Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,069 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just read about two different A6 2.56 geared 08's running 12.4 and 12.5's respectively for their best ets down in texas bone stock in 90 degree weather. Oddly enough, both post only ets and mph and give no incrimental times or post a scan of the times slip. Don't know if they are factual unless slips are there to see, but if this is an indication, the 08's will probally be right within a tenth or two of the 05-07's even in good weather. I don't see a 1/2 second reduction in ets due to 10 -20 degree drop in temp, so 11's, I belive, are not to be had without "cheating" the bone stock term(i.e., weight reduction, lying about mods,etc..). I have seen other times posted in a few places of bone stock 08's, but numbers were low ( 12.8's +up) so they, of course were disreguarded by the "C6.5" crowd. I think it may be possible, however, with good conditions and maybe a tune and mild mods(vararam,opened exhaust valves), to scratch 11's, say maybe a 12.0 or 12.1. Just my opinion, and of course, others will have different ones. The best time overall in a C6 to this point bone stock is 12.2, with only two reported runs at that et, and that was with absolute best conditions and launch,and being abnormal , I feel that even the best '08 C6 driver in the best conditions may, and I stress MAY be able to shave a tenth or two with the extra advertised HP and torque. Saying all 08's will be in the low 12's or maybe 11's is as nutty as saying all C6s should be in the 12.2 range just because two "freak" runs occured.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Sorry to disagree and very friendly of course, but 12.4 in 90 degree weather is stout. And I believe I saw the same times you did and those cars had less than 1K miles on them and I know the one was less than 500. Those are very good times in that kind of weather with cars that I believe are not fully broken in. I fully believe when we see these cars running in nice conditions and cooler temps (lets say around 50 degrees or so), we will se very low 12's. The car has it in it and I am speaking from experience. I have had both. I traded in my '06 A6 with 2.56 gears on an '08 A6 with 2.73 gears. I was not expecting too much difference, but I was after all the upgrades, engine, new steering (which I feel is much improved), on star, and exhaust. But all I will say is that my '08, starting with the shift from 1st into 2nd, literally started to walk away from my '06. And it did not matter who was in the '06 and who was in the '08, the result was always the same. Also my '08 revs up faster (gears) and the shift from 1st into 2nd feels like a manual. It shifts very very fast and hard. So overall the A6 has been improved. Shifts are quite a bit quicker and the lag is less this time around. So we will all have to see how this shakes out, but I believe 12.00 will be seen in the fall.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,069 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Time will tell and my post is opinion only, laced with some facts. Consider how much torque management hurts even a bone stock LS2 and apply that same TM parameter to a car with more torque(ls3)....the TM comes on sooner and stays in place longer with more % applied, reducing power. The only reason 12.2s were seen in the LS2 was that the drivers discovered the secret to "driving around" the TM during the launch technique. The A6 remains the main victim of the most TM invasion, as the M6 cars do not have TM applied in the tranny , yet the A6 still prevails as the fastest et holder, due to the two owners who figured out how to advoid the TM "penalty". I've talked in detail to one of those drivers and belive I know how to get around the TM and will give it a try next time at the track.That being said, most LS3 owners will not think of TM or driving techniques(same as most drivers period at the track) and simply "hammer down" at the green light, which will cause a huge spike in TM % applied and slow the car. Do the LS3s have the HP and TQ to go 11's low 12's, yes, but so do the LS2s, so it's not just simply the HP rating or SOTP feeling from stop light to stop light. My car feels quicker and I have the ets to prove it when the tires are spinning, not hooking, and that goes against everything I've ever learned about racing. TM is not applied when the tires spin, only when they hook and if you hook hard,more TM is applied, and if you have more torque,as the LS3 does over the LS2, the TM % is increased at that launch, hurting the et. If the 12.4/12.5 is correct for the LS3 times listed so far, I can promise they had a poor 60ft time and probally spun in first and some in second.Had they hooked hard at the line, with say a 1.9 or 1.85 60ft, the times would probally be the same or worse. Like I said before, BOTH the LS2 and LS3 have the power to turn low 12's and maybe hit 11's but with the current nanny system GM has placed in these cars , it, IMO, isn't possible bone stock.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,766 Posts
I think all you need is tires to run a 12.00 or better in cool weather, based on the numbers posted (if, as you said, they are accurate). As long as the car used street legal tires the same size as OE, I (personally) wouldn't classify it as modified.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,069 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Anything other than how it rolled out of Bowling Green is consider modded. Dealer installed performance goodies, aftermarket items, tunes, and drs are included in the parameters of modifications.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
All I can say, and hey maybe my '08 is a ringer, but it will walk away from the '06 I had at about 40 MPH and into triple digits. TM may be there, but I do not seem to experience any more with the '08 as I did with the '06. Remember we have only seen a few '08 times, so let's wait and see what happens as more results come in. It is way more than SOTP for me. It was my old one vs. my new one and I will tell you point blank, the '08 was quicker. At all starting points. Dead stop, 2nd gear starts, 3rd gear stars. No matter what, we could not get the '06 to stay with the '08 after about 40 MPH. No if's, and's, or but's. I am 100% a corvette enthusiast and I would be the first to say they run about the same. But when going head to head with my trade in against my new one, they just are not same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
In terms of tire slippage and friction, "most tires" make peak grip at a 6% slip angle, however anywhere from 4-10% is excellent friction also. So, maybe your tires are slipping at say 7-10% which doesn't hurt your friction level but disengages TM, thus helping your times. Just a thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Sorry to disagree and very friendly of course, but 12.4 in 90 degree weather is stout. And I believe I saw the same times you did and those cars had less than 1K miles on them and I know the one was less than 500. Those are very good times in that kind of weather with cars that I believe are not fully broken in. I fully believe when we see these cars running in nice conditions and cooler temps (lets say around 50 degrees or so), we will se very low 12's. The car has it in it and I am speaking from experience. I have had both. I traded in my '06 A6 with 2.56 gears on an '08 A6 with 2.73 gears. I was not expecting too much difference, but I was after all the upgrades, engine, new steering (which I feel is much improved), on star, and exhaust. But all I will say is that my '08, starting with the shift from 1st into 2nd, literally started to walk away from my '06. And it did not matter who was in the '06 and who was in the '08, the result was always the same. Also my '08 revs up faster (gears) and the shift from 1st into 2nd feels like a manual. It shifts very very fast and hard. So overall the A6 has been improved. Shifts are quite a bit quicker and the lag is less this time around. So we will all have to see how this shakes out, but I believe 12.00 will be seen in the fall.

