: Sal C. & Katshot's nonsensical nonsense.



BeelzeBob
07-02-03, 01:42 AM
This message has been split from a topic in the CTS area regarding a CTS with a 3.8 Grand National turbocharged engine:

That's really amazing! Z06 and Viper territory!

Katshot
07-02-03, 08:34 AM
That's really amazing! Z06 and Viper territory!

That's WAY quicker than a ZO6 or Viper Sal.
It's amazing that after so long, the Buick Grand National is STILL a performance ICON.

BeelzeBob
07-02-03, 09:29 AM
I've seen a stock Z06 run 11.7 and I've heard of one running 11.6. These guys haven't beat all the stock Viper's they've raced... The guys who know how to race their Z06's are consistently in the high 11's and the same goes for the Vipers - only a bit faster.

In regards to the GN - that was an amazing setup. Even those regular T-Types were so far ahead of their time.. It was all downhill for a long, long time when they got rid of the GN...

Katshot
07-03-03, 12:05 AM
I've seen a stock Z06 run 11.7 and I've heard of one running 11.6. These guys haven't beat all the stock Viper's they've raced... The guys who know how to race their Z06's are consistently in the high 11's and the same goes for the Vipers - only a bit faster.

In regards to the GN - that was an amazing setup. Even those regular T-Types were so far ahead of their time.. It was all downhill for a long, long time when they got rid of the GN...


Sal,
Again I have to say that I think your times are way off on the ZO6. All the ones I've seen are usually in the mid to upper 12's.
Matter of fact, the other night at Atco raceway, there was a guy with a ZO6 and he ran a 14 second 1/4. NOW THAT'S PATHETIC.
But I just watched a show on TV last night and they did a side by side drag race between the ZO6 and the new Viper. The cars were both driven by professionals and the Viper beat the Vette by like 4 tenths. The Viper did a 12.4 and the Vette did a 12.8. So again, I feel your times are off by quite a bit.

BeelzeBob
07-03-03, 08:45 AM
Sal,
The Viper did a 12.4 and the Vette did a 12.8. So again, I feel your times are off by quite a bit.

With all due respect, my numbers aren't off - and that's a fact. Sorry...

At any cost, being that LS1 Z28's have hit high 12's (on very rare occasion) and so have '96 Corvette Grand Sports (yes, they were faster than C5's. The LT4 will out run the LS1 in 75% of all cases) - right out of the box - why would anyone make such a big deal over the Z06 if it did the same? Professional race car drivers or not - they're not getting the best numbers.

The ZR-1's were getting low to mid 12's way back in 1990. Even the dummies at Motor Trend got a 12.8 at 113.8mph...

For two years I was totally in love with Corvettes and studied them feverishly... It's only after I got one that I realized I'm a 100% luxury kinda guy...

Katshot
07-03-03, 09:39 AM
I think you're not able to be objective about them. Just picked up a new Road & Track and in the "test results" page it had virtually the same times as I told you about. They had the ZO6 at 12.8 and the Viper at 12.3. I've personally seen ZO6's run better and worse than those numbers at the track but I feel they are truly "representative" numbers. Your numbers MAY be possible for a ZO6, and MAYBE even a stock one in RARE instances but I would hardly call them "representative".

BeelzeBob
07-03-03, 10:09 AM
Look.

I said: That's really amazing! Z06 and Viper territory!

You said: That's WAY quicker than a ZO6 or Viper Sal.

Being that 2001 and newer Z06's CAN do 11.6 in the quarter mile without any modifications, it's NOT way quicker than a Z06.

Nobody cares what Road and Track gets in the quarter mile. My numbers ARE possible for a stock Z06. Not MAY or MAYBE. So they are representative of what the car CAN do under the right circumstances with the right driver. Just like the 11.6 second CTS.

P.S. I'm going to move this into the Lounge soon...

Katshot
07-03-03, 11:54 AM
Look.

I said: That's really amazing! Z06 and Viper territory!

You said: That's WAY quicker than a ZO6 or Viper Sal.

Being that 2001 and newer Z06's CAN do 11.6 in the quarter mile without any modifications, it's NOT way quicker than a Z06.

Nobody cares what Road and Track gets in the quarter mile. My numbers ARE possible for a stock Z06. Not MAY or MAYBE. So they are representative of what the car CAN do under the right circumstances with the right driver. Just like the 11.6 second CTS.

P.S. I'm going to move this into the Lounge soon...


