Worst tuning disaster to come out of bowling green??
07-14-2009, 10:03 AM
#1
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: Boston, Dallas, Detroit, SoCal, back to Boston MA
Posts: 30,607
Received 239 Likes
on
167 Posts
Worst tuning disaster to come out of bowling green??
Really???
http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/334487.aspx
http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/334487.aspx
cbramey;
Jr., dude; I can tell you a c6 z06 can't win; but a c5 sure as hell could:
The c6z would NEVER catch a c5z set up exactly as I just described on a solo course. Stock everything, never touched a shock, bar, muffler, or anything else, but alignment.
I won 6 straight pro solos in 3 different c5z's, including the pro finale by over half a second, against some damn fine drivers, with exactly that setup. I won some pros by several seconds.
I also set fast time at solo2 nationals in the dry by .82 seconds, also against a field of some 50 damn fine drivers, with exactly that set up.
Hell, Danny ran ASP the heat right before me, and I was .21 faster than him!; granted there was a little water in the corner that was drying slightly (and it was early in ASP development). The point is, that totally stock setup was PLENTY fast. I also drove plenty of 'setup' c5 z06's, the best of which was equal, and none were better.
I bought fancy shocks because I thought I could go even faster -- no difference in speed, when tuned right, but lots of wasted time and money.
Now, as well matched as a factory c5z is, the c6z is the worst tuning disaster to ever come out of bowling green.
The VSES/ABS/Dynamic stability routine (NOT to be confused with the AH/TCS - which can be turned off with the button) requires an excited, unsuspecting, and wallet depleted aspiring racer to roll around politely on the front tires, never to enjoy any yaw angle on corner entry.... combined with stupid gearing, too much rear tire, too little front, and WAY too much rear bar, made it THE most frustrating car I have ever driven in my entire life.
Complete and total big brother communist party electrogeek suckage of a kind never before seen in any nightmarish siliconjockey's wet dream.
I'd have even put the piece of crap into another class instead of selling it, cause it looked cool and the motor rocked, but the entire hydraulic brake system and ABS would have to be completely stripped, along with all the electronic body control module functions, as those frikking 'Tron' watching geek ***** ran multiple logic circuits through the same wires in and out of the BCM, EBCM, and ECM together: so there was no way to fix the f***ing thing without completely gutting a car I was making some FAT payments on, and voiding the warranty.
I am forever done with new cars. Never again.
Can you tell I am bitter about it? I am going to go have a beer.
Jr., dude; I can tell you a c6 z06 can't win; but a c5 sure as hell could:
The c6z would NEVER catch a c5z set up exactly as I just described on a solo course. Stock everything, never touched a shock, bar, muffler, or anything else, but alignment.
I won 6 straight pro solos in 3 different c5z's, including the pro finale by over half a second, against some damn fine drivers, with exactly that setup. I won some pros by several seconds.
I also set fast time at solo2 nationals in the dry by .82 seconds, also against a field of some 50 damn fine drivers, with exactly that set up.
Hell, Danny ran ASP the heat right before me, and I was .21 faster than him!; granted there was a little water in the corner that was drying slightly (and it was early in ASP development). The point is, that totally stock setup was PLENTY fast. I also drove plenty of 'setup' c5 z06's, the best of which was equal, and none were better.
I bought fancy shocks because I thought I could go even faster -- no difference in speed, when tuned right, but lots of wasted time and money.
Now, as well matched as a factory c5z is, the c6z is the worst tuning disaster to ever come out of bowling green.
The VSES/ABS/Dynamic stability routine (NOT to be confused with the AH/TCS - which can be turned off with the button) requires an excited, unsuspecting, and wallet depleted aspiring racer to roll around politely on the front tires, never to enjoy any yaw angle on corner entry.... combined with stupid gearing, too much rear tire, too little front, and WAY too much rear bar, made it THE most frustrating car I have ever driven in my entire life.
Complete and total big brother communist party electrogeek suckage of a kind never before seen in any nightmarish siliconjockey's wet dream.
I'd have even put the piece of crap into another class instead of selling it, cause it looked cool and the motor rocked, but the entire hydraulic brake system and ABS would have to be completely stripped, along with all the electronic body control module functions, as those frikking 'Tron' watching geek ***** ran multiple logic circuits through the same wires in and out of the BCM, EBCM, and ECM together: so there was no way to fix the f***ing thing without completely gutting a car I was making some FAT payments on, and voiding the warranty.
