C6 Z06: 0-60 3.7 sec, $65.8k

[BigAls87Z28]

MMMMMM MMMMM BITCH!!

http://www.carlist.com/newcars/2006/image/2006_chevy_corvette_z06.jpg

DETROIT – The ultimate Corvette—the 2006 Corvette Z06—is posting numbers at the track and on the window sticker that will get attention. Chevrolet has announced that the fastest Corvette ever—the 505-horsepower Corvette Z06—will achieve 0-60 mph in 3.7 seconds while still in first gear, and pricing will start at $65,800, including destination and freight charges.

“Corvette is a global icon for world-class sports car performance at an incredible value, and offering the fastest production Corvette ever at this price is another testament to that reputation,� said Ed Peper, Chevrolet general manager. “When you compare the Corvette Z06 performance stats to other supercars, you see numerous examples where you’re getting better performance with Corvette for one-third the sticker price of the competition.�

Developed alongside the Corvette C6.R race car, the Corvette Z06 uses advanced lightweight materials typically found only in the most exotic supercars. Use of weight-saving materials such as carbon fiber, aluminum, titanium and magnesium give the 3,132-pound car a highly competitive weight-to-power ratio of 6.2 pounds per horsepower.

“The new Corvette Z06 is the dividend from competing so successfully in endurance racing,� said Dave Hill, Corvette’s chief engineer. “It combines the strong attributes of the new, sixth-generation Corvette with the spirit, technology and know-how from the race program to form an American supercar with outstanding credentials.� The highly anticipated Corvette Z06, which will be available in the fourth quarter of 2005, completes the sixth-generation portfolio, which also includes the 400-hp Corvette coupe and convertible.

see the rest here http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15947&page=1&pp=20

[NJSPEEDER]

LS7 = Sex

still not a fan of the styling, but the obnoxious advertised power and performance are worth every penny.

later
tim

[NLinnear]

The new Corvette ZOSex...I mean 6...not really...makes me drool

[skorpion317]

:hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail:

GM has made a car that will take over the world. i don't know of any other car in this performance category that could conceivably compete with the Z06, in every aspect. it's got power, handling, and a LOW price tag (considering the level of performance it has). This is, hands down, THE car of 2005. Thank you, GM.

now, get to work on the new Camaro!

[jims69camaro]

now, get to work on the new Camaro!

not happening. as a matter of fact, when lutz cut the zeta, ford introduced the shelby gt500. so much for the corvette being the bad boy on the block. since there is no camaro, the mustang boys have to have someone to race. ;)

disclaimer: no, i am not, nor was i ever, nor will i be a ford fan. however, there is something to be said for a 450 hp blown mod motor that says gt500 on the rocker panel, for under $45000. that alone is worth it just to have it in the shelby book...

[skorpion317]

the shelby GT500 won't be a production car. most of what they designed for that car will go into the new Cobra.

and lutz didn't officially cut Zeta. it was just postponed.

[Fasterthanyou]

So let's get some things straight... ignoring everything other than the powertrain we're looking at 505 hp from a naturally aspirated cam in block v8? And were are Ford's BLOWN v8's? Yeah, Ford sucks, I mean blows when it comes to making bad ass horsepower. Imagine if you would, a turbo on the LS7... yeah, let's just let that sink in.
0-60mph in 3.7 in 1st gear :shock: , that's insane.

[skorpion317]

So let's get some things straight... ignoring everything other than the powertrain we're looking at 505 hp from a naturally aspirated cam in block v8? And were are Ford's BLOWN v8's? Yeah, Ford sucks, I mean blows when it comes to making bad ass horsepower. Imagine if you would, a turbo on the LS7... yeah, let's just let that sink in.
0-60mph in 3.7 in 1st gear :shock: , that's insane.

compression ratio on the LS7 is 11:1. a turbo won't be going on there unless the compression is dropped, which lowers the power.

of course, it won't be TOO much of a power loss....and the turbo would more than make up for it.

now, why stop at a turbo? why not twin-turbo? :wink:

[BigAls87Z28]

now, get to work on the new Camaro!

not happening. as a matter of fact, when lutz cut the zeta, ford introduced the shelby gt500. so much for the corvette being the bad boy on the block. since there is no camaro, the mustang boys have to have someone to race. ;)

disclaimer: no, i am not, nor was i ever, nor will i be a ford fan. however, there is something to be said for a 450 hp blown mod motor that says gt500 on the rocker panel, for under $45000. that alone is worth it just to have it in the shelby book...

