Automotive News, Media & Press Television | Magazines | Industry News

GM Strikes Back - Corvette ZR1 Laps the 'Ring in 7:26.4

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-27-2008 | 04:24 PM
  #21  
El es one's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Default

This is truly great..I hope they handover the car to one of the C6R drivers so we can see what it can really do...I love it that Chevy gave us alot of info regarding the car was stock although is their word(pictures and videos will be best for some people lol) is still great IMO....I guess they saw the controversy ring lap times do lol
Old 06-27-2008 | 05:41 PM
  #22  
meangreen94z's Avatar
Launching!
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 2000Hawk
ok i didn't want to tbring the GTR into this, but can we all now agree that the one that ran the ring was a ringer? Honestly it is down more than 100Hp to the ZR1, weighs like a ******* abrams tanks, yet was able to pull off a 7:29. If the ZR1 could accomplish a 7:26, and im sure it will go faster with Jan or Johnny. Then i am for one to call the "stock" GTRs times BS! This might be the last time i speak to you guys, because these comments might get me assasinated.
-Joel
Part of the time is explained with the dual clutch electronically shifting transmission their using. Porsche shaved 13 seconds off their best time on the Nuburgring with the 911 Carrera when they switched to a dual clutch transmission this year.You simply can't manually shift a transmission as fast or precise as you can with something electronically activated
Old 06-27-2008 | 06:01 PM
  #23  
Blakbird24's Avatar
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
From: Fleetwood, PA
Default

Originally Posted by 2000Hawk
ok i didn't want to tbring the GTR into this, but can we all now agree that the one that ran the ring was a ringer? Honestly it is down more than 100Hp to the ZR1, weighs like a ******* abrams tanks, yet was able to pull off a 7:29. If the ZR1 could accomplish a 7:26, and im sure it will go faster with Jan or Johnny. Then i am for one to call the "stock" GTRs times BS! This might be the last time i speak to you guys, because these comments might get me assasinated.
-Joel
It's already pretty much unanimous throughout enthusiast communities that the 7:29 time is useless...Nissan skipped 6-8 secs of track to get that time. The 7:38 time is almost believable, if you accept the rumors that Nissan upped the boost from the factory settings and used R-comp tires.

Several Ring vets have called the GT-R a 7:50 car after driving it. That's still phenomenally fast for a "480hp" 38XXlb car. Hell that's fast for a 550hp 38XXlb car. Bottom line is the GT-R is awesome, and there was no need for Nissan to falsely inflate it's capabilities. They may have done more harm than good in doing that. It's easily one of the fastest in it's class, and probably THE cheapest in it's class. Comparing it to any Vette was a bad move.
Old 06-27-2008 | 06:26 PM
  #24  
djsanchez2's Avatar
TECH Addict

iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,727
Likes: 0
From: Simi Valley, CA.
Default

Good to see the boys back doing their thing. Congrats to Chevy, GM, Vette Team, and the ZR1 program.
Old 06-27-2008 | 06:46 PM
  #25  
BAD ASS TA WS6's Avatar
BMW ///M Nerd
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,112
Likes: 1
From: NH
Default

My mistake. In the original post it stated the treadwear rating at 220. And even though it says they were specifically devleoped for the car. I just assumed different.
Old 06-27-2008 | 07:01 PM
  #26  
Whisper's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast

iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 595
Likes: 1
Default

On another forum Im a member of one guy planning on buying a GTR says the GTR boards have had over 800 new members sign up today- all Vette trolls.

Old 06-27-2008 | 07:03 PM
  #27  
Blakbird24's Avatar
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
From: Fleetwood, PA
Default

Originally Posted by Whisper
On another forum Im a member of one guy planning on buying a GTR says the GTR boards have had over 800 new members sign up today- all Vette trolls.

