Okay, we have the C6 with a base curb weight of 3,179 and 3,199 for the Coupe and 'Vert respectively.
We also have the following cars and their curb weights:
Ferrari Enzo - 3,230 lbs.
Porsche Carrera GT - 3,190 lbs.
M-B SLR McLaren - 3,735 lbs.
So the only car that basically matches the C6 is the Carrera GT which has an engine which is about 282 lbs. (or approximately 40 lbs. lighter than the LS2.) This means that the rest of the car is about 50 lbs. heavier.
So why, with all of their aluminum, spartan interiors (except for the M-B), and carbon fiber, can these ultra-expensive cars not defeat the C6 in the curb weight competition?
Furthermore, this speaks volumes about the lengths to which the GM engineers went to get weight down on both the C5 and C6. Kudos.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Scissors)
a few more numbers to think about
Porsche 911 2959 lbs.
Honda S2000 2835 lbs.
Lotus Elise 1975 lbs.
Not to take anything away from what the Corvette engineers have done but the vette isn't exactly an exotic feather weight like the Lotus. Considering the Corvette engineers have to deal with all the GM BS (accountants, current parts bin, etc...) they did an outstanding job. One simple formula helped them reach there weight goals. 1 lb = 10 dollars. Dave Hill was willing to pay an extra $10 in material cost for each pound saved.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (qs01coupe)
Quote:
a few more numbers to think about
Porsche 911 2959 lbs.
Honda S2000 2835 lbs.
Lotus Elise 1975 lbs.
Not to take anything away from what the Corvette engineers have done but the vette isn't exactly an exotic feather weight like the Lotus.
Well of course not. It's a completely different size of vehicle. You may as well compare to a small SUV if you're going to compare to the Lotus and S2000.
As for the Porsche 911, it is not 2959 lbs. in base targa trim (apples to apples.)
To get a closer comparison to the 400 HP C6 Targa and 'Vert, one must use the 911 Targa and 'Vert weights (preferrably from the 415 HP Turbo.) This gives the closest apples-to-apples comparison.
Here are the 911 weights:
2004 911 Turbo Coupe MT - 3,388
2004 911 Turbo Coupe AT - 3,487
2004 911 Turbo Convertible MT - 3,360
2004 911 Turbo Convertible AT - Can't find
2004 911 Targa MT - 3,119
2004 911 Targa AT - 3,240
2004 911 Carrera Cabriolet MT - 3,135
2004 911 Carrera Cabriolet AT - 3,256
Conclusion? The C6 and 911 are in the same area on weight. Despite the 911 being much more expensive.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Scissors)
Quote:
a few more numbers to think about
Porsche 911 2959 lbs.
Honda S2000 2835 lbs.
Lotus Elise 1975 lbs.
Not to take anything away from what the Corvette engineers have done but the vette isn't exactly an exotic feather weight like the Lotus.
Well of course not. It's a completely different size of vehicle. You may as well compare to a small SUV if you're going to compare to the Lotus and S2000.
As for the Porsche 911, it is not 2959 lbs. in base targa trim (apples to apples.)
To get a closer comparison to the 400 HP C6 Targa and 'Vert, one must use the 911 Targa and 'Vert weights (preferrably from the 415 HP Turbo.) This gives the closest apples-to-apples comparison.
Here are the 911 weights:
2004 911 Turbo Coupe MT - 3,388
2004 911 Turbo Coupe AT - 3,487
2004 911 Turbo Convertible MT - 3,360
2004 911 Turbo Convertible AT - Can't find
2004 911 Targa MT - 3,119
2004 911 Targa AT - 3,240
2004 911 Carrera Cabriolet MT - 3,135
2004 911 Carrera Cabriolet AT - 3,256
Conclusion? The C6 and 911 are in the same area on weight. Despite the 911 being much more expensive.
[Modified by Scissors, 6:50 PM 6/14/2004]
Well the 911 turbo adds the weight of 4 wheel drive and turbo's. The 911 targa has a power operated top and several body modifications that add weight. I still think the base 911 hard top or base cabriolet is the best for comparison on weight.
and since you don't like the comparison to the S2000 how about an RX-8?
3029 lbs. (length within a tenth of an inch of the 911)
As for the price, we all know the Corvette is king on price/performance.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (qs01coupe)
Quote:
and since you don't like the comparison to the S2000 how about an RX-8?
3029 lbs. (length within a tenth of an inch of the 911)
Thread title states "high performance." This knocks out the S2000 and RX-8. Neither of those cars are in the same performance category. One's designed for small, twisty tracks and the other is designed to pretend to be as cool as the RX-7.
High performance cars have requirements that those smaller, slower cars don't have. Including beefy parts that can take the abuse.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Scissors)
Quote:
and since you don't like the comparison to the S2000 how about an RX-8?
