[Towerworld]

Originally Posted by The HACK

The CFTP did it in 1:56xx, not 1:59.68. The 1:59.68 time is for the BASE GT500, which is no slouch.

Oh really thought it was CFP in the video because of the carbon wheels, large wing, white recaros and rear seat delete?

[The HACK]

Originally Posted by Towerworld

Oh really thought it was CFP in the video because of the carbon wheels, large wing, white recaros and rear seat delete?

https://www.motortrend.com/news/chev...ck-comparison/

Scroll to the bottom and look at the table.

[Towerworld]

Originally Posted by The HACK

https://www.motortrend.com/news/chev...ck-comparison/

Scroll to the bottom and look at the table.

Oh i didnt see that ok, kind of disappointing time i suppose for the c8. Im sure however the c8 z06 will murder any version of gt500 though.

[The HACK]

Originally Posted by Towerworld

Oh i didnt see that ok, kind of disappointing time i suppose for the c8. Im sure however the c8 z06 will murder any version of gt500 though.

Disappointing?!

Wow.

Anything remotely close to 2 minutes for a street car should be celebrated on VIR Full Course. That's a 3.3 mile long course with a great mix of turns at different speeds and is a fantastic test for cars with a good combination of handles and power.

For a point of reference, a Dodge Viper GTS MK-V would do 1:57 and change there. That's a full aero race-car disguised as a street car on slick tires.

Let that sink in, and have some perspective please.

I suppose that if one were to be disappointed by a $60K street car can come within 3 seconds and change of the mighty Viper GTS, one can be disappointed by anything.

Perspective, people.

[Towerworld]

Originally Posted by The HACK

Disappointing?!

Wow.

Anything remotely close to 2 minutes for a street car should be celebrated on VIR Full Course. That's a 3.3 mile long course with a great mix of turns at different speeds and is a fantastic test for cars with a good combination of handles and power.

For a point of reference, a Dodge Viper GTS MK-V would do 1:57 and change there. That's a full aero race-car disguised as a street car on slick tires.

Let that sink in, and have some perspective please.

I suppose that if one were to be disappointed by a $60K street car can come within 3 seconds and change of the mighty Viper GTS, one can be disappointed by anything.

Perspective, people.

No its a good time overall i agree, its disappointing to me that the nose heavy 4200 Pound mustang is faster. I guess Ford’s done an amazing job on the suspension and Transmission.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Towerworld

No its a good time overall i agree, its disappointing to me that the nose heavy 4200 Pound mustang is faster. I guess Ford's done an amazing job on the suspension and Transmission.

And it has 50% more power and wildly better tires.

[Towerworld]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

And it has 50% more power and wildly better tires.

The regular gt500 has the same p4s tires. But i suppose the power makes a huge difference.

[N54Yankee]

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-car...e-is-so-quick/

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by N54Yankee

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-car...e-is-so-quick/

All lies. 50/50 is perfect and a rearward bias is failed engineering!


Where is the resident Vette basher?

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

All lies. 50/50 is perfect and a rearward bias is failed engineering!


Where is the resident Vette basher?

50/50 does not tell the whole story. It's just a number. The distribution of weight in the car - high or low center of gravity and so on that cannot be summarized in just one number.

Ideally the engine should be right at the center of the car. Both cars may have 50/50, the one with the engine in the middle will be better than the car with the engine up front.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by WestRace

50/50 does not tell the whole story. It's just a number. The distribution of weight in the car - high or low center of gravity and so on that cannot be summarized in just one number.

Ideally the engine should be right at the center of the car. Both cars may have 50/50, the one with the engine in the middle will be better than the car with the engine up front.

You're talking about polar moments, and it's a valid point. However a 40/60 bias will be faster than a 50/50 bias for all of the reasons listed in the article above. Obviously there's a point of diminishing returns to rearward bias, but no one ever built a mid engine car and brought it back to 50/50 for a reason.

The benefit of 50/50 in a front engine car is that once underway, it behaves closer to a rear heavy car. There's a reason that FD RX7's were about the same balance as a Boxster although they clearly could have kept more weight on the nose if your science was factual.

[N54Yankee]

50/50 W.D. is pretty much a ridiculous mantra spoken by many on car forums. Now I know some guys are adverse to hearing about sports cars and track numbers but if one broadens their horizons past individual feelings the vast majority of best sports cars are not all that close to 50/50. For example, The Porsche GT3, which no one with functioning gray matter would call a bad handling car sports has a WD of around 60:40 yet it’s called one of the premier handing street legal cars and the pinnacle of handling. We see members right on this forum pronounce proudly that their 128’s have 50:50 yet they are far from superb handling cars, and my 135i the same.

