V6 handling Vs V8
06-23-2008, 01:48 PM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I was looking back for a response....but also will add-
You need to relieaze it is not the first time these CMC cars hit Calif Speedway. THey are specific built for racing, my car is not. My Camaro at the time was my wifes daily driver and was not altered for track use in any way. It was the first time the car had seen that track. It had full creature comforts weighing in at 3106 without me in it (I am 240 lbs, 6'4"- so the overall total is aprox 3350 with about 1/2 fuel load). It is also an automatic 700r4 and has 3.23 gears, not the factory 3.42's.
Here is telemetry of the track from a 993 Porsche on racing slicks.
Study that and you will obviously see without wiitnessing in person that my Camaro gets killed entering the high speed oval section from section 13 -to- the end of section 1. I reach a top speed of 123mph at the very end of the section 1 bank turn........In other words, I make back up a whole lot of ground in the infeild twisties....On hardeer compound street tires. The Toyo RA1's are soft.
http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Image...dwayGPS151.jpg
Now also Stan, you state the CMC only run a stock 305, not the nasty V8's- well, I only run a stock 60*V6 cast iron 2.8L, not a nasty lighter weight aluminum turbo'ed 3.3L that have been dyno'ed at 400+ hp as well as the famous Datsun 510 with the chev 60*v6 twin turbo'ed 2.8 at aprox 500hp...and remeber again, this car of mine is an automatic trans.
You need to relieaze it is not the first time these CMC cars hit Calif Speedway. THey are specific built for racing, my car is not. My Camaro at the time was my wifes daily driver and was not altered for track use in any way. It was the first time the car had seen that track. It had full creature comforts weighing in at 3106 without me in it (I am 240 lbs, 6'4"- so the overall total is aprox 3350 with about 1/2 fuel load). It is also an automatic 700r4 and has 3.23 gears, not the factory 3.42's.
Here is telemetry of the track from a 993 Porsche on racing slicks.
Study that and you will obviously see without wiitnessing in person that my Camaro gets killed entering the high speed oval section from section 13 -to- the end of section 1. I reach a top speed of 123mph at the very end of the section 1 bank turn........In other words, I make back up a whole lot of ground in the infeild twisties....On hardeer compound street tires. The Toyo RA1's are soft.
http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Image...dwayGPS151.jpg
Now also Stan, you state the CMC only run a stock 305, not the nasty V8's- well, I only run a stock 60*V6 cast iron 2.8L, not a nasty lighter weight aluminum turbo'ed 3.3L that have been dyno'ed at 400+ hp as well as the famous Datsun 510 with the chev 60*v6 twin turbo'ed 2.8 at aprox 500hp...and remeber again, this car of mine is an automatic trans.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-23-2008 at 02:15 PM.
06-23-2008, 02:19 PM
#52
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
i think this is this gonna end up being a preference thing and most ppl will end up leaning toward the V8 side of things IMO besides these cars were built for V8s from the beggining the V6s are for ppl who cant handle the power or insurance rates
06-23-2008, 02:33 PM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
By all means, nobody is debating that.
The question was if a V6 3rd gen can be built to out handle and generally overall out perform a V8 3rd gen. The answer is unequivically yes. Money talks yes, but I do not care what you do to a V8 car, it will not handle as agile as a lighter weight turbocharged V6 that will put down more than enough usefull power on any roadrace course.
Lap after lap after lap after lap, any of you familiar with racing heats know that extra 100 pounds not only in weight, but in bias % affect will hurt he cars duration and will burn through tires quicker.
My car does not have to slow down as mcuh, so cosequently, it does not have to speed back up as much either. It does not have to work as hard. Turn ratio yaw rate is much more consistant and FAR reduces driver error.
You will always win the pole in qualifying, but I will win the race season- with alot less operating costs also.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-23-2008 at 02:39 PM.
06-23-2008, 02:48 PM
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
A bit of trivia for everybody also that I am sure is unknown to all here....
In 1985, GM had a factory stock motor designed to go into production into the Pontiac Fiero that was a 2.9L twin turbo 60*V6 and weighed 362lbs in iron head and iron block form. It was internal memoed the "Corvette Killer" and was projected to be the fastest production car ever realised in history. The production run was killed in the 11th hour buy a GM hiarchy exectutive that did not want a car coming out to beat his 1984 Corvette.
They reduced the 60*V6 to the economy box levels and have not done anything with them over the years until recently they are now again becoming the cats meow in newer 3.5 formats.
Falconber Racing Engines have uses these badboys for years in racing Hydro boats as well as the old Mickey Thompsen offroad stadium trucks utilizing their high power to weigh ratios when built for racing.
Did we all forget that the fastests and most agile factory 3rd gen was the 90*V6 TTA?, Not a V8. ANd today that 90* motor is still wasting the competition. These 60* motors are a perfect blance and firing order 123456 and respond like nobodys uncle under boosted conditions- AND THEY ARE MUCH LIGHTER THAN THE 90*V6
Heck, This very postings forum proves the ignorance of the general public as to why their was never a street performance aftermarket market for the 60* V6 in a 3rd gen. Nobody wanted it because nobody ever tried it- -----I HAVE.
In 1985, GM had a factory stock motor designed to go into production into the Pontiac Fiero that was a 2.9L twin turbo 60*V6 and weighed 362lbs in iron head and iron block form. It was internal memoed the "Corvette Killer" and was projected to be the fastest production car ever realised in history. The production run was killed in the 11th hour buy a GM hiarchy exectutive that did not want a car coming out to beat his 1984 Corvette.
They reduced the 60*V6 to the economy box levels and have not done anything with them over the years until recently they are now again becoming the cats meow in newer 3.5 formats.
Falconber Racing Engines have uses these badboys for years in racing Hydro boats as well as the old Mickey Thompsen offroad stadium trucks utilizing their high power to weigh ratios when built for racing.
Did we all forget that the fastests and most agile factory 3rd gen was the 90*V6 TTA?, Not a V8. ANd today that 90* motor is still wasting the competition. These 60* motors are a perfect blance and firing order 123456 and respond like nobodys uncle under boosted conditions- AND THEY ARE MUCH LIGHTER THAN THE 90*V6
Heck, This very postings forum proves the ignorance of the general public as to why their was never a street performance aftermarket market for the 60* V6 in a 3rd gen. Nobody wanted it because nobody ever tried it- -----I HAVE.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-23-2008 at 02:59 PM.
06-23-2008, 04:45 PM
#55
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
tomatoes tomAtoes im stickin with the moto theres no replacement for displacement
----------
yes but if you throw enough money at a V8 you can make it get better gas mileage than a V6. like i said preference
----------
yes but if you throw enough money at a V8 you can make it get better gas mileage than a V6. like i said preference
Last edited by mesterz2889; 06-23-2008 at 04:49 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
06-23-2008, 08:19 PM
#57
Supreme Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Western Maryland
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 82z28
Engine: 406
Transmission: th350
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I appreciate tech. Not so much credentials, bragging or smack talking.
Once again...stock for stock iroc wins.
06-23-2008, 09:37 PM
#59
Supreme Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Portland, OR www.cascadecrew.org
Posts: 6,577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1990 Camaro RS
Engine: Juiced 5.0 TBI - 300rwhp
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Eaton Posi, 10 Bolt
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
All thing being equal, when we are talking pure handling potential, the less weight wins. Go race a lotus around a tight track, it is getting it done in a world of 500hp supercars, with a 170hp toyota motor. That is an extreme example.
Sure I would almost always take the extra 100hp of a V8 car, and the much larger power potential. Talking purely as discussion point on handling, the lower weight wins everytime. I don't see how any of your can argue that dropping a good chunk of weight off the front end of our cars, won't help them handle. Check your ego at the door (that goes for Dean too.
). And stop and think about what you all are saying.Here is the arguement I see put forth. The V8 makes more power. Really, DUH!. What doesn't that have to do at all with this, no one has even come close to explaining how the same chassis with and extra 200lbs hanging over the hose, can handle better. Ask the guys who build and prep the C6R's for Le Mans, how much they would pay to drop 200lbs off the nose of their cars. Shedding weight is a HUGE deal. Obviously those guys aren't going to toss a V6 in, because losing the horsepower would kill them. From a handling standpoint though, losing 200lbs off the nose of the car would sure help them.
The same thing goes with our cars. if we are going to not worry about straighline speed, and look at just handling, LESS WEIGHT WINS. Period, end of story.
06-23-2008, 10:35 PM
#60
Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Detroit Suburbs
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 IROC
Engine: 5.3L
Transmission: Jerico
Axle/Gears: Aluminum 8.6 w/ T2R
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Not what the original poster asked, but the thread has evolved to be "which would be faster". If you are looking at the overall performance of the car on a road course or autoX giving up 30, 40, or 50% of your HP to save 5% weight will in almost all situations make you slower. End of story.
06-23-2008, 11:02 PM
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California, Sacrameto
Posts: 855
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 88 gta
Engine: 350 tpi
Transmission: 700r4
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
What would the weight difference be between an Aluminum V8 and an iron V6? I think aluminum Merlin gen 1 V8 block is like 100-120lbs lighter than iron and heads can drop another 40lbs. With pushing the motor back 2 inches or so you must be close to the same weight bias, and you don't need the weight of turbo's or intercooler. And the cost has to be similar between building a 400+ hp v6, to an aluminum NA 400hp+ V8 I have been thinking bout this for a long time, High rpm V6 verses low rpm V8
06-23-2008, 11:45 PM
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I don't think anybody would argue with that.
Not what the original poster asked, but the thread has evolved to be "which would be faster". If you are looking at the overall performance of the car on a road course or autoX giving up 30, 40, or 50% of your HP to save 5% weight will in almost all situations make you slower. End of story.
Not what the original poster asked, but the thread has evolved to be "which would be faster". If you are looking at the overall performance of the car on a road course or autoX giving up 30, 40, or 50% of your HP to save 5% weight will in almost all situations make you slower. End of story.
Who says you have to give up 30-40-50% of your power? Lets say you have a 20K budget to build a car. You can buy an IROC for lets say 5K or you buy a baseline V6 for 1500. You now have an aditional aprox 3500 to build with. That goes a good ways into building a radical turbo V6- your a gonna have to spend money above the 5K on the IROC to build that motor also.
