GT350 vs. Z/28

[mustangletback]

:lol:

2016 Corvette Z06 C7.R Edition

Isn't the "R" kind of R thing?

Limited to 500, just as the GT350R will likely be. This is the minimum production number for homologation.

This brings me to another point. Do you see how Chevy is using Racing and the availability of Chevy built, Race sanctioned editions? The $$$ made in the Motorsport Program, as in Profit, yes they make money selling race cars, is funneled back into the overall Corvette profit. It augments sales profit, it lowers the cost of technology, that technology eventually trickles down.

The Boss 302 Program... Perfect example. All the crashed out Boss 302R's, 302R1's, and the 3 Boss 302S's, replacement cars for model years... all of that $$$ helped bring the OEM MSRP down. Ford gained a lot from the Boss Program, it was highly successful and was only dampened by restriction.

The GT350 Program has probably piggy-backed from the Boss profit. It is in a sense an extension of the current Ford Mustang Racing Program so, as the Boss's stock went up, that money was funneled into a future product in which they don't discuss.

The z28 has nothing... There is NO Team Chevy Z/28 Racing Program. You can't buy a competitive Camaro (except the COPO) from Chevy at all. Unfortunately, not only does this drive the cost of the race car up for private teams (GS.R cost $225,000, Boss 302R cost $125,00, Boss 302S was $89,000). This is an unnecessary burden for these teams when looming restrictions are ever present. A manufacturers development year (there's that silly concept again) entails data given to the organized body that imposes restrictions. Under Chevy's watch (and they should help fight battles), the car should be put through it's paces and restrictions should be imposed the following year. This means 3rd Party Teams don't need to get political but, as we seen with the Boss 302S drivers in PWC, sometimes they DO get political.

Not only that, just like the LT4 wasn't really planed out for the new Z06, the LS7 wasn't really planned out for the z28. At least in the terms of Motorsport. They had to know the LS7 would eventually be restricted to near fatal levels to be permitted to run. They were better off using a unique LS5.5 that is based on the LS7 and used in the Z06 in IMSA. Why not? It would have been f@cking kool!!! But it probably would have had a z28 getting pummeled in every class, maybe even worse than the 1LE. MSRP would have likely increased too...

If Chevy would have at least started a legitimate Z/28 Race Program, regardless of the LS7, it probably would have helped lower that $75,000 price tag on a 2 year run. It would have helped the teams too... However, there is a reason why this was avoided.

If they started in IMSA, the race car would need to be built first. After the race car is complete after it's development season, an OEM version would need to be based on the Z/28.R. If that was the case, the z28 would have never come with 305's or CCB's or probably an LS7. After the results were in, Chevy would have probably turned their nose up to a 65mm restriction. That may even increase before its all over.

All this has done is create additional financial and restrictive stressors on these 3rd Party Teams. The cost to replace these Z/28.R's surely eclipse the GS.R and ZL1 GTS from before... and for the most part, restrictions on the LS3 were either minimal in the SCCA or removed in Grand Am/IMSA.

What Ford has accomplished here is offering packages to conform to a wide variety of classes now. If IMSA were still on the Factory Spec stuff, I have a feeling the Base GT350's equipment would be better suited for the class. While the GT350R's Track Pack/R Package equipment would be permitted under the new PWC Rules this year.

1.) Develop in Racing

2.) Offer Staged Performance Options for OEM

3.) Don't force Standard Tech that gets you DQ'd

the c7.r edition is a waste,and only fools would buy that car.with all of those motors blowing up,and or over heating like the trans.in those cars you would think they would have added more power,made the motor better or something.all you gonna get is some dam stickers,and a few minor things.the stupidity of chevy continues to run deep.:lol::cheers:thePeterMJ's Corvette C7 Stingray and Z06 Exposed




same thing is being said on this site here too.

Sponsored

 

[thePill]

Since nobody wants to play with me!!!



