That's what I thought too about the weight. C&D assumed it was 3600+, it gives some room for the Z to not be too porky. She's gonna weigh more for sure but lets hope its not more than a C7 ZR1.Doesn’t have a high mph due to the low HP, which was expected.
Curb weight at 3,535 is crazy low for today’s standards.
Car is all hook and book at the 1/4, tho. Impressive E.T. GM definitely pumped a superior chassis. Car will be BONKERS once a bit more power is introduced.
Not bad, not bad at all.
You sure about that?The weight distribution looks way off. That would be more accurate for rear engine cars, not mid engines. 45/55 would have been somewhat believable, but not 40/60 on a design aspect that is normally used to achieve 50/50 weight distribution.
Yeah CF saying the same thing. Typo or hanky panky?mmm, I suppose it could be a simple typo but 3.0 to 60mph and 2.9 to 62.xmph (100kph) jumps out at me
You sure about that?
Ferrari 488:
Weight distribution 41.5% Front – 58.5% Rear
Mclaren 650 and 675:
42.5%/57.5% 42.5%/57.5%
With that though, you would think Chevrolet would benchmark against those vehicles that it will compete with. Why would they sell a less than stellar example when they have all the development time in the world to make it better.
Im not saying your wrong, im saying that GM screwed the pooch knowing those cars are already out and they have the jump to make their car better in every aspect.
I wouldnt get hung up on weight distribution, 50/50 being perfect isnt always reality. The best track car in the world by a country mile has a totally retarded distribution and it clearly works. (911)With that though, you would think Chevrolet would benchmark against those vehicles that it will compete with. Why would they sell a less than stellar example when they have all the development time in the world to make it better.
Im not saying your wrong, im saying that GM screwed the pooch knowing those cars are already out and they have the jump to make their car better in every aspect.
mmm, I suppose it could be a simple typo but 3.0 to 60mph and 2.9 to 62.xmph (100kph) jumps out at me
I think that's 3.0 for the base, and 2.9 for the Z51.
I wouldnt get hung up on weight distribution, 50/50 being perfect isnt always reality. The best track car in the world by a country mile has a totally retarded distribution and it clearly works. (911)
Are you saying that you think the extra 1.5% of rear weight bias vs the 488 was GM screwing the pooch?With that though, you would think Chevrolet would benchmark against those vehicles that it will compete with. Why would they sell a less than stellar example when they have all the development time in the world to make it better.
Im not saying your wrong, im saying that GM screwed the pooch knowing those cars are already out and they have the jump to make their car better in every aspect.
You realize you just made my point?You sure about that?
Ferrari 488:
Weight distribution 41.5% Front – 58.5% Rear
Mclaren 650 and 675:
42.5%/57.5% 42.5%/57.5%
You realize you just made my point?
How hard did you search to "prove me wrong" only to find numbers that don't show any mid-engine sports car with a 40/60 weight distribution.
41.5 <> 40, especially when dealing with the handling of sports cars.
lol, I was not here to prove anything, just asking.You realize you just made my point?
How hard did you search to "prove me wrong" only to find numbers that don't show any mid-engine sports car with a 40/60 weight distribution.
41.5 <> 40, especially when dealing with the handling of sports cars.