Jump to content
mach 1 1970

OFF TOPIC THREAD......... (was New C8 maybe it’s getting close.)

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, mach 1 1970 said:

$5000 cost for the Z51 trim Package to get those numbers.. Read my old post why you should get that trim Package. 

I'm not comparing packages, I'm just providing the rest of the info so comparisons can be made knowing which version is being used.  Obviously the 3LT Z51 is not the base model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DrHawkeye said:

I'm not comparing packages, I'm just providing the rest of the info so comparisons can be made knowing which version is being used.  Obviously the 3LT Z51 is not the base model.

The Z51 is a performance package only nothing to do with comfort or dress up stuff. Kind of like Fords performance package 1 and 2 except those don’t provide trans and rear end coolers  like the Z51 does. Ford messed up on that in my book especially the 2 package. 

Edited by mach 1 1970
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mach 1 1970 said:

The Z51 is a performance package only nothing to do with comfort or dress up stuff. Kind of like Fords performance package 1 and 2 except those don’t provide trans and rear end coolers  like the Z51 does. Ford messed up on that in my book especially the 2 package. 

OK, which is why that info needed to be included so people wouldn't assume that it was the base model being tested.  Just like they did with the GT500 and they included the carbon fiber track pack version.  I wonder why they didn't use a base model C8 in addition to the Z51.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, svttim said:

Keith, Not to defend childish comments but since coming back I notice, any comment about the C8 the collective group here deems as negative Is quickly either ignored, dismissed or attacked as idiotic. Posts meant to be interactive are quickly attacked and conversation shut down by making the person not want to come back here. Nowhere has anyone said the C8 is not a great vehicle. But you wouldn't think so from some of the responses

 

Whatever you think Tim...I don't see it that way but I promised you over the phone I wouldn't lash out when people act like jerks and

I'll stand by my word...I'll just leave him post his childish BS here in the Off Topic section he supposedly hates so much

however I think if you go back far enough you'll see what I'm talking about...either way I'll leave him alone.

Edited by svtkeith
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, svtkeith said:

 

Whatever you think Tim...I don't see it that way but I promised you over the phone I wouldn't lash out when people act like jerks and

I'll stand by my word...I'll just leave him post his childish BS here in the Off Topic section he supposedly hates so much

however I think if you go back far enough you'll see what I'm talking about...either way I'll leave him alone.

Who you calling a jerk, jerk! Pointing out mathematical facts about Chevy's preproduction testing of the C8 shouldn't get you all upset, bruh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the mid engine forum 



The mid-engine Corvette hits 60 mph in 2.8 seconds. Here's how.

BY JASON CAMMISA

DEC 19, 2019

We could forever debate the philosophical implications of the Chevrolet Corvette’s switch to a mid-engine layout, but when it comes to physics, the repercussions are clear: moving the Corvette’s heaviest component behind the driver has a dramatic effect on the car’s ability to accelerate.

The Z51-package C8 and the outgoing Z51 C7 have similar weight-to-power ratios, yet the new car can sprint to 60 mph almost a second sooner. To understand why, you have to remember that a tire’s grip is related to the mass it carries. To maximize a powerful car’s ability to accelerate, you want weight over the driven wheels—but only enough so that the car can put its power to ground. Once you’ve accelerated and upshifted to a speed where traction isn’t a concern, weight is acceleration’s enemy. The trick to making a powerful car quick, then, isn’t to make it heavy. It’s to manage where the weight lies.

The front-engine, rear-drive C7 had a front-to-rear weight distribution of 49/51 percent—roughly 1750 pounds on its rear tires when the car wasn’t moving. The mid-engine, rear-drive C8 carries less of its mass on the nose—there are 2210 pounds on the rear tires when stationary. That’s 460 pounds more, which means considerably more available traction at the rear wheels.

Because weight shifts rearward under acceleration, that figure only improves as the car gains speed. To take advantage of this additional traction, Corvette engineers fulfilled their God-given purpose: they sent more torque to the rear wheels. Compared with the automatic-transmission C7, the C8’s first gear is a massive 21 percent shorter—the new car’s rear wheels experience a torque increase of more than 20 percent from that change alone. When you factor in the 10 lb-ft bump from the new V-8, the LT2, the C8’s rear wheels receive an additional 1350 lb-ft. No wonder the new Corvette wears 305-section rear rubber in place of the C7’s 285s.

Those gearing changes alone would account for almost half of the C8’s amazing 0-to-60 gap over the old car—a 1.0-second advantage. The rest, of course, is a function of the available traction at the rear tires, the LT2’s 35 additional horsepower, and finally, the dual-clutch transmission. Which can both shift without interrupting power delivery and perform a perfectly violent launch-control clutch dump.

