06 z06 vs fords gt-40
01-23-2005, 11:39 PM
#41
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lostpatrolman
And I was reading a magazine article about the lamborghini murcielago, and both times the mag tested it they broke it. Doesnt really prove much other then s#it happens.
01-24-2005, 12:02 AM
#42
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas-freakin'-Texas
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What will be the deciding factor will be what the actual C6 Z06 power numbers are... I mean, if the motor really makes 500 or a little over to the crank that's "only" 425-ish to the wheels (assuming 15% driveline loss); while the Z06 will be lighter than the Ford GT, the weight advantage (for the Z06) isn't big enough to cover the 100-125 RWHP advantage that the GT would have.
Now, if we go on the assumption that the new Z06 will put 475-ish to the wheels (as it is my understanding that it will), then the GT still has it covered (power:weight-wise) but the margin is considerably smaller. All of that being said, in a drag race, stock vs. stock, I think that the GT will drag the Z06... not only does it have it covered as far as pounds per HP, it also has the advantage of being mid/rear engined... so it's going to plant the tires well and transfer weight like a ****.
As for weight balancing, while it is true that both cars have nearly a 50/50 balance (I think), there is a difference between having an equal amount of mass over each axle and having the majority of the mass in the center of the car and having each axle share the load equally. The "centered mass" car will transfer weight better, and has the potential to change directions quicker, since the mass isn't swinging around like a pendelum (as it would be in a "mass at the ends" car).
All of that being said, assuming the 475-ish RWHP number for the C6 Z06, I think it'll take the GT on a road course... under those circumstances, the extra weight of the GT would be a real hinderance... because those extra pounds would need to not only accelerate, but brake and change direction, too. Although... ya never know... one of the car rags did a comparo with the C6 (I think it was Z51 equipped) and the Porsche 911 Carrera (I think it was an S model); and despite the distinct power:weight advantage that the 'Vette had, the track results were MIGHTY close. Apparently, the Porsche was more of a "balanced" car that allowed for getting into the throttle early coming out of a turn, whereas doing the same thing in the 'Vette resulted in throttle-on oversteer. Fun... but not particularly fast. While magazine results can be debated 6 ways to Sunday, let's face it... those guys have more seat time in more performance cars than most of us could ever dream of; I'm not saying that they are the best drivers in the world, but I think that they are probably pretty representative of what a fairly talented driver is capable of.
Now, if we go on the assumption that the new Z06 will put 475-ish to the wheels (as it is my understanding that it will), then the GT still has it covered (power:weight-wise) but the margin is considerably smaller. All of that being said, in a drag race, stock vs. stock, I think that the GT will drag the Z06... not only does it have it covered as far as pounds per HP, it also has the advantage of being mid/rear engined... so it's going to plant the tires well and transfer weight like a ****.
As for weight balancing, while it is true that both cars have nearly a 50/50 balance (I think), there is a difference between having an equal amount of mass over each axle and having the majority of the mass in the center of the car and having each axle share the load equally. The "centered mass" car will transfer weight better, and has the potential to change directions quicker, since the mass isn't swinging around like a pendelum (as it would be in a "mass at the ends" car).
All of that being said, assuming the 475-ish RWHP number for the C6 Z06, I think it'll take the GT on a road course... under those circumstances, the extra weight of the GT would be a real hinderance... because those extra pounds would need to not only accelerate, but brake and change direction, too. Although... ya never know... one of the car rags did a comparo with the C6 (I think it was Z51 equipped) and the Porsche 911 Carrera (I think it was an S model); and despite the distinct power:weight advantage that the 'Vette had, the track results were MIGHTY close. Apparently, the Porsche was more of a "balanced" car that allowed for getting into the throttle early coming out of a turn, whereas doing the same thing in the 'Vette resulted in throttle-on oversteer. Fun... but not particularly fast. While magazine results can be debated 6 ways to Sunday, let's face it... those guys have more seat time in more performance cars than most of us could ever dream of; I'm not saying that they are the best drivers in the world, but I think that they are probably pretty representative of what a fairly talented driver is capable of.
01-24-2005, 12:19 AM
#43
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Largo, Fl.
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosins...utos-37905.htm
Nearly 450 vehicles - all Ford GTs built to date - are affected by a suspension component problem that originated with a supplier, said spokeswoman Kristen Kinley. The component is subject to cracking because of a casting process error.
I hardly see how that is fords fault.
