2008 450HP 0-60mph?
11-18-2006, 03:08 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Rockmart GA
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 450HP 0-60mph?
IF the rumor mills are true and we get a 450HP base C6 for the 2008 model with an LS3 engine..would that probably push the C6 0-60 in 4.0 seconds flat? current 0-60mph for stock C6 mn6 z51 is 4.2-4.3 seconds.
That really would be some great performance for the money!
That really would be some great performance for the money!
11-18-2006, 03:40 PM
#2
Team Owner
Originally Posted by UTVOL06
IF the rumor mills are true and we get a 450HP base C6 for the 2008 model with an LS3 engine..would that probably push the C6 0-60 in 4.0 seconds flat? current 0-60mph for stock C6 mn6 z51 is 4.2-4.3 seconds.
That really would be some great performance for the money!
That really would be some great performance for the money!
Not that I give too much credibility to online calculators/conversions but according to the charts my stock C6 A6 (with only 400hp
) already does 0-60 in 3.59 seconds. 
11-18-2006, 08:25 PM
#5
Pro
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: KINGS PARK NY
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LS1LT1
The car already IS great performance for the money.
Not that I give too much credibility to online calculators/conversions but according to the charts my stock C6 A6 (with only 400hp) already does 0-60 in 3.59 seconds.
Not that I give too much credibility to online calculators/conversions but according to the charts my stock C6 A6 (with only 400hp
) already does 0-60 in 3.59 seconds. 
11-18-2006, 08:45 PM
#6
Team Owner
Originally Posted by Dgatto
NO WAY! sorry, man but thats just plain silly
http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm
Like I'd said I don't necessarily believe it all but please note that these are the same type of potentially bogus conversions/corrections that some people use to claim that other people's track times are due entirely to air quality/DA.
11-18-2006, 09:18 PM
#7
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Rockmart GA
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
car and driver and other magazine tested 0-60 for the base z51 C6 is 4.1-4.3 seconds depending on traction and how good the shifter is. The A6 is .10-.20 tenths of a second slower than the MN6 z51 as of 2005 test for 0-60mph. But if your not as good at shifting as a professional driver then u want get those times.
Thats why I thought if corvette c6 gets 450hp for the 2008 model it should be about 4seconds flat 0-60.
Thats why I thought if corvette c6 gets 450hp for the 2008 model it should be about 4seconds flat 0-60.
11-18-2006, 09:24 PM
#8
Moderator
Member Since: Dec 2002
Location: Lakewood Ranch, FL
Posts: 40,059
Received 3,570 Likes
on
1,615 Posts
Lets say that the 08 gets an LS3 with 450hp. Would that mandate a slightly wider wheel/tire - say 295 or 305? The LS2 already has traction problems with 285s.
11-18-2006, 10:04 PM
#9
Team Owner
Originally Posted by UTVOL06
car and driver and other magazine tested 0-60 for the base z51 C6 is 4.1-4.3 seconds depending on traction and how good the shifter is. The A6 is .10-.20 tenths of a second slower than the MN6 z51 as of 2005 test for 0-60mph.
11-19-2006, 03:09 AM
#10
Race Director
Originally Posted by LS1LT1
I agree that it sounds a little out there but that's what the online calculator says when using my 8.03@89.76mph 1/8th mile time.
http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm
Like I'd said I don't necessarily believe it all but please note that these are the same type of potentially bogus conversions/corrections that some people use to claim that other people's track times are due entirely to air quality/DA.
http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm
Like I'd said I don't necessarily believe it all but please note that these are the same type of potentially bogus conversions/corrections that some people use to claim that other people's track times are due entirely to air quality/DA.
11-19-2006, 06:31 AM
#11
Safety Car
If they go to 450hp, the A6 tranny will be the only way to go on stock runflats if traction is not going to be an issue, killing times due to wheelspin.
I will say with an automatic and 450hp low 12s (12.1-12.3) will be commonplace with trap speeds of 115+.
I would think we might even see a bone stock automatic crack the 11s, and I would buy one asap and try to be the first one
With that looming on the horizon, I will try to hold on to my 2006 C6 manual until next fall when the 2008s come out.
I think GM will keep this quiet until the last minute so they don't kill 2007 sales.
Howard
I will say with an automatic and 450hp low 12s (12.1-12.3) will be commonplace with trap speeds of 115+.