The significance of the 110.5 inch wheelbase is that was the WB of 2006 Camaro Concept. Many times Fbod tried to tell people the 2006 and 2010 are the exact same body. I felt that was incorrect. I left Japan to go to Hawaii to test the V6 and SS in 2009 for 18 days. I was shocked at the size when I finally seen it. It was NOT the 2006 Camaro.

Regardless, I have a feeling Chevy has a slight emotional attachment to that particular Camaro. The wheelbase wasn't overly large, nowadays, the M4 uses a 110 inch WB. Although admittedly a bad move by many racing fans. They may even have R&D with that wheelbase.

Another neat thing is the SCCA PWC car shrank to a 110.5 inch wheelbase too. I am sure they are more than capable of doing their own suspension BUT, I have a feeling Chevy PR could have been giving them hints.

Now, I am going to go against the entire Internet here. I feel the 6th Gen Camaro may use a 110.5 inch wheelbase instead of the ATS's 109.3. For a couple of reasons...

1st, when Chevy changed the dash to axle ratio to accommodate an LT1. This is simply moving the dash/firewall/cowl area back to fit a V8 instead of the shorter V6. You can count at least the bore to get a minimum idea how much longer a V8 is compare to the accumulative bore on the one side of a V6. Say a 4 inch bore on 3 cylinders is 12 inches where a 4 inch bore on 4 is 16. So, usually around 4 inches in bore plus all your metal and clearances. 6 inches maybe? Maybe 8?

2nd, this moves the cabin back 6-8 inches too. We have all seen how sudden the rear of the ATS-V ends where the rear window and trunk drop off. The 6th Gen in spy pics actually show a longer rear deck lid on the Camaro vs. the ATS Coupe. In order to keep rear overhang down 3-5 inches, the wheelbase would need to increase from the ATS.

3rd, packaging the IRS, fuel cell and rear seats. If the Camaro's cabin has moved back and the ATS Coupe's wheelbase is retained, the rear seats would literally hover over the IRS Subframe. This would require more clearance and the Camaro would sit noticably higher. I know it kind of does that now BUT, that is because it was built onto of the ATS Coupe. It probably does have a different sub-frame clearance than the ATS due to cabin movement.

So, I am saying this now... I believe the 6th Gen Camaro's wheelbase was increased over the ATS Coupes 109.3. This is complete speculation but, I believe the actual measurement to be 110.5 inches.

I know this is a different ball game for weight figures, it would be maybe 60-70lbs if it's from structural changes to the front section for the LT1. It could be less if the rear suspension geometry is altered as we seen Black Dog do in PWC. In fact, the weight gain would hardly be worth mentioning if that was the case.

One thing is questionable though, the rear seats and IRS subframe could come in conflict if the cabin is moved to the rear and the suspension isn't altered to some degree. I feel that sub-frame spacers will help clearance issues in the Camaro that the ATS didn't have.


Please read and feel free to fact check/comment. i would like to honestly know if this appears feasible.

 

[thePill]

Your talking about a whole new irs rear end, modified pivot points, shortened drive shaft, fender and wheel well modifications. Then it would need some serious r&d to make sure it works good and is balanced with the front suspension. You would think if this was done there would be some article about how it made the Camaro handle better then stock.

Why would Chevy EVER want a press release saying a major engineering flaw exist. That is the last thing Chevy wants on the table. They didn't even want you to know 112 inches was a full-size wheelbase. They hated talking about weight until 2013...

I just choose not to watch it, win or lose, I just like the actions shots and war paint. If GTS moves to a manufactures pissing contest and the cars are literally stock offerings, regardless of equipment, I could get into that. It would be completely unique to the CTSC. GTS could probably be popular with the Fast and Furious youngsters.

CTSC is more of a golf clap or was intended to be a gentleman's (loose term) contest of Win/Sell. This would have been a purer form of manufacturers club Racing. You wouldn't pull dirty homologation stunts and still, equipment is left in check by the customers MSRP and Rulebook. It was suppose to be a balancing act for the manufacturer.. that has been destroyed...