And violent it is. The C8’s peak acceleration is just over 1.0 g, occurring almost a second after launch. That figure dwarfs the C7’s 0.7-g peak. And in case you’re wondering, at those respective peaks, the C8’s rear tires are under 2900 pounds of load, and the C7’s carry only 2150. The same dynamic weight distribution affects braking. Additional weight on the rear of a C7 would even out braking performance—under 1.0 g of deceleration, the car’s front wheels carry 66 percent of the car’s total mass, while the C8’s deal with just 57 percent. This means the braking components up front can be made smaller, and indeed they were. Front rotors shrank from 13.6 to 13.3 inches, and the rears grew, from 13.3 inches to 13.8.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, svttim said:

I didn't call anyone out. It was a general comment to the group. I felt comfortable coming in here before. Something has changed and I would like some to reflect on that

Well maybe it was my fault. We will keep it civil . Stop by more often ...:thumbsup:  we can discuss our 350’s.

Trying to find some darn 305’s for the rear. Michelins to match the front. You have 315’s on your R right ? I can find 295 but nobody has the pilot SS 305’s.  Nobody in the whole country. That are on back order. 

Edited by mach 1 1970
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Well maybe it was my fault. We will keep it civil . Stop by more often ...:thumbsup:  we can discuss our 350’s.

Trying to find some darn 305’s for the rear. Michelins to match the front. You have 315’s on your R right ? I can find 295 but nobody has the pilot SS 305’s.  Nobody in the whole country. That are on back order. 

They had some great sales on 305's but I think they are over. The PP cars used 305 square but those are R compound tires. My R uses 305s front, 315 rear

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, svttim said:

They had some great sales on 305's but I think they are over. The PP cars used 305 square but those are R compound tires. My R uses 305s front, 315 rear

Don’t want cup 2 tires. They need to match my front tread pattern. What’s your thoughts on 295 4s Michelin tires.?  Maybe less the a 1/4 inch different in width and slightly less diameter. Speedometer will be slightly off. Have 295’s pilot SS on the front. 

Edited by mach 1 1970
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laugh of the day to lighten up the place. Remember nobody is supposed to take this place to seriously 

F9887B23-6963-4784-8D30-4E72E7E25A7A.jpeg

9632F5A7-72D7-4F5A-8A8B-C370882C0DE9.jpeg

Edited by mach 1 1970
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Laugh of the day to lighten up the place. Remember nobody is supposed to take this place to seriously 

F9887B23-6963-4784-8D30-4E72E7E25A7A.jpeg

9632F5A7-72D7-4F5A-8A8B-C370882C0DE9.jpeg

 

And where does Baily fit in that office.....:hysterical:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanging on for dear life. Short legs. ...:hysterical2:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Hanging on for dear life. Short legs. ...:hysterical2:

 

Reasonable explanation I'd say!!…….:hysterical:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mongoose said:

Welcome to Slo Lane’s “Toy Box”!!!!   :banvictory:      Pretty cool stuff!     

👍 Very nice

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

From the mid engine forum 



The mid-engine Corvette hits 60 mph in 2.8 seconds. Here's how.

BY JASON CAMMISA

DEC 19, 2019

We could forever debate the philosophical implications of the Chevrolet Corvette’s switch to a mid-engine layout, but when it comes to physics, the repercussions are clear: moving the Corvette’s heaviest component behind the driver has a dramatic effect on the car’s ability to accelerate.

The Z51-package C8 and the outgoing Z51 C7 have similar weight-to-power ratios, yet the new car can sprint to 60 mph almost a second sooner. To understand why, you have to remember that a tire’s grip is related to the mass it carries. To maximize a powerful car’s ability to accelerate, you want weight over the driven wheels—but only enough so that the car can put its power to ground. Once you’ve accelerated and upshifted to a speed where traction isn’t a concern, weight is acceleration’s enemy. The trick to making a powerful car quick, then, isn’t to make it heavy. It’s to manage where the weight lies.

The front-engine, rear-drive C7 had a front-to-rear weight distribution of 49/51 percent—roughly 1750 pounds on its rear tires when the car wasn’t moving. The mid-engine, rear-drive C8 carries less of its mass on the nose—there are 2210 pounds on the rear tires when stationary. That’s 460 pounds more, which means considerably more available traction at the rear wheels.