What's that saying about payback and female dogs...**** i can't remember.
Old 06-27-2008 | 07:19 PM
  #28  
Cole Train's Avatar
TECH Addict
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,829
Likes: 5
From: MN
Default

all i'm gonna say is awesome
Old 06-27-2008 | 07:21 PM
  #29  
scottyballs's Avatar
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
From: Fountain Inn, SC
Default

Originally Posted by Whisper
On another forum Im a member of one guy planning on buying a GTR says the GTR boards have had over 800 new members sign up today- all Vette trolls.

need link to sign up please...
Old 06-27-2008 | 07:34 PM
  #30  
meangreen94z's Avatar
Launching!
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Blakbird24
It's already pretty much unanimous throughout enthusiast communities that the 7:29 time is useless...Nissan skipped 6-8 secs of track to get that time. The 7:38 time is almost believable, if you accept the rumors that Nissan upped the boost from the factory settings and used R-comp tires.

Several Ring vets have called the GT-R a 7:50 car after driving it. That's still phenomenally fast for a "480hp" 38XXlb car. Hell that's fast for a 550hp 38XXlb car. Bottom line is the GT-R is awesome, and there was no need for Nissan to falsely inflate it's capabilities. They may have done more harm than good in doing that. It's easily one of the fastest in it's class, and probably THE cheapest in it's class. Comparing it to any Vette was a bad move.
Come on dude, be realistic. If the Z06 was able to run a 7:43 from a standstill, and there is consistent proof of the GTR being faster on several other different tracks through many different reputable publications, then the GTR running a 7:37, 7:32, or even a 7:29 from a rolling start isnt that hard to believe. The car has a DSG transmission and several other electronic aids/enhancements that can eliminate the difference in weight. Go drive a BMW 5/6/7 series with active roll stabilization and tell me electronics cant make a difference. That technology makes a 4500lb 7 series capable of .90g

I've never heard Nissan try to compare the GTR to a vette. Its generally vette fans/ricers that try to compare the vette to the GTR. I think Nissan was aiming higher with the GTR(Its essentially a reverse engineered 911 turbo).
Im a huge chevrolet fan ,but Im not going to sit around and try to make stuff up on why a car isnt what it is. Nissan is a company from a country that is very well known for taking something great and improving upon it. No need to lie to yourself
Old 06-27-2008 | 07:35 PM
  #31  
Whisper's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast

iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 595
Likes: 1
Default

NICO and NAGTROC are the two he named, he didnt give urls but Ill see if these pop up on google.
Old 06-27-2008 | 08:00 PM
  #32  
2000Hawk's Avatar
TECH Addict
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,458
Likes: 0
From: Miami, Fl. - Hurricane Highway
Default

Originally Posted by Whisper
On another forum Im a member of one guy planning on buying a GTR says the GTR boards have had over 800 new members sign up today- all Vette trolls.

Ha lets see how they like that **** now!
-Joel
Old 06-27-2008 | 09:18 PM
  #33  
Blakbird24's Avatar
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
From: Fleetwood, PA
Default

Originally Posted by meangreen94z
Come on dude, be realistic. If the Z06 was able to run a 7:43 from a standstill, and there is consistent proof of the GTR being faster on several other different tracks through many different reputable publications, then the GTR running a 7:37, 7:32, or even a 7:29 from a rolling start isnt that hard to believe. The car has a DSG transmission and several other electronic aids/enhancements that can eliminate the difference in weight. Go drive a BMW 5/6/7 series with active roll stabilization and tell me electronics cant make a difference. That technology makes a 4500lb 7 series capable of .90g

I've never heard Nissan try to compare the GTR to a vette. Its generally vette fans/ricers that try to compare the vette to the GTR. I think Nissan was aiming higher with the GTR(Its essentially a reverse engineered 911 turbo).
Im a huge chevrolet fan ,but Im not going to sit around and try to make stuff up on why a car isnt what it is. Nissan is a company from a country that is very well known for taking something great and improving upon it. No need to lie to yourself
Come on dude? You speak like i'm the one disregarding physics in this argument.

Bottom line is that we have record of nearly 200 different production cars running the ring. These times give an educated and experienced driver a damn good idea of what a given weight combined with a given hp can do. What people like you don't seem to grasp is that no amount of technology can overcome the basic laws of physics. Tires are getting grippier, sure...but they are still limited by the fact that they are simply pieces of rubber that derive grip from the downward forces applied to them. AWD is still limited by the fact that it only has four places to apply power. Traction control, yaw control, and stabilization algorithms are still limited by the fact that the vehicle they control is a finite and unchanging machine. The day that a car can transform into whatever it's computer system decides is optimum at the time, these things will change. But that day is not today.

