Originally Posted by jschindler (Post 1582788752)

I was one of the first C6 owners. I had two close friends with C5 Z06's - both with headers, cold air and a tune. They pulled me slightly and that is with the mods. I promise you that bone stock the cars were virtually even. It would be a pissing match to call one faster than the other.

Originally Posted by Daekwan06 (Post 1582798025)

Yep.

Its basically a drivers race between a C6/wZ51 & C5Z06. Expect the same with a C7 & C6Z06. Its called progress. And its what you should expect to happen when you give engineers 8 entire years to make a better product, with newer technology & fresh ideas they didnt have access to before. If a fully optioned C7 cant provide C6Z06 like performance.. then I'll personally be wondering what the hell was GM doing for those 8 years.

Originally Posted by Daekwan06 (Post 1582798025)

Its basically a drivers race between a C6/wZ51 & C5Z06.

Originally Posted by FASST LN (Post 1582797392)

I'll throw my observations into the mix.

I expect the new LT5 to redline at approximately 6,500 rpm given the GM released video showing the LCD gauges, which appeared to indicate such.

If the C7 does have an aluminum frame like the outgoing ZO6, then it would make sense it would weigh less than the C6ZO6, when you consider the C7's lighter (narrower) wheels/tires (reciprocating mass), lighter transmission, and use of carbon fiber panels.

When the C6 debuted, GM said its performance would be 75% of the difference between a base C5 and a C5ZO6. I would imagine something similar here with the performance of the C7 slotting between the base C6 and the C6ZO6.

Lastly, if I just shelled out $90M for a loaded '13 ZO6 and the following year a $55M base C7 was nipping at my heals, I would not be happy. But that is because I place so much value in the performance of a car and not its other characteristics.

Originally Posted by Aozora (Post 1582795156)

You're also not taking into account the new transmission(s) or any other technology we don't know about yet..

Originally Posted by JustinStrife (Post 1582800164)

The C6z is faster than the GT500, stock for stock. GM has already stated the new C7 should run 11.9 and a 3.9 second 0-60. That's slower than the C6z and the GT500. The GT500 should sit right inbetween a C6z and a base C7.

Not sure what else there is to debate on this? :crazy2:

Originally Posted by JoesC5 (Post 1582798181)

What do you mean by "fully optioned C7"?

A 575 HP supercharged LT4 engine and beefed up suspension with huge ceramic brakes and 335 tires in the back. That kind of "fully optioned?

Or do you mean the base C7 with 450 HP with regular brakes and suspension and 285 wide tires in the back but with a fancied up interior, monogramed floor mats, chrome wheels, jute box lighting for the dash, upgraded sound system, etc ?

Originally Posted by Jawnathin (Post 1582798226)

No it wasn't. The C5Z was a better performance car in nearly every measurable way.

"Clearly in acceleration and slalom, the new Z51 appears to have delivered about 75 percent of the old Z06's performance and also in terms of brake fade, if not quite in stopping distances."

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2Hi5bhVES

Originally Posted by Daekwan06 (Post 1582800793)

The base C5 delivered 75% of the C5Z performance.

Its okay Jawnathin. I know you feel the need to defend any older Z06 vs. newer incoming model. But it will be alright.

Originally Posted by JustinStrife (Post 1582800164)

The C6z is faster than the GT500, stock for stock. GM has already stated the new C7 should run 11.9 and a 3.9 second 0-60. That's slower than the C6z and the GT500. The GT500 should sit right inbetween a C6z and a base C7.

Not sure what else there is to debate on this? :crazy2:

Originally Posted by JustinStrife (Post 1582800164)

The C6z is faster than the GT500, stock for stock. GM has already stated the new C7 should run 11.9 and a 3.9 second 0-60. That's slower than the C6z and the GT500. The GT500 should sit right inbetween a C6z and a base C7.

Not sure what else there is to debate on this? :crazy2:

Originally Posted by Aceman (Post 1582788063)

When the C6 came out - didn't the base C6 essentially meet the C5 Z06 performance numbers - I could swear it did...

Originally Posted by Jawnathin (Post 1582800945)

Hey bud, don't need to get personal or passive aggressive here.

I like the C6 w/ Z51s but the C5 Z06 was a a better performing car in every measurable way. The article touches on that as it compares a C6 w/ Z51 to the C5Zs. Handling, acceleration, braking, the C5Z had it beat.

And no, I'm not defending anything, don't make it about that, unlike some other people, I actually welcome change. And C5Z vs C6 w/ Z51 has nothing to do with my car. I just think folks are remembering history incorrectly. The C6 w/ Z51 was never a better performance car than a C5 Z06.

Originally Posted by jimmyb (Post 1582788036)

I agree that 10% less than a base C6 is a stretch, but I think 3,000 pounds is approachable.
A base 2013 C6 coupe weighs 3,225 pounds according to Chevrolet's website. Assuming Car and Driver is correct and the C7 does have an aluminum frame, this is a major weight saving. In the case of the steel verses aluminum frames on C6's, the aluminum frame weighs 136 pounds less than the steel frame. So, for the purpose of the discussion, a base C6 would weigh 3,089 pounds if it had the Z06/ZR1 frame. Now, the 3,000 weight on the C7 that we're hoping for doesn't seem so far out of reach.

Jimmy

Originally Posted by racebum (Post 1582801145)

list of times at the ring

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...eife_lap_times

2004 c5z 7:56
2005 z51 7:59

Originally Posted by Daekwan06 (Post 1582802153)

Yep.