3029 lbs. (length within a tenth of an inch of the 911)
Thread title states "high performance." This knocks out the S2000 and RX-8. Neither of those cars are in the same performance category. One's designed for small, twisty tracks and the other is designed to pretend to be as cool as the RX-7.
High performance cars have requirements that those smaller, slower cars don't have. Including beefy parts that can take the abuse.
I don't think the C6 is in the same league as the Enzo, GT, or SLR either but you started with that comparison. High performance doesn't necessarily equate to high-output engines. You think comparing a Lotus Elise to a Corvette is like comparing to a small SUV? I think the same thing about you comparing a Carrerra GT with a C6.
Location: I am Jack's out-dated Fight Club reference. MD
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (qs01coupe)
I think the point is that those cars are many times more expensive than the Corvette yet apparently none of that money goes towards weight savings. [Edit: Rather, just throwing money at a vehicle can't magically shave the pounds.] As great as the Enzo is, the Corvette is within 1.5 to 2 seconds of most of the performance figures. So where does the extra 600,000 dollars go? (Apparently just handling, prestige, and extra horsepower?) Just trying to get this thread back on track.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (qs01coupe)
Quote:
I don't think the C6 is in the same league as the Enzo, GT, or SLR either but you started with that comparison. High performance doesn't necessarily equate to high-output engines. You think comparing a Lotus Elise to a Corvette is like comparing to a small SUV? I think the same thing about you comparing a Carrerra GT with a C6.
I believe the title of the thread is about high performance cars and curb weight. Not OVERPRICED cars and curb weight. If you are comparing peformance figures, the C6 comes closer to the cars you mention than the S2000 and RX8 compare to the C6. And then there's price, in which case, the advantage goes to the Corvette.
And yes, comparing the weight of a Lotus Elise to that of a C6 is about as valid as comparing it to a Tahoe. Can you put a weeks worth of luggage and 2 people in an Elise and travel 850 miles non stop in comfort? I don't think so. I would be thrilled if Corvette was lighter but to be practical, I don't want it to be any smaller or more spartan, therefore, I am very happy with it in it's current form.
What would you do to make it lighter?
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (need-for-speed)
Quote:
I don't think the C6 is in the same league as the Enzo, GT, or SLR either but you started with that comparison. High performance doesn't necessarily equate to high-output engines. You think comparing a Lotus Elise to a Corvette is like comparing to a small SUV? I think the same thing about you comparing a Carrerra GT with a C6.
I believe the title of the thread is about high performance cars and curb weight. Not OVERPRICED cars and curb weight. If you are comparing peformance figures, the C6 comes closer to the cars you mention than the S2000 and RX8 compare to the C6. And then there's price, in which case, the advantage goes to the Corvette.
And yes, comparing the weight of a Lotus Elise to that of a C6 is about as valid as comparing it to a Tahoe. Can you put a weeks worth of luggage and 2 people in an Elise and travel 850 miles non stop in comfort? I don't think so. I would be thrilled if Corvette was lighter but to be practical, I don't want it to be any smaller or more spartan, therefore, I am very happy with it in it's current form.
What would you do to make it lighter?
Well comparing the C6 to an Enzo is no better than comparing the C6 to an Elise (IMO). If you read my original thread I also mentioned the 911 which is considered by most people in the same category as the vette. At least a lot closer than comparing the C6 with the GT. And I never said that the Corvette wasn't a light car. In fact I said the engineers did an "outstanding job".
What would I do to reduce weight? dump the EMT's and go with the current Z06 tires. (23.4 lbs. in unsprung weight savings) Titanium exhaust (17.6 lbs savings) and go on a diet myself (20 lbs savings goal)
Since the LS2 has been advertised as weighing 7kg less than the LS1, one
may then assume that
The total dressed weight of the LS2 (circa 2005) is 201 kg (automatic), 219 kg (manual).
Translating, that's 443 pounds and 483 pounds.
Except that I wasn't talking about total dressed weight, so your numbers clarify nothing previously stated in this thread. I said engine weight. That does not include the transmission.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (qs01coupe)
Quote:
I don't think the C6 is in the same league as the Enzo, GT, or SLR either but you started with that comparison. High performance doesn't necessarily equate to high-output engines. You think comparing a Lotus Elise to a Corvette is like comparing to a small SUV? I think the same thing about you comparing a Carrerra GT with a C6.
This is not a discussion of prestige, rarity, or cost brackets. This is a discussion of high performance cars and their curb weights. The only reason cost should come up is questioning where that money went if it didn't lower weight significantly.
This isn't about subjective interpretations of which "league" various cars are in. It's an objective look at cars that fall into the high performance category and why cars that are much more expensive and which use much more exotic materials than the C6 just can't seem to get their weight below that of the C6 (or not much below, in the case of some underperforming 911s.)
