Not if they can't afford it. A properly optioned ZR1 is going to be pretty far outside of my price range and isn't even remotely in consideration for me. It's Z06 or bust. And really: it's Z06. The engineering team knows that I disagree with the power train choice. I've been quite vociferous about it with them. But, as I've mentioned here in the past: they didn't consider my opinion while designing the car.

 

To my ears, FPC V8s sound decent at high rpm and mid/high rpm under load. To me, all FPC V8s sound like dog **** at idle. The 458 is a great example of that. Sings well up top. Sounds like **** at idle, and at low rpm/low load.

I expect the same from the new Z, which I nonetheless look forward to getting, as it should be quite entertaining to drive. I'll still have my CPC thumpers for those days when I'm more in the mood for thunder.

 

I think for a mid engine car - FPC is literally the go to design and from my humble understanding - what they had always planned for when building the C8. It makes sense. People wanting NA since the C7Z debacle (I had one) - was pretty much a certainty for that to happen. There could be an argument that making it cross plane would have made it more American - but they have that in the Stingray and Eray (which being fair are options for you - multiple SC’s were released the same day the C8Z was). SC and go with the Stingray. I can’t say anything about the sound - but I really do believe that this car will deliver performance wise. As a person who it sounds like does a lot of road course work - I cannot believe that the car won’t hold up to your satisfaction there. I think you will be good.

Lol - I actually like how the 458 sounds all round…to your pint though - I was fortunate to pick up a 2019 Coyote before the price madness and build a simple bolt on drag car (Gen 5 Whipple) which gives me all the cross plane thunder I need.

 

Yeah, I think I'll enjoy having both types. A little variety is entertaining.

 

The ZR1 will cost what the Z06 would have cost if they made it according to your specs (ie. FI). With GM you're not paying for the badging like other manufacturers, you actually get your money's worth. So moot point.

 

I know that. I've known that for ... a while. Or, at least, I knew there would be more than one cam, and that they'd be in the wrong place in the engine. But I disagree vehemently that "FPC is literally the go to design" for a mid-engine car. There's literally no reason why that statement makes sense. The engine placement only dictates engine design insofar as how much room there is in the bay. A higher displacement OHV engine with a charger on top would trounce the LT6's power and torque output, and fit fine in the current engine bay. The convertible engine cover might prove some challenges, but GM's proven they can overcome seemingly impossible challenges in the past, there's no reason to think they couldn't overcome that one if they wanted to.

Which debacle is that? The imagined overheating one? You mean like the car I drove on Summit Point Raceway, during WV summers, without a problem? The car (or, heh, cars) that Sean drove at blistering speeds around SPR and VIR, all without problems? That debacle?

But neither will be as good on the track from a chassis, aero, and traction perspective as the Z06 will be.

I think you should go back and re-read GS' response to me. He understands my position on this debate better than anyone else, it seems.

And there's more to a car than race track driving, as well. All of my Corvettes are or have been daily drivers, and this will be no different. There are times when you want to make a show of yourself and draw attention. Other times: not so much. In previous charged cars, I could easily make a pass on the highway without even bothering to downshift from 7th (or 6th in the C6 ZR1). All I had to do was depress the go pedal a bit more and because the gearing and engine torque were so perfect, the car would make the pass quietly, and without drawing attention. This new car is going to likely require a few gear drops to accomplish the same thing with the same urgency. Doing so will draw attention. I also suspect that when we finally see the official EPA numbers, we'll be in for an unpleasant $urpri$e.

 

I'm not sure where you were going with that statement, and why you thought it pertinent to try and educate me on such things. Specially when you're incorrect. The engine in the new Z06 was an intensely expensive engineering exercise. Very much so. Much more than any power train for a Corvette in the past save for maybe the C4 ZR-1's. A charged OHV engine? Easy-mode for GM. They've got basically a decade of experience working with them. A charged OHC motor might be another story.

 

I say the FPC is the go to engine for mid engine cars as literally every mid engine power plant available today is FPC? For V8’s at least - I know the Huracan is unique.

I really don’t know what to say about the heat soak and poor engine bay circulation of the C7Z. It’s been admitted to by GM - and there were multiple class action lawsuits. They even tried to fix the issue with the taller lid and better cooling for the bricks on cylinder 7 and 8. They added the additional coolers to the ZL1 and changed the front end of the ZR1 to help compensate. It’s a 1.74L tiny roots blower with high rpm. Not a great combo for heat management.

As to power - I think the gearing and torque multiplication that you won’t be dropping as many gears as you think. That said - you liking it or not - may not be a safe bet. What about the SC option on the C8 I mentioned? That will give you exactly what you want.

 

So then why do you say the ZR1 will be priced significantly higher than the Z06?

