Quantcast
Official C8 Corvette Thread - Page 20 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 20 of 20 FirstFirst ... 10 19 20
Results 381 to 398 of 398

Thread: Official C8 Corvette Thread

  1. #381
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    C-Town
    My Ride
    2018 F87
    Posts
    6,996
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    After decades of modding cars I came to the conclusion that today's cars are usually better left in stock form which is why I largely leave my cars stock now outside of minor stuff.

  2. #382
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    C5Z, Duramax
    Posts
    6,040
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heavyD View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Mine wasn't.
    Itís an inside joke related to KRyn.

  3. #383
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Okanagan
    My Ride
    K-car
    Posts
    1,836
    Rep Power
    13

  4. #384
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Edmonton
    My Ride
    Megun/Kyosho/965
    Posts
    3,073
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    O M G …

    Should we believe the result?

    2.8 sec for a Vette, and 2.9 sec for a 911 C2S?

    We are talking Ferrari 488 number! Which has 660 HP!
    The Original !

    1234567, ¶h≥“¶hĪo

  5. #385
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Leduc, Alberta
    Posts
    262
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ukyo8 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The C8 starts at $72,000 CAD
    Why does everyone keep comparing it to Ferrari's and 911's

    It's literally priced on par with a loaded 3-series BMW while providing mountains more performance compared to anything else in that price range.

    People always seem to find something to complain about
    Because that's what it's performance is matched to. It's the interior that has always been abysmal shit. Obviously interior quality can improve significantly at Vettes price point, Dodge has been doing it since 2013 and they didn't have some base model to pad their sales figures and profits. It's a dollar value car, so naturally Chevy should be increasing the value per dollar to progress.

  6. #386
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    My Ride
    2016 MB C450
    Posts
    8,155
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corsvette View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Seem to contradict Matt Farah's take on the interior bits. And I believe they drove the same car.

  7. #387
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    CTS-V, Trackhawk
    Posts
    934
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    https://www.motortrend.com/news/2020...c8-power-dyno/

    Looks like it's very underrated at 495 hp and 470 ft-lbs. Motor Trend made 558 rwhp and 515 rwtq.....
    I like neat cars.

  8. #388
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Okanagan
    My Ride
    K-car
    Posts
    1,836
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 90_Shelby View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    https://www.motortrend.com/news/2020...c8-power-dyno/

    Looks like it's very underrated at 495 hp and 470 ft-lbs. Motor Trend made 558 rwhp and 515 rwtq.....
    They sent M/T a ringer.....

  9. #389
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Calgary AB
    My Ride
    S2K
    Posts
    2,241
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 90_Shelby View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    https://www.motortrend.com/news/2020...c8-power-dyno/

    Looks like it's very underrated at 495 hp and 470 ft-lbs. Motor Trend made 558 rwhp and 515 rwtq.....
    I call BS.

    Quote from the MT article:
    "A quick math check reveals that's an estimated 656 hp and 606 lb-ft of torque at the crank if we assume a 15-percent drivetrain loss..."


    And an explanation by Jason Cammisa (that I think sounds reasonable) for why that's probably BS:
    A certain media outlet published a story today that they dyno'ed one and got more than 500 hp at the wheels... calculating back to 650 hp at the crank.⁣

    This isn't possible. 650 hp from 6.2 liters of displacement can't happen with at only 6500 rpm without forced induction. ⁣

    Horsepower is a function of torque x rpm... and there's a maximum torque-per-displacement (otherwise known as BMEP, or Brake Mean Effective Pressure) that's vastly exceeded by Motor Trend's dyno runs. ⁣

    MT's 630 lb-ft number suggests the LT2 makes 17.2 bar BMEP. The most efficient naturally aspirated engines are around 13. The LT2 is SAE rated at 12.9.⁣

    Did it have turbos on it that no one saw? I suspect not... but they sure didn't show up in acceleration testing...⁣

    Here's the real reason I know the dyno results are invalid. See the screen-shot on image 2.

    This is my acceleration simulator. My nerdiness knows no boundaries, but I've been using this calculator since the early 1990s. ⁣

    I inputted a DynoJet plot from a 7-speed manual Z51 C7 I found on the Internet... 417 hp and 415 lb-ft at the wheels. Then I plugged in the C8's actual weight, gearing, tire size, and I estimated drag coefficient and frontal area.⁣

    The numbers (in black, on the right) line up almost exactly with the testing results @roadandtrack got (in red) - within ~0.3s all the way to 150 mph.⁣

    The most damning is top speed, which calculates to 182 mph. Chevrolet claims 184 mph for the Z51 C8. I'd expect a couple mph higher with the C8's LT2 engine (495 hp instead of the C7's 460 that I used here.)⁣

    If the thing really made 650 hp, top speed would be vastly higher. Like, 200+ mph.⁣

    MT's dyno piece doesn't pass science muster. I'm disappointed that they published it — something was clearly broken on that dyno. They should have brought it elsewhere and re-tested. ⁣

    Or at least realized that the numbers didn't line up with the reality of their tests. ⁣
    Thoughts, anyone?

