[Z06] targa top?
07-18-2005, 09:48 AM
#3
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Dec 1999
Location: Anthony TX
Posts: 32,736
Received 2,180 Likes
on
1,583 Posts
CI 6,7,8,9,11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '08
YEP! It is BOLTED and SEALED inplace! here are some pictures that I took of the rolling C6 Z06 alumuinum frame that they displayed at this summer Birthday Bash: If you got ballsey and wanted to play, you could un-bolt it and remove it. You would have to deal with the mounting pads thet the roof was secured to.
Here are some pictures of other parts of the frame that I thought I would include:
The floor boards on the C5 were bulsa wood sandwiched between fiberglass. The C6 Z06 is Carbonfiber and some sort od fiberous material!! I picked up the panel. Talk about being light !!!
It only weighed a few pounds!
Here are some pictures of other parts of the frame that I thought I would include:
The floor boards on the C5 were bulsa wood sandwiched between fiberglass. The C6 Z06 is Carbonfiber and some sort od fiberous material!! I picked up the panel. Talk about being light !!!
It only weighed a few pounds!
07-18-2005, 10:21 AM
#4
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Dec 1999
Location: Anthony TX
Posts: 32,736
Received 2,180 Likes
on
1,583 Posts
CI 6,7,8,9,11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '08
This post includes an answer from Dave Hill about the top being removable!! It is but strongly NOT recommended!
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...7&forum_id=100
BC
It is but strongly NOT recommended!http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...7&forum_id=100
BC
07-18-2005, 11:43 AM
#5
Burning Brakes
Member Since: May 2003
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave Hill and crew also said that the C5 coupe couldn't handle the LS6 and it's 400 horsepower.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
07-18-2005, 12:22 PM
#6
Originally Posted by 427 C5
Dave Hill and crew also said that the C5 coupe couldn't handle the LS6 and it's 400 horsepower.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
I know that I can jack up my C5 from the side and have 3 wheels off the ground.
07-18-2005, 02:35 PM
#7
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 427 C5
Dave Hill and crew also said that the C5 coupe couldn't handle the LS6 and it's 400 horsepower.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
Not to beat up on you too much, but where did you get your mechanical engineering degree from? Everybody seems to want to be an expert, and assign nefarious intent to what GM does. They have designed a killer car. Accept it and buy one or buy something else and stop whining about things you do not understand.
Reputable designers, like Mr. Hill and his crew, design mechanical structures (like the Z06 chassis) with a safety factor from the ultimate strength standpoint, as well as from the flexing standpoint. If their calculations indicate that the roof structure is needed to limit chassis flex in the Z06 I believe them until you can show me a set of calculations that disprove theirs.
They also design for every contingency they can think of, for example, crash survivability. With all due respect to the dearly departed Mr. Ligenfelter and his crew, I expect that none ov them has even taken a look at the C5/C6 chassis and tried to figure out ultimate strength and/or flexing. They are very good at what they do: tune the engines for more horsepower without concern for gas mileage (i.e.: gas guzzler tax) or compliance with pollution regulations.
The reason why your C5/C6 (if you have one) can run 60,000 miles without a single squeak or rattle (like my 98 Coupe) is precisely because the chassis is so stiff, therefore the components mounted on it are not subject to chassis flexing. You also feel this chassis stiffness as precise handling: the car goes exactly where you point it, especially at high speed.
To say that Hill has ZERO credibility implies extreme ignorance or naïvetè on your part.
I am sure GM would gladly rather sell you a C6 Z06 for $65 large than a C6 coupe for $44K. So please explain to me again how GM would object the Z06s cannibalizing sales away from of plain Coupes/Verts.
Respectfully submitted. Comments welcome.
07-18-2005, 02:38 PM
#8
☠☣☢ Semper Ebrius ☢☣☠
Originally Posted by gonzalezfj
Not to beat up on you too much, but where did you get your mechanical engineering degree from? Everybody seems to want to be an expert, and assign nefarious intent to what GM does. They have designed a killer car. Accept it and buy one or buy something else and stop whining about things you do not understand.
