First ever hot lap in C7 Z06

[Datawiz]

RSeZHoAmRK8

For autocross, C6 Z06 is better. Having said that, C7 Z06 is a shit ton of fun. :yesnod:

[Datawiz]

Ran the fastest time of the day in that car of all of the Exotics. 59.7. We ran the same course 2 weeks ago, and I ran a 60.6 in the supercharged Miata. For a bone stock car, on bone stock alignment, it's exceptional. I bogged at the launch, and some cones were in the way. That car was easily a 57.9 car....FTD for the last event....right off the showroom floor. :yesnod:

FTD last event was 59.536. This car would have devoured that time....with NO setup. :yesnod:

[Jeff '79]

Can you do some doughnuts and high speed skid stops ?

Mix it up a bit. :seasix:

[Datawiz]

Can you do some doughnuts and high speed skid stops ?

Mix it up a bit. :seasix:

Screwing around at our venue is a big no-no, but there was a brand new F-Type Jag that did several smokey doughnuts. He also had an 1,100 HP Nissan GTR. I beat his time by a second in a bone stock NC Miata. :leaving: :D

[The Cripp]

Disgusting. :rofl:

[CertInsaneC5]

Put a driver in that C7 and that shit box filming it would be left in the dust. :D

[VITE1]

So when do you get one?

[GentleBen]

For autocross, C6 Z06 is better. Having said that, C7 Z06 is a shit ton of fun. :yesnod:

Why? Is it familiarity with the C6, is its setup more attuned to autocrossing or some other reason? I would have thought that the rev matching ability of the C7 with 7-speed manual trans would have been a benefit. Of course, if the C7 had the 8-speed auto you would have been able to concentrate more on driving than worrying about the requirement to up-/down-shift to staff within the optimum torque curve.

The C7 looked as if it had sufficient horsepower as it was able to quickly leave you in the dust on the straights between cones so, regardless of transmission type, it looked as if it was competitive while bone stock. With some good (sticky) tires (can you say Michelin Cup Sport 2?), an aggressive autocross alignment, and more time in the car I think you could have gotten the time down to 56.4 or better

[Mike Mercury]

A8 or M7 ?



For autocross, C6 Z06 is better. Having said that, C7 Z06 is a shit ton of fun. :yesnod:

What I've been reading is the C7 requires a little differtent driving to get the max out of it. In other words - some time needed to get aquainted with behind-the-wheel.

How much do you think you left on the table ?

[GRN ENVY]

Why? Is it familiarity with the C6, is its setup more attuned to autocrossing or some other reason? I would have thought that the rev matching ability of the C7 with 7-speed manual trans would have been a benefit. Of course, if the C7 had the 8-speed auto you would have been able to concentrate more on driving than worrying about the requirement to up-/down-shift to staff within the optimum torque curve.

The C7 looked as if it had sufficient horsepower as it was able to quickly leave you in the dust on the straights between cones so, regardless of transmission type, it looked as if it was competitive while bone stock. With some good (sticky) tires (can you say Michelin Cup Sport 2?), an aggressive autocross alignment, and more time in the car I think you could have gotten the time down to 56.4 or better

A8 or M7 ?



What I've been reading is the C7 requires a little differtent driving to get the max out of it. In other words - some time needed to get aquainted with behind-the-wheel.

How much do you think you left on the table ?

If I had to guess knowing how Craig and I drive on that track. Rev range is limiting the ability of that car. Craig is probably having to work harder out there with gear changes

[Datawiz]

Why? Is it familiarity with the C6, is its setup more attuned to autocrossing or some other reason? I would have thought that the rev matching ability of the C7 with 7-speed manual trans would have been a benefit. Of course, if the C7 had the 8-speed auto you would have been able to concentrate more on driving than worrying about the requirement to up-/down-shift to staff within the optimum torque curve.

The C7 looked as if it had sufficient horsepower as it was able to quickly leave you in the dust on the straights between cones so, regardless of transmission type, it looked as if it was competitive while bone stock. With some good (sticky) tires (can you say Michelin Cup Sport 2?), an aggressive autocross alignment, and more time in the car I think you could have gotten the time down to 56.4 or better

Ben, that was me driving the Z06. The reason I don't like it vs. my Z06 is non-linear power. Chassis setup is wonderful, but power delivery is too slow. When it does kick in, it is frequently too late, as I am already at the next element. Shifting is not an issue, as once in 2nd, I never shift again. Tires were the sport cups, and the car's times were exceptional. It easily had a 57 in it. It was a stick, and I hate automatics.

[Datawiz]

If I had to guess knowing how Craig and I drive on that track. Rev range is limiting the ability of that car. Craig is probably having to work harder out there with gear changes

No gear changes, and I never hit the rev limiter. Limitation continues to be throttle response. "There is no replacement for displacement" pretty much sums up the event. If the car were all motor, I think it would be perfect. Having forced induction destroys the experience.

Again, road racing, the car is perfect, autocross, it's not gonna work. The sheer quantity of transitions, and the frequency of turns, and throttle input, dictate that this car is not going to work. In my C6 Z06, if/when i put in 1 single millimeter of throttle input, I get an immediate amount of forward thrust. I'm in a game that is decided by 1,000th of a second. Throttle delay is not acceptable.

Regardless, it was my first time at the wheel of a C7 Z (stick no less) and it was an awesome experience. It just further cements the fact that I WILL have a C7 Z, but it will not be my race car. C6 Z should be back on the track by year's end....with close to 700 HP. :yesnod:

[Datawiz]

How much do you think you left on the table ?

M7

Second and a half, minimum. :yesnod:

[Datawiz]

Why is their throttle lag with a supercharger? Can that be settled with a tune? My Cobalt (my only reference for supercharged cars really) was lightning quick on the throttle with a stage 2 tune to the point where I had to be slow on the gas or it would break the tires free...

Mechanical driven forced induction is WAY better than exhaust driven (turbo charged), but there is "still" lag, and it's SIGNIFICANT when you are turning 60-70 times in 1 mile. Trust me, I want to love this car, and I DO love this car, and I WILL have this car, but it won't be my race car. I still believe part of the problem is that I don't believe all of the electronic nannies were truly defeated. I am currently researching how to fully eliminate the electronic nannies. :yesnod:

The time dictates that it's a stellar car. If my Z06 were there in race prep, it would have likely run a 54 second lap....true, that would be with race rubber, but a 3 second differential between the two is impressive for the C7 Z on stock tires. :yesnod:

[Datawiz]

I just never associated throttle lag and superchargers, I wouldn't be surprised if it could be tuned out. With a mechanical blower (especially an Eaton), throttle input should be identical to naturally aspirated, no? I wouldn't be surprised if it's software getting in the way of the natural response of the motor...

You're an engineer, think of the physics...while the supercharger is driven by a belt on the pulley, when you floor it, the belt spins faster, which drives the supercharger, but the air mass created by the supercharger has to be routed through the pipes to the intake. That distance the air travels to actually be consumed by the cylinders is significant in a game of thousandths. :yesnod:

My full time ride this year is a supercharged Miata, and I frequently set FTD in it, but it's still not all motor, and that "minor" lag is major for what I do.