Corvette Z06 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am dying to hear how the C6Z06 will do at Nurburgring. Any forum member in Germany, please go camp out at the Ring and bring us up to date. :jammin:

I am guessing the new Z will clock in at 7:38~7:42. I arrived that by looking at a graphic of the Ring. There are several long straights that the new Z's extra 100hp should easily cut the times down by 10~12 sec. Then the much better break of the LS7 should gain another few sec. So I am predicting a sub 7:40 time.

In a way, I think the Ring time will be by far the most indictive # we will have about the new Z. Can't wait! :cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
TetraU said:
I am dying to hear how the C6Z06 will do at Nurburgring. Any forum member in Germany, please go camp out at the Ring and bring us up to date. :jammin:

I am guessing the new Z will clock in at 7:38~7:42. I arrived that by looking at a graphic of the Ring. There are several long straights that the new Z's extra 100hp should easily cut the times down by 10~12 sec. Then the much better break of the LS7 should gain another few sec. So I am predicting a sub 7:40 time.

In a way, I think the Ring time will be by far the most indictive # we will have about the new Z. Can't wait! :cheers:

Nurburgring, Is what sets a true sports car apart from muscle pony cars, and turbocharged Ricers, and the true purpose that the z06 was built :jammin:

Wow! 7:38 would be amazing, but I think around 7:45 may be more realistic.. But I sure hope you are correct.

Below are some nurburgring lap times i've found for reference:

7:06 --- BMW M3 GTR, 24hrs, test session, Jörg Müller (2003)
7:18.1-- Donkervoort D8 RS (12/2004)
7:19 --- Radical SR3 Turbo (2003), >>> Link (http://www.radicalmotorsport.com/news_folder/nordchliefe/index.php)
7:20* -- Opel Astra DTM V8 Coupe, set-up for 24hrs race (sport auto 2003) *estimated
7:25 --- Alzen Motorsport Porsche 996, 24hrs race, Uwe Alzen
7:28 --- Porsche Carrera GT, Walther Röhrl, Autobild July 2004 >>> Link (http://supercarfreak.net/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album285)
7:32.4 -- Porsche Carrera GT, definitive time by Horst Von Saurma
7:32.5 - Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 EVO, Wolfgang Kaufmann (2001) >>> Link (http://www.gemballa.com/news/gtr6002.html)
7:36 --- Porsche Carrera GT, factory test driver Walther Röhrl (2002)
7:40* -- Porsche Carrera GT, *estimated time on cold and partially wet track (2003)
7:40 --- Mercedes Benz McLaren SLR, Klaus Ludwig, Autobild July 2004 >>> Link (http://supercarfreak.net/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album285)
7:42 --- Radical 1500 SR3 (2002)
7:43 --- TechArt GT Street (2001)
7:43 --- Porsche 996 911 GT3 RS, factory test driver Walter Rohrl, MOTOR Magazine
7:43.5 - Lamborghini Murcielago (Autocar magazine, 2002)
7:44 --- Pagani Zonda C12S (07/2003)
7:45 --- Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 (12/2000)
7:46 --- Porsche 996 GT2
7:46 --- SHK Porsche 993 GT2, 652 PS (1999)
7:47 --- Porsche 996 GT3 RS, 381PS (996) (2004)
7:49 --- Porsche 996 GT3 Cup
7:50 --- BMW E46 M3 CSL (08/2003)
7:50 --- Blitz Supra, 750 PS, Herbert Schürg (1997)
7:50 --- Honda RC30, Helmut Daehne (1993)
7:50 --- Lamborghini Murcielago (06/2002)
7:52 --- Gemballa Porsche 911 Le Mans (1995)
7:52 --- Lamborghini Gallardo E-Gear (12/2003)
7:52 --- Mercedes Benz SLR McLaren (06/2004)
7:54 --- Porsche GT3 (996) (2003)
7:55 --- Caterham R500 Superlight (2002)
7:56 --- Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale (02/2004)
7:56 --- Porsche 996 Turbo
7:56 --- Honda NSX-R - Motoharu Kurosawa, Best MOTORing
7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette CE Z06 >>> link (http://www.supercarfreak.net/forum/showpost.php?p=6990&postcount=28)
7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (tested by Dave Hill)
7:57 --- Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo, 600 PS, racing suspension
7:59 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Performance Chassis) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:02 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Sport PASM setting) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:03 --- Porsche 996 GT3 (1999)
8:04 --- Lamborghini Diablo GT (07/2000)
8:05 --- Ferrari 575M Maranello F1 (12/2002)
8:05 --- Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (Normal PASM setting)(Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:06 --- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG
8:06 --- Caterham 7 Superlight R, Robert Nearn
8:06 --- Subaru Impreza Sti spec C - Motoharu Kurosawa, Best MOTORing
8:07 --- Ferrari 550 Maranello (06/1998)
8:09 --- Honda NSX-R 3.2 (08/2002)
8:09 --- Ferrari 360 Modena (10/1999)
8:09 --- Lamborghini Diablo SV (no ABS?)
8:10 --- Chrysler Viper GTS, 411PS, UK-Spec, no ABS (10/1997)
8:10 --- Donkervoort D8 180R
