Shno's House of Z

[zcarczar]

Another day and another video, can't hear a blower in this video. I'm going to need a bigger garage...

http://www.gminsidenews.com/articles...lly-aspirated/

[Scarrzz]

To paraphrase The Matrix, "There is no whine."

It just sounds like a whole bunch of mean cubes down in there.

I like the sound of that.

[2cnd chance]

I agree that is pure N/A unless they found a way to muffle the SC.

[BaylorCamaro]

We going to start theorizing 'Ring times after Al O's latest statement?

My personal guess is 7:36.xx I know some people are saying deep into the 7:20's but I have a hard time believing that when you look at the cars in that territory. Low 7:30's and I'd be a bit surprised. 7:20's and I bought the wrong car

https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by BaylorCamaro

We going to start theorizing 'Ring times after Al O's latest statement?

My personal guess is 7:36.xx I know some people are saying deep into the 7:20's but I have a hard time believing that when you look at the cars in that territory. Low 7:30's and I'd be a bit surprised. 7:20's and I bought the wrong car

https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/

You think its only going to be 1 second better than what the 5th gen Zedder managed on a wet track?

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

You think its only going to be 1 second better than what the 5th gen Zedder managed on a wet track?

Well it wasn't until around the 6:00.xx time frame that the Z/28 hit rain which is nearly the time the Z is on the straight away, now he did slide a little bit in the two turns before the straight and after the straight it didn't appear to have much of an issue. The two squirms before the straight probably cost less than a second, and it's hard to tell if time was sacrificed anywhere else, car looked planted and driver looked flat out most everywhere. I know there is word of mouth that the Z/28 has possibly done a couple seconds faster but nothing concrete.

Having tracked a fair amount (NCM, COTA, TWS, MSR Houston) in conditions worse than the Z/28's 'Ring attempt on just as aggressive tires as the Trofeo's I can tell you traction isn't effected that much until the rain starts coming down more steady than that and then of course if there is standing water you're screwed..

Anyways, whatever the 5th gen Z/28 ultimately ended up running I suspect the 6th gen is only 1-2 seconds faster than that time. I'm guessing the 6th gen ZL1 is a little bit heavier than the 5th gen Z/28 and it has WAY less aggressive tires and is likely very nose heavy ('16 SS is 54/46%)

[2cnd chance]

IIRC Al O. said the 5Gen Z/28 broke a 7:30, but not fully recorded. I'll guess 7:28 for the 6Gen ZL1.

[Number 3]

It's a big mystery why this "other" run was never documented. Didn't have it on video??

Depending on several unknowns, I don't think this car (Z/28) will out lap a Z07 Corvette. If it has NA engine, likely no more than 550 HP and I don't think that does the trick.

Now the big thing we don't know is - how much WEIGHT is being pulled out of this car? CF Hood, CF Front Fenders, thin glass, stripped interior, blocked content?

What if this is a 550 HP car with all the upgrades for the track that weighs, oh say, the same a base 4 cylinder Camaro? But that car would still be 100 HP down on a Z07.

So I predict 3 seconds slower than the Z07. So low 7:20s.

[RLHMARINES]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It's a big mystery why this "other" run was never documented. Didn't have it on video??

Depending on several unknowns, I don't think this car (Z/28) will out lap a Z07 Corvette. If it has NA engine, likely no more than 550 HP and I don't think that does the trick.

Now the big thing we don't know is - how much WEIGHT is being pulled out of this car? CF Hood, CF Front Fenders, thin glass, stripped interior, blocked content?

What if this is a 550 HP car with all the upgrades for the track that weighs, oh say, the same a base 4 cylinder Camaro? But that car would still be 100 HP down on a Z07.

So I predict 3 seconds slower than the Z07. So low 7:20s.

Yes!!

[PYROLYSIS]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It's a big mystery why this "other" run was never documented. Didn't have it on video??

Depending on several unknowns, I don't think this car (Z/28) will out lap a Z07 Corvette. If it has NA engine, likely no more than 550 HP and I don't think that does the trick.

Now the big thing we don't know is - how much WEIGHT is being pulled out of this car? CF Hood, CF Front Fenders, thin glass, stripped interior, blocked content?