Sorry, I'm NOT buying a completely stock ZO6 doing a 11.6 1/4. My experience seems to agree with several reputable sources, whereas IMO, yours is very "optimistic" at best, and certainly NOT what you could call "representative" times for the car.
We'll just have to disagree on this one.

BeelzeBob
07-03-03, 12:38 PM
What a perfect way to settle a debate. :D

I can understand where you're coming from. The 11.6 I've only heard of one-time. I've seen the 11.7 but of course, that could have been an error somehow or another. Otherwise, I've read about 11.7 runs from reputable sources on www.corvetteforums.com (http://www.corvetteforums.com) - but then again, how can anybody really, REALLY be sure. When all is said and done, who really cares anyway?

vanaisa
07-03-03, 12:48 PM
Some tests.... (http://popularmechanics.com/automotive/collector_cars/1997/8/showdown_muscle_cars/index.phtml) ;)

BeelzeBob
07-03-03, 01:11 PM
Now put that 11.97 second Viper in the hands of someone who drives one daily and brings it to the track frequently, and I bet you get even better numbers.. The biggest problem with these cars is hooking up. It takes a heck of a lot of practise getting these cars to take off right.

vanaisa
07-03-03, 04:32 PM
Now put that 11.97 second Viper in the hands of someone who drives one daily and brings it to the track frequently, and I bet you get even better numbers.. The biggest problem with these cars is hooking up. It takes a heck of a lot of practise getting these cars to take off right.
I agreed - Viper is powerplant!
In fact we have here (in Estonia) one Viper, and it wins in two years all 1/4 mile runs, where it drives....(OK, then we dont have many strip cars) :worship:

Katshot
07-03-03, 04:34 PM
Nice article but most of the cars are modified, and many of the times are anything but "normal" for the cars. A sub-12 second pass for a stock Viper is virtually unheard of. And the newer Camaro SS and Firebird Firehawk times are just crazy. I've NEVER seen such slow times for them.

Blackout
07-03-03, 06:55 PM
Sal: If you "saw" a Z06 do a 11 second pass then most likely the guy was yanking your chain when saying it was stock. Because I go to Atco and E-Town a decent amount and the fastest "stock" Z06 I have ever seen has ran a 12.3 and I saw one run an 11.8 but he had drag slicks on. So IMO the guy was BS'ing you.

BeelzeBob
07-03-03, 09:43 PM
Sal: If you "saw" a Z06 do a 11 second pass then most likely the guy was yanking your chain when saying it was stock. Because I go to Atco and E-Town a decent amount and the fastest "stock" Z06 I have ever seen has ran a 12.3 and I saw one run an 11.8 but he had drag slicks on. So IMO the guy was BS'ing you.
That is certainly a good possibility... I can never really know for certain...

Ralph
07-03-03, 11:29 PM
Nov. 2002 Motortrend puts the Z06 at 12.85 @ 114.36, and the Viper SRT-10 12.37 @ 117.21, and this is all I have to go by as I don't get out to our track anymore to watch them rip 'er up. :burn:

Katshot
07-04-03, 09:33 AM
Nov. 2002 Motortrend puts the Z06 at 12.85 @ 114.36, and the Viper SRT-10 12.37 @ 117.21, and this is all I have to go by as I don't get out to our track anymore to watch them rip 'er up. :burn:

Virtually identical to the times I quoted again. Sorry Sal.

the Sandman
07-04-03, 10:48 AM
Low to mid 12's for a previous generation Viper, but the new one is consistently high 11's stock with a capable driver (500 vs 450 horsepower and *many* other improvements).

Z06's also come in two different flavors (405 vs 385 horsepower) but they pretty much all run mid to high 12's stock.

As mentioned above, whether or not a vehicle is truly stock when raced is not known. The tester cars sent to the mags for evaluation used to be "enhanced" for better published results but *supposedly* that is no longer the case.