8:11 --- Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX (video (http://www.rbrally.com/Download/EVO9_Nurb.wmv)here (http://www.rbrally.com/Download/EVO9_Nurb.wmv))
8:12 --- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG (04/2002)
8:12 --- Porsche 993 Turbo
8:13 --- Lotus Esprit Sport 350, 354 PS (05/1999)
8:13 --- Dodge Viper SRT-10, 506 PS (10/2004)
8:13 --- BMW M5 (E60) (12/2004)
8:15 --- Ruf 911 CTR 2, 520 PS
8:15*-- Holden GTS (2000), *estimated
8:15 --- Porsche 911 Carrera 2 (997) (Walter Rohrl - WHEELS June 2004)
8:16 --- AC-Schnitzer E36 M3 CLS II, 350 PS (11/1997)
8:16 --- AC Schnitzer Z4 V8 Topster (01/2005)
8:17 --- Aston Martin Vanquish (2003)
8:17 --- Porsche 996 C2
8:18 --- BMW Z8, 400 PS (08/2000)
8:18 --- Chevrolet Corvette Z05 Commemorative Edition, 344 PS (09/2003)
8:18 --- Ferrari F355 (06/1997)
8:20 --- Audi RS6 (2002)
8:22 --- BMW E46 M3 (12/2000)
8:22 --- BMW M Coupe, 321 PS (10/1998)
8:22 --- Mercedes-Benz C55 (07/2004)
8:23 --- Aston Martin DB7 GT (2003)
8:23 --- Porsche 996 Carrera 4
8:24 --- Subaru Impreza WRX STi (2004)
8:25 --- Audi RS4 375 HP
8:25 --- Callaway C12
8:25 --- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VI (11/1999)
8:25 --- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VII (11/2002)
8:26 --- Mercedes Benz SLK 32 AMG (05/2001)
8:26 --- Nissan 350Z (2003)
8:28 --- BMW M5, 400 PS(also confirmed by Motor Commodore magazine, 2000)
8:28 --- Nissan Skyline GTR, 277 PS
8:28 --- Porsche 993 Carrera 2
8:29 --- Mercedes Benz CLK 55 AMG (05/2000)
8:29 --- Audi S4 4.2 Avant (11/2003)
8:30 --- Maserati Coupé Cambiocorsa (10/2002)
8:31 --- Ferrari F355 GTS, 380 PS
8:32 --- BMW M Roadster, 321 PS (09/1997)
8:32 --- BMW Z4 3.0 SMG (05/2003)
8:32 --- Porsche Boxster S
8:32 --- Volkswagen Golf R32
8:34 --- Acura NSX, 276 PS
8:34 --- BMW Z3 Coupé 3.0i, 231 PS (04/2001)
8:35 --- BMW M3 Coupe, 321 PS
8:35 --- Brabus-Mercedes Benz C V8 Sportcoupé (02/2002)
8:35 --- BMW 130i >>> Link (http://www.supercarfreak.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2735)
8:36 --- BMW E36 M3 EVO, 321 PS
8:36 --- Alpina-BMW B3 3.3 Coupé (07/1999)
8:37 --- Maserati 3200GT (2002)
8:37 --- Mercedes Benz C32 AMG (09/2001)
8:37 --- Nissan Skyline GTR V-Spec, 350 PS
8:37 --- Subaru Impreza GT Turbo
8:37 --- Honda NSX 3.0 (07/1991)
8:38 --- Honda NSX 3.2 (08/1997)
8:38 --- Mercedes Benz SL500 (12/2001)
8:38 --- Porsche 996 Carrera, 296 PS
8:38 --- Brabus-Mercedes Benz CLK 5.8 (12/1998)
8:39 --- Honda S2000 (01/2000)
8:39 --- Morgan Aero 8 (04/2003)
8:40 --- Holden GTS, on an in and out lap (2000)
8:40 --- Chevrolet Corvette C5 Targa Automatic (07/1997)
8:41 --- Aston Martin DB7 (1999)
8:41 --- Audi S3, 210 PS (06/1999)
8:42 --- Audi S4, 265 PS (08/1998)
8:42 --- Lotus Exige (11/2000)
8:43 --- Honda Integra Type R (12/2000)
8:44 --- Chevrolet Corvette C5
8:45 --- Chevrolet Corvette, 339 PS, automatic
8:46 --- Porsche 993 Carrera S, 285 PS
8:47 --- Honda Civic Type-R, 200 PS (11/2001)
8:49 --- Jaguar XKR Coupe (07/1998)
8:49 --- Renault Clio Sport V6
8:49 --- Audi TT 1.8T quattro Coupé, 225 PS (11/1998)
8:50* -- Mercedes Benz E55 AMG (2000)
8:51 --- Mercedes Benz C43 AMG (02/1998)
8:52 --- Mercedes Benz CLK 430
8:58 --- Lotus Esprit Turbo SE (07/1991)
9:09 --- Volkswagen Golf V6 4Motion





