Think of it as just a starting point for you forced air guys.
For me it's what ever floats your boat. If you want force induction go for it. This LS7 won't need that much boost to make it undrivable.
Think of it as just a starting point for you forced air guys.
For me it's what ever floats your boat. If you want force induction go for it. This LS7 won't need that much boost to make it undrivable.
WWW.TonyGPhotography.NET
Of course, but this is how milage is measured for all cars, so I don't see how it detracts from this - It just means that despite it's power, it's more streetable than one might think. It's not like any power-efficient engine gets great milage at 9/10ths.Originally Posted by henk4
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
blah blah, your never wrong...whatever your gaggin me with your smug cloud.
My rides:
1999 Mustang GT
1974 Ford Country Squire (for sale!)
1991 Jeep Cherokee
1970 Shelby GT500
this is not at nine tenths, but at 2/10thsOriginally Posted by Egg Nog
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
the cars were tested separately, and probably under different climate circumstances. The test programmes AMS is carrying out is the same for everycar, from econobox to sportscar. More often than not figures for the a similar tested under different circumstances (like in an individual or comparison test) can differ sginificantly. Of course there are always flaws in any test, but highlighting the economy of the ZO6 by looking at the figure under cruising conditions at 60 moh, is a mockery, because that is not what you are buying such a car for....Originally Posted by Slicks
I think the EPA tests are lacking some reality. In Europe with have the ECE cycle (a mix of city/secondary road and highway driving), which gives far more realistic results, corresponding to what might be achievable in real life. (Haven't there been some legal claims from Americans that a specific car could not reach the EPA figures?)
For the Corvette the overall ECE figure is 16 mpg, with city traffic as low as 10.3 mpg, and on normal roads 22 mpg.
The corresponding figures for the Mercedes are 19.3, 12.9 and 26.7.
If you take the test consumption figures again you see that the C6 took 15 mpg (compared to the 16 from the ECE cycle) and the Benz 17 (compared to 19.3) which I think gives a relatively good impression of what an owner of such a car really has to expect. (and for your info, the Benz is about 30,000 US$ more expensive in Germany than the Z06). Furthermore the Z06 has a manual, while the Benz is only available with 6-speed autobox, where 2000 revs in top correspond to 110 kph. (The Corvette is doing already over 140 kph at 2000).
BTW, I was not aiming at making a comparison between those two cars in the first place, I just saw the Benz test, which appeared one issue after the Z06, so I thought it might be informative to produce also those figures.
In the same issue as the Benz, they also published a test of the new 170 BHP Golf 2.0 TDI. Testmpg:32.2, ECE Cycle: 39.9. Topspeed 220, 1/4 mile 15.9 sec.
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
What do you mean? Of course gas milage is measured (for all cars) at maybe 2/10ths - And for its power, the LS7 is very efficient. I don't see how it is somehow "cheating" because of gear ratios or something like that. It simply puts its massive torque to best use to achieve the best economy. Naturally, it's nowhere near as efficient when you push it, but the same can be said for any other engine.Originally Posted by henk4
I just mentioned the ECE Cycle, which is certainly not measured at 2/10ths. All I want to argue with is the sort of hype that has been created about this "efficiency" figure of 26 mpg, when doing 60 mph in top gear. If you are only looking for such figures than there is no need to buy a Corvette. You know as well that any TDI will potter along at 55-60 mpg at such speeds.....In other words there is no need to highlught that particular figure, as the car was not designed for such practices but for being driven in the way it was intended for, so we should look at mpgs under such conditions. And I will be the first to admit that also under such circumstances the engine is quite efficient.Originally Posted by Egg Nog
Last edited by henk4; 04-11-2006 at 12:23 AM.
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Yes,I think they know how to drive a car....Originally Posted by Slicks
Absolutely true.Gear ratios are very influent in terms of consumption and particularly in those tests.EPA or ECE are not very acurate when in comes to sports cars because who drives a high powered car slowly?Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
I read a test of the Z06 in another German magazine(Sport Auto).It was very very very fast around the track.Very good car for the money(isn't GM selling this at lost?...).