Here is a PWC GTS Camaro, the only decent picture I can find at a rest. I think the rear wheel looks pulled up for sure. The smaller diameter tire allows them to move around a little.

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56767

 

[02gtnh]

Why would Chevy EVER want a press release saying a major engineering flaw exist. That is the last thing Chevy wants on the table. They didn't even want you to know 112 inches was a full-size wheelbase. They hated talking about weight until 2013...

I just choose not to watch it, win or lose, I just like the actions shots and war paint. If GTS moves to a manufactures pissing contest and the cars are literally stock offerings, regardless of equipment, I could get into that. It would be completely unique to the CTSC. GTS could probably be popular with the Fast and Furious youngsters.

CTSC is more of a golf clap or was intended to be a gentleman's (loose term) contest of Win/Sell. This would have been a purer form of manufacturers club Racing. You wouldn't pull dirty homologation stunts and still, equipment is left in check by the customers MSRP and Rulebook. It was suppose to be a balancing act for the manufacturer.. that has been destroyed...


Here is a PWC GTS Camaro, the only decent picture I can find at a test. I think the rear wheel looks pulled up for sure. The smaller diameter tire allows them to move around a little.

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56767

If you look at the specs of those cars, it shows stock wheelbase of 112.3

 

[thePill]

If you look at the specs of those cars, it shows stock wheelbase of 112.3

A Riley Camaro GS.R does use a 112.3 inch wheelbase. The Riley Camaro is reduced to a 110.5 in PWC.

 

[02gtnh]

A Riley Camaro GS.R does use a 112.3 inch wheelbase. The Riley Camaro is reduced to a 110.5 in PWC.

If the 110.5 is so much better, then why race with a 112.3?

Plus, you can have one built for racing in any class for $225,000+ but they show no option of a 112.3 WB or a 110.5 WB. If they built both, would they not have that as a option?

 

[thePill]

If the 110.5 is so much better, then why race with a 112.3?

OEM class rules usually prohibit such manipulation. They submitted a request and it was approved.

Could the approval have been granted for future manufacturer R&D?

Long shot but just maybe.

 

[Erik427]

SCCA PWC forces Chevy to supply completely stock LS7's to Black Dog. Stock cam, rods, pistons, heads. although, it hasn't been the force the ZL1 was.

As far as the spec sheet, the LS7 in PWC looks stock. But Chevy isn't really involved, they are there but not involved in the program at all except PR.

The Boss 302 is also stock... Far more stock than the Boss 302R1 in CTSC.

I have zero trust that there been no cylinder head change.

 

[thePill]

If the 110.5 is so much better, then why race with a 112.3?

Plus, you can have one built for racing in any class for $225,000+ but they show no option of a 112.3 WB or a 110.5 WB. If they built both, would they not have that as a option?

No, all levels of 5th Gen Camaro are altered by the 3rd Party Teams that run the series and class.

Riley (and Pratt) offer the basic package. The GS.R and GT4 cars were built by Riley, the Z/28.R in CTSC is a Pratt car and the ZL1 (GS.R based) and Z/28.R (Z/28.R based) was engineered by Black Dog for SCCA PWC.

The S197 had a reduced wheelbase and increased track in GT3. It does happen...

 

[thePill]

I have zero trust that there been no cylinder head change.

I kind of do too but, the rules look legit.

 

[02gtnh]

No, all levels of 5th Gen Camaro are altered by the 3rd Party Teams that run the series and class.

Riley (and Pratt) offer the basic package. The GS.R and GT4 cars were built by Riley, the Z/28.R in CTSC is a Pratt car and the ZL1 (GS.R based) and Z/28.R (Z/28.R based) was engineered by Black Dog for SCCA PWC.

The S197 had a reduced wheelbase and increased track in GT3. It does happen...

