Got into an argument with my buddy. Help please!
08-25-2005 | 11:11 AM
#41
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,799
Likes: 16
From: St.Charles MO
Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton
Remember bald or part worn tyres have a greater surface contact area and less tread roll, so you should see better times/g's over new road tyres.
As for measuring g's it depends. On how, a Skyline has a g meter and if you fling it hard enough at speed into a powerslide it will clock over 1.1g, however if you where driving around a 50foot circle until grip was lost I doubt it would make the same number.
Driver is certainly the biggest factor here. An example would be Top Gear. An Damon Hill drove a 100bhp Susuki saloon round the track quicker than 'average Jo' could probably hussle a Porshce 911 around there.
Also they went to the Nurburgring in Germany, where a very attractive German lady drove a diesel Ford Transit van round the track quicker than a lot of superbikes/cars make it round the 13+miles.
On equal footing on a sprint, road course or circiut with equal drivers a 528 wouldn't stand a chance. It may be slightly better on the breaks and exiting the corners but it doesn't have the straight line speed.
As people have said, the live rear is the limiting factor. On smooth surfaces (read race track) they are fine. But will never beable to react like IRS to uneven sufaces, plus the refinment for a road car with a live rear will always be worse by a considerable margin.
Weight is usually the biggest killer, if you could shave 600kg (1200+lb) off of the Fbody it would make one hell of a difference.
For this reason a 190bhp Lotus Exige and lap slightly faster than a 400bhp Corvette C6.
As for measuring g's it depends. On how, a Skyline has a g meter and if you fling it hard enough at speed into a powerslide it will clock over 1.1g, however if you where driving around a 50foot circle until grip was lost I doubt it would make the same number.
Driver is certainly the biggest factor here. An example would be Top Gear. An Damon Hill drove a 100bhp Susuki saloon round the track quicker than 'average Jo' could probably hussle a Porshce 911 around there.
Also they went to the Nurburgring in Germany, where a very attractive German lady drove a diesel Ford Transit van round the track quicker than a lot of superbikes/cars make it round the 13+miles.
On equal footing on a sprint, road course or circiut with equal drivers a 528 wouldn't stand a chance. It may be slightly better on the breaks and exiting the corners but it doesn't have the straight line speed.
As people have said, the live rear is the limiting factor. On smooth surfaces (read race track) they are fine. But will never beable to react like IRS to uneven sufaces, plus the refinment for a road car with a live rear will always be worse by a considerable margin.
Weight is usually the biggest killer, if you could shave 600kg (1200+lb) off of the Fbody it would make one hell of a difference.
For this reason a 190bhp Lotus Exige and lap slightly faster than a 400bhp Corvette C6.
C6: 7:59
Exige: 8:32
(and just for kicks) C5 Z06: 7:56
And even on the Lotus designed track that Top Gear uses:
Corvette C6 (MSRC): 1:26.8
Lotus Exige 1.26.9
And did you see how the "stig" was driving too? It looked like he was drunk...
08-25-2005 | 06:01 PM
#42
Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton
Remember bald or part worn tyres have a greater surface contact area and less tread roll, so you should see better times/g's over new road tyres.
Some race tires are good to the belts, like Kumho V710's; other loose grip when the tread layer gets thin (like Hoosier road race slicks.)
08-25-2005 | 10:11 PM
#43
On The Tree
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 145
Likes: 1
From: Everett
Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton
As people have said, the live rear is the limiting factor. On smooth surfaces (read race track) they are fine.
Weight, HP and Aero "limit" the F-Body far, far, far, far more than the live rear does. Significant improvements in any of those areas are going to make for a faster car than any IRS would--even on a "bumpy" track.
08-26-2005 | 08:16 AM
#44
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 13
From: England
Originally Posted by Cal
That really depends on which tire you are talking about, but for most street tires you start hitting a harder rubber compound when the tread is worn down to being bald. Half worn street tires have better traction than bald ones do. Don't go racing on bald street tires, they are not slicks!
