Motor Trend vid: GT-R NISMO vs Z06

[hotrodalex]

The 4400 lbs Hellcats do indeed outrun virtually everything in a straight line.

Hellcat vs. Z06 is a silly comparison, they're built for different purposes. Hellcat is missing the suspension and aero to perform on a road track, and that aero is not beneficial to the Z06 on the drag strip.

[GoCougs]

The 4400 lbs Hellcats do indeed outrun virtually everything in a straight line.

So why are you so prone to these sweeping statements that can be researched with 14 seconds of Internetry or 3 seconds of 2nd grade math (4,400 lb/707 hp)?

The average of 5 road tests is:

6.3 lb/hp
0-60 in 3.7 sec
1/4 mile in 11.5 sec @ 125 mph

Those are 10-year-old C6 Z06 numbers, including lb/hp. So, IOW "virtually everything" except the C7 Z06, ZR1, GT-R, F458, F12, 911 Turbo, 911 GT3, Tesla P85D, Audi R8 V10, any Lambo, any McLaren, the ultra hyper exotics (Veyron, 918, LaFerrari), and probably others...

[MX793]

I'm still not convinced it's pulling power in this motor trend test. Just watching the side by side video is pretty clear. Huge difference in corner exit speed. Even with more power and less weight, it's not enough to catch up to the GTR. Even steady state handling favors the vette, but it gets completely destroyed on every corner exit.

It didn't get outrun by the GT-R because it was going into limp mode.  It got outlapped by the GT-R because the GT-R was simply faster around the track.

This isn't mentioned in the video, but the article (which I quoted and linked to in a previous post) noted that it was difficult to hone in on the best possible lap time with the Vette because it had a tendency to lose power after just a single lap, making back-to-back lapping sessions a no-go.  Anyone who autocrosses knows that one of the challenges of that sport is that you don't get back-to-back lapping sessions on the course.  You get one lap, then you sit for a period of time (IIRC, SCCA requires at least 5 minutes) before making your next run.  Makes it very hard to perfect your lap.

[12,000 RPM]

Again, for like the 7th time, the issue isn't "air flow". Just as with exhaust, air intake, etc., GM ain't gonna throw $100MM+ at a car only to then botch air flow. If the ECU is indeed pulling timing or w/e because of hot air charge, it is doing so for systemic reasons. But again, I am not convinced that is what is going on.

Ur OEM fanboyism is showing again. OEMs "botch" stuff all the time; if they didn't there would be no recalls or TSBs. U want it to be about boost to rationalize your anti-boost jihad but no other boosted cars have these issues to this extreme. Most other ~700 HP cars have more than ~1 ft^2 of cooling air flow area though.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

You think the Z06 can manage to not go into limp mode?

Once again there is no mention of "Limp Mode" in this video! The Nismo is just faster in the corners! And the Z is still balls to the walls fast for a car that was 'limping".

[MX793]

Once again there is no mention of "Limp Mode" in this video! The Nismo is just faster in the corners! And the Z is still balls to the walls fast for a car that was 'limping".

Read the article.  The video does not go into the same level of detail.

[Cookie Monster]

I'm still not convinced it's pulling power in this motor trend test. Just watching the side by side video is pretty clear. Huge difference in corner exit speed. Even with more power and less weight, it's not enough to catch up to the GTR. Even steady state handling favors the vette, but it gets completely destroyed on every corner exit.

Yeah, but look at the very beginning of the test. Even at the end of the straightaway, the GTR is doing 154 mph while the Z06 is only doing 148. Yeah, I know that the aero is going to slow it down at higher speeds, but I don't think that the aero the Z06 has is enough to overcome its power and weight advantage. Plus, the GTR is pretty big and blocky to begin with compared with the extremely low frontal area of the Z06.

The Z06 also had the GTR beat by a big margin in apex speeds, which explains why it was so ridiculously fast on the figure 8 test. I think the combination of not being able to put the power down on exit plus the lower power is what caused it to lose to the GTR. Those two could definitely add to a 1.5 second deficit to the GTR. I would think that with all 650 hp on tap, the Z06 would be able to catch the GTR, at least on speed alone, before the next corner.

[SVT666]

Again, for like the 7th time, the issue isn't "air flow". Just as with exhaust, air intake, etc., GM ain't gonna throw $100MM+ at a car only to then botch air flow. If the ECU is indeed pulling timing or w/e because of hot air charge, it is doing so for systemic reasons. But again, I am not convinced that is what is going on.

GM threw $100MM+ at a car and botched the ECU, so I'm sure they could have botched airflow too if they tried hard enough.

[hotrodalex]

GM threw $100MM+ at a car and botched the ECU, so I'm sure they could have botched airflow too if they tried hard enough.

How do they just botch an ECU?

[GoCougs]

Ur OEM fanboyism is showing again. OEMs "botch" stuff all the time; if they didn't there would be no recalls or TSBs. U want it to be about boost to rationalize your anti-boost jihad but no other boosted cars have these issues to this extreme. Most other ~700 HP cars have more than ~1 ft^2 of cooling air flow area though.

GM threw $100MM+ at a car and botched the ECU, so I'm sure they could have botched airflow too if they tried hard enough.

So how could GM spend $100MM+ (probably more like $500MM) paying an army of automotive engineers, including all the development $$$ on an all-new engine, only to somehow botch something as simple as a "cooling" system or "ECU"?

Sorry, bros, ain't happening.

