This thread reminds me of YouTube
Lotus Exige V6. Street legal in Europe not in USA due to headlight height and side airbags. Drive a vette hard and it will consume tires and brakes at prodigious rate, thats just a fact. The C6 would also melt its brake line because you know GM saved $15 per car here. People hate the truth about their favorte car. People went nuts when the C6 was accused (corretly) so of having a cheapo rent a car interior when even a 25k hyundai had a better one. These are cars not chilldren. By highlighting their faults we hope manufactuers will not gloss over then to save a few thousand or hundred. GM cheped out on the C7 and camaro6 motor. We got no high reving non supercharged light small block. The chassis and the rest were ready, and from what we read the program got scrapped.. Instead we got the supercharged boat anchor, which is great for the street not so for the track. As a marketing excercise the supercharged motor has been a great hat trick, as attested to by the debate here. People buy cars mostly on paper specs, because as you point out most dont go to the track and of those that do very few can actualy use the machines potential. So its easy to bluff enough punters with cars optimsed for a 3 lap magazine track test. Thing is consumers are ultimately not that uninformed. As for price a 120k vette ZR1 or even 85k z06 is not cheap. I have had two vettes they are great for what they are. There is a reason why for the same money you see lots more porche at the track. Once you start moding beyond the basics, no one is putting serious money into a vette, the platform and powertrain simply dont warrant it. Where a vette is a good buy for the track is if youre spendign 25k on used one, or even 50K on used C6 z06. A few thousand will make for a reasonably competant reliable track car thats still street legal, and your speed/hp here will cost less than elsewhere. Beyond that its simply not worth it. Now look underneath a C5-C7 there are some really great suspesion and other bits there., and some total cheapening out simply because Gm can get away with it to save what $1k. Good as many components are, the cars are still not all of a piece, and by the C7 were getting heavy because apprently no one cared or could tell the difference. The C6 z06 was certainly a full on attempt to make a serious trackday contender, they did a lot to loose weight in a lot of clever ways, a lot to stiffen the car and they put in an appropriate light and relatively revy track motor. That car got a lot of respect. By the C7 z06 to me it became cynical, lots of tire lots of weight and lots of hp made for a few quick laps for a magazine and sales. The C7 has better handling than the C6, and the GS is therefore quicker around a track than the C6 z06, so imagine what it could be if they had a 550hp 7k rpm smallblock and the C6 weight of 3150lbs or less. Hopefully somewhere in the Me series we will see a return to a serious trackday machine. If thats the case it wont weigh +3600lbs or need 800hp. More like 3000lbs and 5-600hp for 120k. Yeah the senna at 2700lbs and 750 hp has more, but that then is the price difference. To me the ZR1 is a car to comepte with an aventador or bugatti, really cool for what they are, but never to be mistaken for a serious trackday machine.[/QUOTE]
^^^^ So GM's a bum for putting supercharged SBC's in their cars, but Lotus is OK putting supercharged TOYOTA V6's in their cars. Got it. And for the sake of clarity, the Exige V6 is 345HP and 2,593 pounds (from Lotus). Uh, yeah...Senna's are $960,000...why even mention that? Anyhow, let's agree to disagree, OK?
