When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
For what reason are they NOT releasing power and weight numbers ?
Possibly the same reason our federal government releases unfavorable news, that it wants to go unnoticed, on Fridays at closing time, hoping no one will notice.
ummmmm . . . I'm confused . . . .what's your point here?
Just pointing out that JerriVette posted bad info about the LT1 and plenty of the slurpers were on my case when I posted facts, directly from GM, that proved him wrong, and now GM backs up what I said(and what they had been saying all along), at the bash.
I could care less about times around VIR. I want to know the times on the Tail of the Dragon, mixed in with the slow Harleys. the stupid crazy Sport Bikers, and the local SUV's and pickup trucks. That's where the action is.
BlueOx wants to know the time it takes to wax the C7.
For what reason are they NOT releasing power and weight numbers ?
All the various engineers have been pretty clear that marketing and the higher ups arent playing games and that info will be released in a planned timeframe by the marketing dept. if they even think they cant say it...they dont
Originally Posted by Hemi Dave
Thanks for all the info RC........ It's appreciated
I wish they used VIR Full course for the comparison... that's what nearly everyone races on and the majority of trackdays are run on. Mazdadrivers used to run the Grand Course configuration, but it's been a few years and NOBODY races the grand course configuration.
Fuel cutoff at 6600 RPM. That must be another big fat lie by GM at the Bash. Our resident Internet Engineer(JerriVette) said that the LT1 made it's maximum horsepower of 475 at 6600 RPM with a redline of 7100 RPM. http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c7-g...al-number.html
Now read my posts where I said the maximum horsepower is made at approximately 5900-6000 RPM with a redline of 6500 RPM and a fuel cut off at 6600 RPM.
I guess that makes me as big a liar as GM and didn't I also say somewhere that GM has not said anything about the GenV engines being FlexFuel.
Did anyone ask the speaker if the pistons were cast or forged?
What about your posts that said 450 hp is going to be it for the Stingray? Or as you were so fond of saying "only a 14hp increase"
When you get your *** handed to at a light or drag you gonna brag how fast it goes around a track? Lol no like others I want to know hp numbers 1/4 0 to 60 etc.
I wish they used VIR Full course for the comparison... that's what nearly everyone races on and the majority of trackdays are run on. Mazdadrivers used to run the Grand Course configuration, but it's been a few years and NOBODY races the grand course configuration.
If by "they" you're speaking of Car and Driver, I imagine they still run the Grand Course because all the Lightning Lap tests have been run there, and so the previous years of lap times have some meaning and some value for comparison to current lap times.
I may be way off but.....I believe the inference may be that JerriVette is pulling stuff out of his keester.
I believe the man wants VINDICATION.
Originally Posted by JoesC5
Just pointing out that JerriVette posted bad info about the LT1 and plenty of the slurpers were on my case when I posted facts, directly from GM, that proved him wrong, and now GM backs up what I said(and what they had been saying all along), at the bash.
OK-now I understand - wasn't aware of the back story. Just trying to follow along . . . . .
I'm guessing they are having issues selling the last C6's.... They will wait as long as it takes to help move the current Gen... Maybe they should have said "440hp Estimated"
When you get your *** handed to at a light or drag you gonna brag how fast it goes around a track? Lol no like others I want to know hp numbers 1/4 0 to 60 etc.
When you get your *** handed to at a light or drag you gonna brag how fast it goes 0 to 60?
When you get your *** handed to at a light or drag you gonna brag how fast it goes around a track? Lol no like others I want to know hp numbers 1/4 0 to 60 etc.
I don't street race... doing that in the Commonwealth can get your car impounded and confiscated. I could use the same logic for some kid's turbo Civic vs. a Ferrari. I'd rather have the Ferrari.
Originally Posted by jimmyb
If by "they" you're speaking of Car and Driver, I imagine they still run the Grand Course because all the Lightning Lap tests have been run there, and so the previous years of lap times have some meaning and some value for comparison to current lap times.
Jimmy
I mean C&D and GM... I understand it, but they should have used the full course for the lightning lap at the outset. It'd be a far more relevant comparison to anyone who's run timed laps at VIR.
What about your posts that said 450 hp is going to be it for the Stingray? Or as you were so fond of saying "only a 14hp increase"
I said that GM said the estimated horsepower was 450. I also said that looking at the dyno graph GM published in 240C12.pdf, that at 6000 RPM(point at which the LT1's horsepower starts to drop off) the LT1 has approximately 20 lb-ft of torque more then the LS3 at that same RPM. Using the standard formula for converting torque to horsepower, that equates to a 23 HP increase above the LS3's 430, which would make the LT1 453 Horsepower. That's what I said. I used info supplied by GM, not some magical wishful thinking.
JerriVette never posted any official GM dyno graphs that said different. I also quoted the two main LT1 powertrain engineers(Jordan Lee and John Rydzewski) on what they said regarding the LT1's RPM and Jerrivette never posted any quotes from a single GM engineer that proved those two GM engineers were wrong.
I have to chuckle... the information given is of huge value to anyone who tracks these cars. You can see they made a massive effort to make this thing even better on track, yet people want HP figures and meaningless data points like 0-60 times.
Things like discussing the reduced thermal transfer to the hubs from the two-piece rotors is because the old single piece rotors allowed the hubs to get hotter which decreased their life-span and made the hub flange more prone to fracture. This is a big deal to those who track the cars.
The fact that they've re-designed the steering column, rack mount, rack, and spindles to be 5x as stiff is huge. It's these things that contribute to the overall driving "feel" of the car that so many say the Corvette lacks.