R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
Clicky --->
<---
I know Road & Track is usually a couple of tenths behind and a couple of mph slower than the times published in other mags (CandD, MT, for example). But they quote 4.2 seconds to 60 and a 12.3 @116.6 1/4 mile. Nearly a second and 9 mph slower than the others?!
I wonder if something was up with their vBox data acquisition unit, or if it was out of calibration. The article says that they "nearly" hit 60 mph in 1st gear, when the car is specifically geared to allow that. All the other magazines are hitting 60 in first, which would explain the 3.6 second 0-60 times vs. the 4.2 seconds they got (a C5 Z06 can do 4.2 seconds or better). If their vBox was off and they only hit 58 in first, they would have to grab 2nd before it showed 60 mph. The 1/4 mile time/speed is just wrong, though. Other mags got 12.4-12.6 @ 114-116 out of the C5 Z06, while the new one weighs about the same as the old one, has much more rear tire, and 100 more hp...
I hope they test it again at their normal venue with better calibrated equipment, because those numbers make them look really bad when the car is clearly capable of more.
That said, they seemed to love the car, and the Solstice too.
<---I know Road & Track is usually a couple of tenths behind and a couple of mph slower than the times published in other mags (CandD, MT, for example). But they quote 4.2 seconds to 60 and a 12.3 @116.6 1/4 mile. Nearly a second and 9 mph slower than the others?!
I wonder if something was up with their vBox data acquisition unit, or if it was out of calibration. The article says that they "nearly" hit 60 mph in 1st gear, when the car is specifically geared to allow that. All the other magazines are hitting 60 in first, which would explain the 3.6 second 0-60 times vs. the 4.2 seconds they got (a C5 Z06 can do 4.2 seconds or better). If their vBox was off and they only hit 58 in first, they would have to grab 2nd before it showed 60 mph. The 1/4 mile time/speed is just wrong, though. Other mags got 12.4-12.6 @ 114-116 out of the C5 Z06, while the new one weighs about the same as the old one, has much more rear tire, and 100 more hp...
I hope they test it again at their normal venue with better calibrated equipment, because those numbers make them look really bad when the car is clearly capable of more.
That said, they seemed to love the car, and the Solstice too.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,312
From: Aurora, IL
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
I read a recent article where they pulled an 11.5 in the quarter out of the new ZO6. There are alot of variables I'm sure that account to the time differences such as weather, track conditions, and different drivers.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,255
From: new jersey
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
it was an impressive article(although i know those times are a tad bit off). love how they threw in the Ferrari and GT and pointed out that the Vette is more a "blue collar" supercar than the others were. thats what they are supposed to be 
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 576
From: Houston, TX
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
on a side note the C6Z06 has been dynoed..
441.9rwhp 412.3 rwtq
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...8&forum_id=100
with that much power at the wheels I'm thinking the 11.5 will be the norm
Oh yeah I forgot..
441.9rwhp 412.3 rwtq
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...8&forum_id=100
with that much power at the wheels I'm thinking the 11.5 will be the norm
Oh yeah I forgot..
Last edited by ced8; Sep 28, 2005 at 04:06 PM.
Super Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,026
From: Japan
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
Originally Posted by 96_Camaro_B4C
Clicky ---><---
I know Road & Track is usually a couple of tenths behind and a couple of mph slower than the times published in other mags (CandD, MT, for example). But they quote 4.2 seconds to 60 and a 12.3 @116.6 1/4 mile. Nearly a second and 9 mph slower than the others?!
I wonder if something was up with their vBox data acquisition unit, or if it was out of calibration. The article says that they "nearly" hit 60 mph in 1st gear, when the car is specifically geared to allow that. All the other magazines are hitting 60 in first, which would explain the 3.6 second 0-60 times vs. the 4.2 seconds they got (a C5 Z06 can do 4.2 seconds or better). If their vBox was off and they only hit 58 in first, they would have to grab 2nd before it showed 60 mph. The 1/4 mile time/speed is just wrong, though. Other mags got 12.4-12.6 @ 114-116 out of the C5 Z06, while the new one weighs about the same as the old one, has much more rear tire, and 100 more hp...
I hope they test it again at their normal venue with better calibrated equipment, because those numbers make them look really bad when the car is clearly capable of more.
That said, they seemed to love the car, and the Solstice too.
<---I know Road & Track is usually a couple of tenths behind and a couple of mph slower than the times published in other mags (CandD, MT, for example). But they quote 4.2 seconds to 60 and a 12.3 @116.6 1/4 mile. Nearly a second and 9 mph slower than the others?!
I wonder if something was up with their vBox data acquisition unit, or if it was out of calibration. The article says that they "nearly" hit 60 mph in 1st gear, when the car is specifically geared to allow that. All the other magazines are hitting 60 in first, which would explain the 3.6 second 0-60 times vs. the 4.2 seconds they got (a C5 Z06 can do 4.2 seconds or better). If their vBox was off and they only hit 58 in first, they would have to grab 2nd before it showed 60 mph. The 1/4 mile time/speed is just wrong, though. Other mags got 12.4-12.6 @ 114-116 out of the C5 Z06, while the new one weighs about the same as the old one, has much more rear tire, and 100 more hp...
I hope they test it again at their normal venue with better calibrated equipment, because those numbers make them look really bad when the car is clearly capable of more.
That said, they seemed to love the car, and the Solstice too.
That sounds like what it would run with one of the spark plug wires pulled off.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,080
From: Sterling heights, Michigan.
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
Im personally impressed, when they get that motor camming with some better breathing im betting 510RWHP with minimal investment will be common place.
I didnt look, but what is the current model Viper and GT40 putting to the ground?
I didnt look, but what is the current model Viper and GT40 putting to the ground?
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 343
From: Columbia, SC
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
last I heard of Ford GT dynos had it at around 550 rwhp. it might have been more like 565, but I could be wrong. either way, a z06 with minimal investment will be a lighter, faster, better handling car. thats damn impressive
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Re: R&T Quick Test of Z06 (in Europe)
Originally Posted by Stealth 86 LSC
last I heard of Ford GT dynos had it at around 550 rwhp. it might have been more like 565, but I could be wrong. either way, a z06 with minimal investment will be a lighter, faster, better handling car. thats damn impressive
I have seen a stock SRT-10 Viper dyno sheet show 453rwhp I believe. Don't have any on hand though.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Relaquary
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
2
Jul 6, 2015 09:42 AM