Some race tires are good to the belts, like Kumho V710's; other loose grip when the tread layer gets thin (like Hoosier road race slicks.)
Some race tires are good to the belts, like Kumho V710's; other loose grip when the tread layer gets thin (like Hoosier road race slicks.)
But yes you are correct, bald tyres or not slicks.
08-26-2005 | 08:20 AM
#45
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 13
From: England
Originally Posted by Jon A
And "people" can be wrong. Anybody who thinks all racetracks are smooth needs to take a few laps around my home track.
Weight, HP and Aero "limit" the F-Body far, far, far, far more than the live rear does. Significant improvements in any of those areas are going to make for a faster car than any IRS would--even on a "bumpy" track.
Weight, HP and Aero "limit" the F-Body far, far, far, far more than the live rear does. Significant improvements in any of those areas are going to make for a faster car than any IRS would--even on a "bumpy" track.
Weight and rolling chassis are undoubtably the biggest limiting factors outside of the driver.
08-26-2005 | 08:30 AM
#46
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 13
From: England
Originally Posted by JD_AMG
FYI, the C6 (Z51) laps faster at the N-ring than an Exige:
C6: 7:59
Exige: 8:32
(and just for kicks) C5 Z06: 7:56
And even on the Lotus designed track that Top Gear uses:
Corvette C6 (MSRC): 1:26.8
Lotus Exige 1.26.9
And did you see how the "stig" was driving too? It looked like he was drunk...
C6: 7:59
Exige: 8:32
(and just for kicks) C5 Z06: 7:56
And even on the Lotus designed track that Top Gear uses:
Corvette C6 (MSRC): 1:26.8
Lotus Exige 1.26.9
And did you see how the "stig" was driving too? It looked like he was drunk...
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
It looks like you where quoting the time for the Merc SL55 as that did do a 1:26.9
click here to see all lap times
The Nurburgring time for the C6 certainly looks good, but personally it doesn't add up. On the Top gear track a Merc SLR can pull a 7 second faster lap, yet it manages no better over the full 13 miles at Nordschillfe (sp?).
May the SLR had a bad lap or the Vette was running trick tyres
08-26-2005 | 12:59 PM
#48
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,799
Likes: 16
From: St.Charles MO
Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton
according to the Top Gear website the Exige beat the C6:
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
It looks like you where quoting the time for the Merc SL55 as that did do a 1:26.9
click here to see all lap times
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
It looks like you where quoting the time for the Merc SL55 as that did do a 1:26.9
click here to see all lap times
And like I said, keep in mind that is not the Z51 Corvette, but the MSRC model.
The Nurburgring time for the C6 certainly looks good, but personally it doesn't add up. On the Top gear track a Merc SLR can pull a 7 second faster lap, yet it manages no better over the full 13 miles at Nordschillfe (sp?).
May the SLR had a bad lap or the Vette was running trick tyres
May the SLR had a bad lap or the Vette was running trick tyres
Consider that the times on the n-ring are all done with different drivers, unlike TopGear.
One last thing, consider that the Corvette is running runflat tires, while the Exige is running practically race tires.
08-29-2005 | 04:42 PM
#51
Teching In
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
From: Under your bed
gaw I love the N-ring.
8min some odd second run
slower then the C5/C6 posted.
but how does the C5/C6 hold up on 24 hours of running?
M3-GTR
C6
And I looked at those SCCA race states. And yup! the M3 got 'owned.'
The M3 is heavy and is the I6. the M3-GTR is extreamly light and has a V8 in it.
-----------------------------
As for the IRS, its why the bmw is made for cornering. But then again I've had a suspention WAY to tight, 1,100 pounds!!!! and stearing was nearly imposible, I spent more time counter correcting my self Vs, well stearing. bringing the spring/rebound/damp rate it a manageble 800pounds Greatly improved things.
note: Intrax springs, GREAT for 2 inch drop, are horrid HORRID springs for anything other then looking good.
8min some odd second run
slower then the C5/C6 posted.
but how does the C5/C6 hold up on 24 hours of running?