Katshot
07-04-03, 11:08 AM
You're right. The tester cars can be specially prepared for the magazine, and probably are still. But they are still STOCK and not actually modified. Just properly tuned and setup.
The Viper vs. ZO6 race I saw on TV the other day was using the new Viper and it pulled virtually identical times to the old ones. I certainly haven't really delved into the subject but I wouldn't be surprised if the new car wasn't significantly faster than the last one. I thought it's main attraction is supposed to be that it's chassis is much more "civilized".
Actually, there's a funny quote from this months Road & Track about the E55 AMG:
"Based on our previous road test, the E55 AMG can almost keep up with the Dodge Viper SRT-10, and for sure can outrun a Corvette ZO6 without breaking a sweat."
That cracked me up. Just thought any Vette lovers would appreciate it :sneaky:

BeelzeBob
07-04-03, 11:17 AM
I'm perfectly okay with being the only one here who knows a 2001 and newer Z06 is capable of mid/high 11's ya know...

the Sandman
07-04-03, 11:19 AM
The E55 AMG is a frigging rocketship. Very few cars can beat it. I read the same article you're quoting, as well as several others, and it's just astounding. Especially since it's an automatic transmission and gets it's best 0-60 times (4.3 seconds) in Drive with the traction control on. It's almost unbeatable in the 0-100-0 too, except by the most radical supercars. Damn.

Did you read where they're putting an even bigger motor in the next set of AMG cars? The one in the E55/SL55 is 5.5 liter, and the new one is 6.0 liter - basically a modified Maybach motor making over 600 horsepower and almost 750 lb/ft of torque (could have made more but the rest of the drivetrain wouldn't handle it!). They're putting it in the SL65, CL65, and S65 AMG's. No decision yet as to whether or not these even more powerful models will come to the US. Double damn.

BeelzeBob
07-04-03, 11:25 AM
"Based on our previous road test, the E55 AMG can almost keep up with the Dodge Viper SRT-10, and for sure can outrun a Corvette ZO6 without breaking a sweat."
That cracked me up. Just thought any Vette lovers would appreciate it :sneaky:

I'm pretty sure everyone in a Z06 can get a 3.9 0-60.. I can understand the 11's thing being difficult to believe - but the 0-60 is well-documented.. The E55 AMG is a bit slower...

the Sandman
07-04-03, 11:53 AM
I'm pretty sure everyone in a Z06 can get a 3.9 0-60.. I can understand the 11's thing being difficult to believe - but the 0-60 is well-documented.. The E55 AMG is a bit slower...A bit slower 0-60, perhaps, although *most* drivers are closer to 4.3 - 4.5 on street tires. But in the 1/4 mile and 0-100-0 the E55 AMG clearly wins. I know, it's just plain wrong...

the Sandman
07-04-03, 11:58 AM
I'm perfectly okay with being the only one here who knows a 2001 and newer Z06 is capable of mid/high 11's ya know...:burn:With slicks, yes. Unfortunately, the independent rear suspension that makes for such goood handling also makes it difficult to hook on launch. The draggers invariably go for live rear axles.

Katshot
07-04-03, 06:58 PM
The E55 AMG is a frigging rocketship. Very few cars can beat it. I read the same article you're quoting, as well as several others, and it's just astounding. Especially since it's an automatic transmission and gets it's best 0-60 times (4.3 seconds) in Drive with the traction control on. It's almost unbeatable in the 0-100-0 too, except by the most radical supercars. Damn.

Did you read where they're putting an even bigger motor in the next set of AMG cars? The one in the E55/SL55 is 5.5 liter, and the new one is 6.0 liter - basically a modified Maybach motor making over 600 horsepower and almost 750 lb/ft of torque (could have made more but the rest of the drivetrain wouldn't handle it!). They're putting it in the SL65, CL65, and S65 AMG's. No decision yet as to whether or not these even more powerful models will come to the US. Double damn.

That engine's already in the SL600. I just read an article on it. It's in the July Road & Track. It hits the US in October packing a 5.5 liter, twin-turbo V12. 500hp and 590 lb/ft of torque :eek:

the Sandman
07-04-03, 07:22 PM
That engine's already in the SL600. I just read an article on it. It's in the July Road & Track. It hits the US in October packing a 5.5 liter, twin-turbo V12. 500hp and 590 lb/ft of torque !!!!!:eek:Not quite. The SL55/E55/CL55 have a supercharged 5.5 liter V8 from AMG (E55 is 469 HP, 516 lb/ft; SL55 is 493 HP, 516 lb/ft - same engine...go figure). The SL600 has a non-AMG twin-turbo V12 5.6 liter (493 HP, 590 lb/ft). The SL65/CL65/S65 will have an AMG V12 6 liter twin-turbo engine making 604 HP and 738 lb/ft.

:shocked2::bulging::shocked2::bulging::shocked2:

elwesso
07-04-03, 08:12 PM
Its MB, who really cares?

Is anyone <on this board> going to get one of those anyway??

Brett
07-04-03, 08:19 PM
If I could swing an E55 i'd buy one. Between the S55 and the S600, that would be a fun decision to make.

