Little Fun Run with a new Z06

I think it is very high tech. Pushrods... If it ain't broke, don't fix it. To package all that power into 458 lbs. is asStounding!

72 vs 105? What does that mean, really? You could have a 2 liter motor pushing 200 per and where would that get you. Not close enough still.
It may not be optimised. Yes. And, that may or may not be a bad thing. And, that's where the aftermarket comes in. For roughly $3-4k, not including labor, you can push 700 bhp NA. Can you reach 700 NA bhp with your motor for that little?

No matter how bad you pick it apart.... it still kicks asS!

 

it is a very compact, very light engine that includes titanium connecting rods and valves, dry sump, produces 475 lbft or torque and over 500 hp, and is capable of over 27mpg on the highway.

Sorry, but you currently cannot acheive all that with "low" tech. I'd say producing less horsepower and using much more fuel in a heavier and larger and higher center of gravity package is low tech.

 

Pushrod V8's are sooooooooooooo old tech man!! Pushrod's have been around since the dark ages. Here is a nice example. Our V8 Supercars over here. Ford and Holden. Both use pushrod V8's. They are very up to date/high tech 5 Litre V8's that push out around 600HP. The bottom end can take alot of HP and they can push 9000+RPM, BUT.......................they are rev limited to 7500RPM because the valve train cannot handle high RPM. The only way to overcome this issue, is to go overhead cam, but they wont. The history between Ford vs Holden here is huge. As Enzo Ferrari once quoted- "You pay for the engine, you get the rest of the car for free."
FORZA FERRARI!!!

 

The tech used to get the power/efficiency is irrelevant. The following factors matter IMO (in no particular order..).

Power
Torque
Fuel efficiency
Weight
External dimensions
Environmental emissions
Centre of gravity
Cost

I’m a sportscar fan. I can appreciate what GM has achieved with the LS7. They did have an OHC engine in the 90’s but ditched it with the above criteria in mind.

I’d like to own a Ferrari V8, Porsche Turbo, and a LS7 Chevy all at the same time to appreciate the different character of each – but that ain’t gonna happen, I’m too lazy (or I don’t buy enough lottery tickets).

 

The best Ferrari is better then the best Corvette. Period!

Why are you comparing a 15year old car to a moden one?

Maybe indytech would have smoked the Corvette in his 348, how do you know he couldnt? He never said the 348 was a better car. The corvette driver could have been an idoit! The 348 is Fcuking fast! Not from a lunch start, but if you have moment and the course suits the car and driver, your in luck. Just because there are faster cars then the 348, its not slow at all!

My boss's Merc would smoke my 348. But he cant drive to save himself. Im sure I could beat him in my Smart(this is not a joke!) on a twist track short course track.

 

i think his point was that his 348's bang for buck is better... and at a cost of only 18k i would have to agree.

 

No doubt, with 7.0 liters on tap, I would hope it kicks ass.

As for getting 700hp with $3-4k? Easy!... using the "low-tech" logic, just go with a bottle of nitrous for less than $1k installed! What is your point?

Some people prefer a 10 oz. fillet mignon others are happy with 2lbs. of ground beef.

 

That's hilarious. You just described what the buyer of every sports car over 70K looks like.

 

yup exactly. Look at 95% of Ferrari owners as well!

 

I'm always mystified by this thinking. I loved my M3 and my 355 but their engine's are no where near as good as my Z06s. It gets 30mpg at 70mph. It's physically smaller and lighter than the M5/6s 5.0. So it's smaller, lighter, more powerful and more efficient than the mighty BMW engine of the year. Now tell me againn why the BMW engine would be better. Because it costs more, it's less powerful, has more things to break down, is more stressed at load and has more moving parts. Tell me again why this makes it better.

 

I don't think "every" owner fits that...you and I are not in that age group. Also I know a couple F-car owners in their late 20's, one of whom owns an Enzo along with a Carrrera GT.....

Speaking for myself I bought my 911 carrera convertible at 23 and my 930 turbo at 28 years old, while paying half my moms mortgage and not even living there. Nothing was "handed" to me. Just plain ol' "school of hard knocks".

 

You are one of the 5%.

 

I talking about what the manufacturer does with "engine displacement". Not all manufacturers from europe or anywhere else for that matter are equal. I personally don't think Beamers are "all that" either.

It is all just a matter of preference for the owner/enthusiast. I am just stating my preferences and my reasons and nothing more. Just opinions... not insults...

 

phrogs, airbarton, indytech, rammer, et al...thanks for the great comments...

What I meant by that "looks" statement was kind of a lament over the lack of distinguishing style over "regular" Vettes, in both the ZR1 and the current Z06. Especially since it is widely thought that this is a main factor that killed the ZR1. Even the last Z06, like mine, has a "lookalike little brother" in the old Corvette hardtop model. What I was saying was not necessarily my personal style fetish, or else I would not still be driving a ZR1. I think my old 1995 is still a better looking car than either the C5 or C6 vette. And, the "stealth" factor is a lot of fun much of the time, like that hybrid 914...

Lets face it - looks are a big part of all sports-car ownership: Ferrari, Porsche, Jaguar (back when they made sports cars) and also even Vipers.

The "high tech" thing - well, my ZR1 (348cid) makes 405hp and 385lbf torque. It can rev to 7200rpm. My C5 Z06 (360cid) makes 405hp and almost 400lbf torque. It cuts off hard at 6200rpm. This means the pushrod motor is doing pretty good in the stats department, but it was designed 15 years later! And yes, the new Z06 can kick either one in the but, but only because of more cubic inches.