Never say never dear sir.
Who said that Zeta was going to give us a correct Camaro? Who said Camaro was deffinalty going on Zeta?
Zeta or VE is not dead, its just going to be delayed for American consumption. Austraila will be rolling out there VE's next year.
Lutz is not in charge of platforms, he is in charge of future cars and the things that go in, on and around them.

As for the GT500, its a drag racer. STILL a live axle (that is very much like the third/4th gen set up might I add), so it doesnt give us a TRUE performance machine. If Shelby was going to put his name on it, they should have created a IRS set up for the car. Im not paying 45k+ for a drag racer. I want my car to handle just as well.

To tie into the two subjects, Camaro BETTER have IRS with its new chassis. I dont wana hear crap about wheel hop. If you want to make a drag racer out of a brand new car, then enjoy. I want a sports car. 8)

[SteveR]

Wow, those numbers are impressive to say the least. 505hp in a 3100# car should turn some good numbers at the track.

[Fasterthanyou]

So let's get some things straight... ignoring everything other than the powertrain we're looking at 505 hp from a naturally aspirated cam in block v8? And were are Ford's BLOWN v8's? Yeah, Ford sucks, I mean blows when it comes to making bad ass horsepower. Imagine if you would, a turbo on the LS7... yeah, let's just let that sink in.
0-60mph in 3.7 in 1st gear :shock: , that's insane.

compression ratio on the LS7 is 11:1. a turbo won't be going on there unless the compression is dropped, which lowers the power.

of course, it won't be TOO much of a power loss....and the turbo would more than make up for it.

now, why stop at a turbo? why not twin-turbo? :wink:
You've been brainwashed :shock: . You can run a turbo on a 11:1 static compression ratio engine if the other parts match. Get the intake valve to stay open longer during the compression stroke and you're dynamic compression ratio would be well below that of a "low compression" engine.
Also, why twin-turbo? Last time I checked the singles were the setups putting the most power to the wheels and for good reason. Unless you've got a flat-crank v8 or some ultra fancy cross-over headers for your twin turbo there is no way possible for a twin to be more efficient than a single. I'd take a well designed single over a twin in a heartbeat. The twin just sounds cool :P

I don't know about the IRS. To me it doesn't take an IRS to make a sports car, although it does help. IRS just tells me it's better for handling the crappy roads :wink: . Smooth and the IRS has very little advantage over a solid rear.

What does this car do in the 1/4 mile if it's doing 0-60 in 3.7s. That's gotta be well into the 11's if not better.

[Koll]

This is like, yesterdays news

[foff667]

This is like, yesterdays news

well considering your posting on the day following i guess it would be :roll:

koll=dumb

[MapleRed]

Thats a damn good price for the level of performance you're getting. 8)

[skorpion317]

So let's get some things straight... ignoring everything other than the powertrain we're looking at 505 hp from a naturally aspirated cam in block v8? And were are Ford's BLOWN v8's? Yeah, Ford sucks, I mean blows when it comes to making bad ass horsepower. Imagine if you would, a turbo on the LS7... yeah, let's just let that sink in.
0-60mph in 3.7 in 1st gear :shock: , that's insane.

compression ratio on the LS7 is 11:1. a turbo won't be going on there unless the compression is dropped, which lowers the power.

of course, it won't be TOO much of a power loss....and the turbo would more than make up for it.

now, why stop at a turbo? why not twin-turbo? :wink:
You've been brainwashed :shock: . You can run a turbo on a 11:1 static compression ratio engine if the other parts match. Get the intake valve to stay open longer during the compression stroke and you're dynamic compression ratio would be well below that of a "low compression" engine.
Also, why twin-turbo? Last time I checked the singles were the setups putting the most power to the wheels and for good reason. Unless you've got a flat-crank v8 or some ultra fancy cross-over headers for your twin turbo there is no way possible for a twin to be more efficient than a single. I'd take a well designed single over a twin in a heartbeat. The twin just sounds cool :P

I don't know about the IRS. To me it doesn't take an IRS to make a sports car, although it does help. IRS just tells me it's better for handling the crappy roads :wink: . Smooth and the IRS has very little advantage over a solid rear.