I am forever done with new cars. Never again.
Can you tell I am bitter about it? I am going to go have a beer.
07-14-2009, 12:54 PM
#5
Safety Car
I'll say. It was a very eye-opening experience for me this time at the NCM VIR in intermediate. I was on Nitto-RII with Wilwood H pads and the C6Zs in my group mostly appeared stock; at least I assumes so w/stock tires. I really couldn't keep up and I don't think it was just driving--I think the C6Z has a gearing advantage that really helps. For instance, I shift the C5Z after the snake and hold at 100 ish mph into the uphill Esses. Now, the C6Z with his taller gearing could stay in 3rd through this whole section providing gobbs more torque out of 10 & down the hill plus maybe avoid a downshift at oak tree (no downshift=easier to drive).
07-14-2009, 02:01 PM
#9
Safety Car
"Complete and total big brother communist party electrogeek suckage of a kind never before seen in any nightmarish siliconjockey's wet dream"
That is awesome. It sounds like it really comes from the heart
.
That is awesome. It sounds like it really comes from the heart
.
07-14-2009, 04:30 PM
#10
Safety Car
He's a little hysterical but he may have a point. The C6 wheelbase could be making the difference. The change in wheelbase changes the weight distribution of the car. A difference of 1.2 inches may not sound like a lot but it is significant.
I've heard that on certain tracks the C5 is better and at other the C6 is better. Solo 2 is very intense. Notice that he's running at the SCCA Nationals. That's serious sh*t. Track days aren't even close. I've done both so don't beat me up on this one.
Richard Newton
Race Cars 360
I've heard that on certain tracks the C5 is better and at other the C6 is better. Solo 2 is very intense. Notice that he's running at the SCCA Nationals. That's serious sh*t. Track days aren't even close. I've done both so don't beat me up on this one.
Richard Newton
Race Cars 360
07-14-2009, 04:53 PM
#11
Race Director
.....For instance, I shift the C5Z after the snake and hold at 100 ish mph into the uphill Esses. Now, the C6Z with his taller gearing could stay in 3rd through this whole section providing gobbs more torque out of 10 & down the hill plus maybe avoid a downshift at oak tree (no downshift=easier to drive).
Coming out of Oaktree I tried 2nd a few times, but you're shifting to 3rd so quickly, and 3rd pulls so hard anyway, that I finally just stayed in 3rd for Oaktree.
Bob
07-14-2009, 06:40 PM
#12
Here is my 2 cents based on my C5Z autox experience and reading about the C6Z. (no one has let me drive their C6Z yet, any offers?)
Both the C5Z and C6Z had extensive developing testing on high speed tracks (Nurburging, etc). This is very different from autocross in these areas:
1. Steering angle input is much higher.
2. Yaw angle is much higher.
3. Trail braking is done later and heavier in the corner.
Both the C5Z and C6Z have a steering angle sensor and yaw angle sensor. These are used in the Dynamic stability and abs algorithm. They are still active even when the system is “off”. The system is more active on the C6Z than the C5Z when “off”. This makes trail braking more difficult since it will limit the amount of braking force that can be applied to the rear brake. It may even apply rear brake to try and straighten the car out, I’m not sure. The cars already have a heavy front bias for autox and limiting rear brake force makes it worse. The algorithm thinks it’s protecting the driver from a spin for a couple of reasons. The steering angle and slip angle (yaw) is very high (remember it’s tuned for a track) and the braking is very heavy for mid corner. This is a great way to spin a car, turn in a lot, start sliding the car, and stay in the brake late into the corner. The algorithm says, “your gonna spin” and a fast autocrosser thinks this is business as usual to make the car turn. The reaction is limited rear brake and sometimes limited front brake. I think this is what Ramey was trying to explain. The car algorithm simply isn’t designed for what fast autocrossers do. Especially drivers who like to get the tail out early in the corner. A more point and shoot style of driving is probably a good way to avoid interference from the algorithm.
I’m curious if the C5Z and C6Z would be faster with the steering angle and yaw sensor disabled. This may cause other problems so I’m not rushing out to disconnect them, its just an interesting thought.
