Maximum torque for C7 Z51 drive train
Thread Starter
Madison Wisconsin
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 504
Likes: 32
From: Madison Area WI
Maximum torque for C7 Z51 drive train
I know that we have discussed what the maximum horse power might be for the C7and C77 Z51, but I do not see an engineering-based or physics-based response.
Here is a different but similar question to the engineers. What torque level do you think the C7 Z51 standard stick drive train is capable of reliably handling (assuming stock tires). And why do you think this?
I know Hennessy and Lingenfelter say it can hold a lot more than what the stock or Z51 engine set-up can deliver, but what do the engineers think it can reliably handle? I see all kinds of 550, 600, 625, 650, 675, 700 and up-grade packages via Lingenfelter and Hennessy, and others, but what do the engineers say that it can handle reliably for, oh, say 100,000 miles of semi-rigorous driving?
Any engineering based advice?
Nick
Here is a different but similar question to the engineers. What torque level do you think the C7 Z51 standard stick drive train is capable of reliably handling (assuming stock tires). And why do you think this?
I know Hennessy and Lingenfelter say it can hold a lot more than what the stock or Z51 engine set-up can deliver, but what do the engineers think it can reliably handle? I see all kinds of 550, 600, 625, 650, 675, 700 and up-grade packages via Lingenfelter and Hennessy, and others, but what do the engineers say that it can handle reliably for, oh, say 100,000 miles of semi-rigorous driving?
Any engineering based advice?
Nick
Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 606
Likes: 7
From: Nashville, TN
I know that we have discussed what the maximum horse power might be for the C7and C77 Z51, but I do not see an engineering-based or physics-based response.
Here is a different but similar question to the engineers. What torque level do you think the C7 Z51 standard stick drive train is capable of reliably handling (assuming stock tires). And why do you think this?
I know Hennessy and Lingenfelter say it can hold a lot more than what the stock or Z51 engine set-up can deliver, but what do the engineers think it can reliably handle? I see all kinds of 550, 600, 625, 650, 675, 700 and up-grade packages via Lingenfelter and Hennessy, and others, but what do the engineers say that it can handle reliably for, oh, say 100,000 miles of semi-rigorous driving?
Any engineering based advice?
Nick
Here is a different but similar question to the engineers. What torque level do you think the C7 Z51 standard stick drive train is capable of reliably handling (assuming stock tires). And why do you think this?
I know Hennessy and Lingenfelter say it can hold a lot more than what the stock or Z51 engine set-up can deliver, but what do the engineers think it can reliably handle? I see all kinds of 550, 600, 625, 650, 675, 700 and up-grade packages via Lingenfelter and Hennessy, and others, but what do the engineers say that it can handle reliably for, oh, say 100,000 miles of semi-rigorous driving?
Any engineering based advice?
Nick
However I have seen two posters on here with broken differentials that had put on stickier tires and dumped the clutch at elevated RPM. They had superchargers and were probably running ~600 ft-lbs. That's an instantaneous shock load.
That makes sense as engineers usually spec things at least 20% stronger than the load they will see (1.2 safety factor) for long term durability, which would be 460*1.2= 552 ft=lbs. 600 would be a 1.3 safety factor. I used 1.25 frequently when I designed automotive components. So I would split the difference and say 575 ft-lbs.
Good luck.
Thread Starter
Madison Wisconsin
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 504
Likes: 32
From: Madison Area WI
With stock tires it's a moot point because they will spin before the drive train breaks.
... engineers usually spec things at least 20% stronger than the load they will see (1.2 safety factor) for long term durability, which would be 460*1.2= 552 ft=lbs. 600 would be a 1.3 safety factor. I used 1.25 frequently when I designed automotive components. So I would split the difference and say 575 ft-lbs. Good luck.
