10.5 - 1/4
2.2 - 0 to 60
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Reyl1WbF5zQ&feature=youtu.be
Besides sounding otherworldly, the Z06 is also seriously quick: The Z07 coupe we tested jumped to 60 mph in 2.6 seconds and aced the quarter-mile in 10.5 seconds at 131 mph. Its 1.0-second 30-mph time ties it for the quickest rear-drive car we've ever tested alongside a couple of track-attack 991-gen Porsches: the GT2 RS and GT3 RS. On the super-sticky rubber, the Z07 clung to the skidpad at 1.16 g's—short of Chevy's claim of 1.22 g's—and stopped from 70 mph in 139 feet.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a41411338/2023-chevrolet-corvette-z06-by-the-numbers/?src=socialflowFBCAD&utm_campaign=socialflowFBCD&utm_medium=social-media&utm_source=facebook
We'll never know what the real engine and tune was in that car - MI manufacturer plates tell you everything you need to know - TEST MULE.
Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on October 03, 2022, 04:32:33 PM
We'll never know what the real engine and tune was in that car - MI manufacturer plates tell you everything you need to know - TEST MULE.
Part of the cult is believing unrealistic statements of an unavailable to the public vehicle. Hallelujah!
Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on October 03, 2022, 04:32:33 PM
We'll never know what the real engine and tune was in that car - MI manufacturer plates tell you everything you need to know - TEST MULE.
+1. EVERY magazine/video test car we did was a ringer/prototype. NO production car can duplicate those numbers. Tony, you should know better. I guess he doesn't care, his agenda is to promote a new Corvette on every thread...
Okeedokee fellas !
10.5 - 1/4
2.2 - 0 to 60
Quote from: shelbydoug on October 03, 2022, 04:58:16 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 03, 2022, 04:56:40 PM
Okeedokee fellas !
10.5 - 1/4
2.2 - 0 to 60
Got yours?
Naaaaa I can't afford one of them their super cars, we drive fords....we is poor boss, we is poor
10.5 - 1/4
2.2 - 0 to 60
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 03, 2022, 05:00:28 PM
Quote from: shelbydoug on October 03, 2022, 04:58:16 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 03, 2022, 04:56:40 PM
Okeedokee fellas !
10.5 - 1/4
2.2 - 0 to 60
Got yours?
Naaaaa I can't afford one of them their super cars, we drive fords....we is poor boss, we is poor
10.5 - 1/4
2.2 - 0 to 60
Tony,
When you actually BUY one, give us YOUR test results...
Until then, pipe down.
Quote from: crossboss on October 03, 2022, 04:54:14 PM
Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on October 03, 2022, 04:32:33 PM
We'll never know what the real engine and tune was in that car - MI manufacturer plates tell you everything you need to know - TEST MULE.
+1. EVERY magazine/video test car we did was a ringer/prototype. NO production car can duplicate those numbers. Tony, you should know better. I guess he doesn't care, his agenda is to promote a new Corvette on every thread...
Yes indeedee, you are correct.......
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 2.6 sec
100 mph: 5.9 sec
130 mph: 10.3 sec
1/4-Mile: 10.5 sec @ 131 mph
150 mph: 15.2 sec
170 mph: 24.9 sec
Besides sounding otherworldly, the Z06 is also seriously quick: The Z07 coupe we tested jumped to 60 mph in 2.6 seconds and aced the quarter-mile in 10.5 seconds at 131 mph. Its 1.0-second 30-mph time ties it for the quickest rear-drive car we've ever tested alongside a couple of track-attack 991-gen Porsches: the GT2 RS and GT3 RS. On the super-sticky rubber, the Z07 clung to the skidpad at 1.16 g's—short of Chevy's claim of 1.22 g's—and stopped from 70 mph in 139 feet.
"Super sticky tires". What are the replacement costs of those tires and will they go more then 3,500 miles?
Quote from: crossboss on October 03, 2022, 04:54:14 PM+1. EVERY magazine/video test car we did was a ringer/prototype. NO production car can duplicate those numbers. Tony, you should know better. I guess he doesn't care, his agenda is to promote a new Corvette on every thread...
I remember when no one really did the hard testing. They just looked at what the other editors wrote and took a couple 1/10s off upped the mph or shortened the stopping distance. We were all too busy sitting down the street at Carlos & Charlies eating and drinking on Petersen's credit card. I remember one story in Kit Car started out that writing the story was easy - writing the expense account report was the hard part. It was a 5 car Ferrari kit car test from San Diego to Santa Barbara.
Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on October 03, 2022, 06:40:33 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 03, 2022, 04:54:14 PM+1. EVERY magazine/video test car we did was a ringer/prototype. NO production car can duplicate those numbers. Tony, you should know better. I guess he doesn't care, his agenda is to promote a new Corvette on every thread...
I remember when no one really did the hard testing. They just looked at what the other editors wrote and took a couple 1/10s off upped the mph or shortened the stopping distance. We were all too busy sitting down the street at Carlos & Charlies eating and drinking on Petersen's credit card. I remember one story in Kit Car started out that writing the story was easy - writing the expense account report was the hard part. It was a 5 car Ferrari kit car test from San Diego to Santa Barbara.
LOl. So true! When I filmed for Hot-Rod and Motor Trend TV, the 'editors' did just as mentioned above. Some flat out faked the tests. This also goes way back to the 1980s when I did stuff for Car Craft. Articles were written for the advertisers. Can't make your sponsors look bad..The then famous editor (who is a good friend), called it 'Editorial Hype' aka fake news. Its all BS.
I must stand up here and say, in all truth and forthrightness, that during my watch at Motor Trend we NEVER faked a single road test performance chart.
Were we given ringer cars by the manufacturers? Probably all the time, unless it was a minivan, and even then probably so.
Car and Driver fudged their acceleration numbers without informing the readers, when they started in the 1990s subtracting a couple of tenths of a second off the actual e.t. to correspond with drag strip allowed roll-out, because the fifth wheel type of test equipment does not allow roll-out. Well that's definitely fudging/lying, in my opinion. At least say so in print, guys. Well, it took them over a decade to fess up.
I sent more than one test car back to the manufacturer, without writing about it, because it tested way too good compared with the previous year's version, despite no or very little change. Corvette ZR-1s were notorious for this. The variation in top speeds of five ZR-1 test cars (the "same" 405 hp engine car, over two model years) ranged between 167 and 182 mph. Something like: 167, 169, 171, 175, and 182. Same location and very similar weather conditions. Look-up Mrs Orcutt's Driveway. I was there and did a lot of the top speed driving. That proved to us the varying stages of wringers coming from Chevrolet. Plus, one of their guys admitted it privately to me.
He said "The other companies do it too."
Makes sense. When you're going to get publicity in any of the big three buff books (Automobile did not "test" cars, they "evaluated" them by driving to an expensive restaurant, followed by cognac and cigars) it makes sense that the companies would want to cheat, because they knew their competition were cheating. Just like in racing.
As a contrast to the above, I have a good buddy who works in the automotive division of Consumer Reports. Yeah, the magazine you check when you're buying a washing machine. Well, their car testing is more thorough and "honest" than any car magazine was or will be. Simply because CR BUYS all of their cars. NONE come from a Press Fleet or from a company engineering department. And they buy them from dealers all around the country, in the names of individuals, NOT as Consumer Reports.
They properly break-in each car for 2500 miles, set everything settable to factory specs, and then their cadre of white-jumpsuit drivers carry out the myriad tests back to back to back, to eliminate driver error and levels of skill. The test data is tabulated, and that's what they print. Sometimes, they'll keep a car for a year and retest it after the year's worth of miles, to see what's degraded.
It's a thorough testing regimen, but unfortunately their writing style is as boring to read as the recipe of how to make tofu mayonnaise. My buddy has to fight to get even one witty/funny/ironic line of text into any article he's writing. The big wigs in their gov't-like layers of management blue-pencil anything written with less than a "Robert's Rules of Order" type of pedantic structure, even if it makes no literal sense to change what the writer wrote. "Words by Alexa" is what it seems like they're after. But, their testing is truly top-notch.
As for the hot rod car mags like Hot Rod, Car Craft, PHR back in the day. They (I was there too) tested 1/4 mile times only. All they had was the timing clocks at a local drag strip. Only Motor Trend and the other big boys had fifth wheels.
Before those were invented, everyone used stopwatches operated by a passenger recording the times by watching the car's speedometer. THAT'S how Car and Driver got the laughable '65 Pontiac Catalina 2+2's 0-60 time of something like 4.5 seconds. Jim Wangers admitted later in life that not only did that car have a hand built and optimized engine, they changed the ring and pinion from the standard 3.0 (or whatever) to something like 3.90s. Gee, think that'll mess with the speedometer accuracy?
