Rest assured the C8 can keep up with the C5 (as long as it's stock.)
If it's modded, then go up against a modded C8...
(Bring yer pink...)

 

Well at 63 I'm not going to get an engineering degree on top of my Medical, Psych, and Bio degrees but I will now surely go get some rear end gears for every car we own that will give me 50 or more horsepower as some of the geniuses here have indicated. Gotta wonder why guys spend many thousands on forced induction, headers, etc, when all they need to do is a gear swap. The experts here were even nice enough to show their mathematics. Who knew?

 

If the torque is multiplied at the wheels by lower gearing, then the RPM of the wheel at the same engine RPM goes down, and the HP stays the same (assuming the same HP gear loss).

Gearing changes torque and speed at the wheels, and HP remains the same. Just run the HP equation at the wheels and it's clearly seen.

 

Thank You! This nonsense and misconceptions in this thread are almost painful.

 

From what I read not 1 of ya have mention anything about the relocation of the engine which is obviously making a power difference less travel time in the new placement to the wheels. However compare the ratios to a c7 ? Which are two totally different engine placements. Last I checked the ls9 or lt4 was mounted underneath the front hood and has a long drive shaft lol. The c8’s engine is now located mid trunk! Tremendously shortening the distance from engine to wheel . This change alone created a whole difference ball game on how fast power reaches the wheel.

 

I think most people understood what was meant was freeing up more "usable" hp/tq past the drivetrain . I never seen so much fighting and hate over hypothetical guessing from people much smarter then me. Lol

 

Watch this video from a very smart engineer who is also a great communicator! Don't get scared by the math on the board, he reduces it to only what's needed! He covers the Mechanics (properly Kinematics) of why the very fast 0 to 60!

Hmm, has nothing to do with power reaching the rear wheels quicker!

 

Eat it Dude, look at your post #29 where you state with idiotic math that the 5% gear ratio difference equates exactly to 23.5 additional horsepower realized with a gear ratio change. Don't try to weasel out of something completely wrong and act like you have this all under your belt while creating gross misconceptions here.

Plain and simple, gear ratio changes/differences do not create horsepower. Hopefully you can come to this realization before your next engineering lecture.

 

It's not the same as sending radio signals through space to Saturn vs the Moon, lol.

It's possible there will be less driveline frictional HP loss between the flywheel and wheels because of less driveline components. But "how fast the power reaches the wheels" is not a thing with mechanical power transfere.

 

Do you believe what he just told you? No way he is an engineer. The math is not appropriate. Do you know a chassis engineer, besides me? I design and build chassis or frames.
I could try to explain to you in layman's terms what the true story is but it would be easier for me to speak in advanced math.
Let me give you 3 little things to ponder. 1. Newton invented calculus. He discovered gravity to be 32'/s2 or 9.7536 m / s2. Your so called engineer provides a constant rate of acceleration which can't be, but he doesn't know calculus in order to provide the correct equation. 2. u or Mu, is a Greek letter which tire engineers use to determine grip. Although chassis engineers use a tool called the Friction Circle, tire grip does not use friction in it's calculations. Tires don't work with friction. 3. He speaks of load transfer. Loading a tire is not linear. Results are geometric and are calculated with the use of negative logarithms These 3 things require tons of data to achieve any reasonable result. All the scribes that drive this car will get different results. Just the negative camber gain in droop at the rear on a C7, affect it's launch adversely.
To achieve a 1G rate of acceleration in a 3000lb car, requires A 3000 lb traction force.

I really don't give a **** if I don't tell you my story, which will provide insight to the design objectives that the Corvette engineers set for themselves including the gear ratios they choose.. Ask me nicely.

 

^^^
Have heard some of your chassis engineer story and seen your cars. Yep sure you can go into more detail with free body diagrams and reaction forces and discuss all the transients BUT I think Jason does a good job for the "average person" who doesn't want to know how to make a watch, just tell them the time!

I'm sure you can do a good job, tell us if you'd like, some of us will listen and can follow!

PS: Just checked and Jason Fenske is a mechanical engineer from NC State. He is also an excellent communicator.

Managed an R&D Lab in my early career and had 35 professionals, most engineers some metallurgists. Jason is one I would let visits customers with our Regional Engineering staff and help solve customer problems. Had some brilliant engineers who developed products that were very profitable and were granted many patents. Some I would not let near a customer! Always had to tell folks how to make a watch when all they wanted to know was the time! Takes all kinds!

