Corvette Z06 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Going to bed now. I'm beat, but for now:

1) The sound is remarkable and deep from both the exhaust and intake (Virgin stock until after tomorrow's dyno)

2) Feels like more than 405 HP!

3) The Z06 does not like altitude. Runs like a pig.

4) NOT ONE DROP OF OIL USED IN 2200 MILES!

5) I will never drive my 2000 again.

6) The blue is absolutely :eek: and gets many looks and comments.

7) Not one ticket (thank you Valantine 1) and many cops.

8) Never driving through Kansas again. Ever! 60 mph most of the state due to construction on the 70.

9) The Museum delivery was so sweet and both Adam and Mark deserve our thanks for letting us display the banners.

10) Rumor: I have now heard three times, from different sources, all reliable, (one being Mark at the Museum) that the 50th anniversary Z06 has a different front end, different sting ray type sides, Viper like roof, and a stroker motor (6.0 liter?) Now, let's see....how could the 50th have different bodywork and still be 5th Gen? Maybe it's a C5.5.

The Dyno:



Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,159 Posts
Jim, I'm really looking forward to your new '02 Z06 dyno report.

So far we've heard from a few other new owners, but most of their cars not yet been broken in sufficiently to yet produce best possible dyno results. I've yet to hear of a bone stock '02 Z06 dyno over 350rwhp. TQ #s even lower. I think another forum member's car made 349rwhp & 341ft-lbs but with perhaps still too few miles on the odo at the time of the test.

Some say that's spot on to meet GM's "405hp" spec at the crank. Others seem to think it's a bit low, especially peak TQ. I tend to agree with the latter (unless victim to insufficient break-in) and would expect a "corrected" power peak to be in the mid to high 350rwhp range. Hopefully, your new Z after 2200 break-in miles, will shed some new light.

Please post full graph of both HP and TQ curves if at all possible.

TIA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
327 Posts
Ouch, they are doing construcion on I-70? That doesn't sound like fun. Were the roads torn up much? I'm making the same trip Sept 20th. I would go north and take I-80 all the way back (to Sacramento) but I need/want to stop in Colorado Springs and I-70 takes you right through there, right? I'm taking the Valentine One as well... Maybe I should buy/borrow a bra for the car if the road construction is bad?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
Congrats on the new Z Jim!! Several of us here watched you and mrdatalife has a timed lapse video of your delivery. :cool:

We are all anxious to see the dyno results.
 

·
Z06 Maniac!!
Joined
·
1,541 Posts
Jim, too bad your trip wasn't any fun. ;) Sounds like an absolute scream. Now about that bad boy '02-- ENJOY!
 
S

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
ZO SIC said:
I would go north and take I-80 all the way back (to Sacramento) but I need/want to stop in Colorado Springs and I-70 takes you right through there, right?
No, I-70 goes northwest at one point, and you split off there to go to Colorado Springs... A little west of Limon, CO you split off on US-24 towards Colorado Springs. You can actually see Pikes Peak from there (because the top is 14,110 !!!).

I guess I'm going through Nebraska next week too, instead. Very few cops in Nebraska.

Thanks for the Construction on I-70 heads up!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
Halltech said:
3) The Z06 does not like altitude. Runs like a pig.
What kind of altitude are we talking about? I live at 4500 ft. Does that make a big difference?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,388 Posts
beggar said:


What kind of altitude are we talking about? I live at 4500 ft. Does that make a big difference?
ALL normally aspirated engines loose power at higher elevations. The air density and hence the amount of O2 is reduced. At 4500 ft, the engine will have about 17% LESS horsepower. The modern FI engines compensate for altitude (barometric pressure sensor) to keep the A/F ratio correct, but it can't makeup for the lost power due to less bang in the cylinders due to less O2. If a Z puts down say 350 RWHP at sea-level, then at 4500 ft it will put down about 300 RWHP. Sorry, but that's how it will go. If you don't like that you can always put a turbo on it -- turbos don't mind altitude that much :D.

Sea-level is where it's at :D
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Dyno Testing - first stage tomorrow morning- SideWinder vs Stock

Jim's guess: Stock 355 RWHP/348 Torque; SideWinder-365 RWHP/358 Torque.

Results here in the afternoon.

Then the TRIC vs the Vortex

Stage II dyno testing: Halltech Ported TB/Torco Oil/Magnecor Wires/Champion RS12YC Copper plugs/MAF Mod.

Stage III: Long Tube Headers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
ZeeOhSix said:


ALL normally aspirated engines loose power at higher elevations. The air density and hence the amount of O2 is reduced. At 4500 ft, the engine will have about 17% LESS horsepower. The modern FI engines compensate for altitude (barometric pressure sensor) to keep the A/F ratio correct, but it can't makeup for the lost power due to less bang in the cylinders due to less O2. If a Z puts down say 350 RWHP at sea-level, then at 4500 ft it will put down about 300 RWHP. Sorry, but that's how it will go. If you don't like that you can always put a turbo on it -- turbos don't mind altitude that much :D.