There are many other street legal cars that tear up tracks that don’t measure up to that magical balance, a lot more than do hit that ‘perfect balance’ mark. Not even F1 cars are 50:50. Yes there are many other factors that contribute to a sports cars handling prowess and 50:50 is far from the top of the list. Almost irrelevant other then pointless bragging rights on forums.

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by N54Yankee

50/50 W.D. is pretty much a ridiculous mantra spoken by many on car forums. Now I know some guys are adverse to hearing about sports cars and track numbers but if one broadens their horizons past individual feelings the vast majority of best sports cars are not all that close to 50/50. For example, The Porsche GT3, which no one with functioning gray matter would call a bad handling car sports has a WD of around 60:40 yet it’s called one of the premier handing street legal cars and the pinnacle of handling. We see members right on this forum pronounce proudly that their 128’s have 50:50 yet they are far from superb handling cars, and my 135i the same.

There are many other street legal cars that tear up tracks that don’t measure up to that magical balance, a lot more than do hit that ‘perfect balance’ mark. Not even F1 cars are 50:50. Yes there are many other factors that contribute to a sports cars handling prowess and 50:50 is far from the top of the list. Almost irrelevant other then pointless bragging rights on forums.

Just don't let the GT3 kill you lols. They aren't called widow maker for nothing. Kind of funny this guy who swears by the Corvette now saying 50/50 are crap.

[Red Bread]

Man, even my 78 year old dad stopped using that term years ago. Pretty much anything from the 993 forward is pretty tame. The 964 is another story. But that's a nearly 30 year span of the term not applying.

[WestRace]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Man, even my 78 year old dad stopped using that term years ago. Pretty much anything from the 993 forward is pretty tame. The 964 is another story. But that's a nearly 30 year span of the term not applying.

No doubt they've been improving on it for sure. Nobody is arguing about 50/50 or 60/40. Anyway, as for the GT3, it's a good sport car not because the engine at the rear, but in spite of it. Having an engine either right in the front, or right at the rear end is probably not ideal. There's a million reasons why a car is a good sport car and the weight distribution is one part of the equation.

[N54Yankee]

Originally Posted by WestRace

Just don't let the GT3 kill you lols. They aren't called widow maker for nothing. Kind of funny this guy who swears by the Corvette now saying 50/50 are crap.

It’s the GT2 that’s usually referred to as widow maker and I never said 50/50 was crap. Yes recent generations of Corvette dances right on the knifes edge of 50/50 but it’s not the most important factor to Corvette success on tracks. It’s the complete package that makes them perform very well. W.D. is down the list. But you know that’s what I said, you have to throw crap in there to put a dishonest spin on what I said. You should run for Congress.

[WestRace]

With respect to the C8 lap time on the VIR full course, I then looked up on the web the lap time on VIR full course but the only entry came up was the Viper ACR MKV, but it was driven by Ralph Gilles who is not a professional racer.

I then looked the Viper lap time at Laguna Seca driven by Pobst, and it was faster than the 720S, and only one second slower than the McLaren Senna. So comparing the C8 lap time at VIR full course driven by Pobst to the Viper may not be so accurate.

I wished they could have used the same configuration by Car and Driver Lighting Laps so we have a larger sampling data to compare.

Laguna Seca lap times driven by Pobst:
https://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna-seca-post-1988

Viper ACR MKV - 1:28:65
911 GT2 RS - 1:28:30
McLaren Senna - 1:27:62

[RM7]

Originally Posted by N54Yankee

It’s the GT2 that’s usually referred to as widow maker and I never said 50/50 was crap. Yes recent generations of Corvette dances right on the knifes edge of 50/50 but it’s not the most important factor to Corvette success on tracks. It’s the complete package that makes them perform very well. W.D. is down the list. But you know that’s what I said, you have to throw crap in there to put a dishonest spin on what I said. You should run for Congress.

I don't think that's even right, the original porsche "widowmaker", apart from everything that was already tail-happy, was the 930, the dynamics of which included massive turbo lag and the ability to kill people around turns. The GT2 was a far more refined version many models later and wasn't the "widowmaker", although far from benign.

[M5Rick]

Well impressed with this pre production model.

[DieGrüneHölle]

A couple media outlets are now reporting the C8 did 7:28 at Nurburgring.

If true, only 1 sec off C7 Grand Sport equipped with stage 3 Z07 aero, carbon ceramics, and cup2 tires. Z51 C7 had time of 7:33.

[5.M0NSTER]

Originally Posted by DieGrüneHölle

A couple media outlets are now reporting the C8 did 7:28 at Nurburgring.

If true, only 1 sec off C7 Grand Sport equipped with stage 3 Z07 aero, carbon ceramics, and cup2 tires. Z51 C7 had time of 7:33.

It would make sense though, better balance and more HP. Can't wait for the track focused versions!

[N54Yankee]

https://www.freep.com/in-depth/money...es/2731619001/