  10. #390
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Technically the NE
    My Ride
    ĎBerta Special
    Posts
    4,285
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    I think itís pretty bold to say itís not possible. But agree itís unlikely.

    Then again you are barely over 100HP per litre at 650 out of a 6.2. Itís not completely outside the envelope of possible esp with clever intake.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.

  11. #391
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    GLA
    Posts
    1,744
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killramos View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think it’s pretty bold to say it’s not possible. But agree it’s unlikely.

    Then again you are barely over 100HP per litre at 650 out of a 6.2. It’s not completely outside the envelope of possible esp with clever intake.
    For a pushrod V8?

  12. #392
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Technically the NE
    My Ride
    ĎBerta Special
    Posts
    4,285
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For a pushrod V8?
    I’m just saying that from an armchair QB position over the internet it seems bold to say its impossible.

    I do agree it’s probably quite overstated.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.

  13. #393
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    '73 Buick, '88 Silvia, '03 Ruckus, '17 Ridgeline
    Posts
    550
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cjblair View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I call BS.

    Quote from the MT article:
    "A quick math check reveals that's an estimated 656 hp and 606 lb-ft of torque at the crank if we assume a 15-percent drivetrain loss..."


    And an explanation by Jason Cammisa (that I think sounds reasonable) for why that's probably BS:


    Thoughts, anyone?
    Jason is pretty knowledgeable about this stuff. If you follow him on IG he actually posted his calculations that he uses for testing cars and vetting out this latest claim. I'm not doubting that GM sandbagged a bit but 650 Crank seem a little too far fetched. And the dyno arguement (mustang vrs dyno jet) hasn't even come up yet.
    Last edited by Ca_Silvia13; 10-22-2019 at 09:14 AM.

  14. #394
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    C5Z, Duramax
    Posts
    6,040
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Jason’s explanation is logical and I agree with it. The trap speeds and top speed don’t equate to MT’s “horsepower”.

  15. #395
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    17' Camaro SS 1LE, 17' Golf R, 18' F-150
    Posts
    2,331
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    A big rear anti-roll bar and some more front tire/wheel will drastically improve handling on this thing and can be done for <$1000. I bet Strano Performance has a rear bar developed for this thing by Christmas time. I'm very disappointed by the brakes though, I've driven a lot of different vettes in competition environments and the brakes have always been great, if these truly feel as bad as the articles make them out to be that's incredibly disappointing.

    Also, how in the actual f**k did they manage to make this thing weigh 3640lbs seriously, aluminum frame, composite body panels, CF crash beam. Did they hide lead in the front?

    Quote Originally Posted by Buster View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't think you want to mod those magnetic shock suspensions too much.
    You don't want to be changing spring rates on the mag shocks but there's improvements that can be made just by changing the tuning of the shocks, a company named DSC Sport is doing some neat stuff with them.

  16. #396
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    CTS-V, Trackhawk
    Posts
    934
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cjblair View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I call BS.

    Quote from the MT article:
    "A quick math check reveals that's an estimated 656 hp and 606 lb-ft of torque at the crank if we assume a 15-percent drivetrain loss..."


    And an explanation by Jason Cammisa (that I think sounds reasonable) for why that's probably BS:


    Thoughts, anyone?
    You'll notice that I quoted the rwhp numbers as opposed to the back calculated flywheel numbers. I personally don't believe that there is 15% drivetrain loss. I also don't believe that this was a ringer provided by GM either. It's not easy to pull big numbers out of an NA engine for the sake of a dyno pull without replacing major components. It's simply not possible with a simple tune or computer reflash.
    I like neat cars.

  17. #397
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Okanagan
    My Ride
    K-car
    Posts
    1,836
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    **Confirmed** rumor of the ZR1. TT V8 with AWD/Hybrid good for 900 HP.
    https://www.motortrend.com/news/c8-c...8-with-900-hp/

  18. #398
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Edmonton
    My Ride
    Megun/Kyosho/965
    Posts
    3,073
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corsvette View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    **Confirmed** rumor of the ZR1. TT V8 with AWD/Hybrid good for 900 HP.
    https://www.motortrend.com/news/c8-c...8-with-900-hp/

    Drooling ..

    I am in!! That would be a 1/5 price poor man Hybrid Ferrari!
    The Original !

    1234567, ¶h≥“¶hĪo

Page 20 of 20 FirstFirst ... 10 19 20

Similar Threads

  1. 2011 Corvette Grand Sport vs Modified C5 Corvette

    By trev0006 in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 1
    Latest Threads: 09-16-2010, 02:31 PM
  2. Replies: 45
    Latest Threads: 02-19-2010, 10:26 AM
  3. 1973 Corvette Stingray vs Corvette Z06

    By trev0006 in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 1
    Latest Threads: 04-01-2008, 01:50 PM
  4. 2005 C6 Corvette vs. 2001 Corvette Z06 video!

    By cityhunter2501 in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 09-19-2004, 01:23 AM
  5. Corvette ZR-1 vs. Corvette C5 video

    By trev0006 in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 0
    Latest Threads: 06-06-2004, 08:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •