Not too many mid-engine Z06's out there either.

 

Don't you mean blue oval??

 

You don't produce excellence over night, it comes with consistanticy...........
The bar will always be raised and so far 5 generations have answered.
I expect nothing less with the 6th. The Vet is truely America 's sports car!
Then again I might be partial

 

Mid-engine....like the saleen S7? How do they match up to the front engine C5?
Corvette C5-R took top ten in every race in the ALMS 2004 season. Nearly taking 3/4 in every race behind the Audi R8's
The C5's are GTS class and they beat the hell out of alot of P1/P2/GT class cars.
What makes a mid engine street car so much better?

 

Well My point was the z06 has proven itself over and over and just about everyone can vouch for that, On the other hand the gt has been talked about by many but experienced by few, you are an exception so I would say I did o.k. just not 100 percent accurate, but then again I have only been on this board for a few months and have never owned a car that runs faster than 15's in the 1/4 so I have a lot to learn no doubt.


Are you telling me there is more to cars than just running them in the 1/4 mile, where have I been all my life, I told my mom locking me in that closet was going to do some bad things to my mind lol j/k

I get what you are saying and you are right but only the very wealthy even have to worry about debating over buying a 70k car or a 150k car so its really a mute point, honestly the last option you mentioned is better suited for my budget and would probaly give a guy like me more satisfaction than the 150k option anyway hell 7k and a 96 s10 works for me. But if anyone wantsd to donate a 06 zor or a gt I am not going to turn it down.

 

The C6 Z06 will be the better car.....Because

1 The performance vs cost .....Z06 will cost around 65,000 ......GT will Cost 160,000+.........It is much easier to take the 90,000+ you save and invest in add-ons such as Low Compression pistons and Supercharger or Turbo.

2 The Z06 isn't going to break driving it home from the dealer....

3 The GT is a Ford...Who wants to drive a FORD? Not me

4 The Z06 has more potential for improvement than the GT because of the large displacement it starts off with..... This allows future add-ons to yeild greater results.

5 The Z06 has more potential for improvement than the GT because it weighs less to start out. Shed a some pounds by basic weight reduction and you have a car that weighs less than the average civic.....

6 The Z06 in my opinion looks really nice. I would have like to have seen it in a FRC but oh well. I do not like the look of the GT. It reminds me of that kid in high school that is just trying to hard to be kool.

7 The Z06 is easier to work on and will be cheaper to fix if it does break. The parts for a GT are going to be exspensive as hell compaired to a Z06.

As for Ford GTs breaking. I can't say I am suprised on bit. They are junk in my opinion. My TA before I totally redid it was a champ. It rarely had any problems......

I know a lot of people say that the Ford GT can easily "change pulley, add bolt-ons, and tune" and gain much horse power. There is no doubt this is true. No doubt.....But with a 90000 price extra in my pocket I could do much with a 7.0lt V8 LS7. Even if I spend 15000 of that on the car. It up rape the modded GT. For 15,000 You could add bolt-ons, LOw Compression Pistons, S/C and Tune........ Now you tell me which is better?



Lighter 7.0lt Z06 w/ bolt-ons & S/C
OR
Heavier 5.3lt GT w/ Bolt-ons, Pulley, and Tune

This is a no brainer don't care who you are. If you say the ford then you are just being stupid, which would make sence and explain why you would like FORD....

Stock for stock I really think it will be close.....I do not believe that the GT will be hitting 10s nor do I think the Z06 will be hitting 10s. I think they will be very close mid-low 11 second cars....no matter who is driving them.

These are just my opinions and that is all I have to say about that......

 

Gen3Benz, mid engined RWD cars have several addvantages over front engined RWD cars, especialy when it comes to racing. first and formost is they have lower polar inertia. this means that the car will be more nimble and change direction with less force. this improvse the turn in of the car.

a grater advantage of a mid engine car is that of weight distribution. with the engine and drive trains centre of gravity further back, the rear wheals will generate more mechanical grip. this is good for both accelerating and braking as it allows you to run grater rear brake bias, thus improving maximum braking force.

mid mounting the engine also allows the drive to be placed at the front of the car, giving a better weight bias and allowing him to see where the front wheels are going. this will inspire confidence and help the driver be more procise when pushing on.

and at the end of the day take a look at what the racers are doing. top fuel drag guys mid mount their engines as do F1 and GT racers. front engined cars have come along way in recent future with rear mounted tranmitions and by moving the engines futher rearward. but still look at the top supercars of the past 10-15years, all mid engined!


the fact that the C5R won so many racers was, as always in racing, not just down to the car. it was a well fundered project that was destined to be at the top. but if the new maserati (spel????) was to be allowed to enter the GT it would have show the advantage. and as the press wrote it would lead to the end of the series!

thanks Chris.

 

Do you really think the reason Top-fuelers mid mount their engines is because of weight distribution? Thats not the case. How safe would you feel with an 8,000 horsepower engine rumbling in front of you and the percentage of those motors blowing up in your face. Its called SAFETY.

