arguments. Generally, when people buy significant consumer goods they spend considerable time justifying the purchase to themselves and others. Fluff like forged cranks, hand assembly, and dry sumps provide this for them.
The GS is a great car. It has to be a great car because the regular C6 is a great car and that's what it is under the skin.It also has to be a great car because, on the outside, it copies the Z06 and Z06 styling is fantastic. How could the GS not be a great car? It's just not very unique in itself as it's a combination of other models.
Last edited by OregonC6; 12-06-2010 at 01:19 PM. Reason: sp
12-06-2010, 01:14 PM
#24
Yes, it does. What do these cars cost to build? How are the welds verified vs a mass produced frame? Time will tell on this especially as people build the cars well beyond factory hp.
Last edited by OregonC6; 12-06-2010 at 01:17 PM. Reason: sp
12-06-2010, 01:43 PM
#26
Team Owner
12-06-2010, 01:43 PM
#27
Moderator
Member Since: Jul 2005
Location: West MI
Posts: 27,703
Received 3,622 Likes
on
1,741 Posts
CF Banner Relay Captain
West MI & JAX/NE Florida
Events Coordinator
St. Jude Donor '11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17, '21
12-06-2010, 08:07 PM
#29
Le Mans Master
I absolutely agree with you that the C6 is an excellent addition to the C6 lineup. My reasons, however, may differ from yours. Looking at the business model, such as an outsiders like us can infer, the GS was a brilliant success in many ways.
The GS convinced many buyers to "move up" and spend considerably more than they would have spent for a "base" with or without Z-51 option. From a marketing product plan point of view this produced more profit per unit sold.
The GS also convinced many who might have opted for a Z06 to "move down" and buy the GS instead. I suppose there are those who might contest this assertion but I believe that the Z06 has a much higher manufacturer's cost of goods sold than the GS. There are lots of reason for this. Again, a brilliant marketing plan flawlessly executed since, most likely, a GS returns more profit per unit than a Z06.
Furthermore, while I'm talking about the outright brilliance of the GS concept and plan let's look at what you said: "It's performance may well be similar to the base C6, but when a Grand Sport coupe is ordered with the manual transmission the car gets a hand built forged crank LS3 on the same line as the LS7 and LS9. Dry sump is also included. It has the larger wheels/tires and the larger Z06 brakes."
1/ The GS performance is not possibly "similar" to the base C6 it is nearly identical and, in the auto is identical. The GS top speed is lower.
2/ The forged crank is a good thing. That it provides any measurable increase in performance OR reliability is unproven.
3/ The entire "hand built" marketing concept was itself brilliant in both the Z06 and the GS. It has never been claimed by the factory or proven in actual use that this "hand building" produces a car that is any higher performance or more reliable. In fact, looking at the Z06, one can see from failed roller rockers and valve stems that the hand assembly , apparently, did not prevent this from happening.
4/ The dry sump is also a marketing device. It adds weight and complexity to the vehicle yet only a very small percent of owners have any remote need for it. It provides bragging rights for most.
5/ The larger wheels and tires produce more rolling resistance ( see excellent analysis and graphs in this section ) than the base car. Whether the extra wheel width is needed with no hp change is debatable. On the GS this is mostly an appearance enhancement.
6/ The Z06 brakes are larger and do perform better. They also add weight due to their archaic one piece cast design. Read the Z06 section and you will see many examples of Z06 owners who cannot wait to remove these dinosaurs and thereby enhance the performance of their cars.
All six of these items you mention as reasons for superiority of the GS model themselves show how successful the GS marketing program has been! This is because you are "buying" them as major differences when they are not. The primary difference between a "base" C6 and a GS is appearance. While some buyers might protest otherwise I am certain that internal marketing research would show that 90% or more of GS buyers do so based upon appearance and not performance. However, all these items are "set pieces" that are in place to assist the buyer in making the purchase decision and convincing himself/herself that there are many more reasons to buy a GS than a base model.
These "reasons" are also useful after the buyer has purchased a GS for use as "purchase justification" arguments. Generally, when people buy significant consumer goods they spend considerable time justifying the purchase to themselves and others. Fluff like forged cranks, hand assembly, and dry sumps provide this for them.
The GS is a great car. It has to be a great car because the regular C6 is a great car and that's what it is under the skin.It also has to be a great car because, on the outside, it copies the Z06 and Z06 styling is fantastic. How could the GS not be a great car? It's just not very unique in itself as it's a combination of other models.
The GS convinced many buyers to "move up" and spend considerably more than they would have spent for a "base" with or without Z-51 option. From a marketing product plan point of view this produced more profit per unit sold.
The GS also convinced many who might have opted for a Z06 to "move down" and buy the GS instead. I suppose there are those who might contest this assertion but I believe that the Z06 has a much higher manufacturer's cost of goods sold than the GS. There are lots of reason for this. Again, a brilliant marketing plan flawlessly executed since, most likely, a GS returns more profit per unit than a Z06.