My main point in recounting this is that any test driver worth his magazine logo shirt can tell the difference between 0-60 in 4.5 seconds and 0-60 in 8.5 seconds. Yet, Car and Driver let it go to print. David E. probably got a free Bonneville, with a glove box full of cuban cigars, for that one.
And that's my .03 (adjusted for inflation.)
Van,
When you were at Motor Trend, I was not. As you know, they went through several new owners, and several editors during this time. The Aussie guy that was installed as so called 'editor' was a nice guy, however he was 'told' what to do/say from upstairs. All of our 1/4 mile stuff was done @ Fontana. I will never forget the test 'results'. As an example, lets say they tested a supercharged Jag....its actual ET was 14.78. Motor Trend's GPS tracker/timer would say 14.99. So, what did the editors 'claim' it did in print? 13.90. FALSE!! Saw it with my own eyes and through the video cameras lens as a witness. Of course, the video was edited to show only it going down the strip. Only a voice over to say 13.90...lol. One last thing about MT--when they were conducting one of their famous 'Car Of The Year' award, I remember filming it, and the one they picked was always dead last in the tests. It also broke down many times. I asked John the MT-TV host why? He was honest with me and said: "We had too. Range Rover paid for it" There ya go...
Whats ironic about all of this, test ringers were used in the sixties also as Van mentioned. Think your 426 Hemi ran 12s...hah! Fake news. Speaking of Jim Wangers, I actually asked him about that famous test GTO...he had a nice chuckle...and also told me about his later Firebird tests...thats for another thread.
Quote from: Side-Oilers on October 03, 2022, 11:03:40 PM
I must stand up here and say, in all truth and forthrightness, that during my watch at Motor Trend we NEVER faked a single road test performance chart.
As a contrast to the above, I have a good buddy who works in the automotive division of Consumer Reports. Yeah, the magazine you check when you're buying a washing machine. Well, their car testing is more thorough and "honest" than any car magazine was or will be.
Yes MT did do all the "hard testing" they had all the equipment and budget. The industry of course knew that so they probably got the ringers. BTW we always called Motor Trend car of the year "Advertiser of the Year". It was a true revenue producer.
I've got to agree on Consumer Reports. I remember when Toyota pulled 3 months of ads because they hadn't liked an article.
People are going to buy these cars. Some of them will be wrapped in a bubble with a few miles on them and never see the light of day until it's time for the auction. Some of their owners will actually put them on a dyno and take them to a race track. People will record them going down the track. If the numbers recorded are what they're claiming, hats off to Chevrolet for making such a fast car! If you put the numbers in an internet quarter mile calculator (670 horsepower, I figured 3650 pounds with driver and good traction) It shows a 10.73 et at 126.9 mph. Upping the power to 715 got a 10.50 et at 130.1 mph. Is it a ringer or is Chevrolet claiming less horsepower than it actually has? Time will tell. But it certainly wouldn't be the first time a car manufacturer intentionally under rated their horsepower numbers.
We must learn to enjoy and celebrate the ( Ford or Chevy ) moment as soon you will only hear the whisper of the windings of an electric motor.....
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 02:14:21 PM
We must learn to enjoy and celebrate the ( Ford or Chevy ) moment as soon you will only hear the whisper of the windings of an electric motor.....
Unless you live in FL and are without electricity.
Quote from: 98SVT - was 06GT on October 04, 2022, 03:04:18 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 02:14:21 PM
We must learn to enjoy and celebrate the ( Ford or Chevy ) moment as soon you will only hear the whisper of the windings of an electric motor.....
Unless you live in FL and are without electricity.
Thank the Lawd for fossil fueled generators humming through out the night n day !
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 03:59:06 PM
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Why yes it is....find me attractive?
We have a picture of you also swimming after the hurricane, looking good Lolito !
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 03:59:06 PM
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Why yes it is....find be attractive?
We have a picture of you also swimming after the hurricane, looking good Lolito !
Yikes! No wonder you need a 600-700 horsepower car...
Sorry, buddy, I'm 5'11" 165 pounds...AND a lot younger than you. LOL.