Reputable designers, like Mr. Hill and his crew, design mechanical structures (like the Z06 chassis) with a safety factor from the ultimate strength standpoint, as well as from the flexing standpoint. If their calculations indicate that the roof structure is needed to limit chassis flex in the Z06 I believe them until you can show me a set of calculations that disprove theirs.
They also design for every contingency they can think of, for example, crash survivability. With all due respect to the dearly departed Mr. Ligenfelter and his crew, I expect that none ov them has even taken a look at the C5/C6 chassis and tried to figure out ultimate strength and/or flexing. They are very good at what they do: tune the engines for more horsepower without concern for gas mileage (i.e.: gas guzzler tax) or compliance with pollution regulations.
The reason why your C5/C6 (if you have one) can run 60,000 miles without a single squeak or rattle (like my 98 Coupe) is precisely because the chassis is so stiff, therefore the components mounted on it are not subject to chassis flexing. You also feel this chassis stiffness as precise handling: the car goes exactly where you point it, especially at high speed.
To say that Hill has ZERO credibility implies extreme ignorance or naïvetè on your part.
I am sure GM would gladly rather sell you a C6 Z06 for $65 large than a C6 coupe for $44K. So please explain to me again how GM would object the Z06s cannibalizing sales away from of plain Coupes/Verts.
Respectfully submitted. Comments welcome.
Reputable designers, like Mr. Hill and his crew, design mechanical structures (like the Z06 chassis) with a safety factor from the ultimate strength standpoint, as well as from the flexing standpoint. If their calculations indicate that the roof structure is needed to limit chassis flex in the Z06 I believe them until you can show me a set of calculations that disprove theirs.
They also design for every contingency they can think of, for example, crash survivability. With all due respect to the dearly departed Mr. Ligenfelter and his crew, I expect that none ov them has even taken a look at the C5/C6 chassis and tried to figure out ultimate strength and/or flexing. They are very good at what they do: tune the engines for more horsepower without concern for gas mileage (i.e.: gas guzzler tax) or compliance with pollution regulations.
The reason why your C5/C6 (if you have one) can run 60,000 miles without a single squeak or rattle (like my 98 Coupe) is precisely because the chassis is so stiff, therefore the components mounted on it are not subject to chassis flexing. You also feel this chassis stiffness as precise handling: the car goes exactly where you point it, especially at high speed.
To say that Hill has ZERO credibility implies extreme ignorance or naïvetè on your part.
I am sure GM would gladly rather sell you a C6 Z06 for $65 large than a C6 coupe for $44K. So please explain to me again how GM would object the Z06s cannibalizing sales away from of plain Coupes/Verts.
Respectfully submitted. Comments welcome.
You should post more.
07-18-2005, 02:42 PM
#9
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Scissors
Very well stated!
You should post more.
You should post more.
07-18-2005, 03:49 PM
#10
Burning Brakes
Member Since: May 2003
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gonzalezfj
Not to beat up on you too much, but where did you get your mechanical engineering degree from? Everybody seems to want to be an expert, and assign nefarious intent to what GM does. They have designed a killer car. Accept it and buy one or buy something else and stop whining about things you do not understand.
Reputable designers, like Mr. Hill and his crew, design mechanical structures (like the Z06 chassis) with a safety factor from the ultimate strength standpoint, as well as from the flexing standpoint. If their calculations indicate that the roof structure is needed to limit chassis flex in the Z06 I believe them until you can show me a set of calculations that disprove theirs.
They also design for every contingency they can think of, for example, crash survivability. With all due respect to the dearly departed Mr. Ligenfelter and his crew, I expect that none ov them has even taken a look at the C5/C6 chassis and tried to figure out ultimate strength and/or flexing. They are very good at what they do: tune the engines for more horsepower without concern for gas mileage (i.e.: gas guzzler tax) or compliance with pollution regulations.
The reason why your C5/C6 (if you have one) can run 60,000 miles without a single squeak or rattle (like my 98 Coupe) is precisely because the chassis is so stiff, therefore the components mounted on it are not subject to chassis flexing. You also feel this chassis stiffness as precise handling: the car goes exactly where you point it, especially at high speed.
To say that Hill has ZERO credibility implies extreme ignorance or naïvetè on your part.