My "refinement" point was that they are unbelievably different cars to drive - the ZR1 is almost Ferrari smooth with a sophisticated sound. My 2004 Z06 is rough and tough by comparison - noisy, low-geared, hard exhaust note, and a tiresome road car. The new Z06 strikes me the same way - nowhere near any Porsche or Ferrari...way further away from them than the ZR1 was in its day. A lot of Vette people think that refinement is kind of "sissy" - I do not.

The reason that I mostly drive an old Porsche 911 and am looking for an older Ferrari as the next collector is exactly this combination of issues - sophisticated driving experience and exclusive style. I wish GM had taken the Corvette in that direction - the way McLellan tried to with the ZR1 way back when.

 

Yeah you and I both are probably a couple of the few exceptions to the old bald guy rule.

Truth be told I personally like the high tech Ferrari engines better as well. That's why I watch F1 instead of Nascar or Indy. I don't neccessarily think they are better though. It just takes so much more engineering, effort and money to produce equal results and to me that's doesn't equal better. But there is definately no denying the sweet sweet song of a Ferrari at 8K. Music to my soul.

 

We'll see if the upcoming blue devil is going to look enough different from the stock vette to recognize for the average person.

 

Call it what you want. It is high tech to me for the price, performance and packaging they've achieved. And, you've just confirmed the potential of an old tech V8. Go and take down the actual output of the unrestricted LS7 in the C6 Z06R and report back here for us all.

 

You quoted the wrong person.

 

I said NA, twice, if you didn't get the point the first two times. Anyone can slap NO on anything.

 

hey dunsky, I happen to have been a multiple Vette owner. I love the cars....All of them.....However, that attitude seems to live throughout most Vette groups I've encountered, and I've encountered some pretty big ones.

You don't have to call me a moron, my comment about this "not being a Vette forum" was purely tongue in cheek. There was an absence of malice for sure. I guess that just get's lost in text translation. Sorry if I offended.

 

Oh really? Whats that............that the V8 Supercars cant rev past 7500RPM because the valvetrain flys apart. How do you over come that and spin to 9500RPM.............overhead cams!! My 348 revs hard to 7800RPM and its nearly 16 years old. Later 348's to 8000RPM. Personally, I couldnt give a flying f*ck what the output is in the "unrestricted LS7 in the C6 Z06R" Im not a vette hater. The vette is a great package all round. I dont mind it, but ive always been a Ferrari man. Each to their own. Dont sit here and try and tell me that pushrod V8's are high tech, which they are not. Overhead cam engines reduce the number of parts in the valvetrain, which reduces the weight of the valvetrain, so the engine revs more. The valves can be mounted at better angles for improved effeciency and flow. Overhead cam engines were first used in racing, because their high RPM effeciency. Without pushrods to flex(and they do flex) less valvetrain weight and improved valve angles they can acheive, overhead cams are ALOT better.

 

No problem. I appologise for the moron comment. dunsky? Sounds like we are both getting a little frustrated here so maybe it is time to cool things off a bit. I am not trying to make anyone mad. I am simply trying to respond to some of the BS people have been saying in this tread. I can appreciate both of these cars and can't understand why other people have such a hard time doing that.

 

First of all the name is Chuck. Nice to meet you. Second, it's not the "bunch of Vette owners" thing. It is the rest of the statement. Let me refresh your memory if I may. "Now Brothers I’m sure I’m going to get really flamed because of this. There is a lurking Bunch of Corvette owners, (that have no intention of ever owning an f-car) that regularly cruise our chat groups, mostly to asses us, impress us with there performance specs and Make themselves feel good." Come on now be honest.

I thought all Ferraris were perfectly engineered rolling works of art? If so why does the 348 need so many modifications and upgrades? BTW I just happen to think it is fine the way it is but to each his own. Granted it is 15yo tech but even when it was new it had a shopping list of issues. Trust me I know, I own one. No offense but I still don't think you are getting it. Vettes are not just muscle cars anymore. They have the same capabilities as many of the worlds best supercars. Why do you think all the car mag's are constantly comparing them to cars like Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborgini? It's because they are posting similar performance numbers. That is the whole reason this argument got started in the first place.

That has yet to be proven and who are your brothers exactly?

That is one of the most objective statements I've heard yet. Not trying to start another argument but I would really like to see the P-car up against the Vette with a good driver would'nt you? What better way to confirm your thinking. We have a great track here (Road Atlanta) if you would like to give it a whirl. Or maybe there is someone out your way with a Vette that would like to give it shot. You guys have a track nearby don't you?

 

Anyone who drives the 348 regularly will not agree. Heres a question for you. What does the 348 cost in maintenence a year to use as a daily driver? Any idea? Well I just pulled out my 348 file and added up the invoices for 2005. $17,643.22 No offense but there is no way anyone can call that the best bang for the buck! Now granted I put a pile of miles on the car last year. Most owners don't so they will not see those kind of bills. The point is if you drive your 348 as much as you drive your Z06 you are going to spend a lot more money on the 348 and get a fraction of the performance.

 

Why does it matter how high tech it is? It is a phenominal engine. Trust me when I tell you all you need to do is put your foot on the throttle of the LS7 and you will agree!