The absolute unchanging end all of this argument is that a 38XXlb car with 480-550hp DOES NOT run a 7:29 on the Nurburgring. It just doesn't. No amount of arguing or reasoning is going to change that. You might as well just come to terms with it and move on...most already have.
Old 06-27-2008 | 09:34 PM
  #34  
WILWAXU's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 14,378
Likes: 1
From: League City, TX
Default

This thread will remain open ONLY if it remains on subject. If it becomes another run a way Fan boy thread, it will be closed.
Old 06-27-2008 | 09:49 PM
  #35  
Red97Z's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
From: Trenton, NJ
Default

I'm curious as to why they did the test with a rolling start.

It seems like lots of people frowned on nissan for doing a rolling start...
Old 06-27-2008 | 10:01 PM
  #36  
bamalt1's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast

iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
From: Ft. Huachuca, AZ
Default

They wanted to avoid the smokeshow It looks cool but slows you down so they didn't want to do it.
Old 06-27-2008 | 10:06 PM
  #37  
GrahamHill's Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
From: northeast Miss.
Default

Originally Posted by meangreen94z
Come on dude, be realistic. If the Z06 was able to run a 7:43 from a standstill, and there is consistent proof of the GTR being faster on several other different tracks through many different reputable publications, then the GTR running a 7:37, 7:32, or even a 7:29 from a rolling start isnt that hard to believe. The car has a DSG transmission and several other electronic aids/enhancements that can eliminate the difference in weight. Go drive a BMW 5/6/7 series with active roll stabilization and tell me electronics cant make a difference. That technology makes a 4500lb 7 series capable of .90g

I've never heard Nissan try to compare the GTR to a vette. Its generally vette fans/ricers that try to compare the vette to the GTR. I think Nissan was aiming higher with the GTR(Its essentially a reverse engineered 911 turbo).
Im a huge chevrolet fan ,but Im not going to sit around and try to make stuff up on why a car isnt what it is. Nissan is a company from a country that is very well known for taking something great and improving upon it. No need to lie to yourself
The Z06 and GTR ran head to head at Buttonwillow, fwiw.
Old 06-27-2008 | 11:03 PM
  #38  
bboyferal's Avatar
TECH Junkie

iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,472
Likes: 0
From: Miami, FL
Default

And it outlapped the Z06... Of course, it was a Z06, not a ZR-1... It would not have done that to a ZR-1. That's for sure!

I'm surprised nobody has brought up the V-Spec yet, though.
Old 06-28-2008 | 12:20 AM
  #39  
Suaveat69's Avatar
Launching!
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 260
Likes: 2
From: Pittsburgh
Default

Originally Posted by 2000Hawk
^ LMAO, also Chief Engineer Juechter stated in his release "The timed lap was run with a rolling start, a departure from our previous practice of standing starts." So why don't they take the Z06 back out there with the ZR1 and really bring down the times.
-Joel
I just read that they were testing a Z06 but ran into the wall with it. I will try and post the link.

The treadwear rating on the ZR1 is 220, same as all Corvettes and GMs current standard for the car. By comparison the GT-R has a 140 treadwear rating.

Just found this: Listen about how precisely they did this with the Z06. The screaming clue was in the fact that it took Jan an hour to do only four laps. John Heinricy effectively spells that out in this video on the CTS-V's lap: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgfKYeFKK9Y Listen carefully to what he says from 2:26 - 2:57. Pay particular attention to the last 10 seconds of what he says about how much time it would take to do one lap if you were going around the track to come to the start/finish line.

This will put to rest once and for all that the Z did a standing sart and used the WHOLE track just like the V did. You can even see the V backing up to go to the start line.

I guess Jan was right. I posted about 2 weeks agao he said the ZR1 will do the Ring in the 7:2x range.
Old 06-28-2008 | 01:38 AM
  #40  
WECIV's Avatar
TECH Junkie
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,877
Likes: 0
From: Gulf Shores and DC
Default

Without the headwind they could probably pull 7:20

W


Quick Reply: GM Strikes Back - Corvette ZR1 Laps the 'Ring in 7:26.4



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 PM.