How is it possible to claim 50/50 weight distribution without knowing the final weight of the vehicle? Now, I see the hp/tq have ESTIMATED attached to it but no such case with the weight distribution. Surely there will be a difference between sum and no sump and manual vs. auto and different wheel and tire combos.

 

Guess we need to wait and see.

It might turn out to be 49.95/50.05 OH NO! Or 50/50

It'll be ok whichever.

 

Good question. I sure would like to know what the final curb weight is already.

 

50/50 weight distribution is just a ratio of some quantity whether it be known or not.

 

the 50/50 should be an estimate .

 

Sure you can. You weigh the rear of the vehicle and then you weigh the front. If they are the same then you have 50/50 weight distribution. What you don't do is add the numbers together. That's called advanced math and is beyond the skills of your typical engineer.

 

Hopefully not like wishful thinking, LOL.



STRENGTH IN NUMBERS

Performance

Features and Options

Data
Engine LT1 6.2L V-8
Horsepower / Torque 450 / 450 (estimated)
Fuel delivery Direct Injection
Compression ratio 11.5:1
Manual Transmission 7-speed with Active Rev Match
Automatic Transmission 6-speed paddle-shift
Chassis Std, Z51, Z51 with Magnetic Selective Ride

Tires Michelin Pilot Sport ZP run-flat


Wheels 18" front / 19" rear, 19" front / 20" rear (Z51)

Three Available Option Groups 1LT, 2LT, 3LT

Available Roof Options
Painted Carbon Fiber,
Visible Carbon Fiber,
Transparent

Wheelbase (in/mm) 106.7 / 2710
Overall length (in/mm) 177 / 4495
Overall width (in/mm) 73.9 / 1877
Overall height (in/mm) 48.6 / 1235
Weight distribution (%) 50 / 50 (front/rear)

Track (in)62.8 / 61.6 (front/rear)
Brake Diameter (in) 12.6 (13.6 Z51) (front), 13.3 (rear)

Obviously GM knows what word ESTIMATED means. So my question is, how are they exactly are intending to deliver on the weight distribution without even estimating the weight, load per axle, sprung and unsprung weight and few other details?

 

Length, width, blah blah but no weight.

 

Maybe they are waiting to get their deposits on the C7 before they release the weight... It seems the curb weight may be a more than what we expected.

 

Seems there's a simple enough explanation: they're close enough to final mass that they know any tweaks still on the table won't change the balance enough to miss the 50/50 target. Anything less than 50.5% up front and they're good.

 

In the march car and driver tadge said it's actually closer to 48front, 52rear

 

Last March or this upcoming March?

 

C6 base weight distribution is 51/49 (no dry sump), Z06 is 50/50 (with dry sump and battery in the rear).

Has anyone seen a credible explanation regarding C7?

 

I think the 48/52 was inherited with the Stingray name used on the C7 as that's the weight distribution of a C2 with the small block.

 

LOL, it is all in the genes then. I wish GM could put some substance behind their claims. I would be curious what the weight distribution of the last GS with dry sump was, I never saw this being disclosed.

 

I assume any final design tweaks will be a minimal affect on weight distribution. Let's face it, if you dump a cup of water in the ocean, does mean sea level rise?

 

The current March issue - 48/52 is 'close' to final ratio according to Tadge

 

No, but Nice sea level might

 

Agreed. Now, if we could see some substance behind that STRENGTH IN NUMBERS slogan.

 

Some interesting info from years of Road & track.

1957....
curb weight 2880
test weight 3180
distribution 53.5/46.5

1963...327ci
curb weight 3030
test weight 3380
distribution 48/52

1965...396ci
curb weight 3260
test weight 3570
distribution 51/49 with driver aboard.

1968...327ci
curb weight 3260
test weight 3525
distribution 49/51 with driver aboard.

1987...350ci
curb weight 3280
test weight 3440
distribution 50/50 with driver aboard