Car and Driver ZL1 review

[radz28]

Originally Posted by avcbm

What is this new feature you speak of... this NO LIFT SHIFT?

Yup - it's a way to kinda' cheat death when powershifting. There've been a couple instances when I powershifted from 2nd into 1st... With the No-Lift-Shift - I imagine TM is going to influence power, too. Maybe that's one of the reasons why the A6 is a touch faster... I gotta' look at the ratios, too, because I'm not as familiar with that tranny as much as the TR6060. Anyhoo... that TM's a beesh, but helps keep the car together.

Originally Posted by Blown355

I don't think it's a new feature it's just a power shift. I have power shifted my 2010 several times at the drag strip. Unfortunately, the torque management doesn't like it, and dials back the power for a second or so. Making for a crappy quarter mile time.

That really stinks. I mean - I know why they're doing that, but killing that much power makes shifting that way worthless. Oh well - that's nothing some tuning can't take care of. There goes the warranty, LOL!

[SSmoked]

If No lift shift is anything like they gave the cobalts ss/tc from factory, its when u hit a certain rpm and push in the clutch while gas pedal is fully down, it cuts the spark in the clinder for a breif time but keeps the turbo spooling, so when u engage the next gear your already at full boost with no spool time. for a turbo car its great because of the lag we get, but on a supercharged car its a gimmick.

[Trevorw24]

No Lift Shift seems interesting. My feet wouldn't like that.

[OLD_GOAT]

Originally Posted by RLHMARINES

0-60 in 3.8 sec and 1/4 mile time of 12.1 sec @ 117 mph on a sandy cold desert track from the Motor Trend test and much better than the 4.1 sec 0-60 and 12.3 sec 1/4 mile times from Car and Driver on the same track.

I've owned 3 new performance cars since 2005 and always used the magazines times as a baseline to beat. All these runs are bone stock, right off the showroom floor.

2005 Pontiac GTO A4, magazines were showing 13.3 or so, while my pb bone stock was 13.65. These runs were in the summer and I was a complete newbie at the track. In the winter, at Houston Raceway Park, no doubt I could have matched it.

2009 Corvette A6, non Z51 with Z51 gears, the magazines were at 12.5 or so, on a great night at HRP I hit a 12.15. I had a lot of track time in the GTO, so I wasn't a track newbie with this car. The DA that night was about -1500 which was worth about .2 or so on the times.

2009 Pontiac G8 GXP, the magazines were getting 13.0, and my best was a 12.93, which was on target.

My point is that there are too many variables. Where did they (magazines) make their runs, at sea level, up in Michigan? What was the DA at the time of the run? Was it a professional driver or a magazine writer with some skills, or some magazine writer that had zero skills?

True story, I met a magazine writer one day at HRP when the Shelby first came out, around 2007 or so. He had a brand spanking new Shelby and I wanted to run him in my bolt on GTO. I figured I might have him by a bit. As we approached the staging lanes, I see the dude didn't even have a helmet. We ran and I smoked his ass, and my ego was inflated big time. However we talked and I found out he basically had zero racing skills. I felt like a real turd. The guy was as nice as can be and after that a couple of buddies came over and we kind of coached the guy on racing. He showed a vast improvement in his later races, and I was glad for him.

He wasn't a writer for one of the major magazines, but he was important enough to have a Shelby loaned to him with Michigan plates.

The magazine times are something to shoot for, but they aren't the end all of racing the quarter.

Take the times with a grain of salt. Time and many different drivers and conditions will tell you what you need to know. Just look at the best times on this site right now and toss out the top 5 and bottom 5 to get the best idea of what your car will run. Just understand that there is now a history of a couple of years to backup figures. It will take at least a year or so to get enough ZL1's on the track to pin down a time to realistically get.

............again, just too many variables................

[IcePick06]

Originally Posted by OLD_GOAT

Take the times with a grain of salt. Time and many different drivers and conditions will tell you what you need to know. Just look at the best times on this site right now and toss out the top 5 and bottom 5 to get the best idea of what your car will run. Just understand that there is now a history of a couple of years to backup figures. It will take at least a year or so to get enough ZL1's on the track to pin down a time to realistically get.

............again, just too many variables................

That's why I think GM officially released that the manual ZL1 will do 4.0 sec from 0-60mph, it's a realistic very reasonably obtained time--not a HERO TIME. Motortrend got 3.8 seconds and I believe car and driver got 4.1 or 4.2 seconds. So if you average those you get to 4.0 seconds which is what GM released. I'm sure there will be even more reviews in the coming months to back up this claim

[Mr. Wyndham]

This is the first time I've read of a no-lift shift feature....That'll be nice!

[The Stig]

Power shifting?

[mr02Z/28]

It's cool to see my buddy's $7,500 spent on his 1971 Olds Cutlass 455/3.90 rear can run 11.90s consistently.... and a $60,000 ZL1 can do 12.1, sweet...

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

It's cool to see my buddy's $7,500 spent on his 1971 Olds Cutlass 455/3.90 rear can run 11.90s consistently.... and a $60,000 ZL1 can do 12.1, sweet...

How's the Mag Ride holding up on that ol' Cutlass?

[Pappa Joe]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

It's cool to see my buddy's $7,500 spent on his 1971 Olds Cutlass 455/3.90 rear can run 11.90s consistently.... and a $60,000 ZL1 can do 12.1, sweet...

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm? How does he do on the track?