[DrkPhx]

^^ That diagram sums it up perfectly. Back to the Z06.. Yes, the purists were upset, but GM had it right regardless; ZO6 accounted for 20% of Vette sales in 2015. Furthermore the Z51 model (not an option anymore) accounted for 50% of Stingray sales. Once again, GM is in the business of selling vehicles and I expect them to roll out the 1LE in similar fashion. Of course only time will tell if that's what happens.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by DrkPhx

^^ That diagram sums it up perfectly. Back to the Z06.. Yes, the purists were upset, but GM had it right regardless; ZO6 accounted for 20% of Vette sales in 2015. Furthermore the Z51 model (not an option anymore) accounted for 50% of Stingray sales. Once again, GM is in the business of selling vehicles and I expect them to roll out the 1LE in similar fashion. Of course only time will tell if that's what happens.

Wait....Z51 is not a thing anymore?

[DrkPhx]

Well technically it's a performance package.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

From Porsche's website on the GT3:

"At the press of a button, you can select between two different modes. ‘Normal’ mode is designed for sporty driving on public roads and on wet racetracks. ‘Sport’ mode is specially tuned for maximum lateral acceleration and offers the best possible traction on the track."

Obviously Porsche wants the best of both worlds, which is what almost everyone has been saying. You are just harping on the opinion it should not be an option by maybe 2 or 3 people in this thread. I agree with you it should be an option given there's no more extra platform costs now since the SS has it optional. But like others have said, racing classes the SS will be in ban MRC. And that plus those going hard core track setups are good enough reasons to not make it standard.

So lets pretend the GT3 has an available 'performance package' equal to the 1LE package on the SS(so we can better compare apples to apples, instead of cars to car options). How would Porsche pull that off while using the exact same suspension they use on the base model? I asked this question a while ago, as I hope there is a viable answer. I would like to see them use the mag ride, but nobody can explain how that would pan out, and I cannot see a path GM could take to do it.

When I look at the options of mag ride(who knows how), and stiffer shock/spring combo, its easy for me to see which seems most likely. Again, I hope I am wrong and hope someone can convince me otherwise.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Waiting46

Scenarios:
1LE gets MRC standard
- breaks too many racing class rules (a fact that has been stated before) and people wont buy it
- Burns through 30-50% of the 1LE "budget" as MRC is already a $1500 factory option
- purists boo that its "not hardcore enough" -- GM loses out on a small subset of sales

1LE does NOT get MRC standard
- Everymen boo as the car isn't "compliant enough" and they either suck it up or buy an SS with MRC

1LE gets MRC as an option
- People on forums like this are annoyed that they sacrificed some of the 1LE "spirit"
- GM has to spend money ensuring that any suspension tweaks work for MRC(and performance is equal or better) -- overall 1LE price marginally higher OR "2LE" (with MRC option) with slightly higher price than MRC + 1LE

I agree with everything you said, but changed it a little. I can't see how they do that part.

[toehead93]

The Z51 is not a model, it is still an option like it was for the C6. go check the corvette build site to configure one.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by -Rooster-

But I have a question for those "against" allowing MRC as an option...what in the 1LE's history or mission as a more track-capable SS makes MRC a "bad" thing? It's certainly an improvement over regular shim-valve damping (which is what we'd get...).

Two items come to mind. I'm thinking in terms of percent critical damping, which cannot be optimized simultaneously for best ride and best grip.

1) If you leave the rest of the suspension and the wheel/tire package alone, you're stuck with whatever transient handling was dialed into the calibration. Not that the average HPDE driver has much chance of improving it even if GM granted access to the programming or mapping.

2) If you modify anything else in the suspension or move up to a more serious wheel/tire package, would the OE MRC tuning have enough self-adjusting capability built into it to accommodate such changes?


The chart below is just for illustration. Chances are that the two minimum points for a 6th gen Camaro will be somewhat different, but the general idea that best ride needs the damping to be less than that for best grip should still hold true.





Norm

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Maybe a visual will help explain it to some?

Attachment 771764

I totally understand and agree with those who feel MRC should not be standard equipment on the 1LE package...primarily because of SCCA regs and the general "illegal in competition racing" argument.