yEP, HE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, 12.4 IN 90'S PLUS IS STOUT. BEST I COULD MUSTER LAST WEEKEND WITH A 92 DEGREE TEMP AND A DENSITY ALTITUDE OF 2800 FEET WAS A 13.08-WHICH CORRECTED TO A 12.67 WITH THE NHRA CORRECTION FACTOR. COMPUTER PULLS TIMING OUT ABOVE 88 DEGREES O.A.T. I AM TOLD.
 

·
Caution: Car melts in Rain
Joined
·
4,151 Posts
In terms of tire slippage and friction, "most tires" make peak grip at a 6% slip angle, however anywhere from 4-10% is excellent friction also. So, maybe your tires are slipping at say 7-10% which doesn't hurt your friction level but disengages TM, thus helping your times. Just a thought.

really? if you look on my 0-60 video i did beter when my tires chirped off the line
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
really? if you look on my 0-60 video i did beter when my tires chirped off the line
Well, chirping is slipping to a small degree.;)

If you look at the Motor Trend test of the 08 Vette, they say you can launch at 2000rpm with minimal chirping and do a 4.5 sec 0-60 run, or slip the tires more by launching at 3500rpm, but get a 4 sec run, mainly because when the tires hook at about 3500rpm, the LS3 is making somewhere around 350hp vs. 250hp at 2500rpm. But this is only possible because the tire isn't losing much traction by slipping it at 10% vs. 3/4%, and then the higher hp upon "bite" is much higher.

