Shno's House of Z

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

What is the max tire and brake size you can run in most racing classes? Are the magnetic dampers even legal? Will thePill commit suicide if the GT350 isn't legal in stock form?

Probably not suicide but pretty sure we will hear rationalizing at a level not previously seen on the inter webs

Originally Posted by JusticePete

With my family having just experienced a 50 mph broad side crash, you will never hear me complain about the weight of a modern vehicle again. They needed every air bag and ounce of metal to survive. Everyone needs to understand this.




Our other vehicle is a Denali. Many have asked if we'll replace the Sonic with a 'safer' vehicle. Here is the same impact with a taller, heavier Denali.



The penetration into the passenger compartment is higher in the SUV. It didn't move, the rollover doesn't count as it is a result of not moving, so the impact energy is all mostly absorbed in the sheet metal. Crush zones, exotic metals, air bags, belts, seats and advanced engineering modeling have made car substantially safer. That said, if you look at the frontal offset crash tests, bigger is clearly better. Pick your poison.

Back to the Mustang. It appears by the reports it is still running conservative width front tires. That will hold it back.

In real world crashes mass wins every time. Combine that with higher seating and you are much safer in a big, heavy SUV. On the opposite side of the spectrum? Well that is a Sonic meeting the business end of a Ram pickup.

[brt3]

Originally Posted by Number 3

...In real world crashes mass wins every time. Combine that with higher seating and you are much safer in a big, heavy SUV. On the opposite side of the spectrum? Well that is a Sonic meeting the business end of a Ram pickup.

If there's no way to avoid a crash, I agree. However, a lighter more nimble vehicle is something I hope to use to my advantage to avoid an accident. IMHO -- and this is coming from someone who's never had the misfortune to be involved in a serious accident -- it's preferable to have something a little lighter with a lower CG. I'd like to at least have a chance to practice accident avoidance -- but I realize we don't always get to choose these situations.

I think the best thing you can do -- to learn techniques that help avoid situations that lead to accidents -- is ride a motorcycle on the street. Doing that scared the hell out of me, but gave me a lot of insight into reading drivers and learning to place my vehicle in a way that makes it less susceptible to the mistakes of others.

The second-best thing you can do -- for yourself and your loved ones -- is to spend as much time as possible getting instruction from a trained professional. I started down this path iin my twenties, and have gotten my wife and kids into classes at Skip Barber. Both have since had situations where they had to react instantly to avoid accidents, and both commented on how they couldn't believe how well their training kicked in when it was needed.

Sorry to wander a bit OT. I am happy to hear that Deb is improving after such a terrible accident...

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by brt3

If there's no way to avoid a crash, I agree. However, a lighter more nimble vehicle is something I hope to use to my advantage to avoid an accident. IMHO -- and this is coming from someone who's never had the misfortune to be involved in a serious accident -- it's preferable to have something a little lighter with a lower CG. I'd like to at least have a chance to practice accident avoidance -- but I realize we don't always get to choose these situations.

I think the best thing you can do -- to learn techniques that help avoid situations that lead to accidents -- is ride a motorcycle on the street. Doing that scared the hell out of me, but gave me a lot of insight into reading drivers and learning to place my vehicle in a way that makes it less susceptible to the mistakes of others.

The second-best thing you can do -- for yourself and your loved ones -- is to spend as much time as possible getting instruction from a trained professional. I started down this path iin my twenties, and have gotten my wife and kids into classes at Skip Barber. Both have since had situations where they had to react instantly to avoid accidents, and both commented on how they couldn't believe how well their training kicked in when it was needed.

Sorry to wander a bit OT. I am happy to hear that Deb is improving after such a terrible accident...

Don't diagree with your thinking. Avoiding accidents doesn't come from driving a nimble sports car. It comes from paying attention, not texting, not eating while you drive, not using hands free for calling, not gunning it for yellow light and NOT speeding. Just a few.

Most accidents, I think are associated with lack of attention and skill. And surrounded by a poorly trained poorly focussed driving population I choose physics as my ally.