 

Think about this one.........
What if GM wanted to design a car in the price range of the gt.......

 

Let me ask you two things, what does putting a heavy *** blower on top of a motor do to the center of gravity of a car????? Also what does using an overhead cam motor compared to a pushrod style motor do to the center of gravity of a car.
I'd beat that the Z06 will handle at least comparably to the gt if not better. Just look at the current Z06's handling capabilites, now add better suspension larger rubber and comparable weight.

 

I agree completely. I forget which mag it was, maybe Motortrend; they did a test with the GT vs. the Porshe Carera GT vs. the Ferrari Enzo. If I can remember correctly the Enzo ran 11.0 @ 134, the Porshe ran 11.1 @ 133, and the GT ran 11.2 @ 132. The GT hangs with cars that cost $450,000 and $650,000, repectively. That is very impressive. I have no doubt that the new Z06 will be bad ***, but I don't think it will be able to compete with the Ford GT--it wasn't meant to anyway. The intended competition will be the '07 Ford Cobra. Now that's a whole other thread.

 

12 pages later I'm rofl. This is a gem; reminds me of cross-drilled rotors on altimas.net.

Where do I begin?

The C5-R is dominant for 2 reasons.

First and foremost, the Oreca Viper's quit.
Remember those? I sure do. Fu(kin french fry vipers, good riddance eh?

2nd it's the only factory backed GTS car. When you compare the Saleen S7 and C5 and throw in the mid engine thing (which is clearly misunderstood by multiple people here), you need to understand that the C5-R has -millions- of dollars thrown at it every year while the S7 is not only privateer but has trouble getting replacement parts. In fact, I don’t think ANY team in the LM series had more money thrown at it except Audi/Bentley.

The reason top fuel runs mid engine is not only for safety but more importantly something only 1-2 other people in here with triple digit IQ's understand is power train loss. MR configured cars lose about 5-9% of their power while FR's lose about 15%. When engines start making 1000hp or more at the crank, mid engine layout can save a lot of power otherwise lost. Remember that for later...

Next:

The displacement argument. Yes, we all know more displacement is better. But it’s a 427 SMALL BLOCK. You can hack the **** out of a 5.4L GT engine like GM did to the LS7 and get the same result...that being big displacement from a base small block engine.

Which leads to...

The buy cheaper and invest the difference in mods argument.

Think about this scenario:
The 60 grand difference in MSRP isn’t **** to people buying Ford GT's, especially the idiots buying them right now. Buy a Ford GT, put 60 grand in it, blah blah blah the GT will always be faster and the Z06 will always be cheaper when its all said and done, no matter what bullshit reason you can come up with. There is nothing wrong with the Z06/pushrod engine but if you really think its superior to the GT/quad cam engine you need to get a clue then toss the biases.

Someone figured this out on page 4 or so and all this dribble later I'll say it again:
The C6 Z will always weigh less about 300 lbs less stock and will always be exactly 1/2 the MSRP of the Ford GT. The rest of this is opinions and magazine racing by 90-95% of a thread that won't own a Z06 until heavy depreciation later.

 

The LS7 block is different than a regular LSx block. Notice the "7.0L" stamp on the Caddy and C5-R racing engines. But clearly thats not the only difference. I'm just curious, did u say u can bore and stroke Ford's 5.4 out into a 427? I think im misunderstanding.

The LS7 & LS1/6 are similar in some ways but different in a lot of other ways too. I've never heard of GM "hacking the **** out of" an LS1/6 to get the LS7. Im sure an enormous amount of money went into the R&D of the LS7. GM didnt simply bore and stroke the **** out of any other Genlll to get the LS7.

But anyways, lets get back to bitching about whos daddy can beat up your daddy.

 

Snoozer, i wouldn't go around insulting peoples iq's when you don't even know what you're talking about. Power is not an issue in top fuel cars, it wouldn't make a single difference if they squeezed and extra 6% power wise, they have trouble putting down the power they have now.
Next i want you to tell me why the 5.4l is more advanced than the ls7???? A lot of ford people have a popular misconception that pushrod technology is old and outdated. Let me tell you a few things, first a pushrod motor weighs significantly less than a comparable over head cam motor. Second over head cam motors are more top heavy than pushrod motors which raises the center of gravity of the car hurting handling. Next look at an ohc motor dimension wise, they're freaking huge. Tell me that motor dimensions don't play a large roll in car layout, just go pop the hood of about any current car and you'll see what i'm talking about. Also a pushrod motor in a front engine layout allows for a lower hood line and better aerodynamics.
I find it kind of funny that ford naturally aspirated over head cam motors don't make any more horsepower per liter than gm ones, yet they're larger, weigh more and use more "technology"
Another thing, the ZO6 is going to go for more like a 1/3 of what the gt goes for and still have comparable performance. Damn gm's old outdated technology must be garbage if it can do what ford does for 1/3 the price . God I love these ford guys

 

that might have been humorous if it wasn't followed by:

riiiiight. Way to set the tone of the post

So they wouldn't need all that power anyways if they really did have traction problems as you stated. How exactly are they getting faster over the years if power has nothing to do with it?