I
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
I was at the ring a couple of weeks ago and was planning on taking my Twin Turbo around. Unfortunately it was 42 degrees F, raining and about 50 yards visibility in the fog :(
Will be going back for another crack at the beginning of July.

A picture of my car at the ring to be going on with.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
"7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (tested by Dave Hill)"

That is not true; I wish they would take that bogus time off of the list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
vetteheadracer said:
I was at the ring a couple of weeks ago and was planning on taking my Twin Turbo around. Unfortunately it was 42 degrees F, raining and about 50 yards visibility in the fog :(
Will be going back for another crack at the beginning of July.

A picture of my car at the ring to be going on with.......
vetteheadracer,

That is one helluv ride you got there. Is it a LPE Twin or something you got in Germeny? What kind of power are you pushing on that monster?

BTW, how did you get the vette in Germany? Are you with the military?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
SRV said:
"7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (tested by Dave Hill)"

That is not true; I wish they would take that bogus time off of the list.
Just why do you say so. Are we to believe you more than Dave Hill and the GM Corvette Team? :bang:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
TetraU said:
Just why do you say so. Are we to believe you more than Dave Hill and the GM Corvette Team? :bang:
I hate to tell you, but it's pretty much common knowledge that Dave Hill did NOT drive a C6 at the Nurburgring at 7:56. :thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
The ring times are not that great of a measure. The track is old,worn and crowded and most of the times are self reported so they are up for a little fudging. And they are also done with different drivers for each car. All of those factors reduce repeatability and the ability to compare like cars. They say it takes agood driver a ton of laps on the ring just to memorize it because it's so long. I much prefer times like Top Gear has. Same track, same driver and mostly same conditions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
355Spider said:
I much prefer times like Top Gear has. Same track, same driver and mostly same conditions.
Except you have to throw out the lap times listed by Top Gear that have a "W" associated with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
872 Posts
I'll guess... 7:43.x- 7:46.x But if the Heinrocket drives, 7:39.9. If Dave Hill drives.. 8:31.5 ;-) It will be fun to see... Now, how much will the damn car cost?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
High 7:40s. As nice as it is, the Pagani is lighter, has more power, and lower, more rearward CG. Can the C6Z06 be faster?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Dock said:
Except you have to throw out the lap times listed by Top Gear that have a "W" associated with them.
Yeah it's not perfect but much better than random ring times. It's still fun to compare the ring times though. I just don't think they are very reliable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
355Spider said:
The ring times are not that great of a measure. The track is old,worn and crowded and most of the times are self reported so they are up for a little fudging. And they are also done with different drivers for each car. All of those factors reduce repeatability and the ability to compare like cars. They say it takes agood driver a ton of laps on the ring just to memorize it because it's so long. I much prefer times like Top Gear has. Same track, same driver and mostly same conditions.
355Spider said:
Yeah it's not perfect but much better than random ring times. It's still fun to compare the ring times though. I just don't think they are very reliable.
Spider355, I disagree. The ring time is a great measure of the car's overall ability. The longer the track is the more pronounced the difference is between two cars.

As to having one driver testing all the cars, first, it is not necessary. The Ring is not that hard to remember. Any professional test/racecar driver can learn the track in a dozen laps. You don't see Tiger woods playing Augusta National a hundred times before he tored it apart. second, it is also impractical. One driver would have to have enough seat-time for all different cars to get the best out of each car. I am no race car driver, I think it takes just as much time, if not more, to learn about the car one drives than to learn the track one drives on.

What is being done now is perfectly all right. The Porsche has their own drivers, the BMW has it own drivers and the vette brings its own as well. They all know their own cars the best, therefore getting the best possible times.

As to each manufacturer fudging on the #'s, I say there are just too many conspiracies floating around today. Everything is not to be trusted. :eek: C'mon, people, what's the point for a gaint corporate to risk their own reputation by putting out bad #'s. If porsche people say it got 7:30 on the Carrera GT, I am very inclined to trust them. Plus, there is independent sources to verify majority of these times.

As to repeatability of these numbers, by your estimation, no #'s is to be taken too seriously unless you yourself produce them. :eyes: I don't expect an amature driver to reproduce the #'s. But the # GM gets at the Ring will be very indicative of the ability of this new Z.

Definitely not trying to flame you or accuse you of the following, but I often find the ones who don't like the Ring times are the ones who drive the type of sportcars that don't do well on the Ring, ie: Viper, some Ferraris, etc. :eek:o:

Just ask any industry people, they would tell you that the Ring is one of the best true tests for production sports cars.

As to having to put up on a track with other vehicles, I say that is perfect. You don't race yourself when you go to the track on Sunday, do you? A lot of times, car manufacturers tend to use that as an excuse for not getting optimum #'s. But when they do, the # definitely speaks volume of the capabilities of the car.

PS: I meant no disrespect to your F355. I think it's one of the instant classics. Neither am I putting down the Vipers. It's just a shame that the Viper never had any road racing in its short heritage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
TetraU said:
vetteheadracer,

That is one helluv ride you got there. Is it a LPE Twin or something you got in Germeny? What kind of power are you pushing on that monster?

BTW, how did you get the vette in Germany? Are you with the military?
Hi TetraU,

Its a turbo technologies install which was carried out in England. After I bought the 2003 Z06 new in Maryland, I had it shipped to the UK (where I live and no I 'm not in the military). Drove the car as a stock Z06 for about a year then decided to make a few mods to it :)
We were over in Germany on a 4 day touring holiday and "the ring" was part of the plan, unfortunately due to the weather it all went pear shaped!
Will try again in July when I am taking the car to race at Hockenheim as part of the Eurovette Shootout.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
TetraU said:
Spider355, I disagree. The ring time is a great measure of the car's overall ability. The longer the track is the more pronounced the difference is between two cars.

