Alan's Z06 dyno, mods and racing | FerrariChat

Alan's Z06 dyno, mods and racing

Discussion in 'American Muscle' started by alanhenson, May 4, 2006.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    I'll start a thread with my dyno numbers from today and post all other mods with dyno #s as quite a few people have shown interest in the progress of my car. I'll also post any racing numbers I may put up. I'll also paste my driving impressions from the other thread for future comparison. Enjoy.

    Just got back from Lg in Dallas and she ran pretty well. The first pull was only 451rwhp but the car was hot from an hours drive. We let it cool 20 minutes and pulled again which yielded 460 hp and 431 ftlbs. It was 80 with 80% humidity in Dallas. It was running pretty rich and he said it was losing about 10hp to that. I think someone told me most Vettes run about 13% parasitic loss so that yeilds about 530 hp and 495 ftlbs at the crank. Not bad for stock.

    Driving impressions
    "Well I passed to 500 mile breakin on wednesday of last week but I was in NYC all weekend so I couldn't really get on it until today. And let me say this to start off. This thing is an absolute animal. I mean a real beast.

    The power this car makes stock is unreal. Keep in mind I have driven 355s, 360s, 430s, Stradales, E46M3s, my 600hp mustang from college, Murcielagos, Gallardos, Diablos, Porsche TTs, a 600hp TT porsche, Porsche GT2,3 and RUFs(the only one that might keep up). I make that list just to let you know where my point of view comes from. I will compare and contrast using those cars.

    Acceleration
    This car is an absolute rocket right out of the box. The torque is just so phenominal I can't stand it. It will accelerate faster than my E46M3 and my Ferrari 355 did without ever passing 4K on the rpms. And it revs to 7K. Not bad for 7.0 liters. When you nail it in 1st it squats and just rockets forward. The exhaust valves open after 3500rpms at full throttle and it sounds like pure muscle car bliss. Almost like a small dragster. I can't wait to open up this exhaust with headers and high flow cats. I already ordered my air charger which is what got that guy into the 10s from the other thread.

    It easily out accelerates Murcielagos, my buddies GT2 and his Viper. I had a 600hp mustang in college that ran a 10.5@127 and it's a hair faster than that. I think people will be getting these into the 9s with just a few bolt ons and slicks. I drove a Porsche 996 stage 3 TT that had 600 ponies last month and it's definately faster than that. If you can catch a ride in one of these I suggest it.


    Most people that are dynoing these are getting more like 530hp stock which is 25hp over advertised. And a few people weighed them in at 3050-3080 which is 70-100LBs under advertised weight. Now I understand why this car is faster than it should be.

    Braking
    It's kind of like throwing an anchor out the window. It can throw your guts right out of your mouth. My all time favorite stock brakes were the M3s. Most magazines have the M3 with some of the shortest stopping distances they have ever recorded. These are just a little better. Now I can't say they won't fade on the track but the last Z had that problem so they supposedly fixed that with these. Cross drilled rotors multiple calipers on each wheel. 6 front 4 back, I think(don't quote me) and 20 seperate brake pads. They are easy to modulate and offer very good feddback. Not quite as good as the M3 but almost. This may get better as they get more miles on them, but excellent none the less.

    Suspension
    This is where my only performace complaint is. It corners very well. It's pretty neutral. Not as nuetral as my 355 or a 360 or 430 is but pretty neutral. It has very high cornering speeds. Much like my 355. It's easy to drive around the corner with the throttle and all that endless torque. It pulls over 1G which you can see on the heads up display in the g meter. Very cool. When the car turns in I don't feel the confidence I did in my M3 or a GT3. Guiding an M3 or a GT3 into a corner is like driving a laser. You know exactly where the limit is. The Z, not so much. But once it's into the corner and set you know. I think this may be those crappy run flat tires they use. They just don't offer the feedback the pilots on my 2 M3s did. This can be fixed I think with new tires. It aslo suffers a little from being upset in mid corner bumps above .8Gs. Most owners will never know this. I noticed though as have most magazine write ups. I think this may have something to do with spring rates and shocks. I'm sure someone in the aftermarket will fix this though. I lowered mine already so this may have something to do with it. I haven't gotten it aligned yet. Over all the handling is very good though. It doesn't rise to the level of excellent as does the GT3 or Stradale but it is easy to see how it ran the second fastest production car time around the ring behind the Porsche Carrerra GT. It will rip around corners. It just takes a little more guts and skill than say the GT3, Stradale or the Gallardo.