That definitely proves Jawnathan's 75% performance theory. A 3 second difference on a 8 minute lap time couldnt possibly be attributed to a driver's difference.

How dare you provide actual facts?

Originally Posted by LawrenceFromTorrance (Post 1582805803)

PS
all but the Corvettes and the Mustang had paddle shifters

Originally Posted by 1RedVettFor2 (Post 1582787945)

I think we may see a car the will have numbers somewhere inbetween the current base and Z06 with a bump in 2 or 3 years to out perform the Z06 at that point.

Originally Posted by Jasil (Post 1582805908)

I agree!! Good styling, ridiculous interior, performance between the current and Z06 models.

**To show you how far tech has slipped in the corvette. Think about this my friends KIA SORRENTO for 20K. He can upload all of his contacts from his phone, all of his music, and then use voice commands to do anything else. He says it's the best voice command system he's used. IT'S IN A KIA!!!

Originally Posted by DREAMERAK (Post 1582805874)

I thought the ZR1 held the production car record at LS?

Originally Posted by LawrenceFromTorrance (Post 1582806509)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DREAMERAK
I thought the ZR1 held the production car record at LS?

It does in the latest MT test with PTM and Cup tires, nudging out the ACR (just barely though).

I believe the numbers by Lawrence is an older ZR1 on PS2s.

Maybe the ZR1 does hold the record, not sure, could probably look it up. But, the thing about those clips is that it's all the same driver on the same course. The record is probably held by a different driver but if this other driver also drove the other cars how would the numbers come out? I just put these on because of the previous posts saying that the 458 was faster and if you look cafefully at the drag race posts that was put up you can see that the Z06 was toasting his tires for the first 50-100 feet and still came in 3rd or 4th, almost like the driver was trying to lose. Also, another point is that if the C7 beats the C6Z then it's going to be better than all those other cars (hard to believe). Even though I own a C6Z I have no problem with the C7 being as good as it can be:)

Originally Posted by oicw (Post 1582806374)

It does in the latest MT test with PTM and Cup tires, nudging out the ACR (just barely though).

I believe the numbers by Lawrence is an older ZR1 on PS2s.

Originally Posted by LawrenceFromTorrance (Post 1582808299)

Randy Pobst drove the ZR1 to the record and previous record holder was by a Viper driven by Chris Winkler that's what I was trying to say. Randy Pobst also drove a Viper but was not able to best the previous record with the Viper. The point I was trying to make is that if Chris Winkler could drive the earlier Viper faster than Randy Pobst could drive the later Viper, maybe he could have driven the later Viper that Randy Pobst drove even faster. Is that confusing enough:)

Originally Posted by DREAMERAK (Post 1582808370)

If Winkler could drive the new viper faster than pobst, maybe he could drive the ZR1 faster too.:D

Originally Posted by Jawnathin (Post 1582805317)

Since when did I say it was 75%? It was actually Dave Hill, chief engineer of both the C5 and C6 who said that. Someone with much more credibility than you or I. Then the quote was from MotorTrend who validated the claim during the actual performance tests.

I don't think anyone here really thinks a C6 is literally 75% of a C5 Z06 and I do believe the quote was misleading. However, the point has always been it was NOT a drivers race and they were NOT equal in performance. That is a FACT. There is NO performance benchmark that the C6 was better at than the C5 Z.

And you criticize me for not providing facts? Did you even bother to click on the link to the article that was posted? You know, the article with the FACTUAL performance benchmarks between the two cars? The one that shows the C5Z was better than the C6 in handling, acceleration, and braking?

Where are YOUR facts that suggest they are equal in performance?

Then you put out some desperate assertion that I want to 'defend' an older generation Z06 car I've never owned because somehow it makes me feel better about my own? Am I really defending anything, or is it you who is defending an incorrect wishful belief that your very own C6 has equal performance as a C5 Z06 and gets upset when someone disagrees?

Originally Posted by Achmed (Post 1582814772)

Does anyone's answer change now that we know it will be over 471 hp?

Originally Posted by brentil (Post 1582811311)

It's very likely the C7 base could match the C6Z in weight or even be slightly lighter.

From the ZR1 information page;



We also know the current C6 versions weights.

2013 Corvette Coupe 1LT weighs - 3,225 pounds
2013 Corvette Z06 1LZ weights - 3,175 pounds
2013 Corvette ZR1 1Lz weighs - 3,333 pounds

It's also been highly discussed that possibility of some of the more exotic carbon fiber and magnesium components from the ZR1 moving down to base.

So lets say the 3,225 was their basis of development point, subtract the 138 lbs for the aluminum frame you have 3,087 plus lets say "some" carbon fiber parts because otherwise it's too expensive. The Z06 hood as cf weighs 11 pounds less than the fiberglass version so realistically you're not going to see huge weight savings, maybe drop the car down to 3,050 total from those changes.

We also know the new LT1 produces torque on par with the LS7 so in terms of initial starting force it could very likely be on par.

HOWEVER... the C7 is going to be more technologically advanced than the C6 meaning more weight for components in the car. So I would be very surprised if the C7 weighs less than 3,100 lbs.

Also a big negative in terms of performance for the C7 base versus the C6Z is going to be traction from the tires. The C6Z has larger rear tires that are stickier. The C7 might have some technowizardry for launch controls but I still think the C6Z will grip better.

Originally Posted by DREAMERAK (Post 1582815366)

Where are you getting the C6 3225 weight from?

Originally Posted by 8850 (Post 1582815496)