I am sure GM would gladly rather sell you a C6 Z06 for $65 large than a C6 coupe for $44K. So please explain to me again how GM would object the Z06s cannibalizing sales away from of plain Coupes/Verts.
Respectfully submitted. Comments welcome.
Reputable designers, like Mr. Hill and his crew, design mechanical structures (like the Z06 chassis) with a safety factor from the ultimate strength standpoint, as well as from the flexing standpoint. If their calculations indicate that the roof structure is needed to limit chassis flex in the Z06 I believe them until you can show me a set of calculations that disprove theirs.
They also design for every contingency they can think of, for example, crash survivability. With all due respect to the dearly departed Mr. Ligenfelter and his crew, I expect that none ov them has even taken a look at the C5/C6 chassis and tried to figure out ultimate strength and/or flexing. They are very good at what they do: tune the engines for more horsepower without concern for gas mileage (i.e.: gas guzzler tax) or compliance with pollution regulations.
The reason why your C5/C6 (if you have one) can run 60,000 miles without a single squeak or rattle (like my 98 Coupe) is precisely because the chassis is so stiff, therefore the components mounted on it are not subject to chassis flexing. You also feel this chassis stiffness as precise handling: the car goes exactly where you point it, especially at high speed.
To say that Hill has ZERO credibility implies extreme ignorance or naïvetè on your part.
I am sure GM would gladly rather sell you a C6 Z06 for $65 large than a C6 coupe for $44K. So please explain to me again how GM would object the Z06s cannibalizing sales away from of plain Coupes/Verts.
Respectfully submitted. Comments welcome.
Not quite.
"Comments welcome."
Neither you or the moderators could handle them.
07-18-2005, 04:30 PM
#11
Melting Slicks
"Respectfully submitted."
Not quite.
"Comments welcome."
Neither you or the moderators could handle them.
Not quite.
"Comments welcome."
Neither you or the moderators could handle them.
07-18-2005, 04:34 PM
#12
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2000
Location: A small island in WA state
Posts: 34,474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by da808n
is it true that the new C6 Z06 has a fixed roof?(not targa top)just curios. 
And it's not going to be available as a vert either. Holy crap - how much longer are people going to beat this dead horse?
07-18-2005, 04:35 PM
#13
☠☣☢ Semper Ebrius ☢☣☠
Originally Posted by dexter
And it's not going to be available as a vert either. Holy crap - how much longer are people going to beat this dead horse?
07-18-2005, 04:50 PM
#14
Team Owner
Originally Posted by dexter
And it's not going to be available as a vert either. Holy crap - how much longer are people going to beat this dead horse?Probably right up until that damn ginnea pig eats that pancake off his head!!!
07-18-2005, 04:56 PM
#15
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2000
Location: A small island in WA state
Posts: 34,474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DDSLT5
Probably right up until that damn ginnea pig eats that pancake off his head!!!
Guinea pigs are just rats without tails.
07-18-2005, 07:17 PM
#17
Pro
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Chino Valley AZ
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dexter
And it's not going to be available as a vert either. Holy crap - how much longer are people going to beat this dead horse?My arms are TIRED, and his hide is disintegrating, and he smells BADLY.
New Policy: I am NOT going to link to these old replies.
I am going to repeat them inside this thread.
This should end the thread because nobody wants to scroll down THAT MUCH.
And, because of the photo width above, you have to scroll sideways too.
Of course, you could always mark it all, and copy into a MSWord doc or text file.
**************************************** *******************
Quote:
Originally Posted by 427 C6
Originally Posted by 427 C6
:Retired GM Engr -
Can you give your opinion on how removing top on the 2006 ZO6 will affect the frame? From what you have seen, do you think removing the 10 bolts that secure that top in will compromise the structural integrity of the new Z?
Can you give your opinion on how removing top on the 2006 ZO6 will affect the frame? From what you have seen, do you think removing the 10 bolts that secure that top in will compromise the structural integrity of the new Z?
If you EVER plan to track at "DE" days, or race the car, DON'T DO IT
This is so conservative it makes me sick.