As to having one driver testing all the cars, first, it is not necessary. The Ring is not that hard to remember. Any professional test/racecar driver can learn the track in a dozen laps. You don't see Tiger woods playing Augusta National a hundred times before he tored it apart. second, it is also impractical. One driver would have to have enough seat-time for all different cars to get the best out of each car. I am no race car driver, I think it takes just as much time, if not more, to learn about the car one drives than to learn the track one drives on.

What is being done now is perfectly all right. The Porsche has their own drivers, the BMW has it own drivers and the vette brings its own as well. They all know their own cars the best, therefore getting the best possible times.

As to each manufacturer fudging on the #'s, I say there are just too many conspiracies floating around today. Everything is not to be trusted. :eek: C'mon, people, what's the point for a gaint corporate to risk their own reputation by putting out bad #'s. If porsche people say it got 7:30 on the Carrera GT, I am very inclined to trust them. Plus, there is independent sources to verify majority of these times.

As to repeatability of these numbers, by your estimation, no #'s is to be taken too seriously unless you yourself produce them. :eyes: I don't expect an amature driver to reproduce the #'s. But the # GM gets at the Ring will be very indicative of the ability of this new Z.

Definitely not trying to flame you or accuse you of the following, but I often find the ones who don't like the Ring times are the ones who drive the type of sportcars that don't do well on the Ring, ie: Viper, some Ferraris, etc. :eek:o:

Just ask any industry people, they would tell you that the Ring is one of the best true tests for production sports cars.

As to having to put up on a track with other vehicles, I say that is perfect. You don't race yourself when you go to the track on Sunday, do you? A lot of times, car manufacturers tend to use that as an excuse for not getting optimum #'s. But when they do, the # definitely speaks volume of the capabilities of the car.

PS: I meant no disrespect to your F355. I think it's one of the instant classics. Neither am I putting down the Vipers. It's just a shame that the Viper never had any road racing in its short heritage.
All goood points. There are definately advantages to the ring which you have listed. I just think theri are also some big disadvantages to comparing times although it is fun to do so. Anything on the ring that comes in around 8 minutes is flying which is almost all of the modern Ferraris. I don't know why you say they dont do well on the ring. Ferraris do pretty well on almost any road track. I mean a 7:56 for the Stradale is very fast. There are only a handful of production cars faster. I do believe the new Z will best that by a good bit though. But when the F430CS comes out there will be more to debate about. I wish we had some Enzo times. I am sure they would be right near the CGT. Those two are nearly equal on most comparisons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
355Spider said:
All goood points. There are definately advantages to the ring which you have listed. I just think theri are also some big disadvantages to comparing times although it is fun to do so. Anything on the ring that comes in around 8 minutes is flying which is almost all of the modern Ferraris. I don't know why you say they dont do well on the ring. Ferraris do pretty well on almost any road track. I mean a 7:56 for the Stradale is very fast. There are only a handful of production cars faster. I do believe the new Z will best that by a good bit though. But when the F430CS comes out there will be more to debate about. I wish we had some Enzo times. I am sure they would be right near the CGT. Those two are nearly equal on most comparisons.
I guess we agee more than we disagree. :cheers: In anycase, since I don't get to be lucky enough to drive all the great cars I want, it is really fun to compare times on paper.
:drunken:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
SRV said:
"7:56 --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (tested by Dave Hill)"

That is not true; I wish they would take that bogus time off of the list.
I agree, I've posted this quote before. It's from a Dave Hill interview in December 2004 on another forum. They will be testing both the C6 and Z06 soon.

"The last time we ran for time was on the 2004 Z06, which recorded one lap of 7'56". The 2005 would not be quite as good. We will be there in April with a production built Z06, and hope to get a good time for that one." DH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
TetraU said:
I guess we agee more than we disagree. :cheers: In anycase, since I don't get to be lucky enough to drive all the great cars I want, it is really fun to compare times on paper.
:drunken:
Yeah that's what true car guys do. Compare every angle and then beat it into the ground. :cheers:

If you ever get the chance you need to drive the latest Ferraris and Lamborghinis. They truly are phenominal driving machines.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top