[Iron Oak]

Originally Posted by Kracka

Great info! Really glad you asked about the dry-sump system as that was one of my questions as well. As a C7 Z51 owner, consider it a good move by not having it. Especially on a street car, it causes more trouble than it's worth IMO.

Really? I like the idea of a dry sump set up purely from a track standpoint. What issues have you run into?

Also have you had the chance to drive the Z51 on the track? If so, what were your impressions of the eLSD?

[Iron Oak]

Thanks everyone for the warm response! looking forward to further stories on this and the ZL1!

[Kracka]

Originally Posted by Iron Oak

Really? I like the idea of a dry sump set up purely from a track standpoint. What issues have you run into?

Also have you had the chance to drive the Z51 on the track? If so, what were your impressions of the eLSD?

Dry-sump is definitely at home on the track. On the street...not so much. Takes forever for the oil to come up to temp, bizarre procedure to check proper oil level, oil burping into the intake and draining out through the air filter when even just a hair over-filled, etc.

I have not taken it to the track, but when pushing hard on some fun twisties you can definitely feel the eLSD doing it's thing! I consider it the RWD version of the Evo X's S-AWC system (which is magical).

[mjk3888]

Great interview! Now it makes more sense that the corvette has the dry sump. Seem's like it was more of a decision to get the engine as low as possible as opposed to the necessity of needing dry sump lubrication. Very interesting!

Also I had not even noticed the lack of a strut tower brace. That will be one of the first Mods for me along with CAI.

[Nataphen]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

Also I had not even noticed the lack of a strut tower brace. That will be one of the first Mods for me along with CAI.

Me too. A strut tower brace may not be necessary for their goals, but it definitely doesn't hurt.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Do you think you'll feel a difference?

I'd be very curious to see. It could be like the "subframe connectors" for the 5th gens that didn't do anything.

[SS 1LE]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Do you think you'll feel a difference?

I'd be very curious to see. It could be like the "subframe connectors" for the 5th gens that didn't do anything.

You won't feel anything, if it was needed GM would have spend the small amount and added it to the 1LE. It will be more of a cosmetic mod.

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Do you think you'll feel a difference?

I'd be very curious to see. It could be like the "subframe connectors" for the 5th gens that didn't do anything.

I am sure you saw this as well, but on Camaro5 there was much evidence given that the strut tower brace did nothing either, and some of the track guys removed it because it was extra weight up high that was doing nothing. It did not hurt the cars performance at all not to have it. The Gen 6 has an even stronger / stiffer chassis so it does not shock me that it was omitted.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I am sure you saw this as well, but on Camaro5 there was much evidence given that the strut tower brace did nothing either, and some of the track guys removed it because it was extra weight up high that was doing nothing. It did not hurt the cars performance at all not to have it. The Gen 6 has an even stronger / stiffer chassis so it does not shock me that it was omitted.

I saw other data that showed demonstrated enough (although marginal) movement in the strut towers at high G's to warrant a strut tower brace on the performance variants. Front suspension geometry on the Gen6 is much better than Gen5.

And the same people (with the same level of high standards/expectations) are working on the car, which would support what they've said: it just doesn't need it.

(If you notice...the SS does have two strut-to-firewall braces. These will do much of the same job as a dedicated strut-tower brace, without the unnecessary weight.)

[kingbambino22]

Also remember the 2016 Camaro SS motor trend tested was on a full tank of gas. That affected the Camaro lap times. I say it would have match or passed the BMW M4 lap times if all things were equal. Just my opinion

[Nataphen]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Do you think you'll feel a difference?

I'd be very curious to see. It could be like the "subframe connectors" for the 5th gens that didn't do anything.

I know every car is different, but I tried a little experiment years ago with an STB that sold me on them. An aftermarket parts company contacted me about trying an STB for one of my previous cars. That particular car was very stiff as well, had stock firewall to tower braces, and an STB was basically deemed unnecessary for it by the community. The parts company said I could try it and mail it back if I didn't want it, and they would cover shipping. I didn't think it would make any difference honestly, but I figured I'd give it a shot.

I took the car out and did some autocross style driving before installing it, then after, then took it back off and did it again. I could tell that the front of the car was stiffer when being pushed and tossed back and forth. It felt better to me with the STB installed. I called the company and paid them for it. The case may vary with the Camaro, but I'll definitely be trying it. I can always pass it on to someone who just wants it for cosmetic reasons if it doesn't prove to be helpful.

[Iron Oak]

It should be noted that while there is no strut tower brace connection the two, There are small individual braces that connect each strut tower to the firewall, helping with rigidity. As well as gusseting on top of each strut tower on its own. So a cross brace may not be necessary.

[juzefzoozoo]

If it doesn't help, it'll only hinder as it adds unnecessary weight. Knowingly adding a STB for cosmetic purposes is kind of like how Mercedes uses shifters that look like a manual knob.. when everybody knows it's an automatic. I always thought that was kind of pathetic. But hey, whatever floats .

Originally Posted by Nataphen

... I can always pass it on to someone who just wants it for cosmetic reasons if it doesn't prove to be helpful.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Nataphen

I know every car is different, but I tried a little experiment years ago with an STB that sold me on them. An aftermarket parts company contacted me about trying an STB for one of my previous cars. That particular car was very stiff as well, had stock firewall to tower braces, and an STB was basically deemed unnecessary for it by the community. The parts company said I could try it and mail it back if I didn't want it, and they would cover shipping. I didn't think it would make any difference honestly, but I figured I'd give it a shot.

I took the car out and did some autocross style driving before installing it, then after, then took it back off and did it again. I could tell that the front of the car was stiffer when being pushed and tossed back and forth. It felt better to me with the STB installed. I called the company and paid them for it. The case may vary with the Camaro, but I'll definitely be trying it. I can always pass it on to someone who just wants it for cosmetic reasons if it doesn't prove to be helpful.

That's certainly valid, and up to you! I'll be interested in hearing your thoughts!