[JusticePete]

Some are unavoidable. There is little you can do when standing still stopped at a red light at busy intersection. Deb was on the phone, hands free blue tooth, when she was hit. The only possible action she could have taken would have been to move forward into traffic which would have been a high risk maneuver. I have thought about this a great deal in the weeks since her accident. I have gone through the mental exercise at the location of the accident. If you are prepared pre-video game screens fighter pilot ready at an intersection, watching the traffic pattern to your left prepared to take evasive action from a dead stop under similar traffic conditions there is the slight possibility you could have moved forward, avoided the accident, maybe with the right gap in traffic and split second reaction and...

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I am at a red light I make car adjustments (audio selections, temp, check a mirror, adjust my butt to the seat, stretch, check my texts, email, vm) relax for a moment while I wait for the light to change.

Jim,

This is my understanding of a crash and the injuries that follow.

There are three collisions in a crash. The first collision is the vehicle collision.

The vehicle begins stopping as it collides with another object.

The time from crash to full stop in a 30-mph crash is about one-tenth of a second. As the vehicle slows, the front of the vehicle crushes, taking some of the energy of the crash.

The second collision is the human collision. In the human collision, the occupant continues to move toward the point of impact at the same speed even though the vehicle begins to stop once impact occurs. The occupant will begin to stop once he or she connects with an outside force.

An unrestrained occupant will hit the inside of the vehicle, such as a window or other object in the path of motion. As that individual collides with the vehicle interior, he or she slows down from 30 mph to a stop in a few hundredths of a second, with only the body to absorb the energy of the crash

For a restrained occupant, however, the outside force will be met by a seat belt or the harness of a CR.

The third collision is the internal collision. In the internal collision, the occupant’s internal organs move toward the point of impact and
hit other organs, bones, and the skull. Even though the body may appear uninjured, the liver, spleen, heart, or other organs may be torn, bruised, and/or caused to bleed.

Impacts to the head may cause ‘‘closed head injuries’’ resulting from the soft tissue of the brain hitting the skull or being torn as the skull fractures.

When I look at the crash test videos, it would seem to me there would be more energy transfer to the occupants in the Suburban in the 2nd and 3rd collisions than in the Sonic. Is that false because the mass of the Suburban absorbed more energy even though it didn't move? Or is it true because the Sonic moved three lanes over and two car lengths back?

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by JusticePete

It is getting better. Deb has taken full control of her recovery.

Fantastic news Pete!

Originally Posted by Number 3

GT350 announced with Serious but non CC brakes and 500+ HP with flat crank. should give the Z/28 a run for the money.

Now let's see what Ford prices this beast at.

And makes me wonder what GM can do without an LS7, assuming that it dies off with the Gen5.

Just saw this Q&A with Jamal Hameedi (for people that don't know, he is GLOBAL PERFORMANCE VEHICLE CHIEF ENGINEER, FORD MOTOR COMPANY)

Q: How much were you able to share with the 5.0L?
A: There are little common parts (i.e. things in the valve train), but it’s pretty much an all-new engine: new heads, new casting, new intake, new crank, new pistons, new rods, new halfshafts.

Q: Why no carbon ceramic brakes?
A: I think you’ll find out later that affordability was a big part of this car.

Q: So keeping price down was a big part of that?
A: Yes. That was a priority with this car.

VERY VERY interested in this.

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Unless they put this on a serious diet, I can't see it being much faster than a Z/28 but it should be an awesome car. I'm more interested in how they managed to keep engine vibrations in check. The 4.5 liter in the 458 Italia is the largest FPC engine I know of and this is a lot bigger.

I think our best hope is an improved LT1 if GM stays N/A for high performance cars but I don't have much faith for that with the new Z06.

I think the lack of CCB's and ridiculous Pirelli Trofeo tires may just tip the scale in favor of the Z/28. However, with the ability to rev a lot higher and make more hp than the LS7 this new engine is a legitimate threat even if the torque isn't as high (which I doubt it will be).