... engineers usually spec things at least 20% stronger than the load they will see (1.2 safety factor) for long term durability, which would be 460*1.2= 552 ft=lbs. 600 would be a 1.3 safety factor. I used 1.25 frequently when I designed automotive components. So I would split the difference and say 575 ft-lbs. Good luck.
So... In your example you used engine specs. I now have 550 ft-lbs to the rear wheels on a Z51. But a couple of things may work in my favor:
A. I never dump a cluch under any rev conditions.
B. I do have stock tires for the Z51 package.
C. I would floor it only after engaged in a gear and only after moving forward absorbing some torque that could go to breakage.
So from where I sit. I think I am fine on the broken part front as long as I a careful.
Do you agree? Or. Hmmmm, does the 2015 Z06 have a different transmission, rear trans-axle, long and shot shafts, or are these the same as the 2014 Z51. That is; they did what Volkswagen did in the early days, i.e. built a diesel block and use it for gas as well making it great for turbo charging gas as well?
I do not know, but it is fun to think about.
Nick
Team Owner
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 41,732
Likes: 1,718
From: Springfield MO
Hmmmm. Great point and great approach. I agree (old chemist / physicist). 1.1 would be to much risk for the OMB's and attorneys and the engineers. 1.3 would be great for the attorneys, but the OMB's would squawk and the engineers would say "why?". but the 1.2 to 1.25 would be okay for the attorneys, okay for the OMBs as long as it did not impact costs to much and the engineers would feel that the safety factor was okay. This is my bet as well, I agree with you.
So... In your example you used engine specs. I now have 550 ft-lbs to the rear wheels on a Z51. But a couple of things may work in my favor:
A. I never dump a cluch under any rev conditions.
B. I do have stock tires for the Z51 package.
C. I would floor it only after engaged in a gear and only after moving forward absorbing some torque that could go to breakage.
So from where I sit. I think I am fine on the broken part front as long as I a careful.
Do you agree? Or. Hmmmm, does the 2015 Z06 have a different transmission, rear trans-axle, long and shot shafts, or are these the same as the 2014 Z51. That is; they did what Volkswagen did in the early days, i.e. built a diesel block and use it for gas as well making it great for turbo charging gas as well?
I do not know, but it is fun to think about.
Nick
So... In your example you used engine specs. I now have 550 ft-lbs to the rear wheels on a Z51. But a couple of things may work in my favor:
A. I never dump a cluch under any rev conditions.
B. I do have stock tires for the Z51 package.
C. I would floor it only after engaged in a gear and only after moving forward absorbing some torque that could go to breakage.
So from where I sit. I think I am fine on the broken part front as long as I a careful.
Do you agree? Or. Hmmmm, does the 2015 Z06 have a different transmission, rear trans-axle, long and shot shafts, or are these the same as the 2014 Z51. That is; they did what Volkswagen did in the early days, i.e. built a diesel block and use it for gas as well making it great for turbo charging gas as well?
I do not know, but it is fun to think about.
Nick
Z06---650 lb-ft of torque x 2.29 = 1489 lb-ft to the differential.
Z51 with 501 lb-ft(engine modified) of engine torque X 2.97 = 1489 lb-ft to the differential. Stock Z51 delivers 1381 lb-ft to the differential.
As you can see, if the Z51 was modified to 650 lb-ft, it would have 1931 lb-ft of torque delivered to the differential. Much more than the Z06 delivers to the differential.
Those numbers are calculated on torque at the flywheel, not torque calculated based on the results shown on a chassis dyno.
Last edited by JoesC5; Dec 2, 2014 at 11:21 PM.
Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
From: Houston TX
I see the engineering speculations, but can tell you from physical experience that these cars are not holding up well with modifications...at least between myself, and 2 others that all had modifications done at reputable, and respected shops. I had front seal issues early, then valve problems 2-3 months ago, and now looks like I have caught early stages of main bearing being spun. I am now taking th motor out, and building it as GM should have done initially. The teflon coated bearings are failing in many cars...just don't see those postings.