Nearly 450 vehicles - all Ford GTs built to date - are affected by a suspension component problem that originated with a supplier, said spokeswoman Kristen Kinley. The component is subject to cracking because of a casting process error.
I hardly see how that is fords fault.
01-24-2005, 12:46 AM
#44
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: dudley mass
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Big Jimbo]according to the magzine's (i know, i know....) the Z06 ran an 11.7 and the GT40 runs somewhere around 12.2 QUOTE]
every mag i read said the gt40 ran 11.1 or so at 130plus. i dont think the vette will be quite as fast. this is from car and driver and motortrend
every mag i read said the gt40 ran 11.1 or so at 130plus. i dont think the vette will be quite as fast. this is from car and driver and motortrend
01-24-2005, 07:44 AM
#45
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: wilmington delaware
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
according to this website, http://ford.jbcarpages.com/GT/2005/index4.php, the gt's weight distribution is 43/57. in addition, having a relatively large displacement roots blown motor i.e. serious low end torque, it should be a handful in power on corner exits so it being mid-engine wont neccesarily give the advantage on a road course. that extra 300 lbs of heft it has to throw around doesnt help either.
also, tony, the ford gt "might" be better than the f360 and the c6 z06 wont be? i HOPE that was a typo and you meant to put the f430. thats debateable but the f360 is seriously outclassed by those two cars.
also, tony, the ford gt "might" be better than the f360 and the c6 z06 wont be? i HOPE that was a typo and you meant to put the f430. thats debateable but the f360 is seriously outclassed by those two cars.
01-24-2005, 11:00 AM
#47
I have driven and worked on many Gt's. I absolutley dislike them. You can't see out the mirrors to backup and make lane changes. The turning radius sucks so it hard to park. If your tall you have to duck while shutting the door or your melon will get crushed. I don't think many people will be changing the blower pulley since the pulley is so close to the rear window its not very easy to remove.
The vette gets my vote..
The vette gets my vote..
01-24-2005, 12:28 PM
#48
11 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rockland County, NY
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lostpatrolman
http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosins...utos-37905.htm
Nearly 450 vehicles - all Ford GTs built to date - are affected by a suspension component problem that originated with a supplier, said spokeswoman Kristen Kinley. The component is subject to cracking because of a casting process error.
I hardly see how that is fords fault.
Nearly 450 vehicles - all Ford GTs built to date - are affected by a suspension component problem that originated with a supplier, said spokeswoman Kristen Kinley. The component is subject to cracking because of a casting process error.
I hardly see how that is fords fault.
01-24-2005, 12:37 PM
#49
Launching!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lostpatrolman
I have heard of some messed up stories with the c6's key fob letting people jump in the car and drive away if the owner is in close proximity. :
01-24-2005, 12:44 PM
#51
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by el Jonnyo
i duno about that
the GT is a mid-engine car which is far better than front engine for roadracing
the GT is a mid-engine car which is far better than front engine for roadracing
The Z06 is close to a 50/50 weight distribution and it's expected to hold over 1 g of lateral acceleration on the skidpad.
The GT may prove to be a better road course performer, but it won't be simply because its mid-engined and the Vette is front-engined.
01-24-2005, 12:46 PM
#52
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record, I don't quite think the Z06 will be able to keep pace in a straight line with the GT.
550 rwhp is just too much to overcome with just a weight advantage... that's going to be like a 100-120 rwhp advantage for the GT.
And to everyone calling it the "GT-40", that's every bit as annoying as when someone says "CamEro".
550 rwhp is just too much to overcome with just a weight advantage... that's going to be like a 100-120 rwhp advantage for the GT.
And to everyone calling it the "GT-40", that's every bit as annoying as when someone says "CamEro".
01-24-2005, 01:13 PM
#53
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: WA
Posts: 3,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Velocity
That's not even close to an accurate statement if the rest of the car isn't set up as well... Saying that is like saying, "Your engine displaces 4.6 liters, my engine displaces 5.7L... therefore, my car is faster."
The Z06 is close to a 50/50 weight distribution and it's expected to hold over 1 g of lateral acceleration on the skidpad.
The GT may prove to be a better road course performer, but it won't be simply because its mid-engined and the Vette is front-engined.
The Z06 is close to a 50/50 weight distribution and it's expected to hold over 1 g of lateral acceleration on the skidpad.
The GT may prove to be a better road course performer, but it won't be simply because its mid-engined and the Vette is front-engined.