Now lets go to power to weigh ratio. Lets calculate. (The V6 does not need as much power since it is lighter) How much power do we need? We are not running LeMans here. Most of us will never see more than an AutoX course and with that 300+ is unnessecary. Most cars see maybe .00001% of their time above 80mph in the lifetime of the production car. Lets be sensible here.
Take that V6 and build a turbo 300hp motor combined and you are still about 200lbs lighter than the counterpart (starting 250 lighter- 50 for turbo and plumblng) A standard 3.1 V6 stick weighs about 3050 and is 140 hp. A standard IROC is (top model) 3500 and is 245 hp. stock.
V6 PTWR= 21.8lbs per HP
IROC PTWR= 14.3lbs per HP
You now have an extra 3500 aprox more for engine upgrades than the V8 car so the added cost of the V6 upgrades washes with the cheaper purchase price....so... 8500 for the motr and trans upgrades on the V6 vs 5000 for motor and trans upgrades for the V8. Thats going to put both in about the 300 to 350HP range (not enough for the LS1 motor so forget about the aluminum V8 people) and both get lets say world class T5's.
The last 10,000 goes to suspension upgrades.
I am sorry to say, the V8 car is not going to touch the V6 car unless you dump all your money into the motor and go drag racing.
Lets say the V6 ends up with 300hp, the V8 ends up with 350hp
Nopw calculate power to weigh ratio-
Built V6 at 3100 = 10.3 lbs per HP
Built V8 (dropped 40 lbs with alum heads) 3460lbs= 9.89 lbs per hp
Conclusion? The V8 has a "very slight" power to weight advantage straight line.....BUT...gives up 350+ lbs in weigh on the tires, brakes and suspesion balance. Bias front to rear is big people, CG off the roll centers is big also and how it affected by engine roll weigh on the front portion of the roll couple (How the car canters into a corner and causes chassis stress. THe V6 is lighter and retains basically in laymans terms a flatter stiffer chassis keeping each independant contact patch planted through articulation and roll.
Now I will make a very arrogant statement but its a fact- if this Camaro of mine was not my wifes daily driver I intentionally built it for.... AND.... I did in fact put a radical turbo V6 motor into it (I can't if I wanted to because of Fu*&%d up California rules) there aint a car on these boards that would touch me on a street road, and autox course, ANY road course (tire for tire), and alot of you would have a hard time on a drag strip either like the TTA now exibits.
I have documented and proven the dealyness of this car in a few local challanges I have participated in. I do put my money where my mouth is, I have eearned the respect of proof.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-23-2008 at 11:51 PM.
06-23-2008, 11:53 PM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Now with all that said, There are many times the lack of power running around surface streets in this fairly stock motor 2.8 V6 DOES SUCK!!!!!!!
Of course raw V8 power is fun, BUt life is not all stright line acceleration, there are dips bumps turns and slowdowns and I shine in all those once up to speed.
Of course raw V8 power is fun, BUt life is not all stright line acceleration, there are dips bumps turns and slowdowns and I shine in all those once up to speed.
06-24-2008, 12:46 AM
#64
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: right behind you
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
In my estimation you could build one of these race blocks w/ aluminum heads & a fabricated manifold close to 200lbs dry weight. With 3500 heads (220 cfm stock), and a roller valvetrain capable of 9k you could see ~500hp naturally aspirated. The newer 60* v6's are a direct recipient of much of the technology that's gone into the LS-series v8's.
06-24-2008, 01:47 AM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
The only thing I forgot to comment on is the guy that keeps mentioning moving the LS1 block rearward. Yes, this will work, but is it practical and just how many people intend to do all that work on thier 3rd gen. Plus the pain in the *** to try and work on it tucked into the firewall.
again, correct, but just not practical even under more extreme hot rodders standards. You do this first, then start from scrath entirely over with the suspension springs, shock rates and bars.
again, correct, but just not practical even under more extreme hot rodders standards. You do this first, then start from scrath entirely over with the suspension springs, shock rates and bars.
06-25-2008, 08:55 PM
#66
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SW Chicago 'burbs
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: American Iron Firebird
Engine: The little 305 that could.
Transmission: Richmond T-10
Axle/Gears: Floater 9" - 3.64 gears
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Moving the motor back would include: drilling the motor mount holes in the k-member 1" further rearward, slotting the trans cross member a bit more, check the DS and torque arm engagement to make sure it will not bottom out inside the trans and rubber mount respectively, if necessary shorten.
Building a "from scratch" AL turbo 60* V6 race motor seems a little harder (and more expensive) to me.
As far as the $20,000 to buy a 3rd gen and prove which one's faster, I'd buy a 5-color 1985 V6 5-speed rolling chassis for $200, gut the crap out of the car, have a cage put in, build an AL head 305, use a T5 trans, LS1 brakes, and then race it in American Iron. Oh wait, I have.
311RWHP/317RWTQ, 2950lbs with 225lb driver & 5 gallons of fuel, 275/40/17 Toyos on OEM Z06 wheels. No lexan, no carbon fiber, no BS, just a fiberglass hood.
Oh, and it's still not $20,000 as long as you don't count consumables (tires, brake pads, etc).
Race your car, not your opinion on the internet. American Iron rules have provisions for V6s. No minimum weight for the V6, same 9.5lb/HP and 9lb/ft-lb power rules for all motors, same skinny little rule book for all cars. It ought to be right up your alley with the amount of tinkering you can do.
Get the car back from your ex-wife and prove to everyone that you're right. Build the next "class killer". So far, a Fox Mustang with an LS1 and no minimum weight turbo 4-cyl. Mustangs haven't done it, get it done with your Camaro.
Last edited by nape; 06-25-2008 at 09:01 PM.
06-25-2008, 09:32 PM
#67
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I'm not a regular on TGO anymore (sold my 3rd gen a while back), but I would love to see some results from this V6 3rd gen of death. From all the internet hype, it should be the next coming of christ. I can only hope that I can one day witness the greatness that is the V6 monster.
06-26-2008, 12:05 AM
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I all due respect Nape, I already took out 10 local cars of the same street nature that many of them actually had HP mod (250-400hp range) and I didn't in local autox fun. NOTE: The next closest 3rd gen to my time was on 17x11 BFG KD rubberand a race prepped alignment and was 3.9 seconds behind me. THat was the closest of the 10 other cars.
http://www.zippyvideos.com/8464669705208156/d3/
I have already proven my car, I am not butchering it, it was purpose built for the street for my ex-wife and now for my daughter.
I also listed Calif Speedway track times I ran compared to stripped down CMC racecars with limited HP. Again, I am limited HP but not stripped down AND was on street tires.
Nice try, but who in there right mind would strip down my car an butcher it for track use in as pristine shape it is and built for street luxury.- then go band the sh*t out of it on a racetrack.
Here's another little video of it stopping and accelerating. Stops FAST, Goes mediocure, good for a stock V6, but slow. This is down hill, and these are NOT race tires.
http://www.zippyvideos.com/681124941...ilwaffarn_010/
EDIT: I also want to note that for the record, I had gotten there 10 mins before we ran and had to scramble to get teched and ready. The group decided to chnage things on me and entered an earlier run group rather than the afternoon one we had planned. Point being, I ran the course blind without any memorization of the course. Take that to the bank.
http://www.zippyvideos.com/8464669705208156/d3/
I have already proven my car, I am not butchering it, it was purpose built for the street for my ex-wife and now for my daughter.
I also listed Calif Speedway track times I ran compared to stripped down CMC racecars with limited HP. Again, I am limited HP but not stripped down AND was on street tires.
Nice try, but who in there right mind would strip down my car an butcher it for track use in as pristine shape it is and built for street luxury.- then go band the sh*t out of it on a racetrack.
Here's another little video of it stopping and accelerating. Stops FAST, Goes mediocure, good for a stock V6, but slow. This is down hill, and these are NOT race tires.
http://www.zippyvideos.com/681124941...ilwaffarn_010/
EDIT: I also want to note that for the record, I had gotten there 10 mins before we ran and had to scramble to get teched and ready. The group decided to chnage things on me and entered an earlier run group rather than the afternoon one we had planned. Point being, I ran the course blind without any memorization of the course. Take that to the bank.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-26-2008 at 12:13 AM.
06-26-2008, 12:17 AM
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
There is post post ssomewhere on the So Calif board with an obscene photochopped pic of my Camaro humping Greygoose's Camaro (that was the next closest guy and the one that says in the start of the Video about having his *** handed to him). That post has all the smack talk leading up to this grudge match and then all the posted results.
I have put my money where my mouth is.
I have put my money where my mouth is.
06-26-2008, 01:07 AM
#70
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Which handles better stock?
Lets say a 88 v6 and an 88 iroc
Which has the better handling potential?
This is one of the main reasons I want to stick with the V6
Lighter / better weight distribution,
I have iroc sways, new springs, and some other stuff (see sig)
So, im assuming I could stomp a similarly set up iroc / z28
thru the corners / skid pad
The car seems to have no end to how hard I can push it thru a corner,
I always liked cars that handle,
My winter car is an 89 accord LXI, Best handling accord gen ever,
My pre-camaro car was an 87 celica GT, i put gr -2's in that and nice tires, but not much else as it was in good shape,
I also had an 85 cutlass salon that I threw GNX suspension in,
These cars all handled really well, But i know the camaro would
stomp them all.
So yeah, This is one of the main reasons holding me back from a v8 swap,
what do yall think?
Lets say a 88 v6 and an 88 iroc
Which has the better handling potential?
This is one of the main reasons I want to stick with the V6
Lighter / better weight distribution,
I have iroc sways, new springs, and some other stuff (see sig)
So, im assuming I could stomp a similarly set up iroc / z28
thru the corners / skid pad
The car seems to have no end to how hard I can push it thru a corner,
I always liked cars that handle,
My winter car is an 89 accord LXI, Best handling accord gen ever,
My pre-camaro car was an 87 celica GT, i put gr -2's in that and nice tires, but not much else as it was in good shape,
I also had an 85 cutlass salon that I threw GNX suspension in,
These cars all handled really well, But i know the camaro would
stomp them all.
So yeah, This is one of the main reasons holding me back from a v8 swap,
what do yall think?
1. The IROC will handle better (crisper turn-in by degrees/second and more lateral grip and faster transition) than the v6 car in stock form.