Remember I am retired. The only connection I have to GM is my pension (and loyalty). These are my opinions only, and only opinions, not engineering analysis. I am NOT a Registered Professional Engineer, even though I have BSME. If you think I'm trying to be funny or sarcastic, you have not dealt with trial lawyers. They are not nice or polite. It is not in their job description. And, Google works.
Oh my, I've written a book again. If only I couldn't touch-type 40 wpm.
Everybody with the patience to read below feel free to correct or flame me.
"Normal" street use. Not so sure. But I'm VERY, VERY leary of during it to the C6 Z06. I wouldn't do it, or recommend it. I am NOT a conservative old fart with cars. But, I think this is too "edgy" a car for anyone to "play" with the structure.
I think (opinion alert) it would be more feasible on the C5 Z06's than the C6 Z06's. It's been privately done to C5 Z06's, right or wrong. But, that is a more conventional design and (especially) materials structural beast. If I remember correctly, C5 base design started as a vert, steel coupe roof ADDED, later FRC style steel roof ADDED.
I think (opinion alert) it's not the same for the C6 Z06 version - BIG material changes in the structural are documented, see below. That requires structural changes from a vert. Amount of changes? I don't know. But, are they SIGNIFICANT no matter how big or how subtle. Damn right they are. Every change was done for a reason, and cost money to change from the C6 coupe. They were (opinion alert: most likely) based on computer analysis and all kinds of testing, including multiple types of crash testing. GM cannot afford to "play" with Federal Standards. Period.
On the other hand, it will be YOUR car. If you do it, just don't EVER sell it. One itty-bitty injury accident and the trial lawyers have your property and your bankroll and if you have children they will become the lawyer's indentured servants until retirement age.
Even if your structural mod has NOTHING to do with the injury.
Below, in my inimitable (and sometimes castigated) style is a bit MORE stuff about the C6 Z06 structure. But, I even had "quite a bit of" structural analysis 101 below this. I deleted it. How long can a post be?
This is already a record for anyone but me.
I'll pm "101" if you're really that interested.
Go here:
http://www.corvetteking.com/corvette-z06-exterior.html
Carefully read the "magnesium" and "aluminum" sections at the bottom.
To quote "aluminum" bullet points:
* Designing the Z06 as a coupe with the roof serving as an integral part of the overall structure. A convertible version would need a much stiffer frame to compensate for the lack of a roof structure.
* Using extensive math data to simulate stiffness and crash strength requirements to determine where thicker and thinner gauge materials were required to achieve the maximum mass benefit of aluminum.
* Utilizing beefier hydroformed rails than those in the standard Corvette (4 mm compared to 2 mm) to meet crashworthiness and global torsional requirements.
Back to me. See where I'm coming from in points two and three ?
**************************************** **************************************** *****************
Originally Posted by 427 C6
Retired GM Engr -
Can you give your opinion on how removing top on the 2006 ZO6 will affect the frame? From what you have seen, do you think removing the 10 bolts that secure that top in will compromise the structural integrity of the new Z?
Can you give your opinion on how removing top on the 2006 ZO6 will affect the frame? From what you have seen, do you think removing the 10 bolts that secure that top in will compromise the structural integrity of the new Z?
If you EVER plan to track at "DE" days, or race the car, DON'T DO IT. :NoNo:
Remember I am retired. The only connection I have to GM is my pension (and loyalty).
Everybody with the patience to read below feel free to correct or flame me. :flaming:
"Normal" street use. Not so sure. But I'm VERY, VERY leary of during it to the C6 Z06. I wouldn't do it, or recommend it. I am NOT a conservative old fart with cars. But, I think this is too "edgy" a car for anyone to "play" with the structure.
I think (opinion alert) it would be more feasible on the C5 Z06's than the C6 Z06's. It's been done to C5's, right or wrong. But, that is a more conventional design and materials structural beast. Its base design started as a vert, I think.
Here, in my inimitable (and sometimes castigated) style is MORE than you asked.
WAY, WAY more.
Go here:
http://www.corvetteking.com/corvette-z06-exterior.html
Carefully read the "magnesium" and "aluminum" sections at the bottom. To quote "aluminum" bullet points:
* Designing the Z06 as a coupe with the roof serving as an integral part of the overall structure. A convertible version would need a much stiffer frame to compensate for the lack of a roof structure.