I haven't tested this theory myself(;) ), but this is what the info has stated as true.:cheers:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,069 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Here's my experience with "slippage" and TM results:

I ran a 1.939 60 ft en route to a 12.0 @ 119.18 1/4 mile ,the car had recently dyno'd at 406rwhp and 386rwtq. I "slipped" during the 60ft, as well as the 1-2 shift and slightly at the 2-3 shift. This was in "S" mode with TC off.

Next time at the track, I ran a best of a 2.010 60ft en route to a [email protected] This trip I had 450rwhp and 405rwtq on tap. I felt like the car hooked much better on the launch and didn't even chirp once during shifting, all positive traction.

The difference between the two runs ( weather and conditions notwithstanding) is this: 44rwhp more, 19rwtq more, 1mph more and .20 slower on a .071 lower 60ft. Why? TM TM TM The car hooked great then, almost like a power loss, then back into it until shift change, then again slightly until 3rd, then very slightly and then, 1/4 mile over. My car has had a professional tune, as well, eliminating(as much as can be) the TM from programming, EXCEPT for that in the tranny.The A6 cars are , no doubt, the better track performers, stock or modded, save for the TM. Maybe GM victimized the A6s due to the outrage the Manual tranny people would display if an automatic tranny vette was a better performer out of the box. Who knows. I just want someone to develop a program to completely eliminate TM from all aspects of my car. Anyways, sorry about getting off track. The above write up of my two runs display what I belive to be TM being counter productive to extra HP/TQ, and thus supports my theory of the LS3 being restricted to a higher percentage than the LS2 was.The M6 guys may well be the lotto winners with the 08's and up, especially after a tune, unless, of course, that tune comes out to get rid of the TM in the A6 tranny.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Here's my experience with "slippage" and TM results:

I ran a 1.939 60 ft en route to a 12.0 @ 119.18 1/4 mile ,the car had recently dyno'd at 406rwhp and 386rwtq. I "slipped" during the 60ft, as well as the 1-2 shift and slightly at the 2-3 shift. This was in "S" mode with TC off.

Next time at the track, I ran a best of a 2.010 60ft en route to a [email protected] This trip I had 450rwhp and 405rwtq on tap. I felt like the car hooked much better on the launch and didn't even chirp once during shifting, all positive traction.

The difference between the two runs ( weather and conditions notwithstanding) is this: 44rwhp more, 19rwtq more, 1mph more and .20 slower on a .071 lower 60ft. Why? TM TM TM The car hooked great then, almost like a power loss, then back into it until shift change, then again slightly until 3rd, then very slightly and then, 1/4 mile over. My car has had a professional tune, as well, eliminating(as much as can be) the TM from programming, EXCEPT for that in the tranny.The A6 cars are , no doubt, the better track performers, stock or modded, save for the TM. Maybe GM victimized the A6s due to the outrage the Manual tranny people would display if an automatic tranny vette was a better performer out of the box. Who knows. I just want someone to develop a program to completely eliminate TM from all aspects of my car. Anyways, sorry about getting off track. The above write up of my two runs display what I belive to be TM being counter productive to extra HP/TQ, and thus supports my theory of the LS3 being restricted to a higher percentage than the LS2 was.The M6 guys may well be the lotto winners with the 08's and up, especially after a tune, unless, of course, that tune comes out to get rid of the TM in the A6 tranny.
Evilways:

I just got back from Dynoing my LS3, NPP, M6, and a Halltech Intake and the numbers came out to 403.88 rwhp and 394.21 whtq and No Tune. That was the best after 3 pulls. The car now has 900 miles on it. I just wanted to see if these cars are really putting out the horse power that the Dyno are showing and apparently they are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
Evilways:

I just got back from Dynoing my LS3, NPP, M6, and a Halltech Intake and the numbers came out to 403.88 rwhp and 394.21 whtq and No Tune. That was the best after 3 pulls. The car now has 900 miles on it. I just wanted to see if these cars are really putting out the horse power that the Dyno are showing and apparently they are.
Is there anything different between the Halltechs for the LS3 vs the LS2? I had a Halltech Stinger and it did nothing for my car at the track. Replaced in with the VR and gained .2 and 2mph over the Stinger.