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Scissors)
theElise reminds me of an Opel GT. i had a '70 and while it was light weight, as a well used car it had pathetic metal fatigue. i've never seen such flex in an old vette, so i avoid light weight wannabees like the plague. The Elise is a $25k car for $40k+ But i would like to see it with a turbo and 350-400 HP
Since the LS2 has been advertised as weighing 7kg less than the LS1, one
may then assume that
The total dressed weight of the LS2 (circa 2005) is 201 kg (automatic), 219 kg (manual).
Translating, that's 443 pounds and 483 pounds.
Except that I wasn't talking about total dressed weight, so your numbers clarify nothing previously stated in this thread. I said engine weight. That does not include the transmission.
Just what were you talking about??
To state the "weight" of an engine with no definition of
content is uselessly non-descript. The dressed weight of
an engine does not include the transmission.
The dressed weight of the LS1 engine includes the alternator,
the power steering, the A/C compressor, the brackets, and
belts. The difference between the automatic weight and the
manual weights is the weight of the flywheel, the pressure
plate, the clutch, and possibly the bell housing.
If you want to talk about the other meaningful weight, it is the
weight of the engine as shipped from the engine plant. That
does not include much of what I just listed. In any event, your
number of 282+40 is too low for that either.
Talk is cheap! How about some reliable sources?. Did your "sources"
tell you that the dressed weight includes the transmission?
Pinning you down on your BS is utterly futile. Your response will
no doubt make that painfully obvious. What a waste of time.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Runge_Kutta)
Quote:
Just what were you talking about??
The weight of the vehicle and the weight of the engine. Have you not been paying attention?
Quote:
To state the "weight" of an engine with no definition of
content is uselessly non-descript. The dressed weight of
an engine does not include the transmission.
Engine weight is just that: the weight of the engine. No exhaust system, no flywheel, no accessories. Thus the term "engine weight."
As for the part about the transmission, it depends on who you ask. I've seen definitions for "fully dressed weight" that do and do not include the transmission. Regardless, the transmission weight has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Plus, why do you even care. The thread is about the car's overall weight. Stick to the topic, please.
Quote:
If you want to talk about the other meaningful weight, it is the
weight of the engine as shipped from the engine plant. That
does not include much of what I just listed. In any event, your
number of 282+40 is too low for that either.
No, sorry. The LS1's weight is about 340-345 lbs. and the LS2 is supposedly 20 lbs. lighter than that.
Quote:
Talk is cheap! How about some reliable sources?. Did your "sources"
tell you that the dressed weight includes the transmission?
Pinning you down on your BS is utterly futile. Your response will
no doubt make that painfully obvious. What a waste of time.
And how did this add anything meaningful to the discussion? Oh, I get it, you just wanted to be as offensive and insulting as possible. Duly noted.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Scissors)
If you're going to go quoting numbers, let's see some data to back up
your claims. Your first post said 282+40. Now it's 340-345 after you
learned that dressed weight doesn't include the transmission.
Location: City of Angels Socialist Republic of Kah-Li-Fohnia
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Runge_Kutta)
Adding fuel to the fire...
An acquaintance purchased a crate LS6 to transplant it into a 3rd Gen RX-7 because he was tired of blown rotaries. The engine which arrived to us included the alternator and the pwr steering pump, but no A/C. It did not include the bellhousing or the clutch assy., just the flywheel. We weighed it on a reliable scale (twice) and got 355lb in that trim. That was only 25lb more than the 13B-REW twin-turbo rotary that came out of the car.
So I am not sure what the 226Kg engine includes, but that seems like a lot. Also, why would the manual engine be heavier? (I can't imagine the clutch assy weighing an extra 20Kg.).
By the same token, 282lb for a flat-six DOHC Porsche engine sounds way light.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (TTRotary)
The manual trans engine dressed weight includes BOTH a flywheel and complete clutch, so 44 lbs. for a production engine is in the ballpark.
Auto trans engines just need the equivlent of a conventional flex plate used to both on the converter. Not sure of the design details, but since the converter is back with the transmission, only a coupling to the driveshaft is required.
Re: About high performance cars and curb weights. (Runge_Kutta)
Quote:
If you're going to go quoting numbers, let's see some data to back up
your claims. Your first post said 282+40. Now it's 340-345 after you
learned that dressed weight doesn't include the transmission.
Do I have to do your math for you, now?
Here you go:
282 + 40 = 322 lbs.
322 + 20 = 342 lbs.
342 lbs falls within the 340 to 345 range
Requote, since you're having so much trouble with something so simple:
"So the only car that basically matches the C6 is the Carrera GT which has an engine which is about 282 lbs. (or approximately 40 lbs. lighter than the LS2.)"
"The LS1's weight is about 340-345 lbs...."
Must I also provide you with the definitions of "about" and "approximately" while I'm at it?
Corvette Store
About high performance cars and curb weights.
But i would like to see it with a turbo and 350-400 HP 