I would think we might even see a bone stock automatic crack the 11s, and I would buy one asap and try to be the first one
With that looming on the horizon, I will try to hold on to my 2006 C6 manual until next fall when the 2008s come out.
I think GM will keep this quiet until the last minute so they don't kill 2007 sales.
Howard
11-19-2006, 10:04 AM
#12
Team Owner
450
1st it was a 6.2 w/470 hp and 385 ,or somewhere in there,TORQUE.
Then I heard it was 450 in '09,now it's 450 in 08...if I wait long enough,450 might make it back to 05!
Then I heard it was 450 in '09,now it's 450 in 08...if I wait long enough,450 might make it back to 05!
11-19-2006, 01:08 PM
#13
Melting Slicks
Member Since: May 2006
Location: NJ..."the way I saw it, everyone takes a beating sometimes."
Posts: 2,891
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Stop obsessing about what the future Vette will have. Just enjoy driving the one you have now and worry about the "new" Vette when it gets here.
11-19-2006, 01:40 PM
#14
Drifting
Member Since: Feb 2005
Location: Catonsville MD
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LS1LT1
I agree that it sounds a little out there but that's what the online calculator says when using my 8.03@89.76mph 1/8th mile time.
http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm
Like I'd said I don't necessarily believe it all but please note that these are the same type of potentially bogus conversions/corrections that some people use to claim that other people's track times are due entirely to air quality/DA.
http://www.wallaceracing.com/Calculators.htm
Like I'd said I don't necessarily believe it all but please note that these are the same type of potentially bogus conversions/corrections that some people use to claim that other people's track times are due entirely to air quality/DA.
Why did none of these guys come out of the woodwork when Ranger posted his numbers based on the same calculators??
So you guys belive the calculators, but only when certain members post them??
11-19-2006, 06:26 PM
#15
Drifting
Originally Posted by Waveblaster785
Why did none of these guys come out of the woodwork when Ranger posted his numbers based on the same calculators??
So you guys belive the calculators, but only when certain members post them??
So you guys belive the calculators, but only when certain members post them??
I am not sure what Ranger posted but I used his numbers from the time slip and an estimated weight of 3300 and below are the results.
Your HP computed from your vehicle ET is 510.64 rear wheel HP and 638.3 flywheel HP.
Your HP computed from your vehicle MPH is 593.14 rear wheel HP and 741.425 flywheel HP.
Most of the calculations I found on this site are way off. I only wish my car would run an 11.3 as it should according to one of the calculators
11-19-2006, 06:47 PM
#16
Drifting
Wow using one of the calculators I just found out I have 672 HP. Boy that is going to save some mod money.
Back on topic I think if there is a 50 hp increase 4.0 will be pretty close.
Back on topic I think if there is a 50 hp increase 4.0 will be pretty close.
11-19-2006, 08:29 PM
#17
Team Owner
Member Since: Feb 2000
Location: Conroe Texas
Posts: 35,228
Received 865 Likes
on
608 Posts
CI 1-4-5-8-9-10 Vet
St. Jude Donor '03,'04,'05,'07,08,'09,'10,’17
Originally Posted by jesse12804
1st it was a 6.2 w/470 hp and 385 ,or somewhere in there,TORQUE.
Then I heard it was 450 in '09,now it's 450 in 08...if I wait long enough,450 might make it back to 05!
Then I heard it was 450 in '09,now it's 450 in 08...if I wait long enough,450 might make it back to 05!
11-19-2006, 09:40 PM
#18
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Rockmart GA
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS3 for the 2009 camaro and 2008 model corvette should get it first.
Any clue as to how many more hundred pounds the camaro will probably weigh over the corvette? I just hope the corvette stays the king of the thrown when the 2009 Camaro comes out.
Any clue as to how many more hundred pounds the camaro will probably weigh over the corvette? I just hope the corvette stays the king of the thrown when the 2009 Camaro comes out.
11-19-2006, 11:04 PM
#19
Team Owner
Originally Posted by need-for-speed
One of the tuners mentioned the 450 HP LS3 would be in the new 2009 Camaro and the Corvette. Many people ASSumed that meant 2009 was the first year for the LS3 in the Corvette. Not necessarily true.
... I hope it is in the 2008 ...
11-20-2006, 12:24 AM
#20
Team Owner
Originally Posted by Waveblaster785
Why did none of these guys come out of the woodwork when Ranger posted his numbers based on the same calculators??
Videos, time slips and witnesses (myself being one of them) prove this.