[SVT666]

So how could GM spend $100MM+ (probably more like $500MM) paying an army of automotive engineers, including all the development $$$ on an all-new engine, only to somehow botch something as simple as a "cooling" system or "ECU"?

Sorry, bros, ain't happening.

If they didn't botch it, what's wrong with it?  No other car retards timing after one hard acceleration run.  If the "protection" mode is required to extend the life of the drivetrain, then the drivetrain is under engineered and the problem is much worse than botched ECU programming.

[MX793]

So how could GM spend $100MM+ (probably more like $500MM) paying an army of automotive engineers, including all the development $$$ on an all-new engine, only to somehow botch something as simple as a "cooling" system or "ECU"?

Sorry, bros, ain't happening.

You're aware that this is the same GM that managed to botch something as simple as an ignition switch, right?

[FlatBlackCaddy]

You're aware that this is the same GM that managed to botch something as simple as an ignition switch, right?

Which also then preceded to bury and ignore the issue until the government had to step in.

[12,000 RPM]

So how could GM spend $100MM+ (probably more like $500MM) paying an army of automotive engineers, including all the development $$$ on an all-new engine, only to somehow botch something as simple as a "cooling" system or "ECU"?

Sorry, bros, ain't happening.

Are u familiar with General Motors history?

[hotrodalex]

You're aware that this is the same GM that managed to botch something as simple as an ignition switch, right?

That's also not something that is an obvious problem during testing. If it was an unintentional problem, the first test driver around the track would come back complaining big time.

[GoCougs]

That's also not something that is an obvious problem during testing. If it was an unintentional problem, the first test driver around the track would come back complaining big time.

Esp. true given the culprit were people (esp. girls) dangling all manner of stuff off their key chains (i.e., chronic damage).

There are many thousands of test driver hours on the C7 Z06. NOTHING regarding cooling or ECU or w/e is broken. Whatever the car is doing is intentional (i.e., has a reason) though I'm not the least bit convinced we know what it going on.

[SVT666]

Esp. true given the culprit were people (esp. girls) dangling all manner of stuff off their key chains (i.e., chronic damage).

There are many thousands of test driver hours on the C7 Z06. NOTHING regarding cooling or ECU or w/e is broken. Whatever the car is doing is intentional (i.e., has a reason) though I'm not the least bit convinced we know what it going on.

If it's intentional, that makes it worse.

[AutobahnSHO]

LOL at excuses

[FoMoJo]

It seems that GM has suggested that "most people" will be happy with it.  The conclusion being...you have 650 hp on tap that the ECU will let you use for a limited time, so that you don't break the engine.  This seems a bit dodgy.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

It seems that GM has suggested that "most people" will be happy with it.  The conclusion being...you have 650 hp on tap that the ECU will let you use for a limited time, so that you don't break the engine.  This seems a bit dodgy.

Not really, makes it so that it wins the magazine stat wars and can do a few good runs. Thus validating it's claimed 0-60 and 1/4mile times.

It's like the opposite of overboost. Or instead of calling it overboost just stating the overboost number as the main HP figure.

[GoCougs]

If it's intentional, that makes it worse.

So what is intentional?

[hotrodalex]

LOL at excuses

I'm not trying to make excuses, I'm just looking at the development that went into the car and realizing there's no possible way for the test drivers to not notice such an issue. Thus, it can't be a mistake and there's a reason GM did it. Wouldn't be surprised if it's to keep the engine healthy for it's warranty. Are there other such engines with the same warranty?

[r0tor]

So what is intentional?

I don't know... Rating a car at 650hp when it can only maintain that for about 10 seconds?

[12,000 RPM]

That's also not something that is an obvious problem during testing. If it was an unintentional problem, the first test driver around the track would come back complaining big time.

U dont think a test driver would notice a sharp decline in power after a lap at a track in a highly developed perfromance car?

I'm not trying to make excuses, I'm just looking at the development that went into the car and realizing there's no possible way for the test drivers to not notice such an issue. Thus, it can't be a mistake and there's a reason GM did it. Wouldn't be surprised if it's to keep the engine healthy for it's warranty. Are there other such engines with the same warranty?

If it can't make that HP for more than 2 minutes what's the point of having it operate at that HP at all?

And the Hellcats have the same 5/100,000 powertrain warranty, as I'm sure the GT500 did when it was out.

I think theres a bit of hyperbole and drama stemming from people's reactions to this but it's pretty obvious GM dun goofed. Usually when a car's HP is temporary they will say "rated xxx for xx seconds". GM made no such caveats and just hoped Joe Heloc wouldn't notice.

[hotrodalex]

U dont think a test driver would notice a sharp decline in power after a lap at a track in a highly developed perfromance car?

That's exactly what I'm saying... Test driver would notice that and would tell the engineers there was a problem, if he wasn't already aware that it's an intentional ECU function.

[MX793]

That's exactly what I'm saying... Test driver would notice that and would tell the engineers there was a problem, if he wasn't already aware that it's an intentional ECU function.

Intentional is perhaps worse than it being a glitch.

[r0tor]

Thousands of miles of testing, but when was the production ecu code completed?  Most of the time, its not until the end of the thousands of miles of testing.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

I want to know how much power is being cut....

[hotrodalex]

Thousands of miles of testing, but when was the production ecu code completed?  Most of the time, its not until the end of the thousands of miles of testing.

So they just suddenly add 10 lines of code totally screwing everything up right before production?

[AutobahnSHO]

I'm not trying to make excuses,

not you, silly.