Ok reading paper numbers again. An exige V6 cup as opposed to a standard exige V6 makes 360hp, mine which was scaled for corner balancing (4 weeks ago) with full fuel and a cage, fire supression etc weights 2460lbs. Thats a wet weight FYI as oppsed to most manufactuers dry weight. The issue is not supercharged, the issue is weight. GM had a far lighter motor which was NA, they just cheaped out on devloping it firtehr, figurign the punters wouldnt know or care if theyw ere blown away with paper spec. Making power from a NA motor is harder and probably more expesive. By all accounts the supercharger package and attendat cooling adds near on 300lbs to a vette. Just look at the difference between a z06 and GS, same body same chassis different weights, I dot even know wheter thats wet or dry weight. If its dry weight then the wet weight delta will be even greater because supercharged vetets have a lot of cooling fluid. Yes lotus does not have a big budget so they supercharged a pedestrian toyota motor, they also didnt intercool which in some ways is a drawback but it saves weight. Same cheap option as Gm but the lotus is still light enough to get away with it. The point is if youre going to the track less weight is THE virtue. Now Gm or Lotus could have gone with a turbo for the same power, but turbo lag is a real negative on track. Supercharging has near on Na throttle response unlike a turbo. But it adds weight especialy if you need to cool well enough to avoid heat soak issues. In GMs case even the base c7 vette with aluminum subframe weights significantly more than the C6 z06, thats not progress. Then to make power they took the cheap option which added even more weight to an already not light car. Thats not serious if youre talking real as opposed to paper track prowes. And yes the lotus could be better if it too weighted 200lbs less, but compared to anything else its still really light, so no harm no foul. As I said before the supercharged vettes compare to porche tubos which are also hugely powerful heavy cars that show great paper numbers. But if youre going to the track the "faster" porker turbo is slower and far less consistent than the less powerful but far lighter Gt3, even though the turbo has a higher top speed and a faster 0-60. What proche does demonstarte is that off one platform you can make a number of variants with very different attributes. the z06 and Zr1 show the porche turbo approach. Hopefully one day we will again see a vette with the Gt3 apporach. I guess it all depends where and how you use your cars. But since people are singing the Zr1s track praises, lets be honest about its real useable abilities and lack therof, if your doing more than 3-5 laps. Nothign wrong with the ZR1 its a seminal car and certainly the seminal vette to date, but serious track machine its not, same witht he z06. Great cars for what they are. Yeah we disagree, thats what makes a market. I guess it all depends what you want from a car and how you use it..
Wait, you're comparing a street legal, showroom stock Vette to a non-street legal Lotus??? Don't argue it's legal in Europe, we're not in Europe. I stand by my previous comments...if you're a "serious" track driver, whatever that is since you're not really racing, get a race car. Street cars are not race cars.
or, if you want the best of both worlds, buy a used NASCAR. a bit heavy at 3600 pounds, but 800 bhp and true race car badassery. plus they're tanks. probably the safest car in the world.
[/QUOTE] You are dreaming. A ZR1 is so much faster than your Lotus it can't even be considered a contest. Comparable drivers on any road course on the planet will be a massacre with the little Lotus on the losing end. Yeah, the last gen Z06 had some heat soak issues. The ZR1 nor the GS have these issues. As to Corvettes not being used as serious track cars-what tracks do you go to with the Lotus, K1 Speed? We see plenty of well driven, fast Corvettes out here on the west coast-C5s, 6s and 7s. As to Porsche's-some are excellent track cars , others are not. Cheap out? I'd say that's exactly what Lotus did with that crap Toyota engine-that alone would keep me out of one. Not that I'd expect any accuracy from someone that can't even figure out how to use spellcheck.
Oh no, according to our resident Lotus fan, it's too heavy and will use brakes and tires in three laps, while the little wheezer motors right by it.
I think he was pulling your leg. You can get a GT4 spec Cayman that would be eligible for PWC or IMSA CTSCC for less than $200K. http://www.isringhausenmotorsports.com/porsche-blog/2017/1/6/2014-porsche-cayman-s-race-car In fact you could probably just get a GT3 car or an older LMP2 or Corvette DP car for that price.
The Gt4 spec car is quick and I think they were 180k from the factory. We're talking another order of performance above that. Once you start buiding up a track car its endless.
