C8 just got crushed and humiliated by the GT500

[EcoVert]

Per some of my good Chevy buddies. 0-60 and top speed are where it’s at this week.
They’ll also point out “A car of the year award from Motor Trend”. Was given to the Corvette.
But when I point out a Hyundai Veloster won the “Performance Car of the Year”. They get bent.
Go figure?

What beat camaro and Corvette

Sponsored

 

[Hack]

I think that frame bending from the engine power is marketing BS, so you want to tell me that the car had so much traction and the driveline is so solid that the only thing that could give was the chassis?

i would be more inclined to believe it if you tell me they jumped the car during testing and found that it would brake the rear glass, or that hitting a speedbump over certain speed does that.

I agree it's marketing BS. And in my opinion it's really bad marketing BS.

If I believe that the car broke the glass - that means the engineers on the Corvette were so incompetent they couldn't figure out how stiff the car's structure had to be to accommodate the loads.
1. I don't believe they are incompetent.
2. If I did believe the engineers are incompetent I sure wouldn't want to buy a car designed by those same engineers.

 

[millhouse]

You know better than that. There will not be enough room in a merging on-ramp lane to just walk by a Vette on a 60 roll in a ZL1 or a GT500 for that matter. You would need room. But whatever.

Link please.

What are you talking about? 15mph to 70mph is plenty of room to walk a C8 in both cars. Both have a large HP to weight advantage. The only advantage the C8 has is from a dead stop.

 

[Balr14]

The frame deforming because of power and traction is hardly something new. I recall back in the days of when we ran a Thunderbolt having the left front lift so bad it didn't come down. Also had a Thames gasser that twisted the frame so bad it broke. Software prevents a lot those kind of issues with modern high output cars. It's easy to imagine testing a new setup causing problems.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

What are you talking about? 15mph to 70mph is plenty of room to walk a C8 in both cars. Both have a large HP to weight advantage. The only advantage the C8 has is from a dead stop.

Yea at least a car length maybe two.

 

[4V Mayhem]

What are you talking about? 15mph to 70mph is plenty of room to walk a C8 in both cars. Both have a large HP to weight advantage. The only advantage the C8 has is from a dead stop.

Ok. But I wasn't talking about 15 MPH. I specifically mentioned higher speeds and from 60 MPH and when merging into traffic from an on ramp or jockeying to get in front of a car at highway speeds.

Per some of my good Chevy buddies. 0-60 and top speed are where it’s at this week.
They’ll also point out “A car of the year award from Motor Trend”. Was given to the Corvette.
But when I point out a Hyundai Veloster won the “Performance Car of the Year”. They get bent.
Go figure?

If it beat the GT350 or the Mustang GT then I would get bent out of shape also. That thing is about as fast as a 90s era GT. I'm not sure what your point is. Are you agreeing that the Veloster is a performance car on that level or what?

 

[Hack]

The frame deforming because of power and traction is hardly something new. I recall back in the days of when we ran a Thunderbolt having the left front lift so bad it didn't come down. Also had a Thames gasser that twisted the frame so bad it broke. Software prevents a lot those kind of issues with modern high output cars. It's easy to imagine testing a new setup causing problems.

Yes I can understand having structural issues in the 60s when stress had to be hand calculated or in custom applications with a lot more power than the vehicle was designed to accommodate. But with modern analysis tools and with the power output being based on forethought and planning, it pegs my BS-meter. If you were trying to run such a tight design safety factor that a brand new vehicle could fail, imagine how many failures you would have over time as the vehicles age.

 

[martinjlm]

Yes I can understand having structural issues in the 60s when stress had to be hand calculated or in custom applications with a lot more power than the vehicle was designed to accommodate. But with modern analysis tools and with the power output being based on forethought and planning, it pegs my BS-meter. If you were trying to run such a tight design safety factor that a brand new vehicle could fail, imagine how many failures you would have over time as the vehicles age.

For what it’s worth, the people developing chassis and the people developing power trains of any variety are completely different groups. And until very recently, as in AFTER I retired a couple years ago, reported up through entirely different organizations on different campuses in different counties (Pontiac in Oakland County and Warren in Macomb County). It was not uncommon for vehicle chassis specs to change, causing the powertrain development teams to modify engines or transmissions they thought they were done with. It was not uncommon for powertrain development teams to ask chassis development teams to adjust parameters to better take advantage of either packaging requirements for new engines / transmissions or to account for better than expected output.

The reason it is important to point out that the change to have the two development groups report up to the same chain of command is to point out that development of the ME chassis and development of LT2 and all 5.5L variants started BEFORE I retired. When there were still separate, but parallel development chains. Yes, they shared computer models with each other, but it was still NOT uncommon for one or the other to have to tweak a development path to bring the two together.

Vehicles failing in development have little or nothing to do with vehicles failing due to age in the field. At some point you WANT vehicles to fail in development in order to project what the actual limits are and also to predict durability. It’s only a problem when you don’t learn from when, why, and how the failures occur.

 

[millhouse]

Ok. But I wasn't talking about 15 MPH. I specifically mentioned higher speeds and from 60 MPH and when merging into traffic from an on ramp or jockeying to get in front of a car at highway speeds.

