Ben Lurkin

Flux capacitor for Corvettes. . .



http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c3-p...r-project.html

(and a shameless plug too )

Solid LT1

I think my wife's 70 LT-1 will do this and I know my 72 LT-1 will easily beat that figure but, won't get 27MPG like our C6 Z06 that will do it in the low 4 second range.

jb78L-82

I'm surprised your that you feel that the 72 LT-1 could get into the 5's easier than the 70 LT-1- Is the 72 stock? With 255 Net HP it would be tough to do unless you had made some changes to the motor. I would love a race between my 78 L-82 4 speed (zero emissions, roller rockers, Holley 4175, custom advance curve, Shorty headers and 2.5 true duals, Monza turbo mufflers etc) and the 72 LT-1 for fun.

Just for accuracy, I have seen 3.6 sec 0-60 on the 2010 Z06 and 3.2 for the ZR-1. Check the links below for 1/4 miles times of totally stock Z06 and ZR-1 of 11.2 and 10.85. That's why I said above, adding monstor HP to a C3 chassis will not get these types of numbers due to traction issues with street tires. The BB C3's with the highest horsepower could only manage the low 12's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN0GW...eature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxXqWHT9hXg

ajrothm

Well if a new Z06 is getting 0-60 in 3.6 secs, then I should easily accomplish that....at least on a sticky drag strip. My car dead hooks at the track.... 1.57 60's. Shifting to 2nd before 60mph isn't gonna slow a fast shifting auto down much......a stick car...yes... Not to mention a Z06 or ZR1 are not getting their best 0-60 times on the street.....they will blow the tires off also.... No doubt those sub 4 sec 0-60s is on a good prepped track.

And my car is driven 2-3 times a week, has AC/PS and easily cruises 75mph down the highway..... What it DOESN'T do, is get any kind of gas mileage at all.... 9-10mpgs is the norm..... even on the hwy.

jb78L-82

You may want to read this on the 2010 Z06:

http://www.autoguide.com/manufacture...-z06-1263.html

It really is in a class of its own-nothing can touch it in its price range! 3.6-7 second 0- 60 times have been recorded on the street with street tires-BTW! C3's are not Z06's regardless of the power-its just not possible!

MotorHead

"Acceleration is frantic in every gear, the tall first gear allowing 0-60 mph runs to be achieved in as little as 3.6-seconds."

Well I'll be darned if that ain't a fact

roscobbc

When my '68 had the stock 390hp 427/3.08/M21 we did a few 0-60 runs recording with a G Tech Performance Meter - best time managed was 5.2 seconds - engine was a little 'tired' and wouldn't rev willingly past 4000 revs happily so a gear change was required. Now with free reving 489 1st gear goes well past 60 mph. Now provided you can get the required traction surely the fact that a gear change isn't needed has got to negate any advantage from using a lower first gear to get off the line and then the delay of changing into 2nd?

ajrothm

OH NO DOUBT that Z06s are the cream of the crop sports cars in their price range.... and no way would I try to compare a C3 to a Z06 in ANYTHING other then acceleration..... I am quite suprised they are able to get those cars to hook up that well on the street with stock tires.....

No way I could do that on the street, even on ET Street radials.....BUT on a well prepped drag strip, I am confident I could match their 0-60 times..... I haven't seen any bone stock Z06s running 10.70s....or ZR1s for that matter.... they will definitely spank my 126mph trap speed though....its hard to match the trap speed of a 3300lb car(raceweight) with a 3700lb car with the same RWHP....

d555

If I ran that slow, I'd be really bummed

81pilot

Thank goodness a C3 is not a ZO6!! I have the car I want. I can afford a Z06, but right now in my life I find them to be devoid of any character, very sterile. Maybe when I am truly old I won't care anymore. I would rather have a 500 horse C3 that has trouble hooking up than a Z06 because a C3 is truly..,......In a class of thier own.

Les

I agree with the first sentence you wrote- they are very different cars and the C3 is very special in it's own way. However, I'm going to guess that you haven't driven a new Z06. I happen to have both and I love them both for different reasons. If you hammer a Z06 through the gears or really work it through some curves, I challenge you to step out of the car and say it's devoid of character. It's more refined than a C3 but it's still a beast and if it doesn't leave you with a grin on your face you'd better have somebody check you for a pulse.

