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.
Launch control modulates the throttle (engine), not the clutch engagement (transmission). There is launch control in both manual and automatic transmission equipped cars.
You would think yet the manual cars with launch control are often times not even as quick as a well experienced driver...
dct or pdk of the naturally aspirated 991.1 s pdk was traditionally .6 ths quicker in zero to 60 mph and the quarter mile time than the manual version.
to ignore the pdk acceleration times compared to the much slower manual transmission version in the OP data collection would be a statistical error.
if you prefer to ignore then so be it.
performance really does transcend zero to 60 mph performance ....with the invention of launch control dct systems....which game the test and what that test traditionally represented...
manual transmission launch control systems are rarely as effective as the dct units.
Like I said if my suggestion throws off the OP assumption.....then dont sweat it and enjoy.
An engine’s tq / hp curve has a tremendous influence on ability to launch affecting 0-Xx times and often underestimated or overlooked. High torque at low RPM (ZR1 and ZO6) although fun to drive presents a challenge to launch without wheel spin. Other cars with less power but a “more” linear torque curve combined with gearing matched to engine torque often punch above their weight. Obviously many data points factor into rate of acceleration.
This is a silly post... there are so many variables. If you take the same power/wt car with the same tires and one has 50/50 weight distribution and one has 35/65 the one with 35/65 will have more usable traction and more stability under hard braking with the trade-off being less high speed stability in turns. The other benefit to ME is it frees up the chassis for electric front drive which can really put the power down.
OK, I'll bite (not sure why), but the OP wen through an effort, so lets discuss.
I don't think anyone (At least those with 1/4 of a brain) really thinks engine placement is the driver of 0-60 times. Of course power and weight play a huge role, no one needs a graph for that.
Besides handling, an equivalent mid engine vehicle will be able to put the power down more effectively. This only applies/matters when the power is not being put down efficiently to begin with. You will see virtually no differences in 0-60 (which as noted probably isn't the best measure) on a 250 HP car with with good tires -- it will have no problem putting the power down. However, a super-high horsepower front engine, RWD car has trouble putting power down, so you need to move the engine and/or add more drive wheels. The Corvette team has done amazing work with the front engine/RWD platform, but it is maxed out. Engine location is not the driver of 0-60 times. Engine location optimization is needed to have the fastest 0-60 times. (Plus handling and the more important parts).
Here's the top 20 production cars (from 0-60 times website). You'll notice for the real cars, there is only a single Front-Engined Real-Wheel Drive Car. That is Demon, which if you recall comes with a single seat, drag radials, trans brake, line lock, and a suspension adjusted to transfer weight front to back. You can go in a straight line with it, or cruise Main street with it. You don't want to turn too fast (or at all). Every other car either is either a specialty go-kart, or mid engine, except the GTR which is AWD. So, despite the OP's graph (which I admire), it is obvious that the fastest 0-60 cars aren't using front engine/rwd. There is a reason for that.
Like has been said, these days 0-60 is pretty much a worthless metric to measure performance. .5 second or less is really insignificant.Way too many variables like tires, launch control software, road surface traction , driver skill etc. It's really only a bragging right gleamed from car rags. I think a better stat is 0-100 or even 0-120 or 1/4 mile speed to compare acceleration. Roll on comparisons as well but you don't see much of that except in you tube videos.
I didn't know that. Does it delay clutch engagement or slips the clutch at start? First gear is probably good for 60mph, so there is no shift involved. I always thought launch control simply modulates engine power, so tires won't spin endlessly.
Sarcasm doesn't come through on the forum unless you put a couple of smileys on it.
ALL of the threads here in the C8 forum speculating about the potential power and performance of the C8 compared to the C7 claims that. There are even a few that thinks that sub 3.5 second is to be expected of the base C8.
Based on the trend line on the graph, IF the C8 remain the same weight as the C7, it's going to have to make 550+ hp to drop below 3.5 seconds. Or weight about 3,100 lbs.
Now try that acceleration when coming around an apex at 60 mph with the steering turned to either the left or right and rolling onto the throttle so the throttle will be wide open by the time the front wheels are pointing down the next straight at the corner track out point. If the car pivots onto the correct line faster the driver can roll the throttle down faster and be wide open sooner. As everybody knows in a drag race the winner is the one who leaves the starting line first. It takes tons of HP to make up for a fraction of a second difference in leaving the starting line and it takes even more HP when that time difference includes having a higher speed leaving the line.