    Over all the level of constuction seems to be right up there with most of the sports cars out there. The level of quality of materials is where GM saves all it's money. It's mid level parts put together very well. Paints very good. All panels fit perfect. Leather is well put together. Carpet is where they save lots of weight and money. It's fairly thin and will wear fast. Floor mats suck. Lots of plastic. And I have no problem with any of this. It all disappears when I hit that pedal and other cars disappear.

    Overall this is one of the greatest sporst cars built right now under 400K bar none. Especially for the money. Factor that in and it can't be beat. I give it an A+++. I am going to the dyno tomorrow. I'll post my stock #s for future reference. Hope you enjoyed this read a fraction as much as I enjoyed the testing of the car."
     
  2. Mike J

    Mike J Formula Junior

    May 10, 2005
    570
    Ship Bottom, NJ
    Full Name:
    Michael
    Congratulations on owning one of the most special cars on the planet regardless of price. Enjoy it in good health!
     
  3. Gary(SF)

    Gary(SF) F1 Rookie

    Oct 13, 2003
    3,637
    Los Altos Hills, CA
    Full Name:
    Gary B.
    That has to be one of the funniest sentences I've seen here on FChat.

    Gary
     
  4. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    Now don't get me wrong, I LOVE the new ZO6.
    But that is far from the truth. To go from mid/high 11's to 9's will take ALOT more then that my friend.
     
  5. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Well lets take a look at that. I used to drag race quite a bit back in the day so I know a little about it. The Z06s trap speed of 127mph indicate that this is a mid to high 10 second car with slicks. If the trap speed was another 10mph it could hit the very high nines I think. People have already gotten about 170hp out of the motor with just bolt ons and a tune. What would it take to reach another 10mph? I think they may already be there.
     
  6. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Just had my amp and speakers installed today. I used a JL audio amp(250/1) and a JL 10 inch sub in one of their prefabbed boxes. They made it especially for the corvette with weight in mind. It weighs alot less than the battery on the opposite side. It hits extremely clean and hard. I highly recommend it if you are going to add one to your cars pathetic stereo system. Here's some pics. Sorry it was dark.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  7. GSpyder

    GSpyder Formula Junior
    BANNED

    Jan 10, 2006
    421
    Maui, Az, FL
    Full Name:
    Allan-Lambo
    Easily outaccelerate a Murcielago or a GT2..... hardly.
     
  8. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL


    Not quite how it works....but think what you'd like.
     
  9. Webby

    Webby F1 Veteran

    Sep 12, 2004
    6,821
    Well I don't think anything can "easily" outaccelerate a Murcielago, since there's only a few seconds' room for improvement, but I don't doubt that a modified Z06 could at least barely outaccelerate one. And Alan has driven these other cars so he's not just making an obnoxious and ignorant claim.

    Alan, post pictures of the exterior please!
     
  10. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Both cars run 120 traps in the QT. The Z is running 127 regularly and I raced my friends GT2 the oher day and it was a slaughter. Pulled away in 1t and never looked back. Have you driven all three? The GT2 handles better and it more precise but the Z is definately faster. The Murcis not better in any way. Which is what ring times and QT times back up. I love Murcis as that may be my next exotic but they're just not better perfomers and Gallardos are even further away.
     
  11. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    No off course not but that's a very simple explanation. I was meerly stating it was psosible. Normalls getting into the nines takes lots of susoension and chassis work but the Zs HP #s suggest it has the power to run that fast. My guess is that with icks the new Z is a 10.3@130 car with slicks. But as you snidely say,"think what you like".
     
  12. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Thanks for the interest. Here's a few.
    [​IMG]
    Nice pipes.
    [​IMG]
    Nice ass. [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v299/alanhenson/?action=view&current=2006Z06007_edited-2.jpg
     
  13. stephens

    stephens F1 Rookie
    Lifetime Rossa

    Feb 13, 2004
    4,647
    Australia
    Full Name:
    Stephen S
    Alan
    I'm not a drag racing expert, but I do know from personal experience that traction and slicks are going to significantly drop your terminal speed, not increase it.
    The Z with an extra 170hp ie 700hp on slicks is only good for a low 10.
    It will be good for low 11's/high10's, with a good driver IMO, based on power and weight and readily available perfromance calculators.
    As an aside, where are you getting the 127mph terminal velocity from? Do you have a time slip, or is this a guess, based on your previous Mustangs performance?
    An Fchat member who took his stock F40 to the strip did a 12.2 @128mph, with lot's of traction problems. Are you implying that a stock F40 is good for a low 10?
     
