BC

True. But you must allow the fact that the Vette has much more of all of it than a 928.

Well, I was referring to what the Zr-1 comes with from the factory. Which are:
http://jalopnik.com/5042652/secrets-...port-ps2-tires.

If you are on slicks then that can be debated, but I was not aware you were.


The brakes on the ZR-1 are not the same units that people were burning up on the original C6 cars. The ZR-1 comes with CF brakes. So the "fade" of which you speak is not nearly as pronounced, or even completely gone except in full-tilt multiple-dozen lap race.

My point was that the ZR-1 is not your average vette, and when driven properly, there is little way that even a well-driven 928 of around 2900 pounds and your HP could keep up.

BC

^ This. I just use more words.

IcemanG17

Clearly a bunch of corvette lovers are on this forum..... My previous offer of a STOCK ZR1 stands....against my brute 243whp 1979 928.....

Since clearly HP counts WAY more than anything else.....how about a 928 GT or GTS....since they have 100 more hp than I do? I welcome any of those as well......clearly my lowly 4.5L can't possibly keep up with those either

My whole argument that is LOST on many of you (who have never raced? or driven on track?) is that HP is the LEAST important aspect of a racecar.....

GlenL

This is too bold.

I'd say that lots of things are important and the balance varies based on each tracks' characteristics.

Speedtoys

And a 10,000Hp car with 50,000FtLbs of torque without a driver, just sits there.

A lot of these arguments tend to ignore, that 99.99% of racing, is in classes of equally prepared cars within SOME narrowly defined envelope.

James Bailey

Brian it is starting to sound like you are spending too much time around Kibort.....

inactiveuser1

Here is picking the same driver of 4 different cars looks like the ZR1 was faster on this course
http://www.fastestlaps.com/tracks/la...ad_course.html
Horsepower to weight plays a big factor also.

GlenL

Fascinating.

Speedtoys

Exactly. So why is this thread more than 4 posts long?

Who cares?

IcemanG17

Ouch that hurt The truth is I spend MORE time at the track than MK...quite a bit more....

I guess my car is just impossible.....it doesn't have enough HP or Torque to turn the lap times it does (2:02) or can do (2:01.5) with a hack driver like me....

I'll just keep doing the impossible, this week is taking 100lbs out of the car & some other projects.....

BC

Its not lost. I am saying that while the car has more HP, that is not the only issue. It has way more contact patch and MUCH better suspension geometry. And if anything I saying that you much be a VERY good "drover" - but also that the vette driver is not so much.

Jon B.

I'm pretty sure the hp "argument" started when you said your "Brute" low hp 928 would lap faster than a stock ZR1. We've been saying that a ZR1, while yes, it has MUCH more hp, is a MUCH better car all around. Not just with it's mountain of power. You just keep ignoring all that.

I'm glad to have owned a Corvette honestly. My C5 was a MUCH better rounded car than my current 928. I've had both on the same track. I can say from my experience, that my basically stock C5 (not even a Z06), driven by ME, would handily trounce my 928, driven by me as well. Neither were racecars, both on street tires, same width rears, slightly more tire on the front of the Corvette. Both manuals, slightly less power in the 928 even with Ken's chips and exhaust. Corvette only had a catback.

Have you driven them both? If not, you are only guessing.

BC

And the only similarities between your C5 and a C6 Zr-1 is that they are called a Corvette.

Jon B.

That's very true, but I know which one of my two was faster around a track in basically stock form. The argument made better sense in my head I suppose.

GregBBRD

Yes, all of that is very obvious.

Way too general in scope and not, at all, what I was talking about.

Porsche Motorsports was building and selling "higher horsepower" air cooled RSR Sprint engines, in the mid 1990's. These engines had bigger valves, lighter valve train, larger camshafts, different fuel injections systems, and "made" 50-60 more horsepower by increasing the rev limits from 7200 to 8,000+ rpms.

The cars with these "sprint" engines were slower around a race track than the "stock engines". They made more horsepower, but the loss of torque, made them slower, overall. In 1995, I ran a car for a client in IMSA racing. He owned two cars, one brand new car and one older car. The "old" car was for the people that wanted to "rent a seat" and the new car was for the professionals to drive and try to win this race. The brand new car had it's engine removed and "stuck" into the "old lesser car". The brand new car had one of these "magical sprint" engines built for it. 345 horepower versus 400+ horsepower. The "old car had a five speed gearbox. The "new car" had a six speed gearbox, with a "functional" 1st gear.

The old car was faster around Sebring....lap after lap, in testing. Kelly Collins in one car. Cort Wagner in the other (great, very talented, drivers.) They would "swap" cars back and forth...and the "old car", regardless of who was driving it, would just clean the "new cars's clock". They finally stopped on the course, did a rolling start, and essentially "drag raced" the two cars back to the start/finish line. The "old car" beat the "new car" by roughly 8 car lengths.

Of course, they instantly jumped out of the cars and wanted me to "swap" the engine with the torque into the "new car" and put the "Sprint Engine" into the old car. With one day to go, before the start of the race, and completely different fuel injection ssytems, this was too big of a task and could not be done.

Torque wins races. Horsepower sells engines.

I believe this example, all by itself, is a "perfect fit" for what you are trying to say, being not quite correct.

However, here is another example. In 2007, I sent a Cup Engine down to Porsche Motorsports and asked them to build me a new engine (they controlled all of the engine parts that were available, which made getting pieces to build an engine incredibly difficult.)

Long story short, I asked them to build an engine combination that they had never built. Grand Am intake, 3.8 two ring, long rod engine, with milder camshafts than they had been using. They did not want to build this engine. The owner finally had to talk to them and "insist" that they build what I wanted them to build.

They did build it. And they dynoed it. And they laughed. They "nicknamed" it "The Diesel". Made gobs more torque than anything they had ever built, but did loose horsepower, on the top end.

Turns out that the engine was an absolute "bullet' on the race track....because it could "get out of the corners" much quicker.

All of the following year's Grand Am engines were built, by Porsche, Germany, to these engine specifications.

Made the Grand Am cars much faster, trading horsepower for torque.

Racing is a "real world" where theory is fine, but reality trumps everything else.

Torque wins races, Horspower sells engines. Been true as long as I can remember.