I’m not an expert and am interested in hearing comments on this.
Chris Shay
Both the C5Z and C6Z had extensive developing testing on high speed tracks (Nurburging, etc). This is very different from autocross in these areas:
1. Steering angle input is much higher.
2. Yaw angle is much higher.
3. Trail braking is done later and heavier in the corner.
Both the C5Z and C6Z have a steering angle sensor and yaw angle sensor. These are used in the Dynamic stability and abs algorithm. They are still active even when the system is “off”. The system is more active on the C6Z than the C5Z when “off”. This makes trail braking more difficult since it will limit the amount of braking force that can be applied to the rear brake. It may even apply rear brake to try and straighten the car out, I’m not sure. The cars already have a heavy front bias for autox and limiting rear brake force makes it worse. The algorithm thinks it’s protecting the driver from a spin for a couple of reasons. The steering angle and slip angle (yaw) is very high (remember it’s tuned for a track) and the braking is very heavy for mid corner. This is a great way to spin a car, turn in a lot, start sliding the car, and stay in the brake late into the corner. The algorithm says, “your gonna spin” and a fast autocrosser thinks this is business as usual to make the car turn. The reaction is limited rear brake and sometimes limited front brake. I think this is what Ramey was trying to explain. The car algorithm simply isn’t designed for what fast autocrossers do. Especially drivers who like to get the tail out early in the corner. A more point and shoot style of driving is probably a good way to avoid interference from the algorithm.
I’m curious if the C5Z and C6Z would be faster with the steering angle and yaw sensor disabled. This may cause other problems so I’m not rushing out to disconnect them, its just an interesting thought.
I’m not an expert and am interested in hearing comments on this.
Chris Shay
07-14-2009, 09:03 PM
#15
Team Owner
Member Since: Feb 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 40,970
Received 320 Likes
on
152 Posts
CI-7-8-9-10 Veteran
Cruise-In IX AutoX Winner
St. Jude Donor '05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11,'19,'22
St. Jude/CI Name Tag Designer
Tell the OP I and my 2 co-drivers will see him in Lincoln, NE in September. 
Steve Burger has been campaigning a 2001 C5Z since 2001. We've had both his car and my '08 Z at multiple events in the past several months and the C6Z has won every one, by up to 2 seconds. Granted, our typical concrete venue is faster than most, the '08 also beat the '01 on asphalt, with him driving both.
Steve finished 2nd in SS at Dixie. He, Joan Clark and I will be in Lincoln. The car is sorted out. I don't expect to win with the likes of Matthew Braun and Gary Thomason in the running, but I think we'll represent.
Steve Burger has been campaigning a 2001 C5Z since 2001. We've had both his car and my '08 Z at multiple events in the past several months and the C6Z has won every one, by up to 2 seconds. Granted, our typical concrete venue is faster than most, the '08 also beat the '01 on asphalt, with him driving both.
Steve finished 2nd in SS at Dixie. He, Joan Clark and I will be in Lincoln. The car is sorted out. I don't expect to win with the likes of Matthew Braun and Gary Thomason in the running, but I think we'll represent.
07-14-2009, 10:28 PM
#16
Pro
Member Since: Jan 2004
Location: Plantation FL
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris Ramey in the right car or in a C5Z06......can run rings around us mere mortals.
He hasn't been out in a C5Z06 in some time....but if he was rusty driving or not.....he would be hard to beat.
He should pick up a co-drive, or a inexpensive C5Z06 and be a force in SS at nationals.
PS...Craig....this guy would run rings around most guys, and be right there with Braun et al.....if he could shake off the rust.
D.Lehman
He hasn't been out in a C5Z06 in some time....but if he was rusty driving or not.....he would be hard to beat.
He should pick up a co-drive, or a inexpensive C5Z06 and be a force in SS at nationals.
PS...Craig....this guy would run rings around most guys, and be right there with Braun et al.....if he could shake off the rust.
D.Lehman
07-18-2009, 10:36 PM
#19
Team Owner
I don't know crap .... but I know several knowledgeable suspension shops that say the C6Z has a way too stiff rear bar and recommend the stock C6 bar instead.
DH
DH