M3-GTR
C6And I looked at those SCCA race states. And yup! the M3 got 'owned.'
The M3 is heavy and is the I6. the M3-GTR is extreamly light and has a V8 in it.
-----------------------------
As for the IRS, its why the bmw is made for cornering. But then again I've had a suspention WAY to tight, 1,100 pounds!!!! and stearing was nearly imposible, I spent more time counter correcting my self Vs, well stearing. bringing the spring/rebound/damp rate it a manageble 800pounds Greatly improved things.
note: Intrax springs, GREAT for 2 inch drop, are horrid HORRID springs for anything other then looking good.
08-30-2005 | 05:41 AM
#52
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 13
From: England
Originally Posted by JD_AMG
Actually I was quoting from a different site, supercars.net.
And like I said, keep in mind that is not the Z51 Corvette, but the MSRC model.
And like I said, keep in mind that is not the Z51 Corvette, but the MSRC model.
08-30-2005 | 06:18 AM
#53
Originally Posted by erikerikerik
the M3-GTR is extreamly light and has a V8 in it.
You are comparing a factory race car to a production car ... that's hardly apples to apples ...
As far a 24 hour run, look up C5R LeMans and Daytona ...
08-30-2005 | 11:29 AM
#54
TECH Resident
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
From: Mehlingen, Germany
Originally Posted by erikerikerik
gaw I love the N-ring.
8min some odd second run
slower then the C5/C6 posted.
but how does the C5/C6 hold up on 24 hours of running?
M3-GTR C6
And I looked at those SCCA race states. And yup! the M3 got 'owned.'
The M3 is heavy and is the I6. the M3-GTR is extreamly light and has a V8 in it.
-----------------------------
As for the IRS, its why the bmw is made for cornering. But then again I've had a suspention WAY to tight, 1,100 pounds!!!! and stearing was nearly imposible, I spent more time counter correcting my self Vs, well stearing. bringing the spring/rebound/damp rate it a manageble 800pounds Greatly improved things.
note: Intrax springs, GREAT for 2 inch drop, are horrid HORRID springs for anything other then looking good.
8min some odd second run
slower then the C5/C6 posted.
but how does the C5/C6 hold up on 24 hours of running?
M3-GTR
C6And I looked at those SCCA race states. And yup! the M3 got 'owned.'
The M3 is heavy and is the I6. the M3-GTR is extreamly light and has a V8 in it.
-----------------------------
As for the IRS, its why the bmw is made for cornering. But then again I've had a suspention WAY to tight, 1,100 pounds!!!! and stearing was nearly imposible, I spent more time counter correcting my self Vs, well stearing. bringing the spring/rebound/damp rate it a manageble 800pounds Greatly improved things.
note: Intrax springs, GREAT for 2 inch drop, are horrid HORRID springs for anything other then looking good.
08-31-2005 | 03:08 AM
#56
TECH Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 13
From: England
Originally Posted by JD_AMG
So Ive heard.
But I was told that the Corvette tested was a MSRC for whatever reason.
But I was told that the Corvette tested was a MSRC for whatever reason.
But a lap that fast from such a comarably cheap car is still very impressive, only the TVR Sagaris really over shadows the Vette as it costs about £4000 less than a C6.
11-29-2005 | 04:05 AM
#57
TECH Apprentice
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
From: Bessemer City NC
Originally Posted by Jon A
And yet the F-Body, with a relatively stock suspension, has been more than a match for the M3 in recent years in SCCA T2 (even with a restrictor on the LS1!):
http://ww2.scca.com/clubresults.php?ID=199
http://www.scca.org/_Filelibrary/File/t2finalrace.pdf
Etc...
Funny how things are different at the track than the magazine-racing world would lead you to believe.
http://ww2.scca.com/clubresults.php?ID=199
http://www.scca.org/_Filelibrary/File/t2finalrace.pdf
Etc...
Funny how things are different at the track than the magazine-racing world would lead you to believe.
