Modded c6 v.s. Modded c5-z06
#1
Modded c6 v.s. Modded c5-z06
Squared off against a nice 02 c5-zo6 with heads/cam, fast int v.s. Me head/cam ,fast int ...mods for both
cars were nearly the same ...my c6 makes 490 plus and he said his c5 zo6 was near 500. First run was from a 2nd gear roll we hit it dead even" I would start to pull in the higher rpm range ( 6000 on up to 6800 ) and then he missed 3rd gear...i was gonna put a car on him either way....ran again in 3rd I gave him the hit and stopped his pull , he is a nose ahead...by the time we maxed out 3rd I am a nose ahead , go to 4th and started opening up to a good car length...it was fun as **** running something that was just as fast as I was....maybe his pop up head lights was the difference In drag...lol . His clutch went to the floor but we were done by then...dont know why it went out on him, he only had 20 plus thousand on it...I got well over 50thousand on my clutch???
cars were nearly the same ...my c6 makes 490 plus and he said his c5 zo6 was near 500. First run was from a 2nd gear roll we hit it dead even" I would start to pull in the higher rpm range ( 6000 on up to 6800 ) and then he missed 3rd gear...i was gonna put a car on him either way....ran again in 3rd I gave him the hit and stopped his pull , he is a nose ahead...by the time we maxed out 3rd I am a nose ahead , go to 4th and started opening up to a good car length...it was fun as **** running something that was just as fast as I was....maybe his pop up head lights was the difference In drag...lol . His clutch went to the floor but we were done by then...dont know why it went out on him, he only had 20 plus thousand on it...I got well over 50thousand on my clutch???
Last edited by c6r; 08-15-2010 at 06:58 PM.
#4
Banned
Thought the C5 would have pulled you up top being lighter and more power. But guess it came down to cam choice and aerodynamics. I know those C6's with LS2's pull very well in the mid range epically in 3rd but not up top like you did.
Last edited by NoTractionLS1; 08-15-2010 at 10:08 PM.
#5
TECH Regular
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Da 'Cuse, NY
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice runs...I also thought the C5Z would have pulled ahead up top.
I assume he's on the stock clutch? My stock clutch w/ 20K on it does the same thing when I drive it hard...clutch itself is good, slave or master is going bad.
I assume he's on the stock clutch? My stock clutch w/ 20K on it does the same thing when I drive it hard...clutch itself is good, slave or master is going bad.
Trending Topics
#8
Way to represent the LS2 Vettes! It seems as though people hate on em because of the LS3 when in fact an LS2 vette is a more than capable car. Although, I would agree that the C5Z would have pulled maybe his numbers were on a more generous dyno?
#9
Banned
But the reason they put the LS2 on the 05-06 is b/c GM did not want the new corvette to beat the C5Z and keep it's customer happy. The LS2 is a good engine but the LS3 is a great engine.
#10
Moderator
iTrader: (15)
Sweet kill. C5Z's actually have worse Cd (drag) than C5's and the C6 (.27 I believe) is far better than both so with the same power and the additional displacement (5.7 vs 6.0) it makes perfect sense that it would pull up top.
He needs to keep the clutch fluid clean, here get familiar with Ranger's method, everyone with a GM hyd clutch.
http://www.rangeracceleration.com/Clutch_Care.html
I clean(ed) mine every other weekend since the fluid was black when I got it. Once clean (1 full bottle), at 500rwhp no more clutch hang ups when speed shifting at WOT, though a heavier aftermarket clutch would help as well.
For the record, the only reason the LS2 C6 has a "weak" rap is it followed the C5Z which is a brutal car in stock form, and plauged with the weakest LSX intake (LS2) of all and the horrible TM on the LS2's, they still do well. Simply install a FAST intake (eliminating the LS2 stocker flow retardation) and yank some of the TM on an LS2 and they will run great.
He needs to keep the clutch fluid clean, here get familiar with Ranger's method, everyone with a GM hyd clutch.
http://www.rangeracceleration.com/Clutch_Care.html
I clean(ed) mine every other weekend since the fluid was black when I got it. Once clean (1 full bottle), at 500rwhp no more clutch hang ups when speed shifting at WOT, though a heavier aftermarket clutch would help as well.
For the record, the only reason the LS2 C6 has a "weak" rap is it followed the C5Z which is a brutal car in stock form, and plauged with the weakest LSX intake (LS2) of all and the horrible TM on the LS2's, they still do well. Simply install a FAST intake (eliminating the LS2 stocker flow retardation) and yank some of the TM on an LS2 and they will run great.
Last edited by JayplaySS; 08-16-2010 at 09:04 AM.
#11
thanks for the info on the clutch fluid deal...i agree the torque management and intake were the weak links on the ls-2 and the major power advantage for the ls-3 is the cylinder heads, and the block is stronger
#12
Banned
Sweet kill. C5Z's actually have worse Cd (drag) than C5's and the C6 (.27 I believe) is far better than both so with the same power and the additional displacement (5.7 vs 6.0) it makes perfect sense that it would pull up top.
He needs to keep the clutch fluid clean, here get familiar with Ranger's method, everyone with a GM hyd clutch.
http://www.rangeracceleration.com/Clutch_Care.html
I clean(ed) mine every other weekend since the fluid was black when I got it. Once clean (1 full bottle), at 500rwhp no more clutch hang ups when speed shifting at WOT, though a heavier aftermarket clutch would help as well.
For the record, the only reason the LS2 C6 has a "weak" rap is it followed the C5Z which is a brutal car in stock form, and plauged with the weakest LSX intake (LS2) of all and the horrible TM on the LS2's, they still do well. Simply install a FAST intake (eliminating the LS2 stocker flow retardation) and yank some of the TM on an LS2 and they will run great.