The most power I have made in my supercharged applicaion was 610whp, and 570-580 ft lbs of torque.
All I can tell you, based on REAL experience is be careful with these cars. There are limited options out there aftermarket, and it is verrrrrry frustrating.
Good Luck!
The most power I have made in my supercharged applicaion was 610whp, and 570-580 ft lbs of torque.
All I can tell you, based on REAL experience is be careful with these cars. There are limited options out there aftermarket, and it is verrrrrry frustrating.
Good Luck!
Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 606
Likes: 7
From: Nashville, TN
I see the engineering speculations, but can tell you from physical experience that these cars are not holding up well with modifications...at least between myself, and 2 others that all had modifications done at reputable, and respected shops. I had front seal issues early, then valve problems 2-3 months ago, and now looks like I have caught early stages of main bearing being spun. I am now taking th motor out, and building it as GM should have done initially. The teflon coated bearings are failing in many cars...just don't see those postings.
The most power I have made in my supercharged applicaion was 610whp, and 570-580 ft lbs of torque.
All I can tell you, based on REAL experience is be careful with these cars. There are limited options out there aftermarket, and it is verrrrrry frustrating.
Good Luck!
The most power I have made in my supercharged applicaion was 610whp, and 570-580 ft lbs of torque.
All I can tell you, based on REAL experience is be careful with these cars. There are limited options out there aftermarket, and it is verrrrrry frustrating.
Good Luck!
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
Madison Wisconsin
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 504
Likes: 32
From: Madison Area WI
SC issues
I see the engineering speculations, but can tell you from physical experience that these cars are not holding up well with modifications...at least between myself, and 2 others that all had modifications done at reputable, and respected shops. I had front seal issues early, then valve problems 2-3 months ago, and now looks like I have caught early stages of main bearing being spun. I am now taking th motor out, and building it as GM should have done initially. The teflon coated bearings are failing in many cars...just don't see those postings.
The most power I have made in my supercharged applicaion was 610whp, and 570-580 ft lbs of torque.
All I can tell you, based on REAL experience is be careful with these cars. There are limited options out there aftermarket, and it is verrrrrry frustrating.
Good Luck!
The most power I have made in my supercharged applicaion was 610whp, and 570-580 ft lbs of torque.
All I can tell you, based on REAL experience is be careful with these cars. There are limited options out there aftermarket, and it is verrrrrry frustrating.
Good Luck!
Nick
Thread Starter
Madison Wisconsin
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 504
Likes: 32
From: Madison Area WI
Excellent post
Yes, the Z06 has a different transmission. The 1st gear in the Z51 multiplies the engine's torque 2.97 times but the Z06 only multiplies the torque in first gear 2.29 times.
Z06---650 lb-ft of torque x 2.29 = 1489 lb-ft to the differential.
Z51 with 501 lb-ft(engine modified) of engine torque X 2.97 = 1489 lb-ft to the differential. Stock Z51 delivers 1381 lb-ft to the differential.
As you can see, if the Z51 was modified to 650 lb-ft, it would have 1931 lb-ft of torque delivered to the differential. Much more than the Z06 delivers to the differential.
Those numbers are calculated on torque at the flywheel, not torque calculated based on the results shown on a chassis dyno.
Z06---650 lb-ft of torque x 2.29 = 1489 lb-ft to the differential.
Z51 with 501 lb-ft(engine modified) of engine torque X 2.97 = 1489 lb-ft to the differential. Stock Z51 delivers 1381 lb-ft to the differential.
As you can see, if the Z51 was modified to 650 lb-ft, it would have 1931 lb-ft of torque delivered to the differential. Much more than the Z06 delivers to the differential.
Those numbers are calculated on torque at the flywheel, not torque calculated based on the results shown on a chassis dyno.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,049
Likes: 701
From: Tulsa, Ok
Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 606
Likes: 7
From: Nashville, TN