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 10:37:56 AM
Van,
When you were at Motor Trend, I was not. As you know, they went through several new owners, and several editors during this time. The Aussie guy that was installed as so called 'editor' was a nice guy, however he was 'told' what to do/say from upstairs. All of our 1/4 mile stuff was done @ Fontana. I will never forget the test 'results'. As an example, lets say they tested a supercharged Jag....its actual ET was 14.78. Motor Trend's GPS tracker/timer would say 14.99. So, what did the editors 'claim' it did in print? 13.90. FALSE!! Saw it with my own eyes and through the video cameras lens as a witness. Of course, the video was edited to show only it going down the strip. Only a voice over to say 13.90...lol. One last thing about MT--when they were conducting one of their famous 'Car Of The Year' award, I remember filming it, and the one they picked was always dead last in the tests. It also broke down many times. I asked John the MT-TV host why? He was honest with me and said: "We had too. Range Rover paid for it" There ya go...
Whats ironic about all of this, test ringers were used in the sixties also as Van mentioned. Think your 426 Hemi ran 12s...hah! Fake news. Speaking of Jim Wangers, I actually asked him about that famous test GTO...he had a nice chuckle...and also told me about his later Firebird tests...thats for another thread.
HOLY CRAP! I'd heard that things went downhill after I left, but that's what "the person who left" ALWAYS wants to hear, right?
I do know that the guys on what I called my "A Team" (that were still at MT for a year or so after I left) told me. They said that the rules had turned to shite on the one hand, and yet became draconian on the other. A couple of those staff editors left on their own accord, because of the heavy-handed bureaucracy.
Brett is correct that COY is (was?) a huge revenue generator. Thus the spinoffs of Truck of the Year, Import Car of the Year and SUV of the Year (we soon allowed import cars into the formerly domestic-only Car of the Year award.) That's why I and my staff took it all seriously.
And, also to give the readers a thorough test and evaluation of the most significant new vehicles. I changed the testing parameters to put lesser emphasis on track performance and added categories for quality, safety, technical design, styling, and value. That helped level the playing field in the years when you're comparing a widely varied field such as a Tercel, Corvette, Mercedes C Class, and Lincoln Town Car. There's no way to equitably pick a winner from that group simply by comparing against each other on test track.
It ain't rocket science, but we did take it seriously and did the best job we could. Anyone who doubts me can talk to any of my former "A Team" staffers themselves. (As any owner/manager knows: People that you've fired might have axes to grind, and thus make up shite to say against you. I know who those people are.)
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 04:25:35 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 03:59:06 PM
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Why yes it is....find be attractive?
We have a picture of you also swimming after the hurricane, looking good Lolito !
Yikes! No wonder you need a 600-700 horsepower car...
Sorry, buddy, I'm 5'11" 165 pounds...AND a lot younger than you. LOL.
I once dated someone like you....5-11 and 165
Back to the topic at hand:
Mucho fasto !
60 mph: 2.6 sec
100 mph: 5.9 sec
130 mph: 10.3 sec
1/4-Mile: 10.5 sec @ 131 mph
Quote from: Side-Oilers on October 04, 2022, 04:29:10 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 10:37:56 AM
Van,
When you were at Motor Trend, I was not. As you know, they went through several new owners, and several editors during this time. The Aussie guy that was installed as so called 'editor' was a nice guy, however he was 'told' what to do/say from upstairs. All of our 1/4 mile stuff was done @ Fontana. I will never forget the test 'results'. As an example, lets say they tested a supercharged Jag....its actual ET was 14.78. Motor Trend's GPS tracker/timer would say 14.99. So, what did the editors 'claim' it did in print? 13.90. FALSE!! Saw it with my own eyes and through the video cameras lens as a witness. Of course, the video was edited to show only it going down the strip. Only a voice over to say 13.90...lol. One last thing about MT--when they were conducting one of their famous 'Car Of The Year' award, I remember filming it, and the one they picked was always dead last in the tests. It also broke down many times. I asked John the MT-TV host why? He was honest with me and said: "We had too. Range Rover paid for it" There ya go...
Whats ironic about all of this, test ringers were used in the sixties also as Van mentioned. Think your 426 Hemi ran 12s...hah! Fake news. Speaking of Jim Wangers, I actually asked him about that famous test GTO...he had a nice chuckle...and also told me about his later Firebird tests...thats for another thread.
HOLY CRAP! I'd heard that things went downhill after I left, but that's what "the person who left" ALWAYS wants to hear, right?