You are dreaming. A ZR1 is so much faster than your Lotus it can't even be considered a contest. Comparable drivers on any road course on the planet will be a massacre with the little Lotus on the losing end. Yeah, the last gen Z06 had some heat soak issues. The ZR1 nor the GS have these issues. As to Corvettes not being used as serious track cars-what tracks do you go to with the Lotus, K1 Speed? We see plenty of well driven, fast Corvettes out here on the west coast-C5s, 6s and 7s. As to Porsche's-some are excellent track cars , others are not. Cheap out? I'd say that's exactly what Lotus did with that crap Toyota engine-that alone would keep me out of one. Not that I'd expect any accuracy from someone that can't even figure out how to use spellcheck.[/QUOTE] I think we have different defintions of fast. I was at watkins glen last week weds. The ZR1 and Z06 were just not that quick. For laptimes I was running 2.08 lap after lap all day. The worked caymans were 4 secs faster. The vettes were 2.12 for the Zr1 before it melted its tires. The vettes were quick out the toe, and along the straights, not that quick through the esses or elsewhere. For pure street car (legal usa street tires) the vettes were nowehere near as quick as the Gt3 that was there, at least not for 15 laps.. there is a big difference between being able to crack off one really fast lap, and being able to consistently lap. Thats why a Gt3 is actualy faster when you go to a track than a "faster" turboS. People get all worked up because they buy on paper spec and need affirmation that their car is the "fastest" So the game being played is manufactuers is to build a car to run 3 fast really laps, lets call it like a qualifying time. thats very different to runnign 10 -20 laps 5x per day, and thats the point about the current vettes. As to fast vettes, yes there are lots of fast C5s and C6s modfied as such, always said so, and vettes have great suspension pieces underneath. The supercharged C7 series is more like a porche turbo, heavy and with lots of Hp to compensate. The Gs does well on track and exists because thr z06 was too heavy. In fact where I go the Gs is always faster then the z06 c7, after the first 2 or 3 laps. If Gm had not wimped out or taken the gullibility of its customers for granted the C7 z06 would have had 550hp and weighted less than the Gs, still it woudl have been "slower" than a Zr1 by magfazine measure so maybe wouldnt have sold enough? even though it might have been a real track contender. With a lighter Na z06, The ZR1 would still then be what we have now, in the c6 series one was clearly sold as the track car and the other faster one Zr1 as the kickass street car. Instead as we know the NA engine program was scrapped and the big hp boat anchor installed into the z06 because the chassis was ready, same thing happened with the camaro, hence no z28. meanwhile we're getting a me vette, hopefully in this series there will be a light enough version for those who seriously track, to go along with the 850hp 3700lbs version for those who have to have the "fastest" street car. Thats my only point. And yes as porche and other have proven you can build multiple cars of different purpose off a single platform. As for track cars, there are turn key track cars, which would be things like a lotus some porche some modded vettes even, and then pure track cars like a radical. there is vast difference in maintanance and performance/comitment between the two schools. A car whether street driven or not, that starts at the turn of a key and asks for not more than fluids pads and tires for a season is what many of us who spend a lot of time on track go for and is within the realm of financial reality in terms of costs. A miata is $400 per day in consumables and a Gt3 1500-2k with various loti and others soemwhere in between( when you average it out.) If manufactuers sell a "track" capable car consumable wear is a real functional requirement, and while drive train reliabilty is a big factor weight is the biggest single factor when it comes to cosnumables and by extension consistent fast laptimes.. By the math reported tracking a ZR1, if you coudl get enough sets of tires and pads to the track to keep swapping out would run close on 8k per day. How good the car is on track then boils down to laptimes and rate of consumables. a Car that burns up its consumables in 30 mins is a cool stunt but functionaly not a track machine. Or as they say in texas, that dog dont hunt. When people start taking their cars to the track they discover what they thought they needed, whats really fast, and what they really need are different things. As I said vettes are cool cars for what they are, arguably as good as Italian exotics in terms of street performance. Vettes could be great on track, bu they need to get the weight down around a reasonable 3000lbs, and growing weight with each iteration is not progress if youre making a track arguement.
There a vast difference in running cost and support crew needed between a cup ca lmp 2 etc and a turn key out the box car.
Lest put it this way, the vette team absolutely knows what its doing, and the vette has some great pieces in its platform to work off. What they need is the go ahead from Gm to build a truly track capable machine. But its cheaper to add hp than loose weight. In a land where Top speed 1/4 mileand 0-60 are the metrics might as well just add lots of hp and enough tire and brake for 3 fast laps. pity because there is so much potential there.