  14. stephens

    stephens F1 Rookie
    Lifetime Rossa

    Feb 13, 2004
    4,647
    Australia
    Full Name:
    Stephen S
    A further note - sorry to be so long winded!

    Since many of your performance claims appear to be based on other cars you currently drive and have previously driven and it seems to be implied, that you have had a run against on the road, or are relating others experiences.
    The reality is that a Z06 has about the same perfromance as an F430. I say about, it may be slightly faster, but certainly not "leaves it standing"
    My purpose here is not to trash the Z06 and beat the Ferrari chest, just inject a modicum of objectivity into your observations.

    If you try to compare performances of these cars based on the best numbers, guys are getting at their local drag strip compared to magazine reviews, you are wasting your time. Most performance stats, particularly from Euro sources are done with specialist timing equipment, which is very different to the drag strip.
    For example at the drag strip timing starts when you break the timing beam, NOT when you start moving, the car is generally doing 4+mph already giving times as much as 1/2 a second faster than the timing equipment that is used for car tests, which trigger the instant the car moves.
    At the drag strip you heat up the tyres before the run and you are taking off from a very high traction surface that is nothing like the roads where performance tests are done.
    I know some US mags DO use the strip to get their numbers, but they don't generally get to test the really exotic stuff. Most of these tests come out of Europe and are sold in edited form to magazines, which republish them all over the world.

    When it comes to stories of people comparing performance based on "seat of the pants" and past experience, I will relate the story of the motorcycle tuner, who was very well known, respected and sought after for building high horspower bikes. He swore that dyno's were cr@p and relied on seat of the pants to do all his tuning. He would tune engines so that they would come onto the power very quickly, like a turbo effect , because this felt fastest. His customers, naively believed what he said and revelled in the rush of acceleration. When going for weekend runs and swapping bikes, people would remark on how much faster these bikes felt. It was only when the bikes were actually put on the dyno was it shown that the bikes only had slightly more peak power, but aweful powercurves compared to STOCK.

    Further, you simply can't use roll ons etc as an objective measure, because, again, it is as much about rider/driver, technique and skill. Are you starting at exactly the same speed, time, are gear change times the same etc.
    I can show you three data logger runs of my car 0-200kmh, varying from 11.5 to 14secs, all using full throttle, all the way. In the slowest I was checking max speed in gears, so made sure I hit the limiter before changes and didn't force gear changes, there was about 1/2 sec or more lost to wheel spin at the start as it was done from the side of a highway that had a bit of gravel where I started and I was on road tyres. I wasn't fussed because I wasn't trying to see how quickly the car would go from 0-200. My fastest run was at a supersprint on a race track on slicks, which I warmed up thoroughly on the sighting lap as I was paired up against a 400wkw(550whp) GTR which I wanted to see if I could beat through the first turn, by staying close behind, braking late and block passing him. Take off was perfect, gear changes was banged through with absolutely no sympathy for the synchros.
    Long story I know, but result is SAME car, SAME driver, different conditions - 2.5secs difference in 0-200kmh performance measurement.
    Bottom line is two runs, one much slower than a Z06, one much faster. Is my car faster than a Z06? I have no idea and don't really care actually!
     
  15. Clax

    Clax Formula 3

    Oct 3, 2002
    1,611
    Let's say the car can pass the quarter in what you say it can (10.5@127). 127 is a pretty weak trap speed for a 10.5 pass. Clearly the 10.5 is coming as a result of improved traction through use of the slicks. If you look at modded Ford GT's, they are passing 10.4@144 (many others passing mid 10's with traps in low 140's). There is a universe of difference between 127 and 144. The 10.4@144 car is all over the internet, if you want to see it for yourself. And that car has relatively mild mods.

    It seems that you are enjoying your Z06, and that's great. It is a great car for the money. But to make statements like "it will easily beat ______" is rather silly. I have been in cars that feel incredibly fast, only to get beat by a car that feels slower. The only way to know for sure is to run them side by side with relatively equal drivers.

    In my experience owning cars, it's always better to be a little humble. You know that saying "under-promise and over-deliver"?

    Not that I'm looking for it, but I am anxious for the day that a new Z06 picks a fight with me. ;-)
     
  16. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    For reference when I used to race my Saleen mustang convertible. I ran a 10.3@129 with 650hp. And that was at 3800LBS. The Z only weighs 3100. The terminal velocity of 127 has been acheived by many stock Zs already. They are normally running in between 125 and 127. It's hard to believe the F40 was that fast 18 years ago. I can only imagine what it would do with some sticky tires. I believe people have run 11.0@ 131 in the Enzo without traction. That speaks of a mid 10 second run on slicks. 130 is usually about the right speed for a mid to low 10 second run. Of course I am talking about a car that is properly set up for the QT which the Z06 is not. I mean front skinnies, chassis braces to prevent flex, locking diff, etc.. The usual tricks.
     