Because weight shifts rearward under acceleration, that figure only improves as the car gains speed. To take advantage of this additional traction, Corvette engineers fulfilled their God-given purpose: they sent more torque to the rear wheels. Compared with the automatic-transmission C7, the C8’s first gear is a massive 21 percent shorter—the new car’s rear wheels experience a torque increase of more than 20 percent from that change alone. When you factor in the 10 lb-ft bump from the new V-8, the LT2, the C8’s rear wheels receive an additional 1350 lb-ft. No wonder the new Corvette wears 305-section rear rubber in place of the C7’s 285s.

Those gearing changes alone would account for almost half of the C8’s amazing 0-to-60 gap over the old car—a 1.0-second advantage. The rest, of course, is a function of the available traction at the rear tires, the LT2’s 35 additional horsepower, and finally, the dual-clutch transmission. Which can both shift without interrupting power delivery and perform a perfectly violent launch-control clutch dump.

And violent it is. The C8’s peak acceleration is just over 1.0 g, occurring almost a second after launch. That figure dwarfs the C7’s 0.7-g peak. And in case you’re wondering, at those respective peaks, the C8’s rear tires are under 2900 pounds of load, and the C7’s carry only 2150. The same dynamic weight distribution affects braking. Additional weight on the rear of a C7 would even out braking performance—under 1.0 g of deceleration, the car’s front wheels carry 66 percent of the car’s total mass, while the C8’s deal with just 57 percent. This means the braking components up front can be made smaller, and indeed they were. Front rotors shrank from 13.6 to 13.3 inches, and the rears grew, from 13.3 inches to 13.8.

Thanks Mike. There's some engineering and mostly common sense in there but he forgot about HP/Torque. I am very interested to see what the final product test results and actual HP/TQ numbers will be, especially since this will be the first relatively affordable significant mid-engined sports car.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Laugh of the day to lighten up the place. Remember nobody is supposed to take this place to seriously 

F9887B23-6963-4784-8D30-4E72E7E25A7A.jpeg

9632F5A7-72D7-4F5A-8A8B-C370882C0DE9.jpeg

Hey, a little humor sure can’t hurt!    :hysterical2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, shelby001 said:

👍 Very nice

 

:thumbsup:+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, svtkeith said:

 

And where does Baily fit in that office.....:hysterical:

Right on Slo Lane’s lap!    :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Hanging on for dear life. Short legs. ...:hysterical2:

:hysterical2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

From the mid engine forum 



The mid-engine Corvette hits 60 mph in 2.8 seconds. Here's how.

BY JASON CAMMISA

DEC 19, 2019

We could forever debate the philosophical implications of the Chevrolet Corvette’s switch to a mid-engine layout, but when it comes to physics, the repercussions are clear: moving the Corvette’s heaviest component behind the driver has a dramatic effect on the car’s ability to accelerate.

The Z51-package C8 and the outgoing Z51 C7 have similar weight-to-power ratios, yet the new car can sprint to 60 mph almost a second sooner. To understand why, you have to remember that a tire’s grip is related to the mass it carries. To maximize a powerful car’s ability to accelerate, you want weight over the driven wheels—but only enough so that the car can put its power to ground. Once you’ve accelerated and upshifted to a speed where traction isn’t a concern, weight is acceleration’s enemy. The trick to making a powerful car quick, then, isn’t to make it heavy. It’s to manage where the weight lies.

The front-engine, rear-drive C7 had a front-to-rear weight distribution of 49/51 percent—roughly 1750 pounds on its rear tires when the car wasn’t moving. The mid-engine, rear-drive C8 carries less of its mass on the nose—there are 2210 pounds on the rear tires when stationary. That’s 460 pounds more, which means considerably more available traction at the rear wheels.

Because weight shifts rearward under acceleration, that figure only improves as the car gains speed. To take advantage of this additional traction, Corvette engineers fulfilled their God-given purpose: they sent more torque to the rear wheels. Compared with the automatic-transmission C7, the C8’s first gear is a massive 21 percent shorter—the new car’s rear wheels experience a torque increase of more than 20 percent from that change alone. When you factor in the 10 lb-ft bump from the new V-8, the LT2, the C8’s rear wheels receive an additional 1350 lb-ft. No wonder the new Corvette wears 305-section rear rubber in place of the C7’s 285s.

Those gearing changes alone would account for almost half of the C8’s amazing 0-to-60 gap over the old car—a 1.0-second advantage. The rest, of course, is a function of the available traction at the rear tires, the LT2’s 35 additional horsepower, and finally, the dual-clutch transmission. Which can both shift without interrupting power delivery and perform a perfectly violent launch-control clutch dump.