I do know that the guys on what I called my "A Team" (that were still at MT for a year or so after I left) told me. They said that the rules had turned to shite on the one hand, and yet became draconian on the other. A couple of those staff editors left on their own accord, because of the weird set of new rules.
Brett is correct that COY is (was?) a huge revenue generator. Thus the spinoffs of Truck of the Year, Import Car of the Year and SUV of the Year (we soon allowed import cars into the formerly domestic-only Car of the Year award.) That's why I and my staff took it all seriously.
And, also to give the readers a thorough test and evaluation of the most significant new vehicles. I changed the testing parameters to put lesser emphasis on track performance and added categories for quality, safety, technical design, styling, and value. That helped level the playing field in the years when you're comparing a widely varied field such as a Tercel, Corvette, Mercedes C Class, and Lincoln Town Car. There's no way to pick a winner from that group simply by comparing against each other on test track.
It ain't rocket science, but we did take it seriously and did the best job we could. Anyone who doubts me can talk to any of my former "A Team" staffers themselves. People that I fired might have axes to grind.
Van,
Yeah, all of that corporate greed had a lot to do with it. You are correct, the good 'veteran' editors and prob the same 'A Team guys' you are referring to did leave because of all the BS. I DO give credit to Brian Vance and Kiwi for holding down the fort....as long as they could. Pri-Media was a shite company to work for. Always late on my pay checks with tons of errors. Thats another story for another thread...
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:36:01 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 04:25:35 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 03:59:06 PM
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Why yes it is....find be attractive?
We have a picture of you also swimming after the hurricane, looking good Lolito !
Yikes! No wonder you need a 600-700 horsepower car...
Sorry, buddy, I'm 5'11" 165 pounds...AND a lot younger than you. LOL.
I once dated someone like you....5-11 and 165
Back to the topic at hand:
Mucho fasto !
60 mph: 2.6 sec
100 mph: 5.9 sec
130 mph: 10.3 sec
1/4-Mile: 10.5 sec @ 131 mph
Tony,
What was HIS name? lol
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 04:40:14 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:36:01 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 04:25:35 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 03:59:06 PM
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Why yes it is....find be attractive?
We have a picture of you also swimming after the hurricane, looking good Lolito !
Yikes! No wonder you need a 600-700 horsepower car...
Sorry, buddy, I'm 5'11" 165 pounds...AND a lot younger than you. LOL.
I once dated someone like you....5-11 and 165
Back to the topic at hand:
Mucho fasto !
60 mph: 2.6 sec
100 mph: 5.9 sec
130 mph: 10.3 sec
1/4-Mile: 10.5 sec @ 131 mph
Tony,
What was HIS name? lol
" Thats another story for another thread.." over and over LMAO
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:47:02 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 04:40:14 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:36:01 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 04:25:35 PM
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 04, 2022, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: crossboss on October 04, 2022, 03:59:06 PM
Tony, is that you in the last pic?
Why yes it is....find be attractive?
We have a picture of you also swimming after the hurricane, looking good Lolito !
Yikes! No wonder you need a 600-700 horsepower car...
Sorry, buddy, I'm 5'11" 165 pounds...AND a lot younger than you. LOL.
I once dated someone like you....5-11 and 165
Back to the topic at hand:
Mucho fasto !
60 mph: 2.6 sec
100 mph: 5.9 sec
130 mph: 10.3 sec
1/4-Mile: 10.5 sec @ 131 mph
Tony,
What was HIS name? lol
" Thats another story for another thread.." over and over LMAO
Tony is just like a Democrat: pointing fingers, making accusations to others what he is guilty of.
Btw, Tony you are avoiding my original question...
Let's continue with this truly amazing topic:
2023 Corvette Z06 Review // The $100,000 Supercar
https://youtu.be/Dn6gmBQUTdg
Kinda reminds me of whack a mole at the arcade minus the physical workout.
Vavavavoom !
So what happened ?
1 word = "massacred"
2023 Corvette Z06 vs Lamborghini Evo vs Ferrari 458: The Official Supercar Killer Race
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-MzH7Alj0QU&feature=youtu.be
Quote from: FL SAAC on October 14, 2022, 10:53:00 AM
Vavavavoom !
So what happened ?
1 word = "massacred"
2023 Corvette Z06 vs Lamborghini Evo vs Ferrari 458: The Official Supercar Killer Race
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-MzH7Alj0QU&feature=youtu.be
Tony keeps beating the same RINGER dead horse comments...