Laguna Seca: Road Course Times for the SS against it's competition.

[SVT_SRT]

Its amazing how well these 4000 lb beasts do around a track. The current muscle cars are a completely different animal than the old ones. I drove a V6 camaro rental car, Surprisingly it was an RS, Felt really sold the power that V6 had surprised me and the way it took turns felt like a 3-series.

[SSchase]

i havent taken my SS to laguna seca yet, i will in late december, but now i know what times im shooting for.

[returnofcc]

I have to say, I am impressed that the ss beat an old cayman s (def would not beat the new one), the 135i, and not just the normal z, but the nismo z. Also beat the s2000 by a long shot, considering that is a rwd, perfectly balanced, somewhat powerful track car.
That being said, looking further up the list, I would like to see more cars put in the mix. Preferably the gt2 and the r8 v10...

[MrIcky]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

I have to say, I am impressed that the ss beat an old cayman s (def would not beat the new one), the 135i, and not just the normal z, but the nismo z. Also beat the s2000 by a long shot, considering that is a rwd, perfectly balanced, somewhat powerful track car.
That being said, looking further up the list, I would like to see more cars put in the mix. Preferably the gt2 and the r8 v10...

I know people tend to beat on you sometimes, and that's not my intent at all. Although the Z and the Cayman are great cars, I don't think you understand how cars work at tracks like this. In this track you have a lot of corners that force you to dump your speed. It's almost impossible to keep your rpm's up where the the Z and Cayman's torque comes on no matter how good they handle. Cars that develop their torque low are going to do better coming out of those super tight corners. It means the SS is going to be comfortable in 3rd gear while some of the higher revving cars are going to have to hit 2nd. It even explains how the Cobalt SS/TC does so well for it's class because it hits it's torque peak at 2000 rpm.

The worse your driving skill is, the more pronounced that effect will be because maintaining momentum is much harder then nailing the gas- so I'd say a hack like me would clock much higher in a Camaro than I would a 370 or Cayman despite lower handling limits. Now you may be tempted to quote 0-60 times, but those are meaningless in this because there's no standing start. Bottom line is, the Camaro is going to be in the fat part of the power curve more often no matter how ham-fisted you are at driving it.

[ChevyThunder]

I have raced at Laguna numerous times and I can tell you a 1:34 is a very very respectable time for a production based car . Obviously the car was tuned and maybe more importantly geared for Laguna . The Camaro probably never saw 6th gear and not much of 5th. Curious to see the difference in how the Mustangs and Camaros are geared/axle ratio .

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by MrIcky

I know people tend to beat on you sometimes, and that's not my intent at all. Although the Z and the Cayman are great cars, I don't think you understand how cars work at tracks like this. In this track you have a lot of corners that force you to dump your speed. It's almost impossible to keep your rpm's up where the the Z and Cayman's torque comes on no matter how good they handle. Cars that develop their torque low are going to do better coming out of those super tight corners. It means the SS is going to be comfortable in 3rd gear while some of the higher revving cars are going to have to hit 2nd. It even explains how the Cobalt SS/TC does so well for it's class because it hits it's torque peak at 2000 rpm.

The worse your driving skill is, the more pronounced that effect will be because maintaining momentum is much harder then nailing the gas- so I'd say a hack like me would clock much higher in a Camaro than I would a 370 or Cayman despite lower handling limits. Now you may be tempted to quote 0-60 times, but those are meaningless in this because there's no standing start. Bottom line is, the Camaro is going to be in the fat part of the power curve more often no matter how ham-fisted you are at driving it.

Ah, this explains things. I was wondering, because I thought those track oriented cars would be doing much better. I guess it's a track/power curve issue...

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

Ah, this explains things. I was wondering, because I thought those track oriented cars would be doing much better. I guess it's a track/power curve issue...

The Track has as much to do with it as anything. If an Evolution X went up against a SS on a very tight, technical track, then the Evo would pull out the victory. However, go to a track with a decent amount of straight aways, then the Camaro would pull ahead of the Evolution.

[SSmoked]

Originally Posted by a_Username

The Track has as much to do with it as anything. If an Evolution X went up against a SS on a very tight, technical track, then the Evo would pull out the victory. However, go to a track with a decent amount of straight aways, then the Camaro would pull ahead of the Evolution.

correct, any time u pit 2 cars against each other on different tracks ur gona have to expect different times for each. a camaro might take it on laguna, but the evo might take it at road atlanta or something.

[DGthe3]

I don't know too much about race tracks but Laguna Secca seems to be one that is either neutral or favours acceleration slightly (rather than top speed or handling). It has a good variety of turns and most straights are somewhat short, only on the gas for a couple seconds before preping for the next corner. I'm still surprised when I see that it beat the Nismo 370Z by nearly a second. Given the weight of that car and the more aggressive gearing I didn't think it would give up enough in a straight line to lose to the SS. Not gonna complain though.

[SSchase]

from the years ive been tracking my cars there, laguna seca is about handling, braking and torque. top end isnt needed. low end and mid range are what you need. i had a subaru wrx that was completly set up to be competitive at laguna seca and comfortable for street use. with all the mods i was able to match the time of the NSX 1:57. im trying to do the same thing with my camaro, of course it will be faster than the nsx lol.

[redknight]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Yep. This only continues to prove my point of having a Z/28 with a slight power bump and better suspension wouldn't outdo cars like the GT500.

What exactly is proving your point? The Camaro is not only lighter, but will also undoubtedly sacrifice more luxuries and ride quality in the name of performance compared to the cts-v. An LSA Camaro will be faster than the the LSA cts-v which is already faster than the gt500.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by redknight

What exactly is proving your point? The Camaro is not only lighter, but will also undoubtedly sacrifice more luxuries and ride quality in the name of performance compared to the cts-v. An LSA Camaro will be faster than the the LSA cts-v which is already faster than the gt500.

The LSA is not a slight power bump

[billw501]

My co-worker has a Nismo. Nice to see the Camaro can keep up at a track like Laguna. I'll have to send him that link.

I see "Motor Trend" as the driver for most. Does anybody know if this will be in an upcoming or currently released magazine?

[redknight]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

The LSA is not a slight power bump

All signs have pointed towards the LSA. I did not think anyone would bother discussing one without it. But again, based on the cts-v the z28 (lighter, wider tires, more track oriented suspension) wouldn't even need all the power of the lsa to keep up with the gt500.