And violent it is. The C8’s peak acceleration is just over 1.0 g, occurring almost a second after launch. That figure dwarfs the C7’s 0.7-g peak. And in case you’re wondering, at those respective peaks, the C8’s rear tires are under 2900 pounds of load, and the C7’s carry only 2150. The same dynamic weight distribution affects braking. Additional weight on the rear of a C7 would even out braking performance—under 1.0 g of deceleration, the car’s front wheels carry 66 percent of the car’s total mass, while the C8’s deal with just 57 percent. This means the braking components up front can be made smaller, and indeed they were. Front rotors shrank from 13.6 to 13.3 inches, and the rears grew, from 13.3 inches to 13.8.

Hey Slo Lane, great, right to the point article on how the mid-engine is now the way to go and the future of the Chevy C8 Corvette from now on and this new design will help greatly when they start to electrify future Corvettes.  I’ve read this very informative article within the last week in one of my car mags and it’s a easy read and tells it all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, tesgt350 said:

Not really sold in USA.  This one was brought back to the States by someone in the Army.

Our 67 T5 Mustang10.jpg

Our 67 T5 Mustang9.jpg

Our 67 T5 Mustang1.jpg

Our 67 T5 Mustang2.jpg

Hey tes,  thanks for the pics, always love those fastback Mustangs.  It looks like it might be sitting kind of high all the way around, is it possible the engine might be out right now, just wondering.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Thanks Mongoose. Love those mach’s  That looks like a Windsor 2bbl. Talk about patina ...:thumbsup:I had a yellow 2bbl one right out of college and my first job . Living at home and paid it off right away. One year old and paid $2100 for her. That thing was terrible in the snow .So moved on down to south Fl. Michigan weather was just too much and the girls in Detroit were so cold ...kind of like the weather . Well the south fla girls were from all over the country and friendly. That’s where I met Bonnie and 46 years later still a catch. She was from up state NY. 

BEBCEC93-2C5C-4A36-BDB4-AD2F79CC4D7A.jpeg

Hey, like I said, you are Mr. Lucky, if you don’t believe ask Bonnie!!   :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Cool ass car for sure. I only thought the T 5 was made in 1966. Heck you learn something every day on here. Thanks 

:thumbsup:+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

Most people on here feel the 2020 GT500 and the C8 are two great cars to hit the market. Since I can’t afford both I have to pick one. But $73K for both is affordable if both cars are sold at msrp of less. The C8 I ordered is with the Z51 , black trim , wheels and 2LT options . So for $73K it’s not the base. Lots of extra stuff and advanced gear. On the other hand at $73K the Shelby is the base model not Sure if it has the equipment  listed below . The list below is equipment over and above the base C8:

1 data recorder

2 Bose 14 speaker system

3 blind spot mirrors 

4 180 camera in the rear view mirror ...plus back up camera required by law 

5 electronic diff

6 targa top carbon fiber 

7 front and rear aero 

8 performance gearing 

9 performance adjustable exhaust + 5 extra hp and torque 

10 adjustable side bolsters and lumbar . Power 10 way adjustable. 

11 heavy duty cooling ,engine ,trans and rear end 

12 Nav and auto play  

13  memory seats and mirrors . 

14 upgraded interior trim with full leather 

This is just some of the equipment over and above the base model. All for $73K and no ADMS. Plus I can buy for under msrp using my GM card. $71,750. 

So combine this with the performance numbers listed on this tread compared to the base GT500 and it’s a no brained at least for me. Not one dealer in my area will sell a GT 500 for sticker either. Not one in a 200 miles radius. So it’s $71,750 vs $88,000. 

:thumbsup:+100%   Hey bud, again right to the facts it’s really that simple!  I just so happen to really like both the C8 and GT 500 too, but like most of us I’m not made out of money so I would chose the C8 too.   It’s a fair amount cheaper to afford, even with the no-brainer Z51 package, it’s the new mid-engine design of the future, it’s basically done with all top notch quality material and it’s faster than a bat out of hell, plus it can really handle too!   If I’m being honest though, I will say I’m missing the manual in both these very cool cars and with me it’s all about the cool fun factor of shifting my stick and pulling those gears!    That guys, is just how I want to roll, it’s not always about who’s the fastest, but who really has the most fun with his ride and ends up with the biggest smile at the end!!!  In my book, that’s what really counts!  J.M.O.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tesgt350 said:

Nope up to 1978.  I saw a Blue 71-73 T-5 at the 50th Anniversary in Charlotte, NC.  Some where I have a Photo of it.

:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mach 1 1970 said:

$5000 cost for the Z51 trim Package to get those numbers.. Read my old post why you should get that trim Package. 