 

Because they're all doing it, we need to? Got it. I think I made that point earlier when I said:



Careful. Those cooling changes were made for the Z06's LT4 because GM tested to a lower coolant temperature prior to the car's release. When they realized that people taking automatics to the track were having some issues, they suggested work-arounds (eg: manually shifting; see Ask Tadge), and then worked on certifying future LT4s for higher temps. Thus the changes. Calling it a debacle is hyperbole, but I should be used to that here on CF.

A miss-statement of course. How much HP was the ZR1 producing as compared to the Z06's LT4? Was it, per chance, more? Like, more than 100HP more, maybe? And with more HP comes what? Right: more heat. And yes, I'm purposely being condescending here, because you're literally caught up on the same ball of ignorance the majority of others here were or have been as it applies to the two cars.

It feels to me like you're not completely absorbing what I'm writing. I clearly pointed out that neither car you mentioned (charged C8 or ERay) will be as good on the track as the Z06 will be from a chassis, grip, aero perspective. Further, and as it applies to the base car: my days of modifications are well behind me. I don't do that any longer, and have no interest in restarting it.

If I could afford the ZR1 (or whatever the hell it's going to be called) I'd hold out for it. But that's not going to happen.

 

I am sure that you are correct. You know much more than I about the circumstances surrounding the decision to design a FPC / NA engine. But the LT6 and the mid engine chassis of the C8 will convince the world to rethink their attitudes about GM and Chevrolet. The Corvette Z06 will become the textbook example of how a halo car changed the world's perception of a manufacturer. Granted, GM will need to follow through from this point forward by ensuring that future designs in all segments are both superior and maintain a high level of reliability.

No advertising campaign could accomplish what GM has done by producing the C8 and the LT6 engine. Look at what happened at Ciocca when they opened ordering for the Z06. 7,000 or more orders received within 24 hours for a $100K car. I have always been a fan of GM thanks to the 57 Chevy and Bill Mitchell. But, apparently, the best years for GM are ahead of us.

 

Regarding turbos and such, the N/A approach was the lightest design that GM could have used for the Z06. Anything else would have added weight to the extreme rear of the car which already has too much weight. I believe that Gordon Murrays T.50s weight distribution is 42/58 whereas the C8 is 39/61. The C8 does not need any more weight.

 

I guess it’s because I owned one and ran a fairly large Corvette club with many members owning C7Z’s that we encountered the very real heat soak issues. So much so I modded my car around them with a pro charged setup. The difference beyond all of the cooling (13 coolers) between the C7Z and ZR1 was the blower. Almost a full litre of displacement larger than the ultra tiny 1.74L roots - high revving - blower the C7Z came with. The C7Z 2.65L is much more efficient - and heat is still going to be a challenge as roots blowers produce more heat to power than any of the other blower options - screw or centri. The front end was a copy of aftermarket front end dual intercooler solutions made for the C7Z to help with the heat soak challenges.

I think I am absorbing fairly well - back to my C8 and SC combo suggestion - you can change all of the items you raised - grip and aero - brakes - suspension. I know that is modding - but that is pretty minimal. The SC is bolt on. It’s a solid option. You cannot change the C8Z but there are things you can do with the Stingray. The Eray is much heavier likely due to the batteries and won’t give you what you want. That said it will have the C8Z body and will likely have better suspension, tire and braking options.

Like I said about the cross plane option - it would have made the C8Z more American - but to say that FPC solutions are inferior - or not an optimal choice - I don’t think that is accurate. For you - you are definitely not a fan. That is clear - but the success of the car with this preorder madness seems to be a good indicator for GMs decision. Similar to the mid engine decision. I believe there was blow back there from many Corvette owners - and I understand that the C8 is the most successful Corvette of all time.

Again - I am not for one or the other - I am happy with Corvettes in the past and think the mid engine solution is awesome.

 

Before I respond to this, please go back and look at GM official times for the C6Z

 

I don’t need to. I have raced them - and seen them raced many many times. Stock for stock - A C8 Stingray will beat a C6Z in the 1/4 9/10 times. I can spam many a video showing you the mid 11 second 123-125 MPH 1/4’s that these car run - when they have traction - on a stock tire.

Mid 10’s is a night and day difference between the C6Z and the C8Z. Putting it another way - put a stock C6Z vs a Performante - and it would be ugly - in a straight line - 1/4 mile and even 1/2 mile. That is what the C8Z will do to the C6Z stock for stock. So saying they are “close” - in the racing world - is highly inaccurate. Every tenth is a big deal.

It’s silly - which is why I said - I understand you have told yourself you don’t like the C8Z - I get it. Just don’t say it’s either A) slow. Or B) average. Without at least providing some data. I am willing to hear what you have to say. From what I know about - today - There isn’t anything that is made today - production car - especially for this price range - that can touch the C8Z in a straight line - which isn’t bad considering that isn’t it’s design/mission statement (versus being a road course car).