For instance if you and a competitor in an equally powerful car leave T1 at Watkins Glen with your speed being 1 mph higher (1 mph equates to about 1.5 ft per second) than your competitor with both of you holding your throttles wide open all the way to the braking point for the bus stop (which takes about 20 seconds) you will have gained 30 ft on your competitor. Keep that 1 mph advantage at each turn exit through 17 turns per lap and lap after lap and in a few laps your competitor is no longer visible in the rear view mirror. That is how much a small speed differential coming off a corner means when it comes to demolishing your competition, ME cars pivot quicker and let the driver put the power down sooner thus providing the edge.
There is so much variation in a 0-60 run, it’s basically unrepeatable. Look at the first episode of Grand Tour. All cars were DCT, all similar power, all had launch control, they had a different result every run.
Without reading through the entire thread, and someone may have mentioned it already, but once you approach horse powers over 500 in a 31-3500 lb vehicle. Traction Control management is going to be the primary factor in your 0 to 60, and above times, to a point.
We all know, if you’re spinning you’re not winning.
Some FEs have a better tuned TC system then the C7. Or at least it’s tune differently to allow better 0 to 60 times for their weight to HP.
The C7 allows a lot of wheel spin compared to some of the higher end MEs, and FEs out there.
When the TC is fully disengaged.
All of these cars can and will smoke the tires not only out of the whole, but will also break dangerously loose through 60, 70 mph, some on up to 100 mph, and higher.
The trick is keeping it right at the edge of slipping, and applying all of the power to forward acceleration.
So yes it is possible for the new C8 not to do very well with it’s drag times compared to some other vehicles if the traction control management system is not up to par with its competitors.
Sarcasm doesn't come through on the forum unless you put a couple of smileys on it.
ALL of the threads here in the C8 forum speculating about the potential power and performance of the C8 compared to the C7 claims that. There are even a few that thinks that sub 3.5 second is to be expected of the base C8.
Based on the trend line on the graph, IF the C8 remain the same weight as the C7, it's going to have to make 550+ hp to drop below 3.5 seconds. Or weight about 3,100 lbs.
The C8 supposedly will have a DCT, which may cut down the 0-60 (if you care about that stat) dramatically. It’s one of the reasons why the porky AWD GT-R has low 0-60 numbers, and why the Porsche Turbo and Bugattis as well have low 0-60s, despite the Veyron weighing as much as a small dinosaur (aside from AWD of course)
It's about traction. The only science is in the title to your thread. I cannot believe someone would spend as much time explaining something that is complete crap as what you have done.
The C8 supposedly will have a DCT, which may cut down the 0-60 (if you care about that stat) dramatically. It’s one of the reasons why the porky AWD GT-R has low 0-60 numbers, and why the Porsche Turbo and Bugattis as well have low 0-60s, despite the Veyron weighing as much as a small dinosaur (aside from AWD of course)
So the only reason the GTR, Porsche Turbo, and Bugatti have amazing 0-60 times is DCT?
AWD is just a “nice to have” for them in this stat?
Without reading through the entire thread, and someone may have mentioned it already, but once you approach horse powers over 500 in a 31-3500 lb vehicle. Traction Control management is going to be the primary factor in your 0 to 60, and above times, to a point.
We all know, if you’re spinning you’re not winning.
Some FEs have a better tuned TC system then the C7. Or at least it’s tune differently to allow better 0 to 60 times for their weight to HP.
The C7 allows a lot of wheel spin compared to some of the higher end MEs, and FEs out there.
When the TC is fully disengaged.
All of these cars can and will smoke the tires not only out of the whole, but will also break dangerously loose through 60, 70 mph, some on up to 100 mph, and higher.
The trick is keeping it right at the edge of slipping, and applying all of the power to forward acceleration.
So yes it is possible for the new C8 not to do very well with it’s drag times compared to some other vehicles if the traction control management system is not up to par with its competitors.
jmo
I don't know how much if any you've raced your C7, or, if you even have one? Let me clue you in on something. The TC is not nearly as effective as you seem to think it is. It doesn't take "500hp" to negate the C7 TC. 455 HP does it. Every day.....
I appreciate they time you took to put that together. I would only argue if you took the same motor and build one front engine car and another mid engine car. You can reduce the weight of the mid engine car for example no five feet of torque tube, cut 5 feet of dual exhaust, hangars, bolts heat shielding, but most importantly you can build the strength of the frame into one box surrounding the mid engine and trans. So ultimately the mid engine car weighs less and 0-60 times improves. The time improves due to weight reduction; you get the weight reductions from engine locations...... so what I am trying to say is egg or chicken yummm I like them both.
Last edited by CitationZ06@yahoo; 05-14-2019 at 10:51 PM.
05-14-2019, 10:45 AM