* Using extensive math data to simulate stiffness and crash strength requirements to determine where thicker and thinner gauge materials were required to achieve the maximum mass benefit of aluminum.
* Utilizing beefier hydroformed rails than those in the standard Corvette (4 mm compared to 2 mm) to meet crashworthiness and global torsional requirements.
**************************************** **************************************** *****************************
All current cars have similar design processes to this. But, I think this baby has been designed within an inch of its life. It's tough. Really tough. But, change structural things at your peril. And, you're going to twist it with about 475 ft-lbs of torque through BIG tires. It ain't a Monte Carlo (or Taurus).
Structures guys (and girls) live and die by the torsional rigidity of the frame/body structure. The more rigid the structure (higher Hertz no.), the easier to tune "rubber" mounts, springs, shocks, anti-roll bars, and tire spring rates for any car. And "cowl shake", and etc., etc. Big Hertz makes a quality car. GM works really hard at this. Within cost constraints, of course.
Z06's are an attempt to get "Really Stiff" in a fairly light streetable car without a race car roll cage tieing together all the body work/frame AND the suspension pickup points. The C6 Z06 "spends money" to be stiffer and lighter than the C6 coupe. MONEY is SACRED and they spend it. It's in there for a REASON. 04' Mustang SVT weight is more than even the C5 Z06. The "Fox" chassis is ancient. Surprise. Design marches on.
Grab the ends of a beer can and try to twist them (torsion) so it crumples in the middle (pushing the ends towards each other is compression). Now cut a 1" x 1" window in the middle, and twist the ends, or push together. See ? Twist, or Compress, you lost A LOT (you don't have to actually do it).
Here's a better layman's example, by Denise McCluggage in 1999. I think she was a good Corvette road-racer. In C1's when they were NEW ! ! ! :thumb:
"-- Hertz No, not the rental car company, but a measurement that indicates stiffness (and resistance to such matters as cowl shake). The term is named for Heinrich Rudolf Hertz for his study of electromagnetic waves. The higher the hertz, the greater rigidity. To test your car's rigidity, find a break in the curbing such as a driveway. Run the car up on that curb and stop so that just one wheel is elevated. Now try to open your car doors. The flex in the body might not allow it."
Maybe the Hertz values are in the public domain for the three C6 versions. But, only if GM wants to "market" them for the C6 and Z06 and Legal approves. :NoNo:
**************************************** ************************
Originally Posted by 427 C6
Retired GM Engr -
I would love to retrofit coupe's targa top to the new Z.
I would love to retrofit coupe's targa top to the new Z.
You and I wouldn't notice.
All this just to say, "I don't know". I would NEVER recommend it without a complete structural FEM (Finite Element Method) computer analysis, including the crashworthiness analysis. Only GM can afford that. They have "the mesh". Think tiny little triangles modeling every bit of structure and structural properties. Push on one triangle "a little bit", and see how every other triangle reacts. That is TIME to make, and computer POWER to run. $'s. BIG,Big dollars.
On the other hand, it will be YOUR car. Just don't EVER sell it you do it. One itty-bitty injury accident and the trial lawyers have your property and your bankroll. :roll:
07-18-2005, 07:53 PM
#18
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Dec 1999
Location: Anthony TX
Posts: 32,736
Received 2,180 Likes
on
1,583 Posts
CI 6,7,8,9,11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '08
YOU THE MAN! I will never speak of C6 Z06 and rooflessness in the same sentenance again! Promise!
BC
BC
07-18-2005, 08:40 PM
#19
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Middletown Connecticut
Posts: 30,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cruise-In IV Veteran
Originally Posted by 427 C5
Dave Hill and crew also said that the C5 coupe couldn't handle the LS6 and it's 400 horsepower.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
Meanwhile, there are 1000 horsepower Lingenfelter packages being run in C5 coupes and verts.
With that being said, I think Dave Hill has ZERO credibility.
I STRONGLY believe that the top was bolted in so the C6 ZO6 would not cannabolize sales from the C6 coupe and vert.
I really hope that someone in the aftermarket will find a way to retrofit a targa top to the new Z along with whatever frame reinforcement that is necessary to maitain it's rigidity.