Ralph
07-04-03, 10:01 PM
Personally I think torque is more important than HP. I know some don't think much of Motortrend, but the Nov. 2002 also did dyno testing and determined that at just 2000 rpm, the Viper's engine generated a whopping 344 ft.lbs of torque! For the same rpm, the Vette made a respectable 235. Any larger engine should make more torque, I would think. The Z06 would seem to rely more on high tech rather than old fashoned brute force. I think it could be possible for a Vette to run low 12's or high 11's because even two cars of identical make and model can run and perform differently. For example, upon researching gas mileage, etc. some cars that were identical had huge discrepancies in mileage and economy. Also I've heard stories of our 2.8 V6, and rebuilt 2.8's a friend got rebuilt from salvage, and it had half the power ours does. So maybe it depends on the enginebuilder also. There may be many factors that could bias a test of quartermile?

Brett
07-04-03, 11:18 PM
Ive heard a Z06 called different things by different people, but high-tech? Thats the first time I heard that.

1slowZ
07-05-03, 01:11 PM
A bit slower 0-60, perhaps, although *most* drivers are closer to 4.3 - 4.5 on street tires. But in the 1/4 mile and 0-100-0 the E55 AMG clearly wins. I know, it's just plain wrong...

(please note: I quoted figures from the CL55 AMG, because MT did not test the upcoming E55 AMG. I belive they both have the same power, though I could be wrong. I haven't seen C&Ds numbers on the E55 0-100-0, so could one of you guys please post them. Thanks!)

You guys crack me up. The "average" Z06 will run low to mid 12s. The Mercedes-Benz CL55 AMG(493hp/516tq) and the Z06 were both tested in a previous issue of Motor Trend, since most of you guys like doing "magazine comparisons". The AMG went 0-100-0 in 14.45. The Z06 went 0-100-0 in 13.92. Do the math here fellas. The average AMG will beat a Z06 in the 1/4, though. For this test, they got a 12.38@114.45 out of the AMG and a 12.44@116.54 out of the Z06. And there you have it. The fastest time I've seen for a bone-stock Z06 is a 12.2. The fastest I've seen for a stock Z06 EXCEPT for a pair of DRs on the back is a 11.9. I've heard of stock Z06s running high 11s and ones that just have tires going mid 11s, but I've never witnessed them personally. I have also seen stock Z06s running 14s and even moddified ones running 14s. I'm not that stupid to think to myself that all Z06s must run that.... Anyways, so who owns one of these cars? Or is this the typical ricer "I'm gonna hate on a car that I don't have" kinda post. :nyanya:


edit: Forgot to say that I agree with Sandman about the Z06s being in the mid to high 4sec 0-60 range. Z06s are well known for severe wheelhop. IRS sucks for making an aggressive launch.

1slowZ
07-05-03, 01:15 PM
Ive heard a Z06 called different things by different people, but high-tech? Thats the first time I heard that.

I was about to say the same thing.

Ralph
07-05-03, 06:50 PM
Ive heard a Z06 called different things by different people, but high-tech? Thats the first time I heard that.

I guess thats just my own blurp or feeling. By "high tech" I mean a smaller engine that produces close times on the track, compared to a 500 cu. in. monster. I consider the Vette to be high tech compared to the Viper because of the better mileage it gets also, even though this may totally be dependable on the engine size. GM has always had better technology over Dodge, IMO. I consider the Vette to be more refined than a Viper which relies completely on cubic inches to move it, get it? :burn:

the Sandman
07-05-03, 07:53 PM
(please note: I quoted figures from the CL55 AMG, because MT did not test the upcoming E55 AMG. I belive they both have the same power, though I could be wrong. I haven't seen C&Ds numbers on the E55 0-100-0, so could one of you guys please post them. Thanks!)

