hotknives

nevermind my last entry ... according to the latest posting for the site the times quoted are correct ... here's the link http://www.autofacts.ca/classics/fast.htm

OCMusicJunkie

This is totally off topic, but...

Does anyone know how those old muscle cars are pulling faster times than the Enzo? I always thought cars from that era were quite a bit heavier, and I know they had less gears.

YBS1

They weren't, a lot of the times listed on that are suspect to say the least. I think it's been discussed on here in a post before. A good number of the times listed are not 100% OEM stock automobiles, at minimal they may be on modern era tires or drag specific rubber. Some of those times are pulled from magazines long ago and it is unknown how much or how specifically the cars were tuned, not too mention suspected "ringers" supplied by the manufacturers back in those days. I'm not even talking only about those few that are in the 10s, there are tons listed in the 12s and 13s that I have serious reservations believing if it is to be assumed they are 100% stock with no changes at all.

They weren't really as heavy as you might think though, many of them were physically large compared to modern era cars but think of all the stuff they don't have that add weight in newer vehicles. As for the gearing (generally), they had less cogs to work with but then again unlike modern cars they didn't waste some of that with gearing suited to theoretical 200mph top speeds either. Let's just say taking a long drive down interstate in a mid sixties Corvette would be a nerve-wracking experience for someone only used to modern plush-mobiles. You think an S2000 is screaming at 70+mph? lol

God I love old cars, they have character. Got a grin on my face just typing that part about a drive down interstate.

xviper

Final Drive gearing.
We think of our 4.10 gearing in the S2000 as pretty normal. 4.10 for a '60s muscle car was very severe. Those hemi's doing 10's would not likely be able to run much past 160, while the new "muscle" cars like the ones being discussed here can approach or exceed 200.

Dr. WOT

I will wager that these are the best numbers for a stock C6-Z06 you'll ever see published. Just like the much debated 7.43 'Ring time. I don't doubt that it will be very potent, but it seems to be neck-and-neck with cars boasting another 100hp. If so, this wouldn't be the first case of pre-production hype, nor the last.

----

Off topic, re: exotic. There was a good letter to the editor in a recent issue of evo asking why the SL55 isn't considered an exotic, even though it is just as quick or faster than many cars that are considered "exotic." Their answer, which I think is a good one, is that it goes beyond performance numbers, and they distilled it down to a question of whether a teenage boy would hang a poster of it on his bedroom wall.

lyndon_h

In this case the S2000 an exotic.

brent_strong

Just some info I was reading on the ZL1 'vette that was listed:

Any 69 ZL1 is easily capable of 11s with any competent driver, and running on drag slicks, can easily run deep into the 10s. The quickest documented ZL-1 was a 10.60 @ 132 by Motor Trend in Oct 69. Zora Arkas Duntoff himself claimed 10.5 on slicks. As we talk about tires, please remember, this is 1969 technology. Slicks of that era were not as sticky as some of today's radials that we find on sports cars. On top of this, the ZL1's top speed with stock gearing was close to 200 mph, and it could easily go beyond if the gearing was changed.

*drool*

SgtSaunders

It seems that an old technology might be the limiting factor in going beyond Z06/CGT/Enzo type performance....rubber.

To balance the equation of firmly connecting tire to road on these exotics becomes a science project.

If that vette forum info is true, the King of the Road has set one hell of a benchmark.