But I have a question for those "against" allowing MRC as an option...what in the 1LE's history or mission as a more track-capable SS makes MRC a "bad" thing? It's certainly an improvement over regular shim-valve damping (which is what we'd get...).



Oh, my......

Wait, what am I missing. So didn't the 1LE have monotubes? The Z28 had DSSV, but I thought the 1LE with its monotones rides better than the Z28 with DSSV. Is it because the 1LE used the SS springs?

[mcsoul]

I think a 1SS MRC NPP 6sp with 3.91's and a good wheel tire combo will surprise some people on the track. I can't wait for the gen 6 track times to start coming in for well known and tested tracks like Willow. Supposedly the new M4 / SS MT head to head will give us some data.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by mcsoul

I think a 1SS MRC NPP 6sp with 3.91's and a good wheel tire combo will surprise some people on the track. I can't wait for the gen 6 track times to start coming in for well known and tested tracks like Willow. Supposedly the new M4 / SS MT head to head will give us some data.

I agree!

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Two items come to mind. I'm thinking in terms of percent critical damping, which cannot be optimized simultaneously for best ride and best grip.

1) If you leave the rest of the suspension and the wheel/tire package alone, you're stuck with whatever transient handling was dialed into the calibration. Not that the average HPDE driver has much chance of improving it even if GM granted access to the programming or mapping.

2) If you modify anything else in the suspension or move up to a more serious wheel/tire package, would the OE MRC tuning have enough self-adjusting capability built into it to accommodate such changes?


The chart below is just for illustration. Chances are that the two minimum points for a 6th gen Camaro will be somewhat different, but the general idea that best ride needs the damping to be less than that for best grip should still hold true.

Norm

Fair enough. I can see your point.

I suppose it depends how far they planned ahead with this, and whether or not they intended for MRC to be an option on the 1LE to begin with. 5th gen 1LE's came with a revised ABS calibration to accommodate for the more aggressive wheel/tire combo. I would imagine that IF....only IF...they intended for MRC to be an available option when equipped with 1LE, they could update the damper calibrations, too.

Originally Posted by ST1LE

Wait, what am I missing. So didn't the 1LE have monotubes? The Z28 had DSSV, but I thought the 1LE with its monotones rides better than the Z28 with DSSV. Is it because the 1LE used the SS springs?

Correct it did have monotube shocks, and it was a softer ride than the Z/28. But the devil's in the details: the Z/28 springs were 85% stiffer than the SS. Springs do most of the work...dampers only control what the springs do.

[6spdhyperblue]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

I suppose it depends how far they planned ahead with this, and whether or not they intended for MRC to be an option on the 1LE to begin with. 5th gen 1LE's came with a revised ABS calibration to accommodate for the more aggressive wheel/tire combo. I would imagine that IF....only IF...they intended for MRC to be an available option when equipped with 1LE, they could update the damper calibrations, too.

do you guys think they will include a MRC tune for the lowering springs?

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

I agree!



Fair enough. I can see your point.

I suppose it depends how far they planned ahead with this, and whether or not they intended for MRC to be an option on the 1LE to begin with. 5th gen 1LE's came with a revised ABS calibration to accommodate for the more aggressive wheel/tire combo. I would imagine that IF....only IF...they intended for MRC to be an available option when equipped with 1LE, they could update the damper calibrations, too.


Correct it did have monotube shocks, and it was a softer ride than the Z/28. But the devil's in the details: the Z/28 springs were 85% stiffer than the SS. Springs do most of the work...dampers only control what the springs do.

Yeah, that makes sense. The only thing I could think of anyway would have been the springs.

So let's look at this from a different angle. Let's assume GM leaves the MRC unchanged, but makes it standard or something like that. Is there enough left on the table for the engineers to do enough to the SS, to make it a 1LE?

[Waiting46]

Is DSSV really 80% as comfortable as MRC? Ive never been in a vehicle with it

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Waiting46

Is DSSV really 80% as comfortable as MRC? Ive never been in a vehicle with it

I think it has the potential, but depends on the entire setup to determine final comfort level. Like discussed above, the Z28 was more harsh due to the springs.