2. Better handling potential is a tangled subject that would take cubic dollars to solve, but more than likely if you spent the same on both of them, the lighter car would win the three previously mentioned categories.
3. What do I think?
Well…having had lighter with less power and a bit heavier with more power (especially torque) I'd say go with the power every time. A third gen all-iron v8 car can be made to handle remarkably well…enough to hang with nearly anything you'll come across assuming you drive it well. You'll have the added benefit of power which makes coming off the corners and passing much more fun. Yes, with 200 pounds less on the nose (and half the torque) you could go a small amount deeper into the corner and rotate a touch faster and have a small margin of mid-corner speed over the v8 car, but then when the loud pedal went down the v8 driver grins and walks away and you can just watch him pass. That’s the sucky part that I'm sure you are familiar with (it happens to me in my stock tpi305 all the time). Where we drive daily is simply not turn-after-turn-after-turn-after-turn. There are straights both short and long with alarming frequency.
I'm going to guess that you are looking at the hard-to-categorize quotient of 'fun to drive-ness'. Every single person I know will give up a small amount of weight for a much higher fun-to-drive quotient. I've street driven and raced (road racing…not drag) low and high HP cars and I'll take higher HP every time. Every racer I know personally (perhaps 40 or so) will do the exact same.
If one of the main things holding you back from a v8 swap is handling, I say find and drive a v8 with a decent setup and you'll be swapping in no time. You just might lose a small margin of "handling", but I think (just a guess) the torque, the smiles (like when you drop the loud pedal) and the sound( v8sound > * ) will much much more than overcome that.
Bear in mind, this is just my personal opinion and it is worth exactly what you paid for it (grin).
I'm not a regular on TGO anymore (sold my 3rd gen a while back), but I would love to see some results from this V6 3rd gen of death. From all the internet hype, it should be the next coming of Christ. I can only hope that I can one day witness the greatness that is the V6 monster.
Anyway, to the original poster, I hope the above answer sheds some light on the question that you asked.
Costas
cars and such…
06-26-2008, 09:55 AM
#71
Supreme Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Western Maryland
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 82z28
Engine: 406
Transmission: th350
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Somehow this thread has managed to drag out some familiar names...continues to read...
*awaits dean to bring up the fact he has a monster corvette with plenty of "loud pedal"...*
Hello everybody we know from elsewhere.
*awaits dean to bring up the fact he has a monster corvette with plenty of "loud pedal"...*
Hello everybody we know from elsewhere.
06-26-2008, 10:44 AM
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
And a truck that as of yesterday has now breached the 150 mph barrier. 152 top speed (Yes I am feeding fuel to Blythes fire, but it is true)
I have had my so called Monster Vette (with one of my brothers driving it) and me in the Camaro in front of him at Calif Speedway and he could not touch me in the corners. I have said many times my Vette does not hold a candle to my Camaro in cornering and braking, but 540 rwhp is hard for a little 135 rwhp to compete with since the Vette motor is radically built and the Camro little V6 is basically stock with a few bolt-ons. The vette does 0-60 in 3 seconds so it is damn hard to catch but goes through tires quickly. hardly a far fight I seriously think if I put 300hp under the Camaro it would take the Vette on most tracks, prroblem with Calaif Speedway is I go down the front stright at over 165mph and then turn 1&2 high bank is apexed at about 137 mph. Thats a long distance the the Camaro does not have a chance in hell barely reaching 123 at the end of the high bank full throttle the whole distance. My Vette I can not even hold the speed I am revving too high on the front straight. The car will touch 180mph, but the tach is screaming and to regear it would suffer everywhere else.
Not a fair fight between the Vette and Camaro just because of the massive power and ultra wide tires we are dealing with here. Here is a thread on Corvette forum where I recently just had my Vette and Truck out at the racetrack together for a little corvette club carshow during our NASCAR Whelen races locally.(I am in the blue shirt, Kevin "Klawson" on this TGO is standing next to me in the white t-shirt). I enbarassed the sh*t out of 3 c6 Z06's there, They didn't like me much becasue I stole the show- Yes, my Vette is that fast.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show....php?t=2007879
I have had my so called Monster Vette (with one of my brothers driving it) and me in the Camaro in front of him at Calif Speedway and he could not touch me in the corners. I have said many times my Vette does not hold a candle to my Camaro in cornering and braking, but 540 rwhp is hard for a little 135 rwhp to compete with since the Vette motor is radically built and the Camro little V6 is basically stock with a few bolt-ons. The vette does 0-60 in 3 seconds so it is damn hard to catch but goes through tires quickly. hardly a far fight I seriously think if I put 300hp under the Camaro it would take the Vette on most tracks, prroblem with Calaif Speedway is I go down the front stright at over 165mph and then turn 1&2 high bank is apexed at about 137 mph. Thats a long distance the the Camaro does not have a chance in hell barely reaching 123 at the end of the high bank full throttle the whole distance. My Vette I can not even hold the speed I am revving too high on the front straight. The car will touch 180mph, but the tach is screaming and to regear it would suffer everywhere else.
Not a fair fight between the Vette and Camaro just because of the massive power and ultra wide tires we are dealing with here. Here is a thread on Corvette forum where I recently just had my Vette and Truck out at the racetrack together for a little corvette club carshow during our NASCAR Whelen races locally.(I am in the blue shirt, Kevin "Klawson" on this TGO is standing next to me in the white t-shirt). I enbarassed the sh*t out of 3 c6 Z06's there, They didn't like me much becasue I stole the show- Yes, my Vette is that fast.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show....php?t=2007879
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-26-2008 at 10:53 AM.
06-26-2008, 11:30 AM
#74
Member
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: In the sticks near Woodland,CA, USA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 Formula WS6
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: five speed
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I happen to be a long-time CMCer and have driven the 3rd gen platform extensively in that series out West. I have been to California Speedway with CMC twice, once with my 3rd gen 1984 Trans-Am and once with my 1994 Trans-Am. CMCers have been clocked going 145 there with a radar gun, just as a data point.
As far as durability, I think our small block Chevys are terrific in that dept. You can get many years of racing out of one if you keep up with maintenance. Both my motors were well over 100k and I got many seasons out of each.
Once you get the suspension dialed in, which takes some time and adaptation to one's personal style, CMC is pretty much a driver's series and the car factor is taken out of it. We have some amazing drivers running at the top and two have gone off to race professionally like Jonathan Bomarito (open wheels, now Rolex GT series) and Don Campbell (SCCA World Challenge, NASCAR West rookie of the year). So, it comes down to raw skill in the end.
As far as durability, I think our small block Chevys are terrific in that dept. You can get many years of racing out of one if you keep up with maintenance. Both my motors were well over 100k and I got many seasons out of each.
Once you get the suspension dialed in, which takes some time and adaptation to one's personal style, CMC is pretty much a driver's series and the car factor is taken out of it. We have some amazing drivers running at the top and two have gone off to race professionally like Jonathan Bomarito (open wheels, now Rolex GT series) and Don Campbell (SCCA World Challenge, NASCAR West rookie of the year). So, it comes down to raw skill in the end.
06-26-2008, 12:12 PM
#75
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
And a truck that as of yesterday has now breached the 150 mph barrier. 152 top speed (Yes I am feeding fuel to Blythes fire, but it is true)
I have had my so called Monster Vette (with one of my brothers driving it) and me in the Camaro in front of him at Calif Speedway and he could not touch me in the corners. I have said many times my Vette does not hold a candle to my Camaro in cornering and braking, but 540 rwhp is hard for a little 135 rwhp to compete with since the Vette motor is radically built and the Camro little V6 is basically stock with a few bolt-ons. The vette does 0-60 in 3 seconds so it is damn hard to catch but goes through tires quickly. hardly a far fight I seriously think if I put 300hp under the Camaro it would take the Vette on most tracks, prroblem with Calaif Speedway is I go down the front stright at over 165mph and then turn 1&2 high bank is apexed at about 137 mph. Thats a long distance the the Camaro does not have a chance in hell barely reaching 123 at the end of the high bank full throttle the whole distance. My Vette I can not even hold the speed I am revving too high on the front straight. The car will touch 180mph, but the tach is screaming and to regear it would suffer everywhere else.
Not a fair fight between the Vette and Camaro just because of the massive power and ultra wide tires we are dealing with here. Here is a thread on Corvette forum where I recently just had my Vette and Truck out at the racetrack together for a little corvette club carshow during our NASCAR Whelen races locally.(I am in the blue shirt, Kevin "Klawson" on this TGO is standing next to me in the white t-shirt). I enbarassed the sh*t out of 3 c6 Z06's there, They didn't like me much becasue I stole the show- Yes, my Vette is that fast.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show....php?t=2007879
I have had my so called Monster Vette (with one of my brothers driving it) and me in the Camaro in front of him at Calif Speedway and he could not touch me in the corners. I have said many times my Vette does not hold a candle to my Camaro in cornering and braking, but 540 rwhp is hard for a little 135 rwhp to compete with since the Vette motor is radically built and the Camro little V6 is basically stock with a few bolt-ons. The vette does 0-60 in 3 seconds so it is damn hard to catch but goes through tires quickly. hardly a far fight I seriously think if I put 300hp under the Camaro it would take the Vette on most tracks, prroblem with Calaif Speedway is I go down the front stright at over 165mph and then turn 1&2 high bank is apexed at about 137 mph. Thats a long distance the the Camaro does not have a chance in hell barely reaching 123 at the end of the high bank full throttle the whole distance. My Vette I can not even hold the speed I am revving too high on the front straight. The car will touch 180mph, but the tach is screaming and to regear it would suffer everywhere else.
Not a fair fight between the Vette and Camaro just because of the massive power and ultra wide tires we are dealing with here. Here is a thread on Corvette forum where I recently just had my Vette and Truck out at the racetrack together for a little corvette club carshow during our NASCAR Whelen races locally.(I am in the blue shirt, Kevin "Klawson" on this TGO is standing next to me in the white t-shirt). I enbarassed the sh*t out of 3 c6 Z06's there, They didn't like me much becasue I stole the show- Yes, my Vette is that fast.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show....php?t=2007879
If you're such a great driver, why are you arguing about your greatness on a third gen Camaro board? Why aren't you out there getting paid to race? Or at the very least kicking butt and taking names in wheel to wheel racing?