I hate to dyno race but the LS3 puts out 30-40rwhp more than a stock LS2. All else being equal, it's going to be faster on the track. My 397rwhp LS2 is faster by 8 mph in the 1/8th than it was stock. Of course I think my 05 was really hampered by the stock tune though. Granted there's driver improvement in there as well but a stock LS3 has similar peak power and should be faster than a stock LS2, even with the stock tune.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,069 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Congrats, thats a ton of HP from a 99% stock car. I never doubted the HP numbers these things are producing. It's amazing GM didn't advertise them at 450 HP rather than 436HP. Just as a comparison, my stock A6 turned 337rwhp. It seems almost unfair I paid the same or more for a car with 65 less rwhp.:spanked:

It took a cam and headers with tune to get those numbers from my LS2, and even then the tq wasn't as high as yours. Congrats again and take that thing to the track to get some numbers for us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
Congrats, thats a ton of HP from a 99% stock car. I never doubted the HP numbers these things are producing. It's amazing GM didn't advertise them at 450 HP rather than 436HP. Just as a comparison, my stock A6 turned 337rwhp. It seems almost unfair I paid the same or more for a car with 65 less rwhp.:spanked:
That's what mods are for. Of course there will always be someone faster but you've got a good combo there. Plus, you run your car. Look at how many folks on CF do nothing but talk about magazine times, never run, discuss how to properly break in their car over a period of 2000 miles, etc. Internet racers. I'm not a pro, I like the net but I do race my car as well. I look forward to running anyone in the lane next to me, LS3 or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Congrats, thats a ton of HP from a 99% stock car. I never doubted the HP numbers these things are producing. It's amazing GM didn't advertise them at 450 HP rather than 436HP. Just as a comparison, my stock A6 turned 337rwhp. It seems almost unfair I paid the same or more for a car with 65 less rwhp.:spanked:

It took a cam and headers with tune to get those numbers from my LS2, and even then the tq wasn't as high as yours. Congrats again and take that thing to the track to get some numbers for us.
This is the first car that I have ever Dynoed and I was give 2 rating 1st which was listed in my reply was the standard rating. However I found out that the SAE rating is what is used and they are 396.04 rwhp and 386.55 rwtq. I assume that is what LP and MTI are using. Sorry if I miss lead anyone. The Dyno numbers were less bone stock without the Halltech Intake but were still 40 hp more than the 05-07 cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
i have run 12.7 at 105 degrees in az with altitude density of 5500 feet. So my 03 stock z06 will pull low 12 possibly an eleven in the fall
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Here's my 1/4 mile time slips from my 08 LS3 with 2.73 gearing and the NPP exhaust. This was last Friday night at Houston Raceway Park. Car had 418 miles on it when I arrived at the track.

On the first pass, right side, my IAT was 131 degrees. On the second 109 degrees. I had the fuse pulled on the second pass which may be insignificant. I feel this shows the significance of air temperature on these cars. Wish I could have gotten another pass in as the air cooled more but just too crowded.

Not sure how much the 2.73 is helping with this amount of torque management. At launch I recorded -2.5 degrees of advance coming up to +26* 1.469 seconds into my pass. That's 73% of your 60' making a reduced amount of hp/tq. And possibly more from IAT temp. I had let the car cool, hood open on this pass so the engine temp at launch was 190*. 196* at the end of the pass. I read temps up to 203* on my first pass. This high and I have a 160* tstat. Unless the fans are set to come on much lower the tstat isn't going to help in the staging lanes idling. Traction was good as I noted zero tire spinning and zero wheel hop.

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
118 Posts
First of all, most guys that have these cars can't drag race to save their lives.
If you have a car that puts down 406 at the wheels, you'd better be able to run 11's. I have dipped in the 11's on street tires with 365 RWHP in 90 degree weather.
TM is an evil thing. It makes the car so inconsistent and any good pass when you are really hooking well and putting it down will back the car off automatically to save the drive train. I think tuning out this factory handicap to be able to run the car without one hand tied behind your back is completely acceptable if there are no other adjustments made.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top