:banghead:     The Z51 package is a hell of a deal for what you get, like we said, It’s a “No BRAINER”, it’s just that simple!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, svttim said:

I didn't call anyone out. It was a general comment to the group. I felt comfortable coming in here before. Something has changed and I would like some to reflect on that

Hey Tim, your a true blue Ford guy and that’s cool, but please keep a open mind because were car guys, yes we love our performance cars, Mustangs, Shelbys, Corvettes and also some others too. We really like both the C8 and GT500 too and just want to have fun talking cars and stuff with our fellow enthusiasts and we expect to be treated and talked to with respect and dignity by fellow members as we will return the same back.  Us guys never go looking for trouble because were all adults and not little kids and we don’t like name calling or being disrespected either were all suppose to be “Team Members” of Team Shelby.   Yes, at times we’ll have differences in our opinions but if handled the way and not disrespected by others that can be cool too!   Were here trying to have fun with other car guys that feel like us, and in no way looking to make waves with other members, it’s just that simple.  So why is it still going on you say?    Very simple really, some just don’t like us having fun and talking cars, especially the new C8, they just can’t stop till they get their way!    If you keep a open mind and go back and read alot of our past posts you should be able to see were not the bad guys, but I will say   that some of the posts they put on many of the words or meanings were greatly twisted to sound in their favor and put down us car guys.  Example, is one that says were always putting down Ford cars and such, and nothing can be farther from the truth.  Hell, I own and love my 08 Shelby GT and also my Vette too, why not were car guys!   Yes, I did make one comment on the new Ford electric vehicle that they named the Mustang because I didn’t feel that vehicle deserved the legendary name of Mustang.  I felt it should be used on a performance Mustang car instead and I know that I wasn’t alone by a long shot on my feelings.   So, I don’t think that makes me a hater of Fords.  If Chevy would try something like that with the Corvette name I would feel exactly the same.

Hey Tim, don’t you think it’s time to put a stop to all this kiddie (Bull Sh**t)!    None of us enjoy this crap and it’s past time to stop this happening!    It really shouldn’t come down to whether your a Ford guy or a Chevy or Vette or Dodge guy or whatever. Every member should deserve to be treated by other members with respect no matter what vehicle they own and no kind of bullying should be tolerated by any member from another member.  This should be adapted to the rules and terms using the Shelby forums in the near future so this kind of stupid stuff doesn’t happen in the future again!    Also, don’t like some one or subject, very simple ignore or move on, simple isn’t it, I know, but they don’t want too!   :banghead:        J.M.O.        Any-time Tim!     Your welcome!             :peelout:    That’s all I have for you Tim!     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mongoose said:

Hey tes,  thanks for the pics, always love those fastback Mustangs.  It looks like it might be sitting kind of high all the way around, is it possible the engine might be out right now, just wondering.   

Yes, the Engine was removed before the Photo was taken. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, tesgt350 said:

Not really sold in USA.  This one was brought back to the States by someone in the Army.

Our 67 T5 Mustang10.jpg

Our 67 T5 Mustang9.jpg

Our 67 T5 Mustang1.jpg

Our 67 T5 Mustang2.jpg

 

Cool pics Tes…..never even heard of these...what was it like on the road?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mongoose said:

:thumbsup:+100%   Hey bud, again right to the facts it’s really that simple!  I just so happen to really like both the C8 and GT 500 too, but like most of us I’m not made out of money so I would chose the C8 too.   It’s a fair amount cheaper to afford, even with the no-brainer Z51 package, it’s the new mid-engine design of the future, it’s basically done with all top notch quality material and it’s faster than a bat out of hell, plus it can really handle too!   If I’m being honest though, I will say I’m missing the manual in both these very cool cars and with me it’s all about the cool fun factor of shifting my stick and pulling those gears!    That guys, is just how I want to roll, it’s not always about who’s the fastest, but who really has the most fun with his ride and ends up with the biggest smile at the end!!!  In my book, that’s what really counts!  J.M.O.    

Mongoose you might be right about the manual being more fun around town to drive. I’ll let you know my opinion of the DCT once I own it for awhile. The jaguar F type all wheel drive R that I owned  had a similar trans and was enjoying to drive. However the DCT is a bit more responsive from what I’ve read. Never owned one so we shall see in time. I know for a fact the quick down shifts and rev Matching is a feature I’m excited about. Hold the paddle and it picks the lowest gear in a nano second . I’ve never experienced that in a performance car. I have seen a few in car cameras videos of the C7 R on the track with the same shifting and it’s amazing. Well that’s my story and I’m sticking to it. 

Edited by mach 1 1970
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...