I still have not seen where any of those teams are racing a 110.5 WB. I've been on there sites and they don't mention anything about changing WB. In fact many say no majors changes other the safty rules. Plus you would think this would spread like wildfire that this needed to be done, thus major black eye for Chevy. Yet tons of Google search shows nothing. :shrug:

 

[traxiii]

Wowo if the firewall moves back into the cabin 4" to 8" and the WB only increases by an inch, that makes for a huge loss of leg room somewhere. Either the driver or rear seat leg room or both would have to be pretty darn compromised. I haven't sat in an ATS, but they don't look all that roomy. If there is really that much less space inside the cabin of a G6 Camaro, it's going to barely be a 2+2.

So much going on and we won't know the answers for sure until the first ones get prodded and measured at their first press event. probably.

On a side note: have you ever noticed that spell check doesn't know the word Camaro?

 

[thePill]

I still have not seen where any of those teams are racing a 110.5 WB. I've been on there sites and they don't mention anything about changing WB. In fact many say no majors changes other the safty rules. Plus you would think this would spread like wildfire that this needed to be done, thus major black eye for Chevy. Yet tons of Google search shows nothing. :shrug:

It is in the TVS, it is hard to challenge that info.

The KIA is another car that is allowed geometry changes.

They marketed the ZL1 in PWC, I don't put anything past the Camaro these days.

That would make this a pretty exclusive find wouldn't you say...


Nice pics

http://www.andyleeracing.com/2015-race-livery/

 

[Stuntman]

It is in the TVS, it is hard to challenge that info.

The KIA is another car that is allowed geometry changes.

The Boss 302 is allowed A TON of geometry changes in PWC. Almost EVERY suspension link is non-OEM and has changed geometry from factory. As per the rules:

These are factory Ford replacement parts for the boss 302.
bumpsteer kit M-3130-R4 - (Front Toe link geometry change)
rear anti dive brackets M-5650-A - (Rear Control arm geometry change)
Fr lower control arm with extended ball joint M-3075-RA - (Front lower control arm geometry change)
Rr lower control arm M-5649-S - (Entirely non-OEM arm)
Pan hard Bar M-4264 - (Non OEM PHB, since factory bends)
Allow Cortex watts link P/N:CWL-40-302S (Both bracket fully welded to chassis) - (Not only a change in geometry, but an ENTIRE change in suspension design going from a 3-link with Panhardbar to a Wattslink design; requiring custom fabrication to the chassis.

http://www.world-challenge.com/images/vts/Ford-Mustang-boss-302-VTS-v22.pdf

You would absolutely lose it if the Z28 so clearly described changing nearly every suspension component out with non-OEM components with CHANGED GEOMETRY like the Boss 302 is in PWC.

You are so hypocritical in your Camaro-hating rants that you are blind to reality; and blind to the fact that the Boss is very similarly modified and departed from 'stock' for racing.

But I ask: WHO CARES? These are professional racecars with big aftermarket wings and professional drivers in a series that has a "Balance of Performance" to 'equalize' the field - whether that's catering to the bottom denominator of a car, team, or driver to make racing closer; that's what happens.

I don't care that any of these cars are not perfectly "As delivered" off the showroom floor. They likely wouldn't hold up to professional racing abuse if they were; which is why chassis' are stitch welded, reinforced, caged, and racing components go on them. Despite those changes, this is as close to showroom-stock professional racing as you can get. Quit nit-picking the pointless, skewing reality, lying and coming up with moronic reasons why brand X is better than brand Y. Whether you like GM, Kia, Porsche, or Ford. Watch the racing and root for your favorite team/car/driver. If everyone complains about racing and doesn't follow it; it will lose popularity and die altogether. It's already hurting and I for sure won't contribute to the death of motorsports. I'll be watching on Sunday (figuratively speaking, a lot of PWC and CTSCC races are on Saturdays) rooting for: :ford:

 

[Todd15Fastback]

Stuntman - do you know what channel carries these races and what time they are normal on? TIA.

Sponsored