If the 3rd gen V6 is such an amazing platform once you added all 23457278462384 chassis braces to it, why not just go win some AIX national championships?
06-26-2008, 12:19 PM
#76
Supreme Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Western Maryland
Posts: 1,407
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 82z28
Engine: 406
Transmission: th350
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Oh, wow, it's a good thing you swung your Corvette genital out, I really wasn't sure how we could have a discussion about 3rd gen handling without mention your Corvette's Massive E-*****.
If you're such a great driver, why are you arguing about your greatness on a third gen Camaro board? Why aren't you out there getting paid to race?
If you're such a great driver, why are you arguing about your greatness on a third gen Camaro board? Why aren't you out there getting paid to race?
Seriously though folks, can we get back to a purely third gen related technical debate?
Julie, what kind of times did you turn?
06-26-2008, 12:46 PM
#77
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
This thread has been dead for awhile. This is just horseplay BS. Sorry all- I am finished here unless I am asked any tech stuff.
I gave my $$$ summary on what could be built. dollar for dollar and this conversation was mainly intended for keeping the 3rdgen basically intact as a nice street car hotrod, not stripping and hacking it like we do in racing to losse and suffle every pound we can. Racing always has grey areas- but you didn't hear me say that. Even though I deal with strict rules weekly in racing, I like best building a car with no rules, hacking and repositioning things. THis subject was based on not butchering a car in all fairness for just about every TGO member that visits here to read these topics. This is a tech boead for basically stock and street hot rodder 3rd gens but you do get the occational guy that does the frame off re-engineer thing. Now thats nice to see, but not practical tech advice for 99% here reading this.
My post above ( #62 ) gave a very good comarison what could be done to each cars if one where to buy an average car for street use, I gave weights and power to weight comparisons, and dollar figures. I think I argued my point respectfully and backed it with reasons and facts.
Thank you all, no hard feelings
I gave my $$$ summary on what could be built. dollar for dollar and this conversation was mainly intended for keeping the 3rdgen basically intact as a nice street car hotrod, not stripping and hacking it like we do in racing to losse and suffle every pound we can. Racing always has grey areas- but you didn't hear me say that. Even though I deal with strict rules weekly in racing, I like best building a car with no rules, hacking and repositioning things. THis subject was based on not butchering a car in all fairness for just about every TGO member that visits here to read these topics. This is a tech boead for basically stock and street hot rodder 3rd gens but you do get the occational guy that does the frame off re-engineer thing. Now thats nice to see, but not practical tech advice for 99% here reading this.
My post above ( #62 ) gave a very good comarison what could be done to each cars if one where to buy an average car for street use, I gave weights and power to weight comparisons, and dollar figures. I think I argued my point respectfully and backed it with reasons and facts.
Thank you all, no hard feelings
06-26-2008, 12:59 PM
#78
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Oh, wow, it's a good thing you swung your Corvette genital out, I really wasn't sure how we could have a discussion about 3rd gen handling without mention your Corvette's Massive E-*****.
If you're such a great driver, why are you arguing about your greatness on a third gen Camaro board? Why aren't you out there getting paid to race? Or at the very least kicking butt and taking names in wheel to wheel racing?
If the 3rd gen V6 is such an amazing platform once you added all 23457278462384 chassis braces to it, why not just go win some AIX national championships?
If you're such a great driver, why are you arguing about your greatness on a third gen Camaro board? Why aren't you out there getting paid to race? Or at the very least kicking butt and taking names in wheel to wheel racing?
If the 3rd gen V6 is such an amazing platform once you added all 23457278462384 chassis braces to it, why not just go win some AIX national championships?
As Blyth said, I do get paid for this. I am in fact a crewcheif, and my team is currently sitting in 4th place of 27 as we speak. You should come watch, we are racing this Saturday night.
Ever seen "On the Edge" on Speed ch? Thats me getting interveiwed by George (aka Lugg Nutz) at the last race.
Last edited by Vetruck; 10-24-2010 at 06:25 PM.
06-26-2008, 02:44 PM
#79
Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Merryland
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
9 Posts
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LC9
Transmission: AR5
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Heck, if the weight savings of a NA V6 so much equals the playing field against a V8, why not start off with an Iron Duke? 
Pat
Pat
06-26-2008, 03:16 PM
#80
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Weedsport, NY
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1986 Camaro SC
Engine: Bolt-on/cam 305
Transmission: 700R4 w/ 2500stall
Axle/Gears: 3.73 10bolt Posi
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
I thought you build up was bit off, so I thougth I'd go through it w/ my own numbers.
I'd have to stop right there, if I got a 20k budget to build a nice 3rd gen, I don't need to start w/ a pristine Iroc. Let's say you've got $1,500 into a good v6 chassis. You're gonna keep the V6 and trans, and I'm gonna pull it. We'll say $10k goes into suspension, brakes, and tires on either car. That's leaves both each with $8,500 for the motor/trans. That leave's either car w/ pretty good motor options. A modest 450hp aluminum LSx motor w/ heads/cam and T-56 is certainly not outside the reach of that budget. I don't forsee that same budget making the same power on the v6 model - you mention about 300hp. Now you're pretty close in weight over the front end, but you've got a 150hp advantage in your V8 car, that will easily outweight an handling advantage the v6 car has. Call your weight on the V6 at 3050, and the V8 at 3250, your power to weight comes out like this:
V6 : 10.1 lbs/hp
V8: 7.2 lbs/hp
You had the power to weight ratio at:
Now we are talking about a 200lbs difference for the chassis, and 30% more power in the V8 car. I just don't see the V6 car making that up in handling on anything but the absolute tightest of auto-courses.
Its all a wash anyways, its a drivers race.
Stan, Let me start off by thanking you for keeping this debate respectful, As I am also trying to do.
Who says you have to give up 30-40-50% of your power? Lets say you have a 20K budget to build a car. You can buy an IROC for lets say 5K or you buy a baseline V6 for 1500. You now have an aditional aprox 3500 to build with. That goes a good ways into building a radical turbo V6- your a gonna have to spend money above the 5K on the IROC to build that motor also.
Who says you have to give up 30-40-50% of your power? Lets say you have a 20K budget to build a car. You can buy an IROC for lets say 5K or you buy a baseline V6 for 1500. You now have an aditional aprox 3500 to build with. That goes a good ways into building a radical turbo V6- your a gonna have to spend money above the 5K on the IROC to build that motor also.
V6 : 10.1 lbs/hp
V8: 7.2 lbs/hp
You had the power to weight ratio at:
Built V6 at 3100 = 10.3 lbs per HP
Built V8 (dropped 40 lbs with alum heads) 3460lbs= 9.89 lbs per hp
Built V8 (dropped 40 lbs with alum heads) 3460lbs= 9.89 lbs per hp
Its all a wash anyways, its a drivers race.
Last edited by atc3434; 06-26-2008 at 03:19 PM.
06-26-2008, 03:49 PM
#81
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Where's your cash for the cooling system needed for that 450hp motor?
There are alot of little odds and ends that make the V8 more expensive.
You are going to lay down big bucks making the entire car and drivetrain handle that much HP- then also worry about making it slow back down with the incressed buildup of brake heat....should I go on? You have exceeded you 20K limit or you are only drivning the car for a little while till it breaks and sits till you can afford to fix it.
There are alot of little odds and ends that make the V8 more expensive.
You are going to lay down big bucks making the entire car and drivetrain handle that much HP- then also worry about making it slow back down with the incressed buildup of brake heat....should I go on? You have exceeded you 20K limit or you are only drivning the car for a little while till it breaks and sits till you can afford to fix it.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-26-2008 at 03:54 PM.
06-26-2008, 03:58 PM
#82
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Now granted, I currently have a car that has about 25K into it without major internal motor work, so it is a bit extrme for the senerio, but what makes this car great is it is build as a VERY reliable grocery getter that can actually see road course use all day other than tire wear. You can not find a street car that can do than in this price range. Even with another 5K into it for a radical V6 motor, the car is still plenty HD to see all day abuse.
I have better brakes and cooling system than most race cars, and I even still have air conditioning when I get fu*king misserable in the cockpit with my driving suit on- THAT WAS A JOKE PEOPLE
I have better brakes and cooling system than most race cars, and I even still have air conditioning when I get fu*king misserable in the cockpit with my driving suit on- THAT WAS A JOKE PEOPLE
06-26-2008, 04:07 PM
#83
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Besides, how about the two I ran against in autox that had the LS1's and were 7 and 8 seconds behind me when I ran 63 second lap and they ran 70 and 71 sec bests.
That my friend is an eternity of time in autox.
Now before you say HP does not matter in autox, My vette on that same very course would have run a 56-58 sec range and my Camaro out handles it. But the Vette has massive power and a full race suspension with 335-30-17's out back and race rubber so I can actually use it. On street tires, It would be a very close call between my two cars. I would perfer to dsrive the Camaro on street tires, the Vette is a handful unless on race rubber. You just do not need anything more than about 300 hp on a 3000 lb car for anything speed range from 20 mph to about 100. Above the 100mph mark where you can stab the throttle for a prolonged periods coming out of a 60mph corner? Yes the 500hp make a major asz whippin'
Like I stated on that Corvette furm post, I was already rolling 60-70 mph when I clutched the car and lit the asz end up on the track at Irwindale in from of the prerace fans. Not a little tire scratch, I lit them sideways. THis car does that no problem on scary street rubber. I can not use the power for the slower speed stuff.
That my friend is an eternity of time in autox.
Now before you say HP does not matter in autox, My vette on that same very course would have run a 56-58 sec range and my Camaro out handles it. But the Vette has massive power and a full race suspension with 335-30-17's out back and race rubber so I can actually use it. On street tires, It would be a very close call between my two cars. I would perfer to dsrive the Camaro on street tires, the Vette is a handful unless on race rubber. You just do not need anything more than about 300 hp on a 3000 lb car for anything speed range from 20 mph to about 100. Above the 100mph mark where you can stab the throttle for a prolonged periods coming out of a 60mph corner? Yes the 500hp make a major asz whippin'
Like I stated on that Corvette furm post, I was already rolling 60-70 mph when I clutched the car and lit the asz end up on the track at Irwindale in from of the prerace fans. Not a little tire scratch, I lit them sideways. THis car does that no problem on scary street rubber. I can not use the power for the slower speed stuff.
