2007 350z vs 2001-02 vette
09-07-2007, 01:33 PM
#21
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fingers
kryptonite?, then try getting a Z and practicing
Originally Posted by EM-EFER
so you don't even have a Z yet?>
Everyone else thanks for the input!
09-07-2007, 01:35 PM
#22
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
I don't see 112 mph or even close to that on the fastest ones from the corvette forum. lol.
09-07-2007, 01:37 PM
#23
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Speeddemon69
do you guys know how to read? I said its not my 350z that was going to run my brother in law's vette. Just because I'm a forum member doesn't mean i have to own a Z to post, right? I like doing research before buying a car or anything that wastes my hard earned money. I actually want my friend with the 350z to win so my nephew can get stfu about corvette this corvette that. I got to bring him down from his pedestal. Well my friend said he was going to get the stillen intake for his Z, for now. Hopefully that'll be good enough.
Everyone else thanks for the input!
Everyone else thanks for the input!
09-07-2007, 01:39 PM
#24
Sponsor
Sport Z Magazine
Sport Z Magazine
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
The C5 vettes are good for mid 13s stock with a good driver, autos are around the same. It would be a drivers race IMHO. The Vette isn't that much faster than the 07+ Z in 1/4 times if at all. The C6 is a low 13s to 12 sec beast.
Edit: Here is some data from Sept. 2007 Motortrend magazine on the 2008 vette which I feel is a super bang for the buck car with improved hp, steering, & handling this year:
0-60: 4.1 sec
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 115mph
Braking 60-0: 110'
Lat G's: .97 with run flats (Estimated over 1.0 with reg tires)
Oh yeah, the engine runs on 87 octane too....
List with this set up including Z51 performance handling pkg = $48,885 to $61,500 depending on how many lux. items you want along with it. If me, I would go for the 48K range and mod it for better performance just like I did with my enthusiast 350Z.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rolet_corvette
Last edited by zland; 09-07-2007 at 02:12 PM.
09-07-2007, 01:51 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 5,998
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Speeddemon69
Well my friend said he was going to get the stillen intake for his Z, for now. Hopefully that'll be good enough.
09-07-2007, 01:57 PM
#26
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zland
2008 C6 vette with 436hp is putting down 12.4's now, with better drivers in the future posting I am certain that time will go lower.
Edit: Here is some data from Sept. 2007 Motortrend magazine on the 2008 vette which I feel is a super bang for the buck car with improved hp, steering, & handling this year:
0-60: 4.1 sec
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 115mph
Braking 60-0: 110'
Lat G's: .97 with run flats (Estimated over 1.0 with reg tires)
List with this set up including Z51 performance handling pkg = $48,885 to $61,500 depending on how many lux. items you want along with it. If me, I would go for the 48K range and mod it for better performance just like I did with my enthusiast 350Z.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rolet_corvette
Edit: Here is some data from Sept. 2007 Motortrend magazine on the 2008 vette which I feel is a super bang for the buck car with improved hp, steering, & handling this year:
0-60: 4.1 sec
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 115mph
Braking 60-0: 110'
Lat G's: .97 with run flats (Estimated over 1.0 with reg tires)
List with this set up including Z51 performance handling pkg = $48,885 to $61,500 depending on how many lux. items you want along with it. If me, I would go for the 48K range and mod it for better performance just like I did with my enthusiast 350Z.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rolet_corvette
Pending TM hasn't been cranked up yet again.
09-26-2007, 03:07 PM
#28
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My old '01 6MT Vette went 12.9@110 with a just a cat back (which dont add power on those cars). 2001+ got the Z06 intake manifold and a few other goodies which helped trap speeds. On average the 2001 Auto vettes should trap between 106-108mph. Thats higher than most modded Z's on here. If the vette guy cant drive the Z will win, other wise (without mods that do something) the Z will lose. I would recommend a 5/16" MD spacer, HFCs, and a tune. The intake wont do squat. Do those mods and you should see a few more mph out of the Z which should be good enough to keep up with the vette.
Best of luck.
---------------------------------------------------
EDIT: Dang Sig wont show up so here it is:
04 G35s 6MT - 14.1@99mph - Z Tube / PopCharger / MD 5-16" Spacer / Coupe Midpipe / Full Z Suspension / 19" Rays / Z1 Crossdrilled & Slotted Rotors / Axxis Ultimate Pads / OEM Painted Sills
Best of luck.
---------------------------------------------------
EDIT: Dang Sig wont show up so here it is:
04 G35s 6MT - 14.1@99mph - Z Tube / PopCharger / MD 5-16" Spacer / Coupe Midpipe / Full Z Suspension / 19" Rays / Z1 Crossdrilled & Slotted Rotors / Axxis Ultimate Pads / OEM Painted Sills
Last edited by abailey269; 09-26-2007 at 03:11 PM.
09-26-2007, 04:45 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: OR
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hova00
In my 06 C6 Auto vette i went 12.6@111 at atco,nj and in my 07 350z auto i went 13.6@105 at cecil county in maryland.
09-27-2007, 09:21 AM
#33
my friend has a 2000c5 vette he ran a 13.1 but i beat him because i caught him sleeping at the line hopefully you can do that to lol. His time of course was better than mine though but i won the race watch out for there third gear you start getting sucked up down the track.