01-24-2005, 02:23 PM
#54
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fulton 1
You're obviously correct in that you can't arbitrarily say that a mid-engine car will outperform a front engine car - its not that simple. However, a mid-engine car tends to have its weight more centrally located than a front/rear engine setup regardless of F/R weight distribution. This results in a lower polar moment of inertia, which will make the vehicle easier to rotate.
agree
01-24-2005, 07:04 PM
#55
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lostpatrolman
http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosins...utos-37905.htm
Nearly 450 vehicles - all Ford GTs built to date - are affected by a suspension component problem that originated with a supplier, said spokeswoman Kristen Kinley. The component is subject to cracking because of a casting process error.
I hardly see how that is fords fault.
Nearly 450 vehicles - all Ford GTs built to date - are affected by a suspension component problem that originated with a supplier, said spokeswoman Kristen Kinley. The component is subject to cracking because of a casting process error.
I hardly see how that is fords fault.
how is that not fords fault? are you serious? so ford decides to use cheap *** parts that cant handle the stress that its car puts on it, its not their fault it breaks? I dont know about you, but if i was building a production car, a $150,000 one at that, i would check out all the places i plan on buying anything from, to make sure they're not screwing up the casting process, etc. if this sounds like a foreign concept to you remind me not to buy any products affiliated with you or the company you work for. 
01-24-2005, 07:34 PM
#57
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pleasanton, CA
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I just got done reading all the arguments and im not gonna lie, i dont know a whole lot about the stats of the Ford GT. But here are a few points to think about. And some of this maybe a bit off.
As I understand it the corvette is one of the most aerodynamic cars in the world.
The ZO6 weighs less than the Ford GT
The ZO6 has closer gears (not sure on this one, cause not sure of the Fords gears)
When the Viper and Ford GT where compared, they where nearly identical in performance. This is ofcourse before the 50hp bump. But still...
And the last thing is that $150k car should utterly destroy a 70-80k(est)car. But i bet that it will be a close one. And remember the ZO6 comes with forged internals, that means ready for some good poweradders.
Please no more saying the ZO6 has more CI. Cause the GT has a blower. Power is power, no matter how it is generated.
2001 T/A WS6 6-Speed
321HP/337TQ 13.1@109 on Nittos
Lid and Filter/Magnaflow Cat-back/Thermostat/TB Bypass/Pro 5.0 Shifter
Nitto DR's
As I understand it the corvette is one of the most aerodynamic cars in the world.
The ZO6 weighs less than the Ford GT
The ZO6 has closer gears (not sure on this one, cause not sure of the Fords gears)
When the Viper and Ford GT where compared, they where nearly identical in performance. This is ofcourse before the 50hp bump. But still...
And the last thing is that $150k car should utterly destroy a 70-80k(est)car. But i bet that it will be a close one. And remember the ZO6 comes with forged internals, that means ready for some good poweradders.
Please no more saying the ZO6 has more CI. Cause the GT has a blower. Power is power, no matter how it is generated.
2001 T/A WS6 6-Speed
321HP/337TQ 13.1@109 on Nittos
Lid and Filter/Magnaflow Cat-back/Thermostat/TB Bypass/Pro 5.0 Shifter
Nitto DR's
01-24-2005, 07:42 PM
#58
12 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 3,321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
those ime sthat are for the Z06 are estimates GIVE THE CAR TO A GOOD RACER give it to JROD or something and then see how it runs! i bet its faster and i bet it puts awesome powers to the wheels....weight is light and balance is great 50/50 its PERFECT i bet it wins either way HANDS DOWN!
01-24-2005, 08:23 PM
#59
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: TX.
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tony Montana
If the GT40 is a POS, the vette is not road worthy. Sure the Z06 makes 500hp, but it is a much larger displacment engine. Personally, I'd take the GT40 everytime. The fact that it is mid engined is enough to sway me. Hell, it might even be better than the F360....not a claim the "Z06" can make. The GT40 is THE american exotic, period.
the 427s we have now eazly make 650 hp n/a.
01-24-2005, 08:46 PM
#60
Z06 vs Ford GT Correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't the Ford GT that was making 550rwhp a pre-production model? Anyway, the Z06 looks better, that's a fact!! Ask God he'll tell you the truth, he told me. 
Didn't the Viper have about 100rwhp on the 03-04 Z06, those 2 were dang close in a straight line.
Didn't the Viper have about 100rwhp on the 03-04 Z06, those 2 were dang close in a straight line.