He needs to keep the clutch fluid clean, here get familiar with Ranger's method, everyone with a GM hyd clutch.
http://www.rangeracceleration.com/Clutch_Care.html
I clean(ed) mine every other weekend since the fluid was black when I got it. Once clean (1 full bottle), at 500rwhp no more clutch hang ups when speed shifting at WOT, though a heavier aftermarket clutch would help as well.
For the record, the only reason the LS2 C6 has a "weak" rap is it followed the C5Z which is a brutal car in stock form, and plauged with the weakest LSX intake (LS2) of all and the horrible TM on the LS2's, they still do well. Simply install a FAST intake (eliminating the LS2 stocker flow retardation) and yank some of the TM on an LS2 and they will run great.
Thanks for the cool video. Funny thing is I just did that yesterday the exact same way I asked around the best way of cleaning it but no one responded on my thread.
#13
TECH Addict
iTrader: (7)
Great runs. I love both the C5 Z06's and the C6 Vettes. If I had the money, I'd have a tough time choosing between an LS2 Vette and the C5 Z06 (and obviously I'd grab an LS3 before either of them). I like the light weight of the C5 Z better, but the C6 Vettes just look head and shoulders better IMO, plus I like the interiors of the C6's more (not that they're anything special, but I really don't like the C5 Z interior at all).
#15
He got his clutch issue sorted out...we will run again for sure, saw a gtr nissan parked beside me at a buffalo wild wings...waited 15min 2 c if he would come out...no luck , can't wait to try one from a role...lol
#16
Banned
#18
Id say....
LS1=LS2
LS6<LS2&LS1
LS3<LS6<LS2&LS1
Some are gonna argue with me on the LS1 and LS2 being equal...But the LS1 IMHO is the best engine ever built..
From what I saw the LS1 wettes were 300 rwhp and the LS2 vettes were 330 rwhp..But due to bad pcm management on the LS2's they didnt really seem any faster...
LS1=LS2
LS6<LS2&LS1
LS3<LS6<LS2&LS1
Some are gonna argue with me on the LS1 and LS2 being equal...But the LS1 IMHO is the best engine ever built..
From what I saw the LS1 wettes were 300 rwhp and the LS2 vettes were 330 rwhp..But due to bad pcm management on the LS2's they didnt really seem any faster...
#19
Id say....
LS1=LS2
LS6<LS2&LS1
LS3<LS6<LS2&LS1
Some are gonna argue with me on the LS1 and LS2 being equal...But the LS1 IMHO is the best engine ever built..
From what I saw the LS1 wettes were 300 rwhp and the LS2 vettes were 330 rwhp..But due to bad pcm management on the LS2's they didnt really seem any faster...
LS1=LS2
LS6<LS2&LS1
LS3<LS6<LS2&LS1
Some are gonna argue with me on the LS1 and LS2 being equal...But the LS1 IMHO is the best engine ever built..
From what I saw the LS1 wettes were 300 rwhp and the LS2 vettes were 330 rwhp..But due to bad pcm management on the LS2's they didnt really seem any faster...
Then you go on to say that the LS6 is less than the LS1 and LS2... which is even more confusing since the LS6 and LS1 are both 5.7's and the LS6 makes more power and revs higher...
Then you go on to even further confuse the **** out of me by saying the LS3 is less than the LS6 which is less than the LS2 and LS1...
I am thoroughly confused.
Let's put it simply...
The LS1 has 241 castings and 5.7L displacement.
The LS6 has 243 castings, 5.7L and a better cam.
The LS2 has 243 castings, 6.0 and the same cam as the 405hp LS6...
The LS3 has ridiculous heads and 6.2L...
I'm very very confused...
All you need to do is look at dyno charts of each motor at various power levels. That is solid proof as to what motor is better.
#20
So an LS1 is equal to an LS2? Other than your opinion what ground do you have to stand on?
Then you go on to say that the LS6 is less than the LS1 and LS2... which is even more confusing since the LS6 and LS1 are both 5.7's and the LS6 makes more power and revs higher...
Then you go on to even further confuse the **** out of me by saying the LS3 is less than the LS6 which is less than the LS2 and LS1...
I am thoroughly confused.
Let's put it simply...
The LS1 has 241 castings and 5.7L displacement.
The LS6 has 243 castings, 5.7L and a better cam.
The LS2 has 243 castings, 6.0 and the same cam as the 405hp LS6...
The LS3 has ridiculous heads and 6.2L...
I'm very very confused...
All you need to do is look at dyno charts of each motor at various power levels. That is solid proof as to what motor is better.
Then you go on to say that the LS6 is less than the LS1 and LS2... which is even more confusing since the LS6 and LS1 are both 5.7's and the LS6 makes more power and revs higher...
Then you go on to even further confuse the **** out of me by saying the LS3 is less than the LS6 which is less than the LS2 and LS1...
I am thoroughly confused.
Let's put it simply...
The LS1 has 241 castings and 5.7L displacement.
The LS6 has 243 castings, 5.7L and a better cam.
The LS2 has 243 castings, 6.0 and the same cam as the 405hp LS6...
The LS3 has ridiculous heads and 6.2L...
I'm very very confused...
All you need to do is look at dyno charts of each motor at various power levels. That is solid proof as to what motor is better.
I am thinking maybe he has his greater than/less than signs backwards. He really means that LS3>LS6>LS2&LS1, am I right Killemall? If I am, remember tha alligator (<) always wants to eat the bigger or greater value, lol.
Although I do not agree with the LS1 being equal to the LS2. There is no way in hell anyone in their right mind thinks the LS3 worse than the LS1 or LS2.