You are here: Forums Coupes & Convertibles Chevrolet Corvette Chevrolet Corvette Z06

Chevrolet Corvette Z06

221 messages,  Last post on Oct 15, 2009 at 5:37 PM

You are in the Chevrolet Corvette Forum. Your Host is claires

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Corvette, Coupe

Messages Page 10 of 22 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 22 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#91 of 221 Re: My Z06 turns out to be a miser??? [gbjerke] by blkhemi Nov 04, 2005 (9:19 pm)
Replying to: gbjerke (Nov 04, 2005 3:47 pm) That 21.9 came at a price. Their was a Lotus ELise and a Mistubishi EVO driver that had to try their fate against me coming through the Appalachian's of Tennessee. The Lotus kept up through the curves but competely got lost on the straights. But after I had my fun getting closer to the DC area(Troopers get a little ticked off at speeders near the Capital), I setted down to about 65 mph, and I averaged about 29 from there to Philly.   On my '03 Z51, I got up to about 33 on a road trip once. So I now what these cars can acheive.   On the whole, in regular driving I see a 19/27 split, which is fantastic for a car with 505-hp.
#92 of 221 Fuel Efficiency by spiritinthesky Nov 05, 2005 (5:19 am)
This is a sore subject with me. In the spring of 2003 I went on a golfing/fishing trip with a bunch of guys. We drove from Pittsburgh to Burlington, Vt. and back. On the highway trip back we compared gas mileage.   My 2003 M5, EPA rated at 13/21 averaged 23.8 miles on a the 400+/- mile "test" section. Another guy had a 2002 Corvette rated at something like 19/28, and he only got 26.3 - exactly 2.5 miles more than me (not the 7 that the EPA estimated). And that was for a 3,100 lb car with just the driver, vs. a 4,000 lb car with me and two 200 lb passengers. Our average speed was 75-80.   The sore point was that I paid a $2,200 gas guzzler tax on the M5. And mine was the only vehicle of six that exceeded its EPA estimate. Notwithstanding the better mileages reported here, I believe that the EPA overstates US models and understates Eurpopean ones. I have yet to own a BMW that didn't exceed it's highway estimate by at least 10-15% - at speeds of 70-75 mph. Oh, and the guy with the Hummer that we mistakenly invited? He couldn't keep up with us at 80 mph in the mountains and averages about 10 mpg. But he didn't have to pay a gas guzzler tax. American politics.
#93 of 221 Ha, don't blame the govt .... by starrow68 Nov 05, 2005 (3:05 pm)
GM engineered the Vette to pass the test, the test is a known item and anybody can set up the answer if they care. The Germans don't seem to care and hence you get your ultimate driving machine and the guzzler tax. BTW, the C5 Z06 is 3170 before driver not 3100, even the new Z06 is 3130, for the record. You can't use 6th for much other than flat crusing since I'm only doing about 1300 rpm at 65mph in my Z51 coupe. If I keep it down at that level I get close to 30mpg, but on freeways in CA that would get you run over. On the two lane roads I like when I get the chance, dropping to 4th or even 3rd for a pass is what the fun is all about, romp to 70 or 90 and back off until you come up to the next opportunity. Even with that it gets in the mid 20's.   And BTW, this is still a stock engine coupe, no engine mods. The car is great on track with just stock power. Replies to this message: blkhemi (Nov 05, 2005 5:21 pm)
#94 of 221 Re: Ha, don't blame the govt .... [starrow68] by blkhemi Nov 05, 2005 (5:21 pm)
Replying to: starrow68 (Nov 05, 2005 3:05 pm) Right on starrow. It's not our fault that most Euro makers refuse to build more efficient engines. It's not my fault that I got a 505-hp car that will beat the bricks off ANY German offering of current and still return upwards of 30 mpg. There are only a hand full of mass-produced cars that can hang with a Z06.(Ferrari Enzo,Ford GT,Porsche GT to name a few) and none of them can match the fuel economy of any Vette.
#95 of 221 starrow68 & bikhemi by spiritinthesky Nov 06, 2005 (3:32 am)
I must be a glutton for punishment for even trying. Re-read my previous post, nice and slowly if necessary to get the point.   Yes, the "for the record" 3170 lb Corvette got a whopping 2.5 mpg more than my "for the record" 4,055 lb M5 carrying 400+ more lbs of passengers and cargo. But that's a far cry short of the 7 mpg advantage the EPA would claim. I know of relatively few American cars that can achieve their EPA highway estimate in real world driving at 70-75 mph. Every BMW I've owed exceeds it. Same with friends' Mercedes. If you are exceeding your EPA highway estimates, congratulations. You are the exception.   