Furthermore, while I'm talking about the outright brilliance of the GS concept and plan let's look at what you said: "It's performance may well be similar to the base C6, but when a Grand Sport coupe is ordered with the manual transmission the car gets a hand built forged crank LS3 on the same line as the LS7 and LS9. Dry sump is also included. It has the larger wheels/tires and the larger Z06 brakes."
1/ The GS performance is not possibly "similar" to the base C6 it is nearly identical and, in the auto is identical. The GS top speed is lower.
2/ The forged crank is a good thing. That it provides any measurable increase in performance OR reliability is unproven.
3/ The entire "hand built" marketing concept was itself brilliant in both the Z06 and the GS. It has never been claimed by the factory or proven in actual use that this "hand building" produces a car that is any higher performance or more reliable. In fact, looking at the Z06, one can see from failed roller rockers and valve stems that the hand assembly , apparently, did not prevent this from happening.
4/ The dry sump is also a marketing device. It adds weight and complexity to the vehicle yet only a very small percent of owners have any remote need for it. It provides bragging rights for most.
5/ The larger wheels and tires produce more rolling resistance ( see excellent analysis and graphs in this section ) than the base car. Whether the extra wheel width is needed with no hp change is debatable. On the GS this is mostly an appearance enhancement.
6/ The Z06 brakes are larger and do perform better. They also add weight due to their archaic one piece cast design. Read the Z06 section and you will see many examples of Z06 owners who cannot wait to remove these dinosaurs and thereby enhance the performance of their cars.
All six of these items you mention as reasons for superiority of the GS model themselves show how successful the GS marketing program has been! This is because you are "buying" them as major differences when they are not. The primary difference between a "base" C6 and a GS is appearance. While some buyers might protest otherwise I am certain that internal marketing research would show that 90% or more of GS buyers do so based upon appearance and not performance. However, all these items are "set pieces" that are in place to assist the buyer in making the purchase decision and convincing himself/herself that there are many more reasons to buy a GS than a base model.
These "reasons" are also useful after the buyer has purchased a GS for use as "purchase justification" arguments. Generally, when people buy significant consumer goods they spend considerable time justifying the purchase to themselves and others. Fluff like forged cranks, hand assembly, and dry sumps provide this for them.
The GS is a great car. It has to be a great car because the regular C6 is a great car and that's what it is under the skin.It also has to be a great car because, on the outside, it copies the Z06 and Z06 styling is fantastic. How could the GS not be a great car? It's just not very unique in itself as it's a combination of other models.
99 times out of 100 the reason why any corvette buyer is not driving a ZR1 is because they cannot afford it. On the other hand the average ZR1 driver can afford other exotics that cost far more than a ZR1 but chooses to drive the ZR1 because of preference for performance.
Furthermore the average ZR1 driver does not think that their ability to write a bigger check then the GS buyer can makes any difference in their respect for the GS buyer making the most of what they can afford........ ZR1 drivers do wave.
You seem to be down on anything but a base C6 but by the time that most corvette loyalists can buy a ZR1 they are thumbs up on any corvette that's options lean towards performance and driver enjoyment.
BTW the hand built procedure from the manual LS3 to the LS9 is not a substitute for the bad components that are the cause for the LS7 failures.
Now if possible I would like to hear about real world weight comparisons between the ZO6 and the ZR1.
Doug
Last edited by Shurshot; 12-06-2010 at 08:10 PM.
12-06-2010, 08:32 PM
#30
Instructor
Member Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correction noted. I thought the ZR-1 used steel frame rails along with various magnesium components and aluminum for the rest of the body. My opinion of the car is now just a bit lower with the knowledge that the main frame rails are not steel.
Only time will tell if the welds will hold or if the frame will twist. Aluminum is light but more difficult to weld and not as strong as steel.
Only time will tell if the welds will hold or if the frame will twist. Aluminum is light but more difficult to weld and not as strong as steel.
12-06-2010, 10:12 PM
#31
Pro
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Madison MS
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're showing here you know squat about metals. Aluminium is just as strong as steel but lighter tho its only problem is its harder to weld than normal steel. Why do you think less of the ZR1 now because it has an aluminium frame? Are you that backwards? No offence but research does help...
but back on the weight issue. The 06 Z06 was the lightest, and 2011 brought on the CFZ and Z07 which introduced different brakes, suspension and wheels/tires.
It would be interesting to see a list of the 3 Z06's weights (06/07, 08-10, and a 11 CFZ/Z07).
I have an 06, and may see if I can find a scale and throw it on it.
12-06-2010, 10:30 PM
#32
Instructor
Member Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
next he is going to start talking bad about carbon fiber
but back on the weight issue. The 06 Z06 was the lightest, and 2011 brought on the CFZ and Z07 which introduced different brakes, suspension and wheels/tires.
It would be interesting to see a list of the 3 Z06's weights (06/07, 08-10, and a 11 CFZ/Z07).