If it beat the GT350 or the Mustang GT then I would get bent out of shape also. That thing is about as fast as a 90s era GT. I'm not sure what your point is. Are you agreeing that the Veloster is a performance car on that level or what?

you directly quoted my post where I mention acceleration to speed at an on ramp. This is where acceleration takes place. When you’re at the end of an entrance ramp you should already be at the speed limit.

What you are taking about (jockeying for position) has nothing to do with performance.

 

[millhouse]

And now, the tools over in C6G are back at it. Motorweek posted their 1/4 mile results and for some reason they think this is new information. Their results are from the same testing at the Ford Vegas event as all previous runs. They actually think this is new testing and are trying to use it as new data. You can’t make this shit up.

 

[ALUSA]

0-60 does nothing to measure how fast you can merge on a highway. People don't start at a dead stop on an entrance ramp. They don't engage launch control. Throwing it out there, true 0-60 runs on public roads with these cars are an instant jail sentence. It is not indicative of any rear world performance measurement.

Merging on a highway is a 15mph to 55+mph en-devour where traction and gearing is not nearly as much of a factor. Hell, in this test a ZL1 or hellcat will spank a C8.

I don’t know where you live but i grew up in Europe and been living in the states for a very long time. Due to the traffic there are almost always lights before merging on to highways, interstates and stop signs with a yield signs after leaving a Rest Area. Due to the trucks and slow traffic driving on the right lane it is always safer and fun to merge as fast as possible. You won’t get jail time trust me. You are exaggerating pretty bad. Faster 0-60 mph also indicates how fast is the car from light to light. This measurement has been used before you were born. On public roads GT500 has nothing on a C8 vette. Motorweek just posted their test results on the GT500 on a prepped surface. They were only able to get 11.2 seconds in the quarter. Test results started to show up.

 

[millhouse]

I don’t know where you live but i grew up in Europe and been living in the states for a very long time. Due to the traffic there are almost always lights before merging on to highways, interstates and stop signs with a yield signs after leaving a Rest Area. Due to the trucks and slow traffic driving on the right lane it is always safer and fun to merge as fast as possible. You won’t get jail time trust me. You are exaggerating pretty bad. Faster 0-60 mph also indicates how fast is the car from light to light. This measurement has been used before you were born. On public roads GT500 has nothing on a C8 vette. Motorweek just posted their test results on the GT500 on a prepped surface. They were only able to get 11.2 seconds in the quarter. Test results started to show up.

Another clueless fanboy. That motorweek test was done at the Vegas Ford event that everyone else was at. This is not new information, they are just very late in their reporting. The car they used was the same car everyone else used. They were allowed 2 runs by Ford. All runs were in 2000+ da....the same as everyone else. Why are you acting like this is new?

I’m don’t arguing the 0-60. You obviously can’t comprehend the difference between traction and acceleration.

 

[ALUSA]

Another clueless fanboy. That motorweek test was done at the Vegas Ford event that everyone else was at. This is not new information, they are just very late in their reporting. The car they used was the same car everyone else used. They were allowed 2 runs by Ford. All runs were in 2000+ da....the same as everyone else. Why are you acting like this is new?

I’m don’t arguing the 0-60. You obviously can’t comprehend the difference between traction and acceleration.

This review came out 5 days ago.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...EwBnoECAAQDg&usg=AOvVaw0YKNLWFof6EpnRH9RFtpt9

Ahah i do and that is why the GT500 is going nowhere. Why do you think GM put the engine in the back? You can put all that hp in a car without traction it doesn’t matter. By the way Motorweek got a 11.5 for the camaro zl1 10 speed. 0.3 seconds difference with better tires, faster shifting auto and 110 more hp. Not bad.

 

[millhouse]

This review came out 5 days ago.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8UnQZZElHDw&ved=2ahUKEwiJrM3G74bmAhWgHjQIHcf6Ci44ChCjtAEwBnoECAAQDg&usg=AOvVaw0YKNLWFof6EpnRH9RFtpt9

Ahah i do and that is why the GT500 is going nowhere. Why do you think GM put the engine in the back? You can put all that hp in a car without traction it doesn’t matter. By the way Motorweek got a 11.5 for the camaro zl1 10 speed. 0.3 seconds difference with better tires, faster shifting auto and 110 more hp. Not bad.

You aren’t really that ignorant are you? That article could come out next year. It doesn’t change the fact that the 1/4 mile runs were done at the Ford press event in Vegas and all of the driving clips were done on the cross county drive out to the event.

There have been no indecent testing released since the Vegas event.

You’re an idiot if you think the GT500 is .3 seconds faster than the zl1. Hero times will be coming early next year. I predict 10.3s in negative da.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

And now, the tools over in C6G are back at it. Motorweek posted their 1/4 mile results and for some reason they think this is new information. Their results are from the same testing at the Ford Vegas event as all previous runs. They actually think this is new testing and are trying to use it as new data. You can’t make this shit up.

Magazine racing is simple. You pick the fastest time. For your car. Then pick the slowest documented time for the other car. And claim victory. And it's all done from the comfort of your favorite chair.

Sponsored