JLinCA

That is the first thing I thought of when I read the post. I was imagining all the things that are going to start breaking

JLinCA

He obviously has zero experience with the C6.

I love my 81, but it is in no way comparable to my C6. The C6 is a world beater, where my 81 is just, well old. Beautiful, but old.

81pilot

Well. I see your reasoning, however, fast is relative. I raced drag bikes for years, and have owned a plethera of other road motorcycles over the years since with performance that a ZO6 would envy. Even the bike I have now is no slouch, heavy but quick and fun(not exactly fast all things considered). And yes I have driven a C6 Z06, yes they are incredible for what they are. And yes I smiled, and enjoyed it, but walked away thinking, OK I drove it, but if I want a thrill, I'll ride my bike in the twisties and throw some sparks....much more adrenaline inspiring for me. But like I said as I age my priorities and such will no doubt change, who knows maybe I will someday buy a goldwing(yuck) and a ZO6 and drive the car around the Eureka Springs area at ten MPH under the posted speed limit in the hills like the other old guys do every fall that I have been forced to putter behind on my bike... LOL

jb78L-82

I agree with all of you guys and I too have my 78 L-82 4 speed and a 2010 Z06-love them both but they are very different. I really still do enjoy the L-82 after all the years I have owned it and decided to buy a new Z06 this year after salivating over them for the last few years-the Z06 is an absolute animal-scary fast, incredible handling, great fuel economy (I have managed, once 27 MPG), comfortable, and incredible brakes but I still truly love to drive my 78-stock motor (sort of) but everything else has been upgraded-suspension, steering, brakes, wheels etc. Corvettes rock!!!

81pilot

I did never compare my car to a ZO6. I stated my opinion on them (my opinion). It irks me that people here like you think just because I differ in opinion that I "obviously have no experience with the C6" I find that insulting. What I want is what I want not you or anybody else. Not that it matters but I have been behind the wheel of a few and have the same opinion. Just because I own a Vette does not mean I have to like them all....the C6 cars are incredible for what they represent, I suppose, but not my taste, or can I not say that on here?

yukonranger

80K miles on a 77 is a worn out engine....a really good rebuild will get you to 6.8 seconds....but you may need new tires to get that.

Todays engine last well over 100k but that was not the case 20yrs ago. You are not going to see 5 sec with a "stock" engine. You will need so much more power that the engine will not be close to "stock" anymore. A stock 65 375hp fuelie did about 6 sec in magazine tests. This was a high compression, high rpm, no emissions, 4.11 rear end car that weighed hundreds of pounds less than a 1977..6 sec. You would need probably twice the power to get to 4.5-5 sec.

To start, I would figure out how you could measure the 0-60 in the first place.

MarkBullis

Hey man, your HHR... have you had it turned yet? I've turned my wifes Sky, 3inch exhaust, bigger turbo, new intercooler and at the wheel was 323... FW was like 398. I've tuned a buddy of mines HHR SS, done the same mod's and he's got 346 at the wheel and 414 at the crank. Also I can turn it off so if I take it in to the dealer the only thing they think i've done is HW.

Modifying the Vette would Cost a lot more than it did on the SKY, Plus the Sky weighs 1000lbs less and it's all new parts.. If I put 400 hp under the Vette it's still not going to run 0-60 in 4.5 seconds... I'd have to have close to 500hp and a lot bigger tires on the rear.. Those 225/70/15's are not going to keep that power to the ground like those 245/45/18's that the Sky has. Plus a 2.0 turbo auto don't melt the tires like the Vette will with 400+ hp

yukonranger

What tires is the sw assuming you have? Most vintage road tests got 0-60 in the high 6's with quarter in low mid 14s. The 0-60 and quarter mile numbers from your sw don't approximate real world tests so I wonder if the sw is assuming a much grippier tire.

yukonranger

70 LT-1 ran 14.3 quarter mile and about 6.7 sec 0-60.