Snorman

Thanks for the link.
My first reaction would be that those are STD numbers, not SAE. Both HP and torque are up ~4% over what would be considered a reasonable range for a ZR1.
But I think Vengeance answered the question. They posted the ZR1 graph of 532 rwhp because of the large amount of ZR1's they have had on their dyno it was most representative of an average one.

I agree...we don't yet know if the 587 rwhp on a DynoJet or the 572 rwhp on a MustangDyno are completely representative of the power the C7 Z06 will make. Need more samples. But I think the torque will definitely be very healthy relative to a ZR1.
S.

JoesC5

I don't see any difference in the design of the driveline that would cause the ZR1 to have 16.6% driveline loss vs the C7 Z06 with 10% driveline loss.

might even be the reverse. While the C7 Z06 has a lighter carbon fiber drive shaft, it has a small diameter.

Both the ZR1 and the C7 Z06 have a small diameter dual disc clutch but the C7 Z06 has a dual mass flywheel whereas the ZR1 does not. The dual mass flywheel weighs more than the ZR1's flywheel and the additional weight is at a larger radius.


C7 Z06 flywheel.


C6 ZR1 flywheel




The TR6070 is the same transmission as the TR6060 used in the ZR1(except it has an additional overdrive gear). Chassis dyno runs are performed in 4th gear(1:1 direct). The C7 Z06 appears to have the same design Hypoid differential as the ZR1.
I don't see where the transmission and the differential in the ZR1 that would take a drastic amount to horsepower to overcome vs the transmission and differential in the C7 Z06. Nothing explains why a 638 HP ZR1 would dyno at 530 rwhp(16.9% driveline loss), but the 650 HP C7 Z06 would dyno at 585 rwhp(10% driveline loss).

Vernon

QUOTE=JG853;The reason I am asking all of this is that the dyno numbers do not add up to the test results from the magazine. With all of this power on a car that is "only" 200 pounds more, how come it's times and speed are not better? I know, we are going to talk about some drag, and for that, I will remind you of a nice "old" report Katech completed - http://www.katechengines.com/street_...a%20report.pdf

I like the car, I am just trying to understand why the dyno's do not equate to the magazine times - they should be much better. The times are what matters in the end, not the dyno number anyway.




I agree with power and drive train points made by JG853 and JoesC5 and wonder why the magazines haven't recorded a M7 C7 Z06 (Z07 with Pilot Sport Cup 2 tires) running 1/4 mile times in the 10's - strongly suspect Corvette Forum members will soon post slips in the 10's.

RANGER?

mirage2991

exactly, well said.

JoesC5

I guess the only explanation is that both have the same driveline loss but the ZR1 only had 590 bhp and the C7 Z06 had a whopping 700 bhp. LOL.

To hell with that SAE 638 bhp and that SAE 650bhp!!!!!!! Only dyno pulls under uncontrolled conditions counts with some people.
Of course that doesn't explain why GM says the ZR1 does 11.3 at 130 in the quarter and the C7 Z06 does 11.2 at 127 in the quarter(both equipped with manual transmissions) since there is a minor difference of 110 bhp between the two, instead of 12 bhp. LOL

JG853

Since you called me out on my posts - Are you going to admit you are wrong? Or, was the black Z in the first video posted going against a Viper with 660 HP not in the "cushion" in C7 Z06's made that have more power than 650/650 that you describe below?

Yet - A C6 ZR1 with 590 HP (In this example) can stay even with a 660HP Viper (In this video above, that was not a stock ZR1, but in several others it does). We can make all of the excuses about why the Viper won, the drivers of the car, drag, etc. Nineball has posted several of these videos in the past. It is only one example, but tells a story similar to those that the magazines told (Speed/times).

In the end, I stand by what I posted. There are no freaks, period. The car is 650/650. Manufacturing tolerances and variances in this process are very tight. The speeds and times that were reported in the magazines display different results than "freak" dyno results (As if the car had more HP, the times would be better, and the results of the video with that kind of power would be better). And as Joe pointed out above, the drive trains in the C6 ZR1 and C7 Z06 are similar, which I still am trying to understand why a C6 ZR1 has more drive train loss than a C7 Z06 (Thanks Joe for the data above as I was not familiar with it).

I like the C7 Z06. I most likely will add one to my stable.

breecher_7

Ron I know you have seen this thread already since you commented on it, but I think some of the other guys here would get a kick out of it as well.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...ery-video.html

Apparently our wax and shine crew doesn't approve of your actions!

ChucksZ06

Please quite dragging this thread off of topic. I want to here Vengeance's reality based test results instead of the hand wringing of the magazine spec racers.

JG853

I think you should read the posts of where the Stage 1 areo car and the other cars met up. Stock to stock - That is one example, but shows what I have been mentioning and JoeC5 has been mentioning. We have been on topic the whole thread...

SBC_and_a_stick

Ron is doing the correct statistical approach, it is unbiased. What we are really after is the expected value, or if you will, the true value of whp and wtq.

For the ZR1 there are apparently dozens of pulls on that dyno. The sample size is large, and Ron is using all of the information gleaned from it to pick the dyno pull that he did. It is representative of what an average ZR1 would put down. Fair and balanced.

For the C7 Z06 there is only one pull. The sample size is 1. Ron is STILL using all of the sample information. One pull may or may not be the average but statistically it is the best guess. Fair and balanced.

0Ron@Vengeance Racing

I fail

0NORCAL-SS

tell me about it man!!

facq all the other heat bs posts!!! just give me some numbers man lol how much the fukr make today!!

0Ron@Vengeance Racing

Weather did not cooperate with us today... It misted most of the day and we had several customer cars to complete before leaving for PRI. The Z06 got a day of rest....

Will try to get IAT logs on the street tomorrow weather permitting, then PRI Thursday/Friday.... Monday ARH 2" NON Catted system, then methanol, then heads/cam/compression

_M_

Excellent, thanks for sharing this info and helping owners decide what to do. Quick question, why meth before heads and cam? I guess you can choose not to run the meth, but why not do everything else first to see what each component does in terms of heat?

petecaballero

Subscribing

0Ron@Vengeance Racing

We want to do the methanol before heads/cam as the labor for heads/cam upgrades is fairly significant on the C7 platform. Testing the meth on a 100% bolt on car will let us know if it is a beneficial upgrade for our customers. Once we add the heads/cam we can obviously disable the methanol for results both ways there as well.

I hope this helps.

ffr1352

Ron,

Just curious if you still have the white Z06 you broke in at the Hendricks Chevrolet dealership per what appears to be a cold engine and 2 minute burnout to see if there have been any negative consequences since this method is very different from the 500 mile break in recommended in the manual!?

How many miles on the car now, any high engine oil consumption rates or any negative results, etc.? I will die laughing if it turns out your cars stock dyno numbers were significantly better than other stock cars like yours with the same transmission due to possibly the unconventional break-in!

Phil