well! I hope everyone is having a good day!

Rooster: Please remember that we also drive CTS-V's and that most the people in here purchased them new at 56K+... The only dif is that we can go do a trade in with our first gen V's and knock off at least 15k to 18k off the sticker price of a new V! Even more $ if we sell it on our own so statements about a fellow V owner not being able to afford the note can and will be construed as being a not very realistic comment considering the tipe of car that we drive as well! Regardless of that we ALL love our V's and also love the new Gen V's as well!!

Im not trying to throw rocks but felt that I need to say something! No harm in my words...

 

Thanks for the information, as I thought Jamie ran on DRs to get under 11secs-damn good driver!!! IIRC, Ranger ran like 11.2secs with the runcraps, and went 10.8secs with DRs. Both ran without any mods, not even a tune. Not sure if those times have been bettered, as I think both drivers did those runs 18-24 months ago.

 

An update of C6Z 1/4 mile times that I posted:

Jamie Furman, 10.98@129 on stock runflats, no mods, not even a tune
Jamie, same day, with DRs, 10.83@130, no mods, not even a tune
Ranger, 10.85@129.5, with DRs, no mods, not even a tune
Ranger, 11.22@127.16 on stock runflats, no mods, not even a tune

It will be not be possible for a stock V2 and a stock V2 with DRs to match those times, but a 11.5 or better on DRs and a tune would be damn good.

 

The stats on the GT500 are wayyyyy shitty!!!!

 

No one bickering on this end. You keep tossing out profanity, name calling and are all mad. You could not come across as some one more angry and upset about whatever it is that is bothering you. That's why you made that smug little comment about not needing a V2.

"Yea, I would honestly think theyd be faster....

No 09 V for me."

That is crap, you know it, don't even try to defend it. For 59 grand it's a pretty good package. Especially, my friend adanieljohnson1, if you chucked down $56K on the V1.

Justify it however you want. And if you want to change the subject to a 997, I got something for ya.
I still think 12 flat is good for a stock luxury sedan and 59 large, if you were to pay MSRP.

 

Jamie did his 10:83 bone stock and it still stands. Ranger and others had a huge problem with it because Jamie had a tune, removed it and ran it stock to see what it would do. Folks thought that was modded so they could keep their "records". I guess an oil change would be a mod too then. He caught a bit of grief for it but numbers are numbers and he's a good guy.

 

from what i read, the only difference in the 116mph and 122mph runs were the heat and humidity. he had the tune the whole time.

even he couldnt give an answer in the 6mph variation. maybe the track's system had some issues.

in my experience (not much), trap speeds rarely vary much. with 11.91s and 11.96s, the mph will be extremely close. even if you have wheelspin off the line, your times will drop a grip, but the traps wont hardly change.

mph will give you and idea of what the car is capable of. the ETs are the result of everything coming together.

dont know why im writing this, im sure youve got a lot more passes than ive got.....

i wish i could cut a 1.7, hell...id be happy as hell with a 1.9!!!

 

im not very familiar with the setup, but if i remember correctly the IC is on top of the blower and the SC actually blows upward rather than down into the motor like a usual roots blower. imo, it would be better to ditch the IC and go with meth...

 

I want the time I wasted reading these responses back.

 

Yes, the 122 down to 116 was with more traction and higher humidity. I was saying I have heard other owners go from 116 or so to 122 with a tune. Getting rid of the pig richness on the top end is helping these cars a lot. I'm sure removing TM and tuning how the A6 tranny shifts helps a lot overall as well.

 

 

The ZR1 runs 2 small brick intercoolers while the V runs 1 large brick, it's pretty safe to say that the V has a higher capacity cooler, but neither are large enough for my taste. The other big difference between the blowers are the inlets, the ZR1 has been significantly more compromised due to the packaging of the engine under the hood of the vette.

The R1900 TVS is good for 750HP+ flywheel while the R2300 will do 900+, but work on the coolers and inlet might be required to hit this level on either system.

 

^ like said the '09 has superior cooling to the ZR1 due to the single larger brick cooler. I think the times you see on the '09's are still low is because the motor does require some good mileage like 5-6k miles to fully break in and also because all that instant torque makes traction a serious issue. I remember when the c6 'z's were out and nobody could get out of the 11's for a while. Same issue here. Obviously there is no way in hell the V will match the times of a vehicle a good 1500lbs lighter but as noted by gm engineers the V is a vehicle that is capable of high 11's even to mid 11's stock. YOU WILL see V's crack into the high 10's with full bolt on's, pulley, ecu, possibly more cooling and better tires by next summer. My prediction - Right now I'd like to see some comparison runs on the V going like 50-110 on the highway, a condition where traction wont be an issue.

 

^yeah, obviously going from a roll, they will pull like a bigdog.....

im just saying, id ditch the IC all together and go with meth. no flow restrictions there...

after doing some internet research, it looks like you could just pull the top off of the blower/IC assembly and remove the IC core. then just cap the coolant lines in the back and call it good. put a progressive meth/water system on, swap the pulley on it and have it tuned. bingo, crazy HP increase!

or better yet, put the R2300 on that girl and do the above mods.....

 

I went at it with a modded' VR4 on the highway.....lol, i blew by him so hard that i didnt even know he was going wot until later on he gave me a thumbs up

 

The ZR1 2300 is going to have better intercooling than the V's 1900.

 

^ 2x small brick coolers will not work as efficently as 1 large one.

 

Until somone posts the sizes of BOTH the intercoolers from the ZR1 and the CTS-V, the ZR1 has better intercooling then the V. (638hp vs 550hp)

 

I'm not taking sides on either case but just because the ZR1 has more hp, that doesn't mean it has a better intercooler. The ZR1's blower is dumping more boost but it is also bigger meaning less heat. The speed at which the blowers become inefficient and just start to build heat is unknown so the air coming out of the rotors on the ZR1 may not be nearly as hot as the ones coming out of the V. I have never seen info on these engines, that is simple an illustration. Unless a person has seen the AIT and boost of both engines before the intercooler and after, we have no way of comparing the two. You cannot base facts on assumptions, which is what you have just done.

 

i thought "restriction" was the original issue someone brought up about the ICs.

either way, raven154 is right. the only way your going to know without a doubt is to use both style intercoolers on the same motor with the same blower and compare the the IATs and the boost.

and then you may have to figure out your definition of efficiency....one may flow better, and the other may produce a cooler charge (will the single brick heat exchanger even fit on the bigger blower or the other way around?)? nobody has given any info on the amount of liquid each IC uses or how much the pump and system flows. that is going to make a difference on how well a water-to-air IC works....oh, and how large is the heat exchanger that cools the water????

i know somebody is going to say if the air is cooler its going to give more HP, but there is a balance. i dont know exactly where it is, but a lot of warm air can give more HP than a little bit of cold air.

why is there a debate about this anyway? ditch em' and use meth......