What if this is a 550 HP car with all the upgrades for the track that weighs, oh say, the same a base 4 cylinder Camaro? But that car would still be 100 HP down on a Z07.

So I predict 3 seconds slower than the Z07. So low 7:20s.

That run wasn't documented because there were other manufacturers out there on the track at the time and they have a gentlemans agreement to not post spy videos of each other.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by PYROLYSIS

That run wasn't documented because there were other manufacturers out there on the track at the time and they have a gentlemans agreement to not post spy videos of each other.

Thanks!

[zcarczar]

The ZL1's are out playing, they sound awfully similar to the alleged Z/28. https://youtu.be/GXiF2PWfJZA

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by zcarczar

The ZL1's are out playing, they sound awfully similar to the alleged Z/28. https://youtu.be/GXiF2PWfJZA

Beautiful!!

[2cnd chance]

“Car enthusiasts don't buy sports cars to stay in the slow lane. But given that the allure of higher speeds and bolder performance might lead to faster and more aggressive driving, they might think manufacturers have outfitted these cars with stringent safety protections.
That's not necessarily the case, according to the latest crash-test results from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The organization, which conducts the most prominent crash tests in the industry, recently put America's three most iconic sports coupes through its full crash-test battery for the first time – and found none of them reached the organization's threshold for safety recognition.
The Ford Mustang, Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger all fell short of both Top Safety Pick+ and Top Safety Pick status, something that 65 other 2016 models achieved in prior testing. Released Tuesday morning, the results raise questions about the safety of motorists in cars they're prone to more risky driving behaviors.
"These vehicles have high horsepower and they're driven at higher speeds, and they'll crash at higher speeds," IIHS president Adrian Lund tells Autoblog. "So you'd like them to have strong protection, but none of them earned Top Safety Pick."
It can often be difficult for car shoppers to discern much difference from crash-test results. Ninety-nine percent of 2016 models tested under the federal government's program earn 4 or 5 stars, according to new data from the Center for Auto Safety. But in the IIHS' testing of muscle cars, stark differences emerge.
On the organization's small-front overlap test, which mimics the impact of the front quarter of the car with a fixed object like a parked vehicle or tree at 40 miles per hour, the Camaro was the only model to achieve a "good" ranking. The Mustang earned an "acceptable" mark and the Challenger had "marginal" performance. Researchers found extensive intrusion on the Challenger, and "limited survival space for the driver." Measurements taken on the crash-test dummy indicated a "high likelihood" of serious leg injuries (see photo below).
The dummy's left foot was entrapped and its ankle deformed. Technicians had to unbolt the dummy's foot from its leg to free it from the wreckage. That's only happened five other times in the organization's small-overlap testing history.
"When these vehicles go off the road in a single-car crash, it's often in a small-overlap configuration," Lund said, "so that's an important result." Forty-three percent of car-occupant deaths occurred in single-vehicle crashes in 2014, the latest year for which federal data is available.
IIHS evaluated the three vehicles across all five of its crash tests as well as their crash-prevention systems. Overall, the Challenger was the worst-performing car of the group.
The Mustang came closest to achieving Top Safety Pick status, Lund said. Its small-front overlap rating holds it back, but otherwise it outperforms both its competitors in roof strength. Strong roofs are especially important for sports cars, which have among the highest driver death rates in single-vehicle rollovers, IIHS says.
Another differentiator: Both the Mustang and Challenger were equipped with basic crash-warning systems designed to alert drivers to imminent collisions. The Camaro was not equipped with any sort of crash-avoidance system.
"What we're seeing here is these vehicles are lagging behind on the crash-avoidance features that are being built into family-type cars," Lund said.
The results highlight another sore point for Detroit's Big Three manufacturers. When it comes to safety, they've fallen behind the competition. Of the 52 Top Safety Pick+ rankings awarded to 2016 models through January, only one has gone to a domestic vehicle. The Chrysler 200 – which FCA has since decided to discontinue – is the lone domestic recipient.
IIHS doesn't typically crash-test sports cars because they comprise a small overall share of the consumer market. But insurance data shows sports cars have the highest losses among passenger vehicles for crash damage repairs under collision coverage, according to the Highway Loss Data Institute. The three cars tested were all equipped with V-8 engines.”