 

Takes all kinds and you are one of them for sure as in a 0.18 numerical gear change does NOT create 23.5 more horsepower, no way, no how. Get a clue Man.

 

Will stick with my post saying I won't communicate with what I now know is an idiot or AH!

Started on this Thread by responding to a post that was obvuosly from someone who did not understand torque and gears:

Punk Post #21
"For the C8 the difference is 3.62 vs 3.80, giving the Z51 pkg. equipped car a very minute 0.18 mechanical advantage which is so small that it is barely worth mentioning."

Punk Post #22 (responding to my post and I thought he just didn’t understand as he reinforced what I thought was just a foolish statement)
"A 0.18 ratio difference is what we know at this point and is not even in the realm of being "significant". Transmission gear ratios are not a factor if they are the same which is obvious."

My Post # 27 (I said clearly it was torque but had assumed because of Punks other foolish posts thought he would no understand torque!)
"IF the 3.62 and 3.80 were correct the difference in torque multiplication would be = (3.80 -3.62)/3.62 = 5% more. That extra torque would equate to 5% x 495 hp = 25 hp. Nothing to sneeze at!"

My post #29 (assumed he would not know torque from hp so provided the equation, he copied it a later! Realized he was an AH!)
"Now: HP = Torque x RPM ÷ 5252
I'd go through the derivation but don't want to lose you!"

My Post #31; For another poster I clearly defined why it’s not a hp increase only torque!

My post #35 I was trying to be nice and changed the word from Idiot to Fool! But post should read as written by Mark Twain:

Will leave discussing this subject with you following the classic suggestion:
“Never argue with an “idiot.” They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience!”

Punk says he’s a doctor, perhaps a vet but wouldn’t bring my dog there. Considering how he acts, possibly a proctologist as he sure acts like an AH on the forum!

 

Yeah Man, Got it straight from the "engineer" himself, deeper gear gives you more horsepower! Gotta love it!
Simple as pie!
. Sorry that my exposing your BS and stupidity compels you to your personal attacks.

 

I'm sure I have some of missed this from my reading, but wanted to confirm or clarify the contents of the Z51 package:

1. Performance exhaust - louder - tuneable -
2. change in the suspension - what changes over base? Shock adjustments?
3. Electronic limited slip - improved launches
4. front splitter
5. rear "spoiler" (in conjunction with front) adding 400 ft lbs +/- of down force
6. larger disc brakes - improved stopping distances
7. Michelin Pilot Sport summer tires- stickier
8. slightly improved axle ratio for reduced 0-60 times
9. front cooling inlets for brake wear and performance
10. additional radiator for cooling of the trans temperatures??
11. valve change??? Read this on another forum without seeing any clarification or support of validity

Is this information accurate?

 

^^
Close:
No valve change, just an exhaust valve timing (perhaps lift) change.
There is an extra radiator in the driver's side air duct that further cools the water coming from the front rads and some circulates to the trans. Tadge in a Video called it "super cooling," I won't use that word!
eLSD (electrotonic limited slip replaces the 1960's Positraction used in the base C8) does much more than help launch.
Shocks, spring rates, sway bars are different even if MRC is not selected.

 

Wow. Sorry to add to this, but I'm also an engineer. Looking at one of the gear ratios in the drivetrain mean nothing without knowing the ratio of the other gear. Having seen the threads on the transmission, the rear gearing makes good sense. It's a combination of trans and rear gear ration the produces the effective ratio in any given gear. That's the simplest mechanics there is. Why is it even being argued?

 

don't forget -- to add tire diameter. if a change is made there.

 

If if these were radios signals and they would reach the moon faster than the 7th planet from the sun. How fast power reaches its destination plays a huge role in power loss transfer in the case of your radio signals it would be speed loss to its destination because its further and will not maintain the same velocity due to gravity if only we were in space where whatever in motion stays in motion. Mechanical power transfer is exactly what it states you need a mechanical device to transfer the left over power through the trans to diff!

 

Z51 package to add: V08 thicker front radiators (different radiators from base model?) with additional 3rd rear mounted radiator added.

I'm seeing value in the Z51 package in multiple areas. Stopping, cooling, mechanical life, launching, handling, exhaust sound etc.