Last edited by Vetruck; 06-26-2008 at 04:21 PM.
06-26-2008, 04:10 PM
#84
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Weedsport, NY
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1986 Camaro SC
Engine: Bolt-on/cam 305
Transmission: 700R4 w/ 2500stall
Axle/Gears: 3.73 10bolt Posi
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Where's your cash for the cooling system needed for that 450hp motor?
There are alot of little odds and ends that make the V8 more expensive.
You are going to lay down big bucks making the entire car and drivetrain handle that much HP- then also worry about making it slow back down with the incressed buildup of brake heat....should I go on? You have exceeded you 20K limit or you are only drivning the car for a little while till it breaks and sits till you can afford to fix it.
There are alot of little odds and ends that make the V8 more expensive.
You are going to lay down big bucks making the entire car and drivetrain handle that much HP- then also worry about making it slow back down with the incressed buildup of brake heat....should I go on? You have exceeded you 20K limit or you are only drivning the car for a little while till it breaks and sits till you can afford to fix it.
06-26-2008, 04:16 PM
#85
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Weedsport, NY
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1986 Camaro SC
Engine: Bolt-on/cam 305
Transmission: 700R4 w/ 2500stall
Axle/Gears: 3.73 10bolt Posi
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Besides, I thought we were talking track racing, not auto-x. Obviously as the track gets tighter, power is less and less of a factor with more and more emphasis on handling.
06-26-2008, 08:21 PM
#86
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SW Chicago 'burbs
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: American Iron Firebird
Engine: The little 305 that could.
Transmission: Richmond T-10
Axle/Gears: Floater 9" - 3.64 gears
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
And if your better brakes and cooling system aren't needed on a race car, doesn't that just make it extra weight on the front end that would hurt the handling of the V6?
06-26-2008, 08:43 PM
#87
Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Merryland
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
9 Posts
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LC9
Transmission: AR5
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Pat
06-26-2008, 09:09 PM
#88
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 10,401
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 89 RS 89 iroc 87 firebird
Engine: 3.1 Turbo/ 355 twin turbo
Transmission: a4 w/ 4500 stall/ a4 / t5
Axle/Gears: strange s60 /w 3:42's
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
You have to consider when you add a turbo, the turbo and all the piping adds weight in the very front of the engine bay. Not sure as to what that'll actually weigh, but it may negate the advantages of the lighter V6.
I'll like to have Dean's car with about 300 BHP though....
I'll like to have Dean's car with about 300 BHP though....
at the same time i also ditched the factory cast iron manifolds.egr etc i didnt get to wiegh that stuff but i bet in the end the turbo system adds about 20 pounds on the front end.maybe not even since i ditched the ac when i went turbo
06-26-2008, 09:18 PM
#89
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Originally Posted by Vetruck
Falconber Racing Engines....
Illustrated Corvette Series No. 93 - 1992 Falconer V-12 Experimental Corvette
"The Conan Corvette"
When the Dodge Viper debuted at the North American International Auto Show in January 1989, NO ONE knew what hit them. The Viper was new and fresh, yet it had a definite connection to the Shelby Cobra. Advanced orders were flooding in you know that designers were going back to the office saying, "DAMN!"
The Corvette team was working on three fronts: improving the production Corvette, getting the LT-5 (ZR-1) ready for production, and honing the CERV III prototype as a possible C5 Corvette. But the economy wasn't good and the reality of a CERV III-based car seemed dim at best Meanwhile, Chrysler was going into production with the V10-powered Viper. This posed a serious threat to the Corvette's "America's Only True Sports Car" status.
Under the guise of a "chassis development" program, the Corvette team came up with the idea of trumping the V10 Viper with a V12 Corvette prototype. Enter Ryan Falconer.
Falconer got his start in the early '60 working for Andy Granatelli's Novi engine -powered Indy racers. Later he joined in the Shelby American team and worked on the GT40 and racing Cobras. Two years later, Ryan started his own company, building his own racing engines. His associates reads like a "who's who" of auto racing legends, including; Parnelli Jones, Al Unser, Mario Andretti, Jackie Stewart, and many others.
So when the Corvette team decided to one-up the Viper with two extra cylinders, they decided on one of Ryan Falconer's stunning, all aluminum V12 racing engines. Since the Corvette would have to be stretched, this was the perfect time for a "chassis study."
Since the Falconer V12 packed a 680-horsepower kick, the obvious place to begin was with a production ZR-1. The biggest challenge was the fact that the all-aluminum V12 engine was 8.8-inches longer than the production Corvette engine. So the front end of the ZR-1 would have to be stretched 8-inches. SportsFab of Wixom, Michigan was contracted to do the stretching. The extra length is barely noticeable, but the '60s-styled side pipes sure are. Those were straight-through pipes directly off the tuned headers with no mufflers! With the hood up, the engine looked enormous. Amazingly, the extra length and the larger engine only added 100-pounds to the overall weight of the car. The engine used electronic fuel injection with a short-runner intake manifold and the aluminum block had pressed in cast iron sleeves, similar to the famous ZL-1
Actual performance figures were never published, as this was just a "chassis study." But you can figure out the power-to-weight ratio. What was certain was that at $45,000 per engine, plus the chassis and body modifications, there was no chance this car would ever get into production. Nick-named "Conan" because of the huge V12 engine, the ZR-12 was without a doubt, the one of the baddest engineering study Corvettes ever made....
06-26-2008, 09:38 PM
#90
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Originally Posted by Vetruck
In 1985, GM had a factory stock motor designed to go into production into the Pontiac Fiero that was a 2.9L twin turbo 60*V6 and weighed 362lbs in iron head and iron block form. It was internal memoed the "Corvette Killer" and was projected to be the fastest production car ever realised in history....
Also, I'd like to clarify your argument, just in case I'm misunderstanding you. Are you arguing here the size/weight of the engine in itself being the weak link in handling capabilites, regardless of the vehicle's weight? If that's the case, Formula One racers, the fastest and best handling cars on the planet, must be ill informed then....
... not to mention those TERRIBLE handling six/seven figure exotics, Click Here!
06-26-2008, 09:50 PM
#91
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 10,401
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 89 RS 89 iroc 87 firebird
Engine: 3.1 Turbo/ 355 twin turbo
Transmission: a4 w/ 4500 stall/ a4 / t5
Axle/Gears: strange s60 /w 3:42's
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
engine management system 311$'s
im not going to list the full turbo kit prices but if i recall right i ended up spending just under 1k
motor build
stock block -comes with car
crank rods - with car
kb pistons with costed skirts - 100$'s
plasma moly rings 100$'s
full gasket set 200$'s
custom cam grind 100$'s
rotating assembly lightened and balanced 150$'s
injectors 50$'s
cyl head and intake porting free if done by urself
just over 2k
cant give full results yet but cars making just over 300hp @ 6psi with a to small of a turbo, running lean.
setup is prolly good for 375hp once dialed in at 6psi not bad for 2k and im sure some ppl can do this even cheaper hell using mild steel headers instead of 316L could drop 3-400 off the total
06-26-2008, 10:01 PM
#92
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Originally Posted by slow305
Having competed in national SCCA autocrosses for the past 10 years, I'm pretty familiar with who is fast and who is not. Can you share with us the LS1 drivers who were behind you by 7 or 8 seconds? Do you have a link to those results?
In any event, here we have the folks over at Katech running the autocross over at carlisle @ 41.8 seconds, Click Here, Click here, and Click here....
Last edited by Street Lethal; 06-26-2008 at 10:04 PM.
06-27-2008, 12:00 AM
#93
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: right behind you
Posts: 2,574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '85 maro
Engine: In the works...
Transmission: TH700 R4
Axle/Gears: 3.73 posi
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Not to start another huge debate here or anything, but I can't see where people get the idea that building a 'hybrid' v6 is an expensive proposition given the sheer glut of oem fwd parts available at any junkyard. I got my 3400 heads for $50!!! They weigh 25lbs each and flow nearly 200cfm stock! with a little porting I'll be able to touch the 220cfm mark. That gives me an ultralight engine, excellent power potential and economy to boot! I'm sorry, but I'm completely convinced in the potenital of these little engines and waiting to see the general population wake up and see them for what they really are.
06-27-2008, 12:18 AM
#94
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Originally Posted by bl85c
Not to start another huge debate here or anything, but I can't see where people get the idea that building a 'hybrid' v6 is an expensive proposition given the sheer glut of oem fwd parts available at any junkyard. I got my 3400 heads for $50!!! They weigh 25lbs each and flow nearly 200cfm stock! with a little porting I'll be able to touch the 220cfm mark. That gives me an ultralight engine, excellent power potential and economy to boot!
06-27-2008, 02:24 AM
#95
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Troy IL
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Car: 1990 rs 1992 z28 1995 jeep
Engine: no engine, 383stroker, inline 6 4.0
Transmission: none, t5, auto
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
wow i dont get on for a week and i miss all the good arguments... lol well i have alot too say on almost everything in this post but ill keep it bottled up so it doesnt turn into more flaming lol.... hey vetruck what kind of springs do u use in ur camaro would u recommened wieght jacks?
06-27-2008, 02:58 AM
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Well f*ck people, I'm gonna be stupid now and put a Judd GV5 in a camaro because I have unlimited funds.
THis topic went so far of course.
How many people in this TGO forum that can realistically fall under anyone elses ideas and budgets except mine.
99.9 % of posters on TGO have an iron V8 or the V6 platforms. THis topic is a realistic tech proposal to them for future builds.
THis is not "lets throw a $100,000 motor in a $200 car that has no aero and go to Lemans."
S Lethal- I did not see any cars in that video link that portrayed any handling. besides, My Vette can do better burnouts than any of them. Those cars only shine above 100 mph in aero situations. And you know what would KIC THE LIVIN CRAP OUT OF THEM....... Stillens twin turbo V6 GTS imsa car for about the same price.
THis topic went so far of course.
How many people in this TGO forum that can realistically fall under anyone elses ideas and budgets except mine.
99.9 % of posters on TGO have an iron V8 or the V6 platforms. THis topic is a realistic tech proposal to them for future builds.