You guys crack me up. The "average" Z06 will run low to mid 12s. The Mercedes-Benz CL55 AMG(493hp/516tq) and the Z06 were both tested in a previous issue of Motor Trend, since most of you guys like doing "magazine comparisons". The AMG went 0-100-0 in 14.45. The Z06 went 0-100-0 in 13.9 2. Do the math here fellas. The average AMG will beat a Z06 in the 1/4, though. For this test, they got a 12.38@114.45 out of the AMG and a 12.44@116.54 out of the Z06. And there you have it. The fastest time I've seen for a bone-stock Z06 is a 12.2. The fastest I've seen for a stock Z06 EXCEPT for a pair of DRs on the back is a 11.9. I've heard of stock Z06s running high 11s and ones that just have tires going mid 11s, but I've never witnessed them personally. I have also seen stock Z06s running 14s and even moddified ones running 14s. I'm not that stupid to think to myself that all Z06s must run that.... Anyways, so who owns one of these cars? Or is this the typical ricer "I'm gonna hate on a car that I don't have" kinda post. :nyanya:


edit: Forgot to say that I agree with Sandman about the Z06s being in the mid to high 4sec 0-60 range. Z06s are well known for severe wheelhop. IRS sucks for making an aggressive launch.There are certainly drawbacks to using the magazine test results but what are the options? Either you buy one of each and test them yourself or you go by someone else's track times and hope they're accurate and that their vehicles are truly stock. With the magazines, hopefully they're at least consistent with their methodology and drivers so that the results have validity when comparing the different cars they test.

In the latest Road & Track, in the Summary at the back, they have test results for the 405 hp Z06, 500 hp Viper, and E55 (CL55 *is* a different car, heavier and somewhat slower):

Z06 (405 HP model)
0-60 4.5 sec
0-100 9.9 sec
1/4 mile 12.8 sec at 113.5 mph
80-0 204 ft

Viper (500 HP model)
0-60 4.1 sec
0-100 8.9 sec
1/4 mile 12.2 sec at 119.6 mph
80-0 196 ft

E55
0-60 4.2 sec
0-100 9.4 sec
1/4 mile 12.4 sec at 116.4 mph
80-0 209 ft

When I do the math the E55 beats the Z06 based on Road & Track's data. And yes, I am considering getting one of the AMG cars rather than the STS-V in a couple of years.

Brett
07-05-03, 09:33 PM
Well I agree with the refined part. I've owned a vette, and a friend of mine has owned both Vipers RT/10 and currently an SRT-10. And the vette is considerably more refined than either of them

elwesso
07-05-03, 11:09 PM
The Vette is more of a car to be a racecar/drivers car... Most others seem to be JUST racecars, and arent that comfortable to be in......

Ralph
07-05-03, 11:30 PM
Mind you, I could definetly see myself cruising down Ocean Drive in Miami in a Viper. I wouldn't even care about the supposed "heat problem" that comes in through the floor in a Viper. Brett, did your friend experience the heat problem in his Vipers? It would keep my feet warm where I live, however at 120,000 dollars for a new Viper, I'd get a used Vette. I always liked the old "Snoopy nosed" Vettes up to 1982, but I thought they would be underpowered at 200 HP!?

the Sandman
07-06-03, 12:55 AM
Personally, I'd take any one of them. Though quite different, all 3 are awesome in their own way.

Brett
07-06-03, 11:33 AM
Mind you, I could definetly see myself cruising down Ocean Drive in Miami in a Viper. I wouldn't even care about the supposed "heat problem" that comes in through the floor in a Viper. Brett, did your friend experience the heat problem in his Vipers? It would keep my feet warm where I live, however at 120,000 dollars for a new Viper, I'd get a used Vette. I always liked the old "Snoopy nosed" Vettes up to 1982, but I thought they would be underpowered at 200 HP!?


It is quite toasty in both varieties of Viper, not so much though that you wouldnt want to own one. And if your driving up ocean drive, its hot enough already, you may not even notice the heat in the car.

catbert
07-06-03, 02:42 PM
I'm perfectly okay with being the only one here who knows a 2001 and newer Z06 is capable of mid/high 11's ya know...


As a C5 owner, let me say that the Z06 that runs mid 11s is not stock...period. Even GM claims mid 12s with a engineer/driver who has raced Vettes professionally for over a decade. When they run 11s, they have had intake work done - no way around it. They may appear near stock, but they aren't...as much as I'd like to see a stock Vette in the 11s. :burn:

BeelzeBob
07-06-03, 03:42 PM
Well then that settles it. I'm going to chalk all of this up to the fact that Z06 owners were very, very intimidated by the '03 Mustang Cobra and did enough BSing to have had me convinced...

Katshot was right. That 11.6 second CTS is in a league of it's own... Let's hope the CTS-v can even be nearly as impressive...

:cheers:

Katshot
07-06-03, 06:09 PM
NO CHANCE!!
The CTS-v will be lucky to see mid 12's IMO. But that will be MORE than fast enough to smoke it's competition.

BeelzeBob
07-07-03, 07:14 AM
I agree...