Below are the salient specs for the corvette C7R, the one that actualy races, and is based on C7. Note they didnt go all high Hp supercharged, they went light and didnt mind less power, because on track thats faster.. If youre building a tack capable car, even if its street car, thats the formula, less weight more than compensates for less power. Based on what we saw with the C6, A street C7 track capable car could have been 3000lbs and 550hp. Power 491 hp (366 kW) @ 6000 RPM Weight 1,110 kg (2,447 lb) (excluding driver and fuel) 1,245 kg (2,745 lb) (including driver and fuel)
I'm so tired of the HP wars, both in cars and motorcycles. My first sports car was a 2002 Z06 that I owned while stationed in Germany. I learned the hard way, through PCA Auto-X and the 'Ring, where GM cheaped out on certain items. The man that ran the PCA Auto-X is an engineer at Porsche and I learned so much from him about auto manufacturing. He turned me into a realist about cars. He drove a base 911 with some GT3 seats and suspension bits. My last time at the 'Ring was in a prepped Suzuki Swift and I passed a 911 LOL. Why can't we have lightweight wars? ATTACH=full]2565103[/ATTACH] Image Unavailable, Please Login
They didn't "go all high HP supercharged" because the class that the C7.R races in (GTE) limits displacement to 5.5 Liters naturally-aspirated and 4.0 Liters turbo/supercharged: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LM_GTE Nobody is arguing that heavier is better, in any sense, for track racing! We all agree that, all things being equal, lower weight is better But, for many, a single-minded obsession on weight alone may lead to less-than satisfying choices ...
I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but the market is dictating otherwise. There's simply not enough people that want lightweight cars that give up creature comforts to justify making a mass market car like that. Take a look at the number of unsold Alfa 4Cs that have been sitting on dealer lots for TWO YEARS. You can't even buy a Lotus Elise in the US anymore. Mass market manufacturers like GM have to have business cases for the cars they make. If they could make a 3,000 lb. car easily and affordably, I'm sure they'd do it for a multitude of reasons: performance, fuel economy, etc. The fact of the matter is that it isn't cheap or easy to do so--if it were, we would see a lot more performance oriented cars in that weight range that are priced competitively to the Corvette. Sure a GT3 is a great car, but you could have 2 Z51 C7s and money to mod them for the same price. The only cars that immediately pop into my head as being in your 3,000 lb. range that price similarly to the Corvette are the Boxster and the Cayman. I don't know anyone that's blowing through a set a tires for one track day either... I certainly have a hard time believing that the ZR1 would burn a set of Cup 2s in a half-hour. Sounds like "magazine talk" to make the car sound crazy. In any event, I would've preferred a naturally aspirated Z06 or ZR1, but at least they got the cooling sorted out (theoretically, anyway) for the ZR1 as that was really the Achilles heel of the Z06.
Plus, I have been a good number of track days, and did not see a whole lot of amateurs going 10/10ths driving the car to the ragged edge of its capabilities.
Somewhere there is a sweet spot. With todays tech 3000lbs is eminently possible, hell the C6 z06 was 3150.
I'm not talkign extreme lightweight like a 4c, which BTW is not a handler on track because while it has a cf tub, the Italians hobbled it with bendy srtruts, go figure. If a C6 z06 could weigh 3150lbs, there is no reason a Me car cannot be similarily light. in fact the C7 could have been as well. We're not talking a 50k vette here but as we see witht he zr1 a 120k vette. Porche seems to do well selling a few thousand light cars per year. no reason corvette cant either. Even the latest lotus evora 410 is under 3000lbs. My larger point is a 3700lbs car is not a trackday car no matter how much hp it has or how fast it can turn a single lap..
I don't disagree ... here's kinda how i look at it ... On the track, the "brake-torque/weight" ratio matters as much as the "engine-torque/weight" ratio ... and, of course, lower weight helps both acceleration and deceleration (cornering too, naturally). So much so, that a lighter-weight car with lower power/weight ratio may post better lap times (lap after lap) than a heavier one with higher power/weight. But yet ... that heavier car with higher power/weight ratio may be more exciting (because of better raw acceleration), may be better looking, may be more comfortable, etc. Guess what i'm saying is that lower weight is desirable, OF COURSE!! But for many, it's simply not the be-all, end-all metric for a performance car.