Sea-level is where it's at :D
I knew the lower air density at higher elevations reduces horsepower. I was just wondering how much. How did you arrive at the 17%? From what you're saying, my 2002 Z06 at 4500 ft will perform like a F-body at sea level?:eek: The good thing is that pressure is not the only thing affecting air density and fortunately we have relatively cold temperatures here most of the year. Plus the humidity is very low. I'm sure that helps a bit.:smile:
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
beggar: Go to this link:

http://www.corvettec5.com/cgi-bin/SoftCart.100.exe/newsite/calc_hp_dp.htm?L+scstore+tpdm9365+998858514

Start with 80 degrees/29.92 baro/65 dew and 0 ft altitude. Should be close to baseline. Then add altitude (any figure) and recalculate.

By the way, there were two things happening. The altitude lowered the available O2, causing a rich condition, but before the short term trims could reset the long term trims, I was at another altitude. Sometimes up to 10,000 ft (I think) and down to 5000 ft. The computer would relearn pretty quickly if you could drive at a fairly consistant altitude.

You would still loose power, however, no matter what the computer could do. At 10000 ft. the loss of hp is almost 36% or over 100 HP. Thats after the computer has time to change the mixture to stoichiometric.

Best bet at altitude. Turbocharging. Aircrafts favorite fix for altitude problems.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,159 Posts
Jim, you made some statements that I'm kind of curious about.

You said: "I will never drive my 2000 again."

In lieu of your latest dyno results, what about the 2002 other than the EB paint, make it so much more appealing? Perhaps the new HUD feature? Or, maybe it is the subtle change in "sound" of the '02's exhaust system?

Why do you think the R&D dyno test now produces ~20 less rwhp & TQ? Could this be due to lower octane gas (no more MTBE) in CA since August 1st. :confused:

Comments?
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Good questions.

First of all, I really love my coupe. It is actually cooler looking than the Z06 and will stay dead even with a 2001 at the drags. It will not touch the 2002 with our SideWinder onboard.

I guarantee that with the SideWinder we will turn 12.1s to 12.2s at 117 to 118 with no other mods.

With the TRIC T-1 onboard, 11.90s at 119. With our whole T-2 package we will be in the 11.7s. Roll bar time.

By next spring, we will have our Katech head and cam package, or T-3 setup, which we expect 11.4 to 11.5 e.t. at 121+

We have one customer who is turning 11.99 @ 117 with his 2001 TRIC setup and LT headers, pupless, and underdrive pulley. Stock titanium exhaust and stock tires.

I miss being able to take of the top, but one of our best Canadian dealer (Carivaggio) can fix that with his new convertible option for the Z06. WOW!

Here's the thing. The new Z06 gearing, smoothness of the tranny, and power output is phenominal!

The dyno we went to is not showing the Max HP numbers it should by an estimated 5-7%.

We'll know tomorrow, when we dyno at a different shop next door. My original estimate of 360 to 370 should be on target with the TRIC T-1. We'll see.

My wife is taking over the 2000, but she is afraid of the power and the tickets she might end up with.

The TRIC T-1 package will be announced tomorrow, with full dyno numbers.

Jim

I will be installing the last Titanium TRIC on our 02 if we can ever get it back from Katech Engines.

:grin:
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
N4C5S said:
IMO, the exhaust note of the 02 vs the 01 is not subtle.

It is dramatic.

JC
I can't believe the difference.

The stock 2002 exhaust sounds like the Corsa Indy Pace. Even the idle is very deep.

This is not the result of pup cat removal entirely. My 99 did not have pups and sounded nothing like this, even with aftermarket exhaust.

Maybe they lost a baffle or two?

One footnote: The 2002 Z06 has no pups as we know, but I saw the LS1 exhaust at the factory, and guess what, PUPS! Not only that, I was told the cats are higher flow cats. That would account for the sound difference.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,388 Posts
Yup, the main cats on the 2002 Z are a totally new design, and only used on the Zs. I tend to agree that the new cats are better flowing. I thought I read something about the mufflers being alittle different, but don't know the accuracy of that rumor.

BTW, a comment on the effect of air temp, baro pressue and humidity on a normally aspirated engine's HP output.

Per SAE, the air correction factor is
CF = 1.18[(Ps/Pm - Pv)(Tm/Ts)^0.5] - 0.18

where,
Ps = Standard Pressure (absolute) = 29.235 inHg
Pm = Measured Pressure (absolute) [inHg]
Pv = Measured Water Vapor Pressure (absolute) [inHg]
Ts = Standard Temperature (use absolute) = 77 deg F = 536.7 deg R (R = F + 459.7)
Tm = Measured Temperature in Deg. R


In the link that was given by Halltech it says:

"For example, at 85 deg F, 30.14 in-Hg barometer reading, 58 deg F dew point and 5000 ft altitude, the engine only produces
about 81.1% of the rated horsepower."


Humm... something doesn't add up with this statement. If you actually have air at 85 deg F, 30.14 inHg and 58 deg F dewpoint, does it really matter at what altitude this occures at? Don't these air parameters (temp, pressure and humidity) define the air density and O2 content? IMO, if the air is at 85 F, 30.14 ihHg and DP of 58 F at sea-level or at 5000 ft, a N/A should run exactly the same because the air density and O2 content is the same. Any insight here??
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top