This car has me seriously interested in actually buying a Mustang I cannot believe I'm saying that, my family would disown me. We have one of the oldest family run dealerships in the U.S. (Grovert Chevrolet in Iowa). I'm going to wait to see what kinks need to be worked out after the first year in circulation and see what GM has in response.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by BaylorCamaro

I think the lack of CCB's and ridiculous Pirelli Trofeo tires may just tip the scale in favor of the Z/28. However, with the ability to rev a lot higher and make more hp than the LS7 this new engine is a legitimate threat even if the torque isn't as high (which I doubt it will be).

This car has me seriously interested in actually buying a Mustang I cannot believe I'm saying that, my family would disown me. We have one of the oldest family run dealerships in the U.S. (Grovert Chevrolet in Iowa). I'm going to wait to see what kinks need to be worked out after the first year in circulation and see what GM has in response.

On courses that prefer power to weight over braking and grip, I'm sure the GT350 will run with or outrun the Z/28 due to the higher rev range, greater power and potentially lighter weight. I think the GT350 will provide an excellent track car without sacrificing the amenities. If Ford manages to keep the price well below the Z/28, I think they will hit a home run.

[2cnd chance]

My guess for the GT350 is: $59,995. weigh mid 3,800’s. 520/440. hp/tq

[Number 3]

ATS-V now "about 3700 pounds".

Hmmmmmmmm

Making me think an SS might be more like 3750????

ELS rear diff may add some weight but not making the 3500 pound SS everyone thinks is going to happen look very likely

[FenwickHockey65]

Time to trade in Mrs. Number 3's ATS?

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Time to trade in Mrs. Number 3's ATS?

Sadly it's a lease. Otherwise..........

[Number 3]

Ok, there is a hidden message in the ATS-V, at least from my thinking.

GM took the LF3 and massaged it, or gave it a pretty solid make over to get to 455 HP and 445 lbft of torque resulting in the LF4. Up dramatically from, well ok, up solidly over the 420 HP in the LF3 found in the CTS V-sport.

So now GM has shown an indication it is willing to create low volume variants for special or specific applications. Unless GM is putting the LF4 in something else, and not sure what that could be. Possibly and upgrade for the V-sport, but I have my doubts. I think it is intended to be special.

With that in mind, could we see an LT2 in the Gen 6 Z/28? The LF4 was an 8% bump in HP. The equivalent bump from an LT1 would be a magical 500 HP NA.

Just chew on that.....................or hope for that.

[Bhobbs]

Good point Number 3. I hope that's the case.

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

Originally Posted by Number 3

With that in mind, could we see an LT2 in the Gen 6 Z/28? The LT4 was an 8% bump in HP. The equivalent bump from an LT1 would be a magical 500 HP NA.

Just chew on that...or hope for that.

With a 91-octane-only tune and a few minor tweaks, that "should" be do-able. It's a recipe mentioned before...and a recipe a Powertrain source confirms as do-able. Ready-and-willing remains the unknown.

It would make a great addition to the Corvette line-up as well...can you say GS?

Lessons learned with the ATS-V, along with a potentially larger tire capability for the Camaro variant in combination with mass and equipment rationalization, would make for a very weight-conscious and nimble car fully worthy of a certain "badge of honor".

With an earlier arrival in the next-Gen product line-up, combined with assembly line-built engines shared with Corvette, a more volume-oriented price point should be the result. And, like our friends at Ford, an R-type version with C-C brakes and such for the absolute diehard "coneheads" would be welcomed, too.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Ok, there is a hidden message in the ATS-V, at least from my thinking.

GM took the LF3 and massaged it, or gave it a pretty solid make over to get to 455 HP and 445 lbft of torque resulting in the LF4. Up dramatically from, well ok, up solidly over the 420 HP in the LF3 found in the CTS V-sport.

So now GM has shown an indication it is willing to create low volume variants for special or specific applications. Unless GM is putting the LF4 in something else, and not sure what that could be. Possibly and upgrade for the V-sport, but I have my doubts. I think it is intended to be special.

With that in mind, could we see an LT2 in the Gen 6 Z/28? The LT4 was an 8% bump in HP. The equivalent bump from an LT1 would be a magical 500 HP NA.

Just chew on that.....................or hope for that.

Ahhhh, I see what you did there.