THis is not "lets throw a $100,000 motor in a $200 car that has no aero and go to Lemans."
S Lethal- I did not see any cars in that video link that portrayed any handling. besides, My Vette can do better burnouts than any of them. Those cars only shine above 100 mph in aero situations. And you know what would KIC THE LIVIN CRAP OUT OF THEM....... Stillens twin turbo V6 GTS imsa car for about the same price.
06-27-2008, 08:08 AM
#97
Supporter/Moderator
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
What it ultimately comes down to is what will generate a faster laptime. I started working on a spreadsheet to help calculate the ultimate NASA car. Since the class goes by a power to weight ratio, you can trade off weight vs power. On a tight track that doesn't have high speeds, less weight and power gives the advantage, since you can corner at higher g's, which results in a faster exit speed. If the straight is long enough, eventually the higher hp heavier car will catch up and pass the lighter, lower HP car.
Aero is the other consideration. With a 3rd gen Camaro, I used a Cd of .34, area of 22 ft^2, and Rho at sea level and 59 deg F.
HP Required to overcome drag:
60 MPH - 11 HP
80 26
100 51
120 88
140 140
160 209
180 298
200 408
On the higher speed sections of the course, aero starts to become a significant factor. If you've only got 150 hp at the rear wheels, at 100 mph, you only have 99hp left over to accelerate the car (3200 lb / 99 hp = 32lb/hp), while the stock V8 with 250 hp has 200 hp on tap (3400/200=17 lb/hp), so it'll have almost twice the acceleration as the lighter, lower hp V6.
The last thing I'll address is cornerweights. Dean's familiar with this, but tires don't have a linear coefficient of friction. As more weight gets added, the tires proportionally grip less. I graphed out the coefficient of friction as best I could from a few different tables (Herb Adams book & Milliken, but the grip is low compared to what I see with the Kumho V710's in my 3400 lb Camaro, cornering at 1.2 g's - http://www.skulte.com/z28tt/archives...ing_the_d.html).
The quadratic formula I came up with was (I love Excel!):
146.7+1.102x-.00025x^2=Traction, with x being corner weight
Weight:Traction:Coef. of Friction
300 460 1.53
550 680 1.24
750 840 1.12
950 970 1.02
1000 1000 1.00
1250 1140 0.91
1500 1250 0.83
The goal of a performance car is to maximize grip. If you lower your CofG, that reduces weight transfer in corners, keeping more grip on the inside tires, rather than overloading the outside tires.
If your CofG is 20", track width is 60", and weight is 3500 lbs, you have a lateral weight transfer of 875 lbs if cornering at a max of .76g's (I know it's low, but my tire grip formula is off). That's 875 added to the outside tires, and 875 taken away from the inside tires. Calc'g it out, the car has 3500 lbs of grip in the corner, vs 3693 when it's just sitting there, so you've now lost 193 lbs of grip due to weight transfer.
Same with getting weight off the nose. If you drop 200 theoretical lbs, the car weighs 3300 lbs, and has 3554 lbs of grip when static. It can corner at .92g's, rather than .76g's. In a 350ft radius corner, thats vs 69.5 mph vs 63.2 mph. In an autox where you don't have time to make up that speed difference with the faster acceleration, the lighter V6 may be faster, but if you get on a road course where aero drag becomes a factor, the heavier, higher HP car gets a chance to catch up and pass the V6.
The one wrinkle is tire size. If you're allowed to run larger tires to deal with the extra weight of a V8, then you'll have more grip than the V6, as well as more HP.
That being said, an LS1 is only about 30 lbs heavier than the V6, according to Brent Franker's 4th gen page at:
http://www.bfranker.badz28.com/fbody/weights.htm has:
460.9 lbs - LS1 (5.7L) Manual with oil and flywheel
428.8 lbs - L36 (3.8L) Manual with oil and flywheel
405.5 lbs - LS1 (5.7L) Auto with oil and flexplate
391.2 lbs - L36 (3.8L) Auto with oil and flexplate
I'd be thrilled to take an extra 30 lbs in exchange for 150 hp. Best of both worlds.
Andris, anyone want to trade a heavy 1000hp capable twin turbo V8 for an LS1?
BTW Dean - If you have a race coming up and want to borrow the Race Technologies DL90 data acquisition box, and get telemetry, send me an email...
Aero is the other consideration. With a 3rd gen Camaro, I used a Cd of .34, area of 22 ft^2, and Rho at sea level and 59 deg F.
HP Required to overcome drag:
60 MPH - 11 HP
80 26
100 51
120 88
140 140
160 209
180 298
200 408
On the higher speed sections of the course, aero starts to become a significant factor. If you've only got 150 hp at the rear wheels, at 100 mph, you only have 99hp left over to accelerate the car (3200 lb / 99 hp = 32lb/hp), while the stock V8 with 250 hp has 200 hp on tap (3400/200=17 lb/hp), so it'll have almost twice the acceleration as the lighter, lower hp V6.
The last thing I'll address is cornerweights. Dean's familiar with this, but tires don't have a linear coefficient of friction. As more weight gets added, the tires proportionally grip less. I graphed out the coefficient of friction as best I could from a few different tables (Herb Adams book & Milliken, but the grip is low compared to what I see with the Kumho V710's in my 3400 lb Camaro, cornering at 1.2 g's - http://www.skulte.com/z28tt/archives...ing_the_d.html).
The quadratic formula I came up with was (I love Excel!):
146.7+1.102x-.00025x^2=Traction, with x being corner weight
Weight:Traction:Coef. of Friction
300 460 1.53
550 680 1.24
750 840 1.12
950 970 1.02
1000 1000 1.00
1250 1140 0.91
1500 1250 0.83
The goal of a performance car is to maximize grip. If you lower your CofG, that reduces weight transfer in corners, keeping more grip on the inside tires, rather than overloading the outside tires.
If your CofG is 20", track width is 60", and weight is 3500 lbs, you have a lateral weight transfer of 875 lbs if cornering at a max of .76g's (I know it's low, but my tire grip formula is off). That's 875 added to the outside tires, and 875 taken away from the inside tires. Calc'g it out, the car has 3500 lbs of grip in the corner, vs 3693 when it's just sitting there, so you've now lost 193 lbs of grip due to weight transfer.
Same with getting weight off the nose. If you drop 200 theoretical lbs, the car weighs 3300 lbs, and has 3554 lbs of grip when static. It can corner at .92g's, rather than .76g's. In a 350ft radius corner, thats vs 69.5 mph vs 63.2 mph. In an autox where you don't have time to make up that speed difference with the faster acceleration, the lighter V6 may be faster, but if you get on a road course where aero drag becomes a factor, the heavier, higher HP car gets a chance to catch up and pass the V6.
The one wrinkle is tire size. If you're allowed to run larger tires to deal with the extra weight of a V8, then you'll have more grip than the V6, as well as more HP.
That being said, an LS1 is only about 30 lbs heavier than the V6, according to Brent Franker's 4th gen page at:
http://www.bfranker.badz28.com/fbody/weights.htm has:
460.9 lbs - LS1 (5.7L) Manual with oil and flywheel
428.8 lbs - L36 (3.8L) Manual with oil and flywheel
405.5 lbs - LS1 (5.7L) Auto with oil and flexplate
391.2 lbs - L36 (3.8L) Auto with oil and flexplate
I'd be thrilled to take an extra 30 lbs in exchange for 150 hp. Best of both worlds.
Andris, anyone want to trade a heavy 1000hp capable twin turbo V8 for an LS1?
BTW Dean - If you have a race coming up and want to borrow the Race Technologies DL90 data acquisition box, and get telemetry, send me an email...
Last edited by askulte; 06-27-2008 at 08:15 AM. Reason: added data from limerock
06-27-2008, 10:19 AM
#98
Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Corvette
Engine: 353 cu in
Transmission: M6
Axle/Gears: 3.45
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
On paper, from an engineering perspective, an identical, but lighter car will always change directions better, make more grip (all things being IDENTICAL), etc. So, from that standpoint, yup, sure, a V6 3rd gen can potentially handle better than a heavier V8 car. Perfect. Now that we have that out of the way...
This thread has devolved into which is the faster way around a race track and that is a whole different animal completely. Though the V6 car may make a touch more cornering grip, it's not likely (in most cases) to be able to overcome the horsepower differential (stock for stock). If we build a V6 and a V8 to have very nearly identical power curves (and similar power/torque), the lighter car should be the faster one. Again, this is not a difficult concept on paper.
However it was then brought up that a particular V6 car in this thread has about 25k in it and turns pretty good laps at a road course. If we are going to take 25k and a 3rd gen and head to a road course, I'll present another option. I can do this because I too have a 3rd gen with way too much money in it, and (amazingly enough) that total investment is about $25k. This allows us the chance to consider two different $25k approaches to third gen ownership. This is the only reason I've let myself be drug into this thread. But (if we weren't on opposite ends of the country) we could actually take both of these cars to a race track and take lap times and find out the fastest way around a track in a 3rd gen for $25k (I'm pretty sure I already know the answer to this one though, my car is light and makes hp, but it's really mostly a track car, so it's possibly not fair to pick on the little V6). As I have no cardomain page or anything else dedicated to my car (though there is a thread on frrax about some of it), I'll simply list the breakdown of parts and specs (by copying my thread from the classifieds forum). With that said, there are better ways to invest $25k in a 3rd gen (an LS1 swap would be part of it, but I already had built this engine) and if I were doing it again, it would be far different and much faster (a head and cam swap could be worth 50-90 hp on this thing for not much more than I have in the heads and cam that are on it, meaning, I made some "mistakes" that I might correct the second time around). The only way to truly find the answer to this would be to get both cars to a track, but you can still see another way to spend too much money on a 3rd gen. Also, this car has tags on it, but it does not even pretend to be a daily driver. You could, it's reliable, but I'm not sure you'd want to (no AC, slightly loud, etc), but I have driven it to work on occasion and on the odd 150 mile round trip to a friends place, etc. I would hop in and drive it across country if I was in the mood, it is that reliable.
I'm not sure how you put $25k into one of these without engine work though... This car was purchased 7 years ago for $5k, all tie rods, ball joints, etc have been replaced (everything but the steering box is new) and it's been rebuilt from the ground up and with the engine and all, there is only close to $20-25k in it (total).
