Yep that was fairly descent air for drag racing. Still very fast for an LS1.

 

It was a 2002 stripper Z28 the pinickle of LS1 performance, and it took lots of practice to get those times.

 

To me it say, Zippin is a very good 6-speed driver/launcher and that he should be seeing proportionately fast times in the C6, which he is not....because of TM.

My experience is similar.
11.52 with 363 rwhp in a C5Z.
11.20 with 450 rwhp in a C6Z.

three tenth improvement with 90 additional rwhp. Yes, paying that TM toll is a bitch.

Ranger

 

No doubt that is some very good shifting. I am an auto guy so I don't have to get good, just lucky.

 

Well I am definately no Ronnie Socks, may he rest in peace, but it is not my first time around the block either. I appreciate the complements. But to be intirely fair to the C6, I haven't ran my C6 in as good conditions as the day of my 12.89 pass, but this fall I will and even with 6000 miles on the C6 and the same or better conditions I dont' see bettering 12.40 which is a long way from 2001 Z06 performance which I believe our cars should be comparable to. How fast did your stock 2001 Z06 go Ranger?

 

Never ran the 01 without the CAI.

With 345 rwhp (stock except CAI) on stock tires, my 01 Z06 ran
60'...........1.856
330'.........5.170
660'.........7.885 @ 91.45
1000'......10.191
1320'......12.145 @115.85
Density Alt: 1703 Feet

With 353 rwhp bone stock on stock tires, my 02 Z06 ran
60'..........1.783
330'........5.038
660'........7.669 @ 93.96 mph
1000'.......9.918
1320'......11.818 @ 117.26
Density Alt: 170 Feet

Ranger

 

My C5 ran a 1.83 60 foot on a 12.71 with a vararam, catback, and hypertech tuner

on runflats!!!!!!

 

I wish I could get a 1.83 sixty with my C6

 

That's a hell of a good time. I admit that I never kept up with Z28 times. I actually had a couple of Z28s (95 and 97) but that was well before I did any drag racing (at the track).

 

One night I made three straight runs in the 12.6s in my 2001. It was a six speed, with a cold air intake and B&B exhaust - dynod at 317. I had Michelin Pilot sports. My best 60' that night was a 2.01. That's the first car I ever drag raced, and somehow, that car really worked well for me.

I ran 12.8s in my 2001 convertible with exactly the same rwhp and same tires. I could not launch it as well. My 01 did not have Z51, and the 03 did. I think the softer springs helped my launch the '01 better.

 

Not to throw fuel on the fire but here is a link to a info page that verify's the existence of TM. But I guess we all agree it exists anyway. But just for ***** and grins I thought I would post it. I found it looking up info for another thread.

It also talks about the A6 parasitic loss being 5-10 HP more than the A4


http://wheeltalk.fancal.net/?p=358

 

I had a really good time with that car. Most of the young guys would walk around it about 3 times look under it and then say, you mean its stock. I've got a lid and a catback and it's still faster than mine.

Your Z28's were LT1's, the LS1 cars were a whole different ball game.

 

Yes, the LT1's were different. Actually, even though they didn't make the hp of the LS engines, the LTs had more low end torque (relative to the power) and sounded better. Just my opinion of course.

BTW, were the hell do you live? What's with "Springtown"???

 

A small town northwest of Ft. Worth. Due north of Weatherford 18 miles.

 

cool... good find

i'm impressed the auto can take a redline shift, yeow... good job gm.

any info for the manual transmission ?

or do we assume that GM is using the same program, in the ecm, for both versions of the car (manual and automatic) and therefore the TM features from the auto apply to the manual. if this is true, i'm gonna be upset. why the heck did i buy a manual if the computer is gonna control it anyway ???

it also appears we have two types of tm dicussions going, one dicussing launch, shift and drag strip techniques and one trying to find the 'logic' or method by which tm is invoked. i'm simply trying to approach it from a mechanical view. i would like to isolate the components involved and then determine their individual effects upon the system and how to manipulate them in such a way as to control the impact of the tm function.

 

Hey Zig,
Not sure on the M6. My theory is the M6 is just much more difficult to program a TM type function. If you think about it in a A6 or A4 the computer does the shifting so it would seem easier for a TM type function to be controlled, whereas in a M6 the person shifts. Just a thought.

I am not saying there is no TM in a M6, just not to the extent that it functions in an auto. And that would seem to be the case when you look at the ET's.

 

According to a well known and respected tuner that I have talked to about this a couple of times, there definitely is TM in automatic cars, but very little in manual cars. My point being that there is no way that the automatic and manuals use the same TM settings.

 

Makes sense.

 

yes it does.

i don't believe there is any doubt that tm exists in the automatics, simply do to their nature.

is it safe to assume that the same program is used in the ecm for all (non-z06) versions of the car ?

if it is safe to assume so, then the questions that begs an answer is. Do the thresholds that invoke a tm event on the automatic apply to the manual ? for example, let's say the logic for the automatic required a reduction in timing, for the time it takes the transmission to upshift, so as not to create a driveline shock from excessive flywheel speed and sudden engement of the transmission.

if, for arguments sake, the above logic was used, not saying it is, just trying to follow it to it's conclusion. let's say the ecm is using the same programming and the thresholds are the same but will only be experienced if and when the driver causes the manual transmission and engine to fall into the same logic stream that would invoke a tm event in the automatic. if this is the case and we know what invoke a tm event in the automatic and the logic is the same for both transmissions we should be able to drive around it by staying just shy of the threshold.

if tm is controlled simply by a gear to rpm lookup table i would love to know what ve gm is limiting the car too, anything less than 100% is gonna be upsetting, that's not what i paid for.

 

i was wondering, do you know what one would be able to conclude if rpms were included in the 60, 330, etc. ft times ?

i was wondering if one would be able to use rpms to plot how the run was going. i'm wondering if similiar 60' times show similiar rpms, etc...