Generation IV Internal Engine 2005-2014 LS2 | LS3 | LS7 | L92 | LS9

C6 ZO6 Top Speed Question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-02-2005, 04:32 PM
  #1  
Teching In
Thread Starter
 
Given To Fly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default C6 ZO6 Top Speed Question

I have the October issue of Car and Driver here and something puzzles me:

Gear Speed in Gears
I 59 mph (7000 rpm)
II 88 mph (7000 rpm)
III 121 mph (7000 rpm)
IV 157 mph (7000 rpm)
V 198 mph (6500 rpm)
VI 160 mph (3600 rpm)


What's with the 6500 rpm in 5th gear? Why don't they use 7000 like the rest of the gears (except 6th)? It seems the top speed would be higher or am I missing something?
Old 10-02-2005, 04:35 PM
  #2  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (16)
 
ss1129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ft Lupton, CO
Posts: 1,517
Received 22 Likes on 18 Posts

Default

um...I think i was watching the building of the c6 corvette and they hit 180 in a non z06 version. I could be wrong though. I will watch it again.
Old 10-02-2005, 04:40 PM
  #3  
TECH Junkie
 
BlueSix's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: its fucking cold
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

There is a good chance the car simply won't pull past 6500 rpm in 5th.
Old 10-02-2005, 04:42 PM
  #4  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Ryan02SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lake Anna, VA/ Fairmont, WV
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

More than likely aerodynamics. The Fbody platform becomes aerodynamically dead after 170mph.
Old 10-02-2005, 04:50 PM
  #5  
TECH Regular
 
John McGraw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Blue six is exactly correct. There just ain't enough power left to pull beyond 6500 in 5th. A lot of people just do not understand the relationship between speed and frictional loss associated with it. The frictional loss goes up by the square of the velocity, if all else is equal. If it takes 100 horsepower to make a particular car go 100 mph, it will take 400 hp to make that same car go 200! This is why aerodynamics is so important, if you can lower the CD, you can travel faster without the need for more horsepower.

Regards, John McGraw

Last edited by John McGraw; 10-02-2005 at 09:13 PM.
Old 10-02-2005, 05:37 PM
  #6  
TECH Fanatic
 
gun5l1ng3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Laguna Niguel, CA
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

So, then how much extra HP would the ZO6 need to break the awesome 200MPH barrier. Are we talking about a set of long tube headers, or a radical cam. I would think that 2 mph could definitley be added to the top speed with just a set of headers or even a computer tune.
Old 10-02-2005, 06:34 PM
  #7  
10 Second Club
 
Gary Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Berkeley, California
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

I think the truth is that the C6 Z06 can exceed 200 MPH without modification.

Last edited by Gary Z; 10-02-2005 at 06:43 PM.
Old 10-02-2005, 06:58 PM
  #8  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (12)
 
Wnts2Go10O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 4,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

limiter maybe?
Old 10-02-2005, 08:31 PM
  #9  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
P Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by John McGraw
Blue six is exactly correct. There just ain't enough power left to pull beyond 6500 in 5th. A lot of people just do not understand the relationship between speed and frictional loss associated with it. The frictional loss goes up by the square of the velocity, if all else is equal. If it takes 25 horsepower to make a particular car go 100 mph, it will take 625 hp to make that same car go 200! This is why aerodynamics is so important, if you can lower the CD, you can travel faster without the need for more horsepower.

Regards, John McGraw
You made a couple different math errors there.
Old 10-02-2005, 09:16 PM
  #10  
TECH Regular
 
John McGraw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

P Mack,
You are absolutely correct, I squared the horsepower instead of just multiplying it X 4 ! Duh! Corrected now.
Old 10-02-2005, 09:41 PM
  #11  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
P Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

One more thing, it is force (drag) that is related to velocity^2. Power is a function of velocity^3. For the purpose of this thread, power = drag * velocity.
Old 10-02-2005, 10:10 PM
  #12  
TECH Regular
 
John McGraw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

P Mack,
I knew the Qubeing formula was used in centrifigual fan calculations, but I did not know that it applied here. I allways just thought that it was a simple square of the velocity. So, if I understand you correctly, a 100 hp at 100 mph would be 800 hp at 200mph?

Regards, John McGraw

Last edited by John McGraw; 10-02-2005 at 10:23 PM.
Old 10-02-2005, 10:22 PM
  #13  
TECH Regular
 
John McGraw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

P Mack,
Never mind. After thinking about it, it only makes sense! I was thinking of force (drag), but totally discounting the effects of velocity.

Regards, John McGraw
Old 10-02-2005, 10:28 PM
  #14  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
P Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

edit: sorry, I hijacked the thread

Last edited by P Mack; 10-02-2005 at 11:00 PM.
Old 10-02-2005, 10:44 PM
  #15  
Teching In
Thread Starter
 
Given To Fly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Old 10-02-2005, 11:09 PM
  #16  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
P Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

To get back on topic, the reason it only goes to 6500 in fifth is because at 7000 rpm it would be going about 213 mph. And to do that would take roughly 25% more horsepower. Instead of 505 hp at 6500 rpm, it would need around 630 hp at 7000 rpm.
Old 10-02-2005, 11:50 PM
  #17  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Richiec77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I play with Sand!!
Posts: 1,799
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by P Mack
To get back on topic, the reason it only goes to 6500 in fifth is because at 7000 rpm it would be going about 213 mph. And to do that would take roughly 25% more horsepower. Instead of 505 hp at 6500 rpm, it would need around 630 hp at 7000 rpm.
Hmmm. With bolt-on, Cam, Headers, tune; it might do that.
Old 10-03-2005, 12:20 AM
  #18  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
BigBronco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 10,591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

should be interesting to see what it can do
Old 10-03-2005, 10:06 AM
  #19  
Launching!
 
StickSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Hi All: I think the reason it didn't go over 200 mph is more to do with limitations of the stock ECM and speed sensor. I don't think it is calibrated for over 200 mph operation. If you could recalibrated the ECM and sensor I think you would see a higher top end? Maybe FAST will come out with an aftermarket unit for these motors? Just my thoughts I could be wrong. Bye
Old 10-03-2005, 12:59 PM
  #20  
Teching In
Thread Starter
 
Given To Fly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Is there some politics involved too? If a car has a claimed top speed of 200 mph or more does something happen? (Insurance, price, etc.) I mean, 198 is so close that it seems Chevy could have made a very minute change to push it over 200, or do they just not care?


Quick Reply: C6 ZO6 Top Speed Question



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:22 AM.