I'll try not to get suckered into a debate on the "efficiency" of a Chevy's 7.0 liter pushrod engine that produces 505 hp vs. BMW's ability to get the same power from a 5.0 liter 8,200 rpm V10. Or Porsche's ability to get 355 hp out of 3.8 liters that matches or beats the 400 hp Corvette in 0-60 acceleration. I've seen the response before that hp/liter is not important, so I'll leave that modern engineering vs. push rod debate alone, if you will.   Government conspiracy, probably not. But the EPA is about as good at fuel efficiency estimates as I am at throwing darts. The should stick with cleaning up their superfund sites. My neighbor had a 240 hp 2.0 liter Honda S2000 rated at 26 on the highway. He regularly averaged 32+/- at 75 mph (that's 23% over the EPA estimate, for the record). Anyone in a Corvette want to take that on with your 400 hp 6.0 liter V8 rated at 28 mpg? Replies to this message: starrow68 (Nov 06, 2005 11:56 am) blkhemi (Nov 06, 2005 5:33 pm) xkss (Nov 12, 2005 10:09 pm) texasmerq (Nov 16, 2005 3:11 pm)
#96 of 221 Re: starrow68 & bikhemi [spiritinthesky] by starrow68 Nov 06, 2005 (11:56 am)
Replying to: spiritinthesky (Nov 06, 2005 3:32 am) Sprit.. no need to reread, you are talking about exceeding the published numbers by percentages. We are talking about not putting the blame on GM if BMW and others can't figure out how to get the test to show the real world. Remember back in school, some people studied a lot and some were good at taking tests, that's GM. Bellyaching about why your car has bad test results but good real world performance is something you might take up with BMW.      Read Corvette message boards, everyone and that includes the moderators here complain about the 1st to 4th skip shift but since the test calls for a shift at a specific RPM that gets the job done and produces a test result that saves GM and its buyers the gas guzzler tax. The EPA just does the best horse design that a committee can, and maybe it's a camel, but if you try to put a horse saddle on it, who is making the mistake? GM seems to have figured it out. Enjoy your real world mileage, when I'm on track I get as low as 7mpg, gotta love torque and cubes ... Randy
#97 of 221 Re: starrow68 & bikhemi [spiritinthesky] by blkhemi Nov 06, 2005 (5:33 pm)
Replying to: spiritinthesky (Nov 06, 2005 3:32 am) I don't understand where the problems come in at. The M5 and Vette are two different beasts. Sure the M5 is competent(albeit not as competent as an E55), but it can't prance like a Vette, especially a Z06. And as for the fuel econ estimates, in regular driving without even revving hard I can see upwards of 35mpg. Remember, the EPA can only ESTIMATE, not give a certain figure. And as Randy said, the 1-4 shift feature is a pain. However, with it Chevy saved us from having to pay gas guzzler tax.   Here is an example: A 2006 BMW 645i 6-speed stick gets 17/25, according to the EPA. A 2005 Vette Z51 6-Speed stick gets 18/28, according to the EPA.   The Vette with 400hp and 400 pound feet of torque with a 6.0L motor gets BETTER fuel economy than the Bimmer with 325hp and a smaller 4.4L V8. Even the autobox Vette gets better fuel mileage at 18/26. And you call this technology? I sure would love to see it. Oh and for the record, the Bimmer gets penalized with a $1300 gas-guzzler tax. It even gets hit hard in it's own country of origin Germany. All for it's more "modern design". I guess Randy and I will be keeping our "old-tech" Vettes.   P.S.- As for the 2.5mpg and not the 7 that was claimed, remember everyone has different driving styles. Even tho all of the cars were going the same speed, if the cruise wasn't set it makes all the difference in the world.
#98 of 221 Just for fun ... by starrow68 Nov 07, 2005 (10:46 am)
http://automobilemag.com/reviews/coupes/0511_z06_gt_viper/   Out for a month on the news stand, but for those that don't hang at the mag racks, fun reading.
#99 of 221 Another review by starrow68 Nov 08, 2005 (8:44 am)
http://www.topgear.com/drives/CB/A1/roadtests/03/01.html   With perspectives from the other side of the Atlantic. Glad I don't buy cars or pay for gas over there. Randy
#100 of 221 cars by xkss Nov 12, 2005 (10:09 pm)
Replying to: spiritinthesky (Nov 06, 2005 3:32 am) The weight of an engine has a bigger effect on a car than hp/liter.   Despite "F1" technology, the new M5's engine weighs 529 pounds which is 91 pounds more than AMG's new 6.2 liter (AMG calls it 6.3 though).   A new C6 Z06 owner reported better hw mpg than the factory on a busier Corvette forum.   Car & Driver recorded 0-60 in 3.4 seconds, 0-100 in 7.8 seconds (December issue), and 0-150 in 17.5 second (October issue).   The following is from Motor Trend October 2005:   Standing 1/4-mile: 11.5 sec at 127.1 mph   Lateral acceleration: 1.05 g average

Messages Page 10 of 22 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 22 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Coupes & Convertibles Chevrolet Corvette Chevrolet Corvette Z06