Sport Auto also tests the maximal fuel consumption of a car.Small high revving engines have always an advantage in terms of fuel consumption over a bigger low revving engine.
Z06 - 32.7L/100km
Viper SRT-10 - 41.3L/100km(!!)
F430 - 26.5L/100km
Gallardo - 28.2L/100km
E60 M5 - 27.5L/100km
It's nearly always the same thing:comparing 2 engines with roughly the same power output,it's the engine that revs higher that has a better maximal fuel consumption.
997 Carrera S - 14.4L/100km
M3 - 13L/100km
Boxster S (old model) - 13.2L/100km
Z3 3.0L SMG - 13L/100km
S2000 - 11.7L/100km
Of course,there are other things.But,it seems that it is like I said.
The reason for this is quite simple:the bigger pistons, the bigger the friction losses.
At a low rev range,the bigger engine has an advantage because it has torque.
Well you clearly deserve it as you're not grown up enough to answer questions OR admit errorsOriginally Posted by Juggs
PS: And I'm only SELDOM wrong ..... but that's because I only say what is known, fact or provable. You'll find it helps you in teh future to adopt that strategy in life, home, school, work
Last edited by Matra et Alpine; 04-11-2006 at 03:20 AM.
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
BUT, If an owner were not romping on the car, he/she would just be cruising at 60mph, our roads have speed limits you know.Originally Posted by henk4
It would be pointless to watch the economy of the car at WOT, or even 5/10ths throttle, because the owner isnt going to be driving like that if they want to save gas.
To an extent they do lack some reality, and if I remember right they might change or modify it soon.I think the EPA tests are lacking some reality. In Europe with have the ECE cycle (a mix of city/secondary road and highway driving), which gives far more realistic results, corresponding to what might be achievable in real life. (Haven't there been some legal claims from Americans that a specific car could not reach the EPA figures?)
For the Corvette the overall ECE figure is 16 mpg, with city traffic as low as 10.3 mpg, and on normal roads 22 mpg.
The corresponding figures for the Mercedes are 19.3, 12.9 and 26.7.
I think the legal claims your talking about were for the Prius, stuff like when you turn the A/C on the car looses a lot of mpg?
Its what the owners should expect in Europe. Like I said, different roads and driving. Also do you know if they used the skipshift?If you take the test consumption figures again you see that the C6 took 15 mpg (compared to the 16 from the ECE cycle) and the Benz 17 (compared to 19.3) which I think gives a relatively good impression of what an owner of such a car really has to expect. (and for your info, the Benz is about 30,000 US$ more expensive in Germany than the Z06). Furthermore the Z06 has a manual, while the Benz is only available with 6-speed autobox, where 2000 revs in top correspond to 110 kph. (The Corvette is doing already over 140 kph at 2000).
I'd still love to see how they drive each of these cars to get the figures. Something tells me they arnt keeping the RPMs as low as they should...Originally Posted by Max Power
In Germany there are still ungoverned motorways, but restrictions keep coming. Where there are restictions maximum speed is 120/130 kph, still higher than allowed anywhere in the USA (except Montana?)Originally Posted by Slicks
I would agree with you that it is pointless to look at the economy at Wide Open Throttle (??) but that is not what these AMS testers are doing. Thet look at daily driving circumstances, and you have to keep going with the flow. However European driving is much more eventful (in terms of accelerating and slowing down) than I have ever experienced in the USA or Canada.
On another note, why would somebody who is keen on saving gas, buy a Z06? There must be better options around.
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
they were probably measuring fuel consumption during their efforts to set fast laptimes at the Nuerburgring...Originally Posted by Slicks
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
I dont know about Montana by my state (Missouri) and some other midwest states have 70-75mph limits on some highways.Originally Posted by henk4
Well I dont mean a Z06 buyer is looking for a green car. But when playtime is over its nice to go home without wasting too much gas. Its not like they are going to keep it in 2nd gear on the highway and cruise around.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)