  17. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Well people that are running 144 have low at 9 second cars. I used to run a twin turbo mustang with a friend of mine that dynoed at 900hp at a weight of 3600 lbs. It ran a 9.2@145. Scary car to drive I might add. SO if you look at a Z06 with 700 hp which they are already hitting with bolt ons you can extrapolate a hp/weight ratio that is near the mustangs. Assuming the Z was set up for the QT I would guess it could pull a very high nine, but it would not be easy. I've seen plenty of guys runs high nines at 137-138 in my day. A Z with 700hp@3100lbs a different rear end gear, slicks, skinnies, chassis bracing might be able to do it. But maybe not. I wasn't trying to imply that these cars will be running nines off the rack or anything. It was just an off the hip ex drag racers agademic guess which may be a little off but not too far. I believe someone has already run 10.6s at 127 without slicks, skinnies, gearing or the like. Set up his car properly and he would be deep in the 10s.

    What are you diving?
     
  18. Clax

    Clax Formula 3

    Oct 3, 2002
    1,611
    So what exactly is the point of this thread? Bench racing the Z06 against other cars? If you are having fun with it, great, but to come here and make claims is just silly. Enjoy your car.
     
  19. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357

    I'll have to beg to differ on the performance claims of the 430 versus the Z. We all know the 430 is about equal to the Stradale on most tracks as Ferrari claims. The 430 is faster in a straight line though. And if I am not mistaken the best time for the CS around the ring is 7:55(on sticky tires) which is alot slower than the Zs 7:43 on run flats.

    I as many Ferrarists have been a little dissapointed in the 430s track prowess. It is fast in a straight line but it just doesn't seem to have the quick track times. On most tracks it's only as fast as the CS. The Z06 and the GT3 both got alot faster when the new model came out. The GT3 is running the ring about the same time as the Z06. I guess we know why Ferari won't test there.

    Don't get me wrong. I am a huge Ferrari fan. I sold mine to buy the Z06 and I almost cried that day but the boys of marranello really needs to catch up.
     
  20. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Not the point of this thread. I was exicted about getting the Z06 and offered some driving impressions relative to other cars I have driven and I think I ruffled a few feathers. So I was simply responding to peoples posts. And I agree as long as you have fun with it that's the car you should drive. I guess i'll stop posting about it. This place isn't what it used to be. It was a very different response when I offered driving impressions of my Ferrari.
     
  21. Juice It

    Juice It F1 Rookie

    Sep 22, 2002
    3,233
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Full Name:
    Jeff
    I watched two guys here at our local track run the new Z06 about 12 runs and it got below 12 twice at 11.9. The fastest trap speed was 126. Traction was somewhat of an issue but there were a few clean runs between the two drivers. It is a quick car no doubt but no where near what you are claiming. If that is the case, my SL65 that runs 11.6's bone stock every time should be an 9 second car with a few mods.
     
  22. alanhenson

    alanhenson Formula 3

    Dec 2, 2003
    1,357
    Well the difference is that with each horsepower you add you have to push and extra 1400Lbs around. What's the trap speed like in yours? And keep in mind I am talking about modifed Zs. Not stock.
     
  23. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    Why do you think that? Lowly car rags got mid to high 11's at 125+ all the time.
    Hell, crappy Road & Track got a 11.8 @ 124.5....on a runway, not even a drag strip.

    The F40 was/is quite a machine.
     
  24. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    Well that trap speed shows there is more in it, the drivers make a HUGE difference as we know. My cousin drove his new ZO6 to a 11.5 @ 125.5, so the car has a easy mid 11 in it stock. IF the driver and track is up to it.
     
  25. teak360

    teak360 F1 World Champ

    Nov 3, 2003
    10,065
    Boulder, CO
    Full Name:
    Scott

    Someone is telling you it is silly to make claims on the internet? Claims about car performance in an off-topic cars section? Wow, talk about silly.
    Please post away, that is exactly what threads like these are for. There is a big difference between the street and the strip as others have noted, but when you say the car can get in to the 9's it is obvious you mean on the track.
    Modded cars are in the high 10's already on drag radials and a mechanically stock car except for drag radials only has run an 11.0. Having said that, getting from high 10's to 9's is a major leap, and I think it will take some major mods to get to the high 9's. It will be interesting to see how soon that happens, and with what mods.
     

Share This Page