I have an 06, and may see if I can find a scale and throw it on it.
but back on the weight issue. The 06 Z06 was the lightest, and 2011 brought on the CFZ and Z07 which introduced different brakes, suspension and wheels/tires.
It would be interesting to see a list of the 3 Z06's weights (06/07, 08-10, and a 11 CFZ/Z07).
I have an 06, and may see if I can find a scale and throw it on it.
12-06-2010, 11:33 PM
#33
Drifting
12-09-2010, 03:15 PM
#35
Le Mans Master
next he is going to start talking bad about carbon fiber
but back on the weight issue. The 06 Z06 was the lightest, and 2011 brought on the CFZ and Z07 which introduced different brakes, suspension and wheels/tires.
It would be interesting to see a list of the 3 Z06's weights (06/07, 08-10, and a 11 CFZ/Z07).
I have an 06, and may see if I can find a scale and throw it on it.
but back on the weight issue. The 06 Z06 was the lightest, and 2011 brought on the CFZ and Z07 which introduced different brakes, suspension and wheels/tires.
It would be interesting to see a list of the 3 Z06's weights (06/07, 08-10, and a 11 CFZ/Z07).
I have an 06, and may see if I can find a scale and throw it on it.
I do remember weighing my 01 Z06 and it came in at 2920
, I didnt beleive it, until I grabed a couple other owners, which all came in the 3100's
12-09-2010, 03:32 PM
#36
Moderator
Member Since: Jul 2005
Location: West MI
Posts: 27,703
Received 3,622 Likes
on
1,741 Posts
CF Banner Relay Captain
West MI & JAX/NE Florida
Events Coordinator
St. Jude Donor '11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17, '21
12-09-2010, 05:15 PM
#37
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2010
Location: Manassas VA
Posts: 839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I put mt 06 on the scale under a 1/4 tank of gas 3130, I dont think any car is going to weigh exactly the same, but all in the ballpark.
I do remember weighing my 01 Z06 and it came in at 2920, I didnt beleive it, until I grabed a couple other owners, which all came in the 3100's
I do remember weighing my 01 Z06 and it came in at 2920
, I didnt beleive it, until I grabed a couple other owners, which all came in the 3100'sThe original premise of my post still stands - We are Not Overweight!
12-14-2010, 11:42 AM
#38
Melting Slicks
Th weight quoted by R&T is wrong, simply as that...sorry you got so excited about not being overweight because that's not really the case
Per GM the curb weight (that's with all fluids topped up including fuel) for the Z06 is: '06-3130, '07-3132, '08-3162, '09&'10-3180, '11-3175. While it's possible the Z07 is a few lbs heavier than a Z06, there's no way it's anywhere close to the ZR1 curb weight of 3333.
Given the Z07 is essentually a ZR1 with a LS7 it has to weigh a least a 100 lbs less because of the LS9's supercharger system.
Cheers, Paul.
Per GM the curb weight (that's with all fluids topped up including fuel) for the Z06 is: '06-3130, '07-3132, '08-3162, '09&'10-3180, '11-3175. While it's possible the Z07 is a few lbs heavier than a Z06, there's no way it's anywhere close to the ZR1 curb weight of 3333.
Given the Z07 is essentually a ZR1 with a LS7 it has to weigh a least a 100 lbs less because of the LS9's supercharger system.
Cheers, Paul.
12-14-2010, 12:05 PM
#39
Le Mans Master
Th weight quoted by R&T is wrong, simply as that...sorry you got so excited about not being overweight because that's not really the case
Per GM the curb weight (that's with all fluids topped up including fuel) for the Z06 is: '06-3130, '07-3132, '08-3162, '09&'10-3180, '11-3175. While it's possible the Z07 is a few lbs heavier than a Z06, there's no way it's anywhere close to the ZR1 curb weight of 3333.
Given the Z07 is essentually a ZR1 with a LS7 it has to weigh a least a 100 lbs less because of the LS9's supercharger system.
Cheers, Paul.
Per GM the curb weight (that's with all fluids topped up including fuel) for the Z06 is: '06-3130, '07-3132, '08-3162, '09&'10-3180, '11-3175. While it's possible the Z07 is a few lbs heavier than a Z06, there's no way it's anywhere close to the ZR1 curb weight of 3333.
Given the Z07 is essentually a ZR1 with a LS7 it has to weigh a least a 100 lbs less because of the LS9's supercharger system.
Cheers, Paul.
I think your weight numbers and estimates are as close to reality as it needs to be....... so thanks for sharing the information you have posted
So I think we need make a real life comparison between the two based on your numbers and look at the difference in performance that results from the differences in weight versus differences in power...... do you agree?
At high performance levels with paratactic losses not being any different between the two cars, 1 net RWHP equals 10 pounds weight. Thus if the difference between the two cars is 100 pounds all things equal is compensated by 10 additional RWHP.
So in the end when you get down the bottom double line that means net net net........ the ZR1 is no more overweight than the ZO6 is underpowered
Doug
Last edited by Shurshot; 12-14-2010 at 12:07 PM.