Anyway, here is "Plan B".
1992 Z28 factory 5.7 TPI car (hardtop)
Engine:
ZZ3 GM factory steel crank
Lunati Street Race rods
Milodon splayed main caps (positions 2, 3 and 4)
GM Performance parts 2 bolt billet front main cap (position 1)
ARP 2 bolt main studs (milodon bolts in the splayed locations)
Clevite bearings
Melling M55HV oil pump (old M55HV, not the new one)
Milodon steel oil pump driveshaft
1995 GM factory roller block (seasoned with 5k miles on it before being built)
Fluidamper Streetdampr harmonic balancer
Factory LT1 flywheel
Roller pilot bearing
KB Signature series pistons (12cc dish)
Speed Pro file fit plasma moly rings
ZZ3/ZZ4/87 and up Corvette aluminum heads (port matched to a 1206 intake gasket)
Manley Race-flo undercut valves (1.94/1.50)
K-motion valve springs (130 lbs on seat/380 open)
Comp locks and retainers
ARP 7/16 screw in rocker studs
Pushrod guide plates (I forget who’s guide plates, comp cams I think).
Comp Pro Magnum chromoly 1.52 roller rockers
Moroso polished valve covers
Holley Stealth Ram intake
Edelbrock/BBK 52mm throttle body
SVO 24 lb hour injectors
MSD Pro Billet distributor (87 and up small cap HEI drop in)
TPIS oil pan
Comp 220/230 .510/.510 lift roller cam
Comp “R” drop in hydraulic roller lifters
Comp hardened pushrods
Comp pro billet double roller timing chain (7 keyways for setting advance)
Factory GM timing cover
Balanced
0 decked
“deck plugs” (reduce the core holes down to smaller water passages and reinforce the deck)
Multi angle valve job
Heads were skim cut to make sure they were true
Fel pro gaskets
Bored .020 and torque plate honed
Line bored when the splayed caps were installed (blueprinted to proper crank location)
ARP bolts throughout (oil pan, intake, timing cover, harmonic balancer, etc but it has the GM specified head bolts for these heads). Engine is about 10.5:1 and runs on premium pump gas.
The engine has about 1,200 street miles on it, 6 autocrosses (maybe 7) and 50 minutes of road course track time.
Engine supporting equipment:
MSD ignition coil
Edelbrock water pump
Serpentine 2 piece under drive pulley set
AC and smog pump delete pulleys
K&N drop in filters (modified air box, no baffles)
Energy suspension poly motor mounts
Moroso billet oil line block adaptor
Moroso billet remote oil filter mount (with temp fitting)
3 quart Canton Accusump
Custom Afco radiator with built in oil cooler.
Flex a lite Black Magic Extreme electric cooling fan (3000 cfm)
#10 an line and fittings for all of the oil system (20-30 feet of line, a small pile of fittings)
Autometer mechanical oil pressure gauge.
Autometer mechanical water temp gauge
Autometer electric oil temp gauge
Autometer pro lite low oil pressure warning light (30 psi)
Autometer shift light
Autometer pro lite coolant pressure warning lite
Wideband O2 sensor (PLX technologies M400).
Exhaust:
SLP 1 ¾” shorty headers with dual cat Y pipe (no cats, it has stainless straight pipe in there)
3” aluminized pipe to a Magnaflow 3x9” race muffler with a turn down in front of the rear axle.
Transmission:
LT1 T56 (rebuilt by Danny Popp)
B&M Ripper shifter
Centerforce DF clutch
Energy suspension poly trans mount
Driveline:
Baker precision “stacked plate” power steering cooler
Lingenfelter 3.5” aluminum driveshaft
Eaton posi
3.73 gears
Moser axles
Summit Racings version of a “TA” rear cover (with cap support bolts)
Spohn torque arm (with front rod end mount that connects to the cross member)
Spohn 6 speed adaptor cross member (it was a kit with the torque arm)
Rear was rebuilt just before I bought the car (last May/June) with an Eaton posi, all fresh bearings, gears, axles, seals, etc.
Bodywork:
Glasstek 2.5” “bolt on” fiberglass cowl hood
Blain Fab 7.5” “road race” adjustable lexan rear spoiler
Round tube SFC’s (welded, possibly spohn, not sure though)
Interior:
Grant steering wheel (airbag has been removed)
G-force lap belt (part of a 5 piece belt system) on the driver side.
All carpet, door panels, etc has been removed. The AC and heater assembly has been removed and the holes in the firewall are patched and sealed with RTV. There are two front seats in the car. The factory dash is in place as is the factory instrument cluster. It does still have power windows in place. However the rear hatch latch has been removed and hood pins have been installed to keep the hatch closed. The power locks are still in the doors and the front locks are functional and I have keys for the doors and ignition (it still uses a key). This car does have headlights, tail lights and turn signals, but the horn has been removed (just fyi).
Suspension:
Front:
Hotpart castor/camber plates
ST 35mm front bar
Koni SA’s
Energy suspension front control arm bushings
Ground control weight jacks with 1000 in lb springs
Balljoints, tie rods, center link, idler arm, etc were all replaced about 1,400 miles ago. Everything but the steering box is new.
Rear:
Hotpart swedged chromoly rod ended PHB
Hotpart aluminum rod ended LCA’s
Koni SA’s (30 series monotube)
Hellwig 3 position adjustable rear sway bar 22mm (other bars on request)
Ground control weight jacks with 225 in lb springs
Brakes:
Ed Miller C4HD setup on front with Hawk HP+ pads
Factory 1992 disk rear with Hawk HPS pads
ATE superblue brake fluid
Wheels:
Polished factory IROC 16x8’s
Car needs redyno’d, but it is approximately 330-350 RWHP (it was dyno’d on a dyno that was reading very wrong, my max rpm was showing as 5,600 and we ran to the 6,400 rpm shift light. That dyno showed 299 hp/ 338 ft lbs, some exhaust changes were made and it picked up considerable power, so, that’s where the 330-350 hp guess is coming from (fix the 800 rpm they “lost” in the calculations and add a touch for the new traction problems after the exhaust). Car is approximately 2,800 lbs. This engine was built to be durable (hence the splayed caps, main studs, balancing, etc). It makes good (actually it’s about perfect for American Iron once it’s caged) hp and torque, but it’s not a 700 hp monster. It is still pretty quick due to the power it makes and the weight (or lack of weight).
Tuning:
I’ve got the moats “Osterich” setup for this car. I also have a prom burner and cables to do datalogging. (available for additional cost)
As you can see, there is a "fortune" in this car. I'm guessing between Mike and I (the last owner), it's something approaching $20-25k. Of course you never get that out of them, but go find a factory 1992 hardtop chassis (the "best" year for 3rd gen chassis since they were welded and bonded together) and start pricing parts. I think you'll find this to be a pretty good deal on a fairly well sorted car. It's been pretty quick out of the box (beating some slick tired cars in CP while running on street rubber...and I'm not sure how, it's not my driving). Someone cage this thing and take it AI racing.
Engine:
ZZ3 GM factory steel crank
Lunati Street Race rods
Milodon splayed main caps (positions 2, 3 and 4)
GM Performance parts 2 bolt billet front main cap (position 1)
ARP 2 bolt main studs (milodon bolts in the splayed locations)
Clevite bearings
Melling M55HV oil pump (old M55HV, not the new one)
Milodon steel oil pump driveshaft
1995 GM factory roller block (seasoned with 5k miles on it before being built)
Fluidamper Streetdampr harmonic balancer
Factory LT1 flywheel
Roller pilot bearing
KB Signature series pistons (12cc dish)
Speed Pro file fit plasma moly rings
ZZ3/ZZ4/87 and up Corvette aluminum heads (port matched to a 1206 intake gasket)
Manley Race-flo undercut valves (1.94/1.50)
K-motion valve springs (130 lbs on seat/380 open)
Comp locks and retainers
ARP 7/16 screw in rocker studs
Pushrod guide plates (I forget who’s guide plates, comp cams I think).
Comp Pro Magnum chromoly 1.52 roller rockers
Moroso polished valve covers
Holley Stealth Ram intake
Edelbrock/BBK 52mm throttle body
SVO 24 lb hour injectors
MSD Pro Billet distributor (87 and up small cap HEI drop in)
TPIS oil pan
Comp 220/230 .510/.510 lift roller cam
Comp “R” drop in hydraulic roller lifters
Comp hardened pushrods
Comp pro billet double roller timing chain (7 keyways for setting advance)
Factory GM timing cover
Balanced
0 decked
“deck plugs” (reduce the core holes down to smaller water passages and reinforce the deck)
Multi angle valve job
Heads were skim cut to make sure they were true
Fel pro gaskets
Bored .020 and torque plate honed
Line bored when the splayed caps were installed (blueprinted to proper crank location)
ARP bolts throughout (oil pan, intake, timing cover, harmonic balancer, etc but it has the GM specified head bolts for these heads). Engine is about 10.5:1 and runs on premium pump gas.
The engine has about 1,200 street miles on it, 6 autocrosses (maybe 7) and 50 minutes of road course track time.
Engine supporting equipment:
MSD ignition coil
Edelbrock water pump
Serpentine 2 piece under drive pulley set
AC and smog pump delete pulleys
K&N drop in filters (modified air box, no baffles)
Energy suspension poly motor mounts
Moroso billet oil line block adaptor
Moroso billet remote oil filter mount (with temp fitting)
3 quart Canton Accusump
Custom Afco radiator with built in oil cooler.
Flex a lite Black Magic Extreme electric cooling fan (3000 cfm)
#10 an line and fittings for all of the oil system (20-30 feet of line, a small pile of fittings)
Autometer mechanical oil pressure gauge.
Autometer mechanical water temp gauge
Autometer electric oil temp gauge
Autometer pro lite low oil pressure warning light (30 psi)
Autometer shift light
Autometer pro lite coolant pressure warning lite
Wideband O2 sensor (PLX technologies M400).
Exhaust:
SLP 1 ¾” shorty headers with dual cat Y pipe (no cats, it has stainless straight pipe in there)
3” aluminized pipe to a Magnaflow 3x9” race muffler with a turn down in front of the rear axle.