Right now it's not; never said it was. I don't care about advanced, what works in a car works. However, since you brought it up, the 5.4 is more advanced in concept and in time will be a better package of an engine design.

But its superior.

Now I want you to tell me how a pushrod engine is going to make more power than a modular one with 4 cams. Same CID vs. same CID.

True, however I'm not one of them. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Thanks for telling me captain obvious, but you forgot better fuel efficiency and friendlier environment emissions.

Just when I thought "power is not an issue in top fuel cars" was dumb...

I'm sure you remember who said this:

"i wouldn't go around insulting peoples iq's when you don't even know what you're talking about. "

With that in mind, look at a stock Mach 1 (4.6L) against a LS1. Same power, same 1/4 mile time. All those bullshit reasons about pushrods listed above along with 1.1L LESS displacement. Math problem here?

There are 4.6 liter modular aluminum block engines that are making more power than any LS1 I've seen. 4.6 4V isn't 10 years old but runs 6's in the 1/4 with all those disadvantages you listed above. Not that it means anything.

Yep, you have a math problem. Since we know the GT's MSRP is 139,000, dividing that by 3 = 46,333. The new Z06 will not MSRP for less than the old one.

And its not that the pushrod technology is old, it’s more developed.

"God I love these ford guys."

Joke's on you. Sad thing is, I own a C5.

 

lmao, I don't know...Did I say you could B/S a 5.4L to 427? Go back and look fool.

I'm still trying to figure out wtf you typed all that for. What are you misunderstanding, me or the relevance of what you typed in response to the quote from my first post?

You must have A.D.D. You hit 3 different subjects in under 5 sentences. Goddamn, this is hilarious

Out of pity I'll half-answer your question. A Modular Ford 5.0 typically max bore/strokes within safe tolerances to 347 cid. Now do the math; if you need help ask stickshift.

Good, cause neither have I, nor did I imply that they did that to a LS1 or a LS6. lol...mabey it was a LS2!?!

Wow, the first sentence that actually applies to something you quoted from my post. The reason I said it like that was to emphasize the LS7 being the biggest small block in GM history.

Sure thing "BJ", the combination of the redundancy of your post coupled with the A.D.D owns me and my daddy.

If you took off your helmet I'd own you

 

The S7 finished every race.
Every race their fastest lap time was 1+ seconds slower than the C5-R
Did they have broken parts in the first race?

What class are the GT's in? What PSI are they going to be running?
If they run the "mid engine" GT in the same comparable power level as the C6-R....Ford will not be first on race day.

That is funny, take the blower off and they are turds.

 

I am confused snoozer about your comment on the Mach 1 doing the same times as a stock LS1. The corvettes and F-bodies have been known to be able to hit 12's in stock form. I am yet to hear of a 100% stock Mach 1 hit 12's. Also the Mach 1's are putting down somewhere between 270-285 to the wheels in manual form. While almost all manual and most auto LS1's put down over 300 stock. And both the F-bodies and vettes weight less than the mach 1. The f-bodies being only about 50 lbs less. But still less weight. But we arent talking about the Mach 1, we are talking about the Ford GT. Which as i have stated before will not be far away from the C6 ZO6. Oh and your argument of OHC has more valves so it has a better potential for power. I guess you do not know but almost all drag cars are OHV and they make massive amounts of power. And you said that the Ford GT will always be faster. But that too is wrong. Any car can be faster than any car. I could throw an *** load of money in my stratus and make it faster than the Ford GT. Also this old technology crap has gotten really old from Ford lovers. The fords jsut got 6-speeds in there cars. They dont have magnetic ride control, HUD, skipshift(even though i hate it). So who is to say there not behind the times. About the only thing they have going for them is they have good rear-ends and i like the wire clutch system better than hydraulic.
I would like to pint out though that i am not a Ford hater or bashing on them. The Mach 1 is a great car for the price as is the new mustang and the Cobra. I still do however think that the Ford GT is overrated and overpriced. I know not considering the foreign supercars. But it is when you go up against the new Z06 and even the Viper. Which before the 50bhp bump there where neck and neck with performance. Remember the new ZO6 is supposed to outperform the Viper. the only question is was the 50bhp bump enough for the Ford GT.

 

snoozer, i actually agree with just about everything you said, except...

the Mach 1 is making 20-40(ish) hp less than stock ls1s, depending on year, but runs similar times due to gearing. 3.55(i believe) rear vs any of the ls1 gears, 2.73-3.23.

 

Speaking of videos, you may have seen the very recent race of a convertible Kenne Bell Cobra (@21 psi) beating a Z06 (427 ci) that was squirting a 75 shot of N20. I wouldn't write off the cobras so quickly (at least in a straight line). Just thought I'd mention it since the new Z06 (and this particular older Z06) have a 427.