09-27-2007, 09:32 AM
#34
Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
It's an auto trapping 2mph higher than the manuals....Riiiiiiiight.
Mod list please.
Mod list please.
Just like how the Fbody, the autos were faster and more consistant at the drag strip.
09-28-2007, 11:25 AM
#35
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
If I recall correctly, the MPH wasn't too far off on the older cars. G35 manual vs auto or Z same way. The auto trannies in these cars are very efficient.
Just like how the Fbody, the autos were faster and more consistant at the drag strip.
Just like how the Fbody, the autos were faster and more consistant at the drag strip.
Autos were not faster than M6 cars...more consistant yes...faster no.
Fastest LS1 M6 has gone 12.8...fastest A4 LS1 has been 13.0 I believe.... typically an M6 is 2 or 3 tenths quicker and traps 2~3mph higher.
09-28-2007, 11:29 AM
#36
Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
'
Autos were not faster than M6 cars...more consistant yes...faster no.
Fastest LS1 M6 has gone 12.8...fastest A4 LS1 has been 13.0 I believe.... typically an M6 is 2 or 3 tenths quicker and traps 2~3mph higher.
Autos were not faster than M6 cars...more consistant yes...faster no.
Fastest LS1 M6 has gone 12.8...fastest A4 LS1 has been 13.0 I believe.... typically an M6 is 2 or 3 tenths quicker and traps 2~3mph higher.
So? You had a better driver in one car vs the other. But you ask any FBODY owners that race and they will say get the auto.
09-28-2007, 11:33 AM
#37
http://www.ls1.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61550
One example.
And another good one
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showt...37#post4779137
One example.
And another good one
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showt...37#post4779137
09-28-2007, 11:36 AM
#38
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
Wrong. It is known in the fbody world if you want a drag car, get the auto.
So? You had a better driver in one car vs the other. But you ask any FBODY owners that race and they will say get the auto.
So? You had a better driver in one car vs the other. But you ask any FBODY owners that race and they will say get the auto.
FYI I've owned F-Body cars since 2001 (and still do today)... I owned the 4L60E for 4 years and now own a T-56 car.... You are mistaken.
If it makes you feel better I can head over the several F-body boards and post up...I bet you will find the same answer.
The 4L60E has a greater DT loss % and doesn't put down as much power as the manual car. It's a fact that in stock form M6 cars run quicker and faster through the 1/4. They both struggle to take off smoothly and both cars are lucky to get a 2.0 let alone 1.9 60ft on stock rubber... You can argue if you want but I am speaking from experience personally and from many track rentals / visits with other F-body owners.If you are talking built cars running single digits then an Auto is the only way to go. (M6 records are in the 9 second range...and that is rediculously hard to pull off)... of course by that point we are not talking stock cars and you are not using a stock trans to get it done)
You are mixing up two completely different arguments with this one.
Last edited by S8ER95Z; 09-28-2007 at 11:39 AM.
09-28-2007, 11:44 AM
#40
Oh? lol. It has 2-3 more % drivetrain loss per other dynos compared to the MT. That isn't that much. But the car shifts much faster than a M6 car owner COULD shift. So its faster. Normally the 1/4 time will be faster than the M6, but the mph will be a little slower with stock tranny components.
The Auto actually takes off the line much better than the m6 would and gets better 60fts due to this.
If you want a drag car, you get a auto. If you want a track car get the M6.
The Auto actually takes off the line much better than the m6 would and gets better 60fts due to this.
If you want a drag car, you get a auto. If you want a track car get the M6.
Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
Really...ANY FBODY owner?
FYI I've owned F-Body cars since 2001 (and still do today)... I owned the 4L60E for 4 years and now own a T-56 car.... You are mistaken.
If it makes you feel better I can head over the several F-body boards and post up...I bet you will find the same answer. The 4L60E has a greater DT loss % and doesn't put down as much power as the manual car. It's a fact that in stock form M6 cars run quicker and faster through the 1/4. They both struggle to take off smoothly and both cars are lucky to get a 2.0 let alone 1.9 60ft on stock rubber... You can argue if you want but I am speaking from experience personally and from many track rentals / visits with other F-body owners.
If you are talking built cars running single digits then an Auto is the only way to go. (M6 records are in the 9 second range...and that is rediculously hard to pull off)... of course by that point we are not talking stock cars and you are not using a stock trans to get it done)
You are mixing up two completely different arguments with this one.
FYI I've owned F-Body cars since 2001 (and still do today)... I owned the 4L60E for 4 years and now own a T-56 car.... You are mistaken.
If it makes you feel better I can head over the several F-body boards and post up...I bet you will find the same answer.
The 4L60E has a greater DT loss % and doesn't put down as much power as the manual car. It's a fact that in stock form M6 cars run quicker and faster through the 1/4. They both struggle to take off smoothly and both cars are lucky to get a 2.0 let alone 1.9 60ft on stock rubber... You can argue if you want but I am speaking from experience personally and from many track rentals / visits with other F-body owners.If you are talking built cars running single digits then an Auto is the only way to go. (M6 records are in the 9 second range...and that is rediculously hard to pull off)... of course by that point we are not talking stock cars and you are not using a stock trans to get it done)
You are mixing up two completely different arguments with this one.