Transmission:
LT1 T56 (rebuilt by Danny Popp)
B&M Ripper shifter
Centerforce DF clutch
Energy suspension poly trans mount
Driveline:
Baker precision “stacked plate” power steering cooler
Lingenfelter 3.5” aluminum driveshaft
Eaton posi
3.73 gears
Moser axles
Summit Racings version of a “TA” rear cover (with cap support bolts)
Spohn torque arm (with front rod end mount that connects to the cross member)
Spohn 6 speed adaptor cross member (it was a kit with the torque arm)
Rear was rebuilt just before I bought the car (last May/June) with an Eaton posi, all fresh bearings, gears, axles, seals, etc.
Bodywork:
Glasstek 2.5” “bolt on” fiberglass cowl hood
Blain Fab 7.5” “road race” adjustable lexan rear spoiler
Round tube SFC’s (welded, possibly spohn, not sure though)
Interior:
Grant steering wheel (airbag has been removed)
G-force lap belt (part of a 5 piece belt system) on the driver side.
All carpet, door panels, etc has been removed. The AC and heater assembly has been removed and the holes in the firewall are patched and sealed with RTV. There are two front seats in the car. The factory dash is in place as is the factory instrument cluster. It does still have power windows in place. However the rear hatch latch has been removed and hood pins have been installed to keep the hatch closed. The power locks are still in the doors and the front locks are functional and I have keys for the doors and ignition (it still uses a key). This car does have headlights, tail lights and turn signals, but the horn has been removed (just fyi).
Suspension:
Front:
Hotpart castor/camber plates
ST 35mm front bar
Koni SA’s
Energy suspension front control arm bushings
Ground control weight jacks with 1000 in lb springs
Balljoints, tie rods, center link, idler arm, etc were all replaced about 1,400 miles ago. Everything but the steering box is new.
Rear:
Hotpart swedged chromoly rod ended PHB
Hotpart aluminum rod ended LCA’s
Koni SA’s (30 series monotube)
Hellwig 3 position adjustable rear sway bar 22mm (other bars on request)
Ground control weight jacks with 225 in lb springs
Brakes:
Ed Miller C4HD setup on front with Hawk HP+ pads
Factory 1992 disk rear with Hawk HPS pads
ATE superblue brake fluid
Wheels:
Polished factory IROC 16x8’s
Car needs redyno’d, but it is approximately 330-350 RWHP (it was dyno’d on a dyno that was reading very wrong, my max rpm was showing as 5,600 and we ran to the 6,400 rpm shift light. That dyno showed 299 hp/ 338 ft lbs, some exhaust changes were made and it picked up considerable power, so, that’s where the 330-350 hp guess is coming from (fix the 800 rpm they “lost” in the calculations and add a touch for the new traction problems after the exhaust). Car is approximately 2,800 lbs. This engine was built to be durable (hence the splayed caps, main studs, balancing, etc). It makes good (actually it’s about perfect for American Iron once it’s caged) hp and torque, but it’s not a 700 hp monster. It is still pretty quick due to the power it makes and the weight (or lack of weight).
Tuning:
I’ve got the moats “Osterich” setup for this car. I also have a prom burner and cables to do datalogging. (available for additional cost)
As you can see, there is a "fortune" in this car. I'm guessing between Mike and I (the last owner), it's something approaching $20-25k. Of course you never get that out of them, but go find a factory 1992 hardtop chassis (the "best" year for 3rd gen chassis since they were welded and bonded together) and start pricing parts. I think you'll find this to be a pretty good deal on a fairly well sorted car. It's been pretty quick out of the box (beating some slick tired cars in CP while running on street rubber...and I'm not sure how, it's not my driving). Someone cage this thing and take it AI racing.
06-27-2008, 10:32 AM
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
Ah yes, The traction circle
Very nice calculations Andris.
It boils down to just how fast you need to go, we are on the same page.
Cornering weighs has everything to do with your CG (center of gravity hieght) and you roll centers.
The lower the CG, the better the car "can" handle compared to the same weigh vehicle with the CG higher. This is where it goes to my old saying, "Its not what you got, but how you set it".
The way the tires are loaded in a corner is everything whether they are side loaded or top loaded based on dynamic roll.
But in the end, as Dewey stated, Less weight will win every time if the HP is the same (If things are set right). Back to that traction circle, the tire does not care what direction it has to grip. Grip is not one direction, it is all and mostly simultaniously in 2 direction. As that heavier car is braking and turning, some of the needed lateral grip to rotate is being lost in the longitudinal direction in slowing. The heavier the weight the vehicle and/or the high the speed change ratio, the more this traction circle keeps the yaw ratio in a corner from staying predictible and controlable.
There is only so much tires can take. The two most important things on a car in performance driving are tires and shocks, when the tires go away, you are done....period....well, except my driver last race when he had the RF tire pop on about lap 15 and milked it all the way to the end of 40 lap without touching the wall. It keep building enough heat to just get him there and we salvaged a 9th place finish. 5 mins after the race I had 3psi in that tire when it should have bee at about 32.5psi....I love this kid, he's good.
My next motto that is lived by in the racing world is "its not just the vehicle overall weigh, its how that weight is positioned in the vehicle."
I gotta run.
Very nice calculations Andris.
It boils down to just how fast you need to go, we are on the same page.
Cornering weighs has everything to do with your CG (center of gravity hieght) and you roll centers.
The lower the CG, the better the car "can" handle compared to the same weigh vehicle with the CG higher. This is where it goes to my old saying, "Its not what you got, but how you set it".
The way the tires are loaded in a corner is everything whether they are side loaded or top loaded based on dynamic roll.
But in the end, as Dewey stated, Less weight will win every time if the HP is the same (If things are set right). Back to that traction circle, the tire does not care what direction it has to grip. Grip is not one direction, it is all and mostly simultaniously in 2 direction. As that heavier car is braking and turning, some of the needed lateral grip to rotate is being lost in the longitudinal direction in slowing. The heavier the weight the vehicle and/or the high the speed change ratio, the more this traction circle keeps the yaw ratio in a corner from staying predictible and controlable.
There is only so much tires can take. The two most important things on a car in performance driving are tires and shocks, when the tires go away, you are done....period....well, except my driver last race when he had the RF tire pop on about lap 15 and milked it all the way to the end of 40 lap without touching the wall. It keep building enough heat to just get him there and we salvaged a 9th place finish. 5 mins after the race I had 3psi in that tire when it should have bee at about 32.5psi....I love this kid, he's good.
My next motto that is lived by in the racing world is "its not just the vehicle overall weigh, its how that weight is positioned in the vehicle."
I gotta run.
06-27-2008, 10:57 AM
#100
Supporter/Moderator
Re: V6 handling Vs V8
It's actually not the traction circle... The traction circle is when you have a finite amount of grip (the circle), and get an X (lateral, cornering) and Y (axial, fwd/back) component. I.e. transition from 100% cornering by feeding in throttle gently as you track out into straight acceleration. The formula I posted is more about the nature of tire grip, and how more weight doesn't give an equal amount of extra traction, since the coef. of friction is going down.
Thanks. I've got a few monster excel spreadsheets that are messy as hell, but are nice to play with for theory.
I disagree with the roll center part. That has nothing to do with the total weight transfer from cornering (which is strictly CoG, Weight, Cornering G's and Track Width). The roll centers are just to dial in the roll stiffness front to back. Optimizing the roll stiffness so at max cornering they're similar will make sure that both the front and rear tire pairs grip the maximum possible. This is why some guys with monster front swaybars and zero lean are limited by understeer (assuming equal f/r tires). If one end of the car has roll stiffness significantly stiffer, that end will take more of the cornering weight transfer, and that end's outside tire will be overloaded, the inside tire will be underloaded, and the opposite end of the car will have equal weight on both tires. If you add up the total traction, it'll be theoretically less than if both the front and rear had equal roll stiffness.
Should I start my rant about folks believing that adding extra weight to the rear of the car will make it grip better? (Adding, not moving...).
I guess the initial question is "Does better handling mean having a higher cornering force (g's)?" To add one more thing into the mix - You can always add a wider tire for more cornering force. The low hp car would be killed by the extra 10-15 lbs rotating weight, while the high HP car would have more than enough to make up for it, and still corner harder.
The best bang for the buck in the handling department would be a $2000 competition go-cart, if you're going strictly by cornering force! Going back to the original post, if he's already got a car, and just wants to make it corner as hard as possible (steady state, like sweeping 270 on-ramps), then whatever solution gives him the lightest & most balanced F:R setup will have the most grip, *IF* tire size must stay the same. The game changes as soon as you have to get on the gas, and accelerate away. If I were building a third-gen from scratch, the LS1 seems impossible to beat. It's almost as light as a V6, and will make 1.5x the HP, if you mod them the same.
$25k car, mostly in the motor!
Handling, maybe $4k - Koni yellows, 3 link, adj rear swaybar, 950/175 lb springs w/ weight jackers, CCW's w 315/275 17" V710's, full cage, sfc's
Andris, reformed drag racer
Very nice calculations Andris.
Cornering weighs has everything to do with your CG (center of gravity hieght) and you roll centers.
My next motto that is lived by in the racing world is "its not just the vehicle overall weigh, its how that weight is positioned in the vehicle."
I guess the initial question is "Does better handling mean having a higher cornering force (g's)?" To add one more thing into the mix - You can always add a wider tire for more cornering force. The low hp car would be killed by the extra 10-15 lbs rotating weight, while the high HP car would have more than enough to make up for it, and still corner harder.
The best bang for the buck in the handling department would be a $2000 competition go-cart, if you're going strictly by cornering force! Going back to the original post, if he's already got a car, and just wants to make it corner as hard as possible (steady state, like sweeping 270 on-ramps), then whatever solution gives him the lightest & most balanced F:R setup will have the most grip, *IF* tire size must stay the same. The game changes as soon as you have to get on the gas, and accelerate away.
If I were building a third-gen from scratch, the LS1 seems impossible to beat. It's almost as light as a V6, and will make 1.5x the HP, if you mod them the same. $25k car, mostly in the motor!
Handling, maybe $4k - Koni yellows, 3 link, adj rear swaybar, 950/175 lb springs w/ weight jackers, CCW's w 315/275 17" V710's, full cage, sfc's
Andris, reformed drag racer
Last edited by askulte; 06-27-2008 at 11:08 AM.