EDIT: if you are saying that the official GM times are quicker than mid to mid-low 11’s at 125 MPH - imagine what that will mean for the C8Z. It can surely be done and was for the C6Z. That said - The times that were substantially quicker - into the 10’s and higher MPH - were accomplished on the most unicorn of DA days - with fantastical prep - and the best drivers. Like a Hellcat or Demon though - almost no one else can reproduce these times. And they are not the average.

 

First, BMEP is more related to torque and displacement. Second, if you want to use BMEP as your standard then the GT3 is quite a bit better than the C8 and the Valkyrie, lol. In fact the Mustang GT is about identical to the C8 for max BMEP (14.2 vs 14.3). The Ferrari 458 comes in at 15.1, much higher than any of them.

 

We only have GM quoted times right now for the C8Z. That is why I am referring to GM times. GM quoted a 1/4mile trap speed of 127mph for the C6Z.. So by your logic, if Gm is quoting a 130mph trap speed for the C8Z, it will really be closer to 125-127. Thanks for proving exactly what I have been saying. This car is going to be unimpressive in straight line performance by today's standards. Yes the et is going tp be a lot better on the new C8Z in a 1/4 mile drag race than a C6Z . From a roll it is going to be a lot closer than it should for a car that is 17 years newer. I love the way the new car looks and I am excited about the new ME platform as it was designed to handle more power than the last platform. I am just disappointed in the acceleration. Honestly, I think this car should have trapped mid to upper 130's stock.

And in response to your earlier comment about 0-60 times. Most European cars do not use a 1' for roll out.

 

The C7 Z06 heat soak you describe - Please see this thread (As well as many others about this issue as it relates mainly to automatics) - https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...ak-tables.html
Additionally - The LG Motorsports fix (When Lou developed it) was not for heat soak issues (But it helped in this area too). Finally, I am not aware of any aftermarket company that has been able to tune a C8 Stingray to date (Unless they are using a piggy back override - That does not count).

The C8 Z06 is going to be an awesome car. That said - One thing for sure is that the C8 Z06 will be the most inexpensive car to buy vs it's rivals (Whatever the price may be). I along with many of you wish it were a lot lighter. But, reality is that in it's lightest version, it is looking like 3700 pounds minimum.

 

I honestly thought this heat soak debate was put to bed. The Corvette Community lost its collective minds when owners dared speak those words - but after so many issues - and yes more with automatics affected than manuals - as the autos could not use the secondary rad that GM thought to release immediately (I wonder why lol). The taller lid and angled bricks did next to nothing. Many owners don't track their cars. Heat soak is SC based, this is true. The dual intercooler solution is about heat overall and directly connected to the poor engine bay heat circulation (meaning that is why the cooling aftermarket for the C7Z was so healthy- because heat soak and poor engine bay circulation massively contributed to the heat issues of the C7Z. I know this because I owned one, raced it and had to mod around it like so many did. We had a group of over 100 Corvettes - 59 were C7Z’s and anyone who tracked their cars - had the issue - some worse than others.
You are correct that the C8 ECU cannot be tuned as GM reflashes it remotely with updates (and it is encrypted etc.). Stand alone ECU or piggyback isn’t cheating though - it’s adapting. And the new SC's offered seem to offer a nice power upgrade.
3700 lbs - in todays market - across platforms and manufacturers is the norm. This is because people want fast and comfy. The “olden days” some people pine for (I see this all the time on the BMW forums) - don’t exist - because that time is gone and has been for a long time. The 2009 R35 GTR (released in 2007) was almost 4000 lbs.
The Corvette Community is an old community - meaning its been around a long time as the car is 70 years old. The Corvette has been one way 68 of those years. And change can be difficult. This mid engine solution from GM - is a prime example. Jay Leno spoke about it - that the US owners would have a difficult time with a FPC car.
What no one who continues to bring weight into the discussion can seem to answer so far - on more than maybe 4-5 threads I am on - is how is this negatively affecting the performance numbers? Especially since we apparently know some of the performance numbers. 10.6 1/4 mile (which the math suggests - a 130+ MPH trap speed will accompany). And - it seems accepted - that this car in Z07 trim will run sub 7 minutes on the Nurburgring. I have heard this is slow, average, disappointing etc. These same people compare FI cars to an NA car. They talk about low torque. But my question is - what is quicker and faster? Today? Stock for stock and in this price range. Even in a straight line - despite it being a road course car first? Sub 7 minute Nurburgring time? How many cars can accomplish that? Maybe there are cars I am not aware of.

Or:

There is a reason that there hasn’t been any answers.

 

The Camaro ZL1, Mustang GT500, and Hellcat run 0-60 as fast as the Z06? I was unaware.

The Z06 is a boat? Then you also think the comparably weighted Porsche 911 TTS is a boat. And the Acura NSX and Audi R8 are weightier.

Who wouldn't love the Z06 to weigh as much as the GT3 RS or the 720? However, saving weight costs money. So, one can buy a lighter F8 or McLaren. But it costs a lot more money. That said. "Boat" is hyperbolic.

This.