What does this car do in the 1/4 mile if it's doing 0-60 in 3.7s. That's gotta be well into the 11's if not better.

brainwashed, my ass. 11:1 is do-able for a turbo, but i'd rather have lower compression to ensure that the motor won't grenade itself.

as for the twin-turbo setup, it's a matter of personal preference. if you want all-out balls to the wall power, a huge single turbo is great. but if you actually wanna drive the thing and enjoy it (and not have ridiculous turbo lag), i'd go with a twin-turbo, a small turbo to have quicker power off the line, and a large one that takes over when it's finished spooling up.

[79dizZy28]

i'll take a stock C6-ZO6 thank you 8)

[Fasterthanyou]

So let's get some things straight... ignoring everything other than the powertrain we're looking at 505 hp from a naturally aspirated cam in block v8? And were are Ford's BLOWN v8's? Yeah, Ford sucks, I mean blows when it comes to making bad ass horsepower. Imagine if you would, a turbo on the LS7... yeah, let's just let that sink in.
0-60mph in 3.7 in 1st gear :shock: , that's insane.

compression ratio on the LS7 is 11:1. a turbo won't be going on there unless the compression is dropped, which lowers the power.

of course, it won't be TOO much of a power loss....and the turbo would more than make up for it.

now, why stop at a turbo? why not twin-turbo? :wink:
You've been brainwashed :shock: . You can run a turbo on a 11:1 static compression ratio engine if the other parts match. Get the intake valve to stay open longer during the compression stroke and you're dynamic compression ratio would be well below that of a "low compression" engine.
Also, why twin-turbo? Last time I checked the singles were the setups putting the most power to the wheels and for good reason. Unless you've got a flat-crank v8 or some ultra fancy cross-over headers for your twin turbo there is no way possible for a twin to be more efficient than a single. I'd take a well designed single over a twin in a heartbeat. The twin just sounds cool :P

I don't know about the IRS. To me it doesn't take an IRS to make a sports car, although it does help. IRS just tells me it's better for handling the crappy roads :wink: . Smooth and the IRS has very little advantage over a solid rear.

What does this car do in the 1/4 mile if it's doing 0-60 in 3.7s. That's gotta be well into the 11's if not better.

brainwashed, my ass. 11:1 is do-able for a turbo, but i'd rather have lower compression to ensure that the motor won't grenade itself.

as for the twin-turbo setup, it's a matter of personal preference. if you want all-out balls to the wall power, a huge single turbo is great. but if you actually wanna drive the thing and enjoy it (and not have ridiculous turbo lag), i'd go with a twin-turbo, a small turbo to have quicker power off the line, and a large one that takes over when it's finished spooling up.
Yes brainwashed. Did you even read my post about the dynamic compression? Just because static compression is high, it doesn't mean you're actual compressiong ratio is that high. The intake valve staying open when the piston is coming up is on 99% of all the engines in the world. Install the correct cam and you can get a low enough compression to be safe on pump gas. I know, I've done it before. Turbo motorcycle motor. Instead of lowering compressiong we kept it stock and it handled 10psi without a hickup.
With the same horsepower goal a properly made single turbo will have lower lag than a twin setup. You forget that with a twin setup you've got half the engine going to each turbo and the pressure pulses aren't smooth because of the firing order (unless you use cross over headers) where as a singel turbo feeds a nice smooth pressure from all 8 cylinders. The result is the single is always better when done properly. The only time the twins work out is when you can't plumb the exhaust over to a collector. It's only a selling point to have multiple turbo's, the more turbo's you have does NOT decrease lag, it will infact increase it.

[jims69camaro]

one more thing: turbo lag is now being measure in hundredths of seconds. let me know the last time you felt a hundredth of a second.

the shelby will be hitting the street. no cobra this trip. IRS is for neo-pansy-euro-drivers who have really soft tushies. :P