Z06 beats ZR1 @ Spring Mountain
03-07-2012, 07:27 AM
#1
Z06 beats ZR1 @ Spring Mountain You guys see the April Road & Track where Tom Milner drove all (4) 2012Vette moldes + the C6.R around Spring Mountain Motor Sports Ranch? Z06 beat the ZR1 by 7 lengths or 0.84 seconds. As tested price difference was $28K. Although, base versions of the two models are $36K apart. Granted, the ZR1 beat the Z06 @ the Nurburgring. I still don't get the transverse leaf spring design, but, doesn't seem do negatively effect handling.
03-07-2012, 07:43 AM
#2
That was their short course, so it's not hard to believe, although I don't think you could draw many conclusions from their findings. Put them on a tiny, tight auto-x course with a Miata, and you'd probably get results that favor the Miata, but it doesn't mean the Miata is the better car.
03-07-2012, 09:55 AM
#3
1.5 miles is long enough that the ZR1 should be better for the $. Interesting that you mention a Miata. My Miata "the Munster" can beat 'em both on any paved road course; drivers being equal. So, that might not be the best analogy to use, lol.
03-07-2012, 11:07 AM
#5
If I'm not mistaken, the C6R wiped the floor with all of them.
03-07-2012, 12:37 PM
#6
TECH Addict
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Simi Valley, CA.
Posts: 2,727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C6R was over 6 seconds faster than the Z06.
Repost btw, might wanna add this link to your post so people can read the article.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/automotiv...tte-fever.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/corvette-fever
Repost btw, might wanna add this link to your post so people can read the article.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/automotiv...tte-fever.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/corvette-fever
Last edited by djsanchez2; 03-07-2012 at 01:55 PM.
Trending Topics
03-07-2012, 03:41 PM
#8
TECH Fanatic
I read that article, just got it in the mail a couple of days ago or so. Z06 is an impressive performer for sure, but, like I said, I still feel like it's just too much money though. Once you start adding any kind of options to it, the price just gets kind of ridiculous for what you're getting.
03-07-2012, 04:37 PM
#9
* Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.
* Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace. Volvo reported that the single composite leaf spring used in the rear suspension of the 960 Wagon had the same mass as just one of the two springs it replaced.[8]
* Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of mass of the car.
* Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1983 have been. As of 1980, the composite spring was an option on the C3.
* As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.
* Also as used on the C4 front suspension, C5, and C6 Corvettes, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs. As implemented on the C3 and C4 rear suspensions with a rigid central mount, the anti-roll effect does not occur.
* Packaging. As used on the C5 and later Corvettes the use of OEM coil over damper springs would have forced the chassis engineers to either vertically raise the shock towers or move them inward. In the rear this would have reduced trunk space. In the front this would have interfered with engine packaging. The use of the leaf spring allowed the spring to be placed out of the way under the chassis and while keeping the diameter of the shock absorber assembly to that of just the damper rather than damper and spring.
Carroll Smith is quoted in his book, 'Engineer to Win':
If I were involved in the design of a new passenger vehicle, however, I would give serious consideration to the use of a transverse composite single leaf spring of unidirectional glass or carbon filament in an epoxy matrix. This would be the lightest practical spring configuration and, although space constraints would seem to limit its use in racing, it should be perfectly feasible on road-going vehicles, from large trucks to small commuter cars. (Since I wrote this paragraph the new-generation Corvette has come out with just such a spring to control its independent suspension systems-at both end of the car.)
* Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace. Volvo reported that the single composite leaf spring used in the rear suspension of the 960 Wagon had the same mass as just one of the two springs it replaced.[8]
* Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of mass of the car.
* Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1983 have been. As of 1980, the composite spring was an option on the C3.
* As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.
* Also as used on the C4 front suspension, C5, and C6 Corvettes, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs. As implemented on the C3 and C4 rear suspensions with a rigid central mount, the anti-roll effect does not occur.
* Packaging. As used on the C5 and later Corvettes the use of OEM coil over damper springs would have forced the chassis engineers to either vertically raise the shock towers or move them inward. In the rear this would have reduced trunk space. In the front this would have interfered with engine packaging. The use of the leaf spring allowed the spring to be placed out of the way under the chassis and while keeping the diameter of the shock absorber assembly to that of just the damper rather than damper and spring.
Carroll Smith is quoted in his book, 'Engineer to Win':
If I were involved in the design of a new passenger vehicle, however, I would give serious consideration to the use of a transverse composite single leaf spring of unidirectional glass or carbon filament in an epoxy matrix. This would be the lightest practical spring configuration and, although space constraints would seem to limit its use in racing, it should be perfectly feasible on road-going vehicles, from large trucks to small commuter cars. (Since I wrote this paragraph the new-generation Corvette has come out with just such a spring to control its independent suspension systems-at both end of the car.)
03-07-2012, 04:45 PM
#10
^^^
Quite informative. Thank-you for posting. Never consider the unsprung weight savings. Although, I do know that the C6R uses coil overs. Don't know if it's required by specs for their class or not.
BTW, all Vettes later than C4 do very well on our road course. Driver specific of course. The pros who come to practice on open track days in their lowered Vettes w/ pig fat slicks, literally fly around the track.
Quite informative. Thank-you for posting. Never consider the unsprung weight savings. Although, I do know that the C6R uses coil overs. Don't know if it's required by specs for their class or not.
BTW, all Vettes later than C4 do very well on our road course. Driver specific of course. The pros who come to practice on open track days in their lowered Vettes w/ pig fat slicks, literally fly around the track.
03-07-2012, 11:28 PM
#11
My opinion is based on listening to their head driving instructor tell me with a straight face that he could get around their 2.2 mile course in a C6 Grand Sport just as fast as a ZR1. After watching the guy drive, I believed him.
If I'm not mistaken, the C6R wiped the floor with all of them.
If I'm not mistaken, the C6R wiped the floor with all of them.
Did you talk to Victor a Spring Mtn?
03-09-2012, 04:51 AM
#13
I think that it's a good thing that the Z06 topped the ZL1 in "one instance." The Z06 is the top of the line model & should perform @ a high level. The ZL1 has historical significance, but, is more of a collectors' nestalgic model, IMO.
