What's after Z06?

Vandervecken wrote:
> DaLoverhino wrote:
> Interesting thoughts. If I may throw in an engineer's perspective:
>
>
> > 1. Mid-engine Corvette
> My personal guess is the Corvette will stay with the traditional front
> engine layout. It's too much a part of the car's character. Actually, I
> think the C6's engine is far enough aft to qualify as a front-mid engine
> layout.
>

I'd love to see this happen; make a car that handles awesomely, and
make it even better.


> > 2. Carbon Fiber body frame
> OMG the cost! OMG the difficulty of repair! And I'm not sure the energy
> dissipation characteristics of carbon fiber would make for a very good
> crash test.
>

Yeah, I don't know what I was somking. Perhaps if the manufacturing
costs ever go down, this can be an alternative, say in the 2050 Z06
Corvette.


> > 3. Sequential Manual Gearbox
> Ya betcha. Or an infinitely-variable box.
>

When do you think SMG will happen? I heard the infinitely variable
boxes can't handle over like over 200 HP, at least the one Audi
developed.


> > 4. Supercharged
> Maybe if 500 hp isn't enough... but bet they can get more than that out
> of the 7L V8.
>

I read somewhere, they bore the cylinders so large that the walls
between the cylinders are very thin.




> > 5. Carbon fiber driveshaft
> I thnk the Corvette's drive shaft is already pretty light. One of the
> advantages of the aft gearbox is that the driveshaft needs to transmit
> much less torque, thus is much thinner and lighter. Only payback is
> higher RPM of the shaft....
>
>

Wow, that's cool. I didn't read about the gearbox being in the back.


> > How can they make this car any lighter than it is? Perhaps swapping
> > out aluminum parts for magnesium?
> Ummmm... magnesium is lighter than aluminum but not as strong for its
> weight. And although it casts well and can can be machined it doesn't
> form very easily in other production processes. I think in most cases a
> good aluminum alloy is stronger for its weight than a magnesium alloy,
> and also likely more cost-effective. Magnesium's also more vulnerable to
> corrosion than aluminum.
>


There's probably an alloy waiting to be found with magnesium to make it
a viable, lighter alternative? Here's what I found on the web:

Specific Weight:
Auminum: 2.55-2.80
Magnesium: 1.73


Young's Modulus:
Aluminum 69
Magnesium 45


So taking 2.55 for aluminum, and 1.73 for Mg, Magnesium is about 67%
lighter, yet 65% weaker. So, you'd save yourself maybe 2% in weight
savings when you thicken the magnesium beams to match aluminum
strength? Perhaps that's not right since volume, hence weight goes up
by a cube, and strength goes up the the square (cross sectional area.)

There has to be some alloy out there.

As far as rust goes, the new Pagoni Zonda F uses magnesium rims instead
of aluminum rims for weight savings. Maybe owners of a Zonda don't
care about rust and having to replace their rims every 6 months? I
doubt it. There has to be room for some kind of magnesium application
in a vette. Right?

>
> > What do you think guys? How can they impvoe on this car?
> Hard to do at the cost - it's awesome.


Yeah, for the cost, it's awesome. Maybe they can work on the interior
some. Perhaps they will make a environmentally friendlier Vette by
introducing displacement on demand, a 'new' engine technology GM is
developing. Which would be cool: imagine a vette that also does 32mpg
highway cruising.

thanks for your thoughts.

DaLoverhino wrote:
> Perhaps they will make a environmentally friendlier Vette by
> introducing displacement on demand, a 'new' engine technology GM is
> developing. Which would be cool: imagine a vette that also does 32mpg
> highway cruising.

I'm told the current LS-2 engine casting is fitted for DOD, it's just
not in use. And my C6 gives 28.3 mpg at 75 mph cruise, 30.5 at 70, and
33+ at 65. For comparison my old '67 VW Bug gives 33-35 at 60 and 28 at
70. I think the Corvette's fuel figures are fabulous for a
high-performance car, especially one that performs without having to be
driven like you're mad at it.

-- V

"DaLoverhino" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
>
> I read somewhere, they bore the cylinders so large that the walls
> between the cylinders are very thin.
>
Not true, better read it again, you might be thinking about the
cylinder flange.

>> > 5. Carbon fiber driveshaft
>> I thnk the Corvette's drive shaft is already pretty light. One of
>> the
>> advantages of the aft gearbox is that the driveshaft needs to
>> transmit
>> much less torque, thus is much thinner and lighter. Only payback is
>> higher RPM of the shaft....
>>
>>
>
> Wow, that's cool. I didn't read about the gearbox being in the
> back.
>
That happened in the last century, you need to catch-up with the
present day Corvette before you start making it better.

There was also magnesium wheels available as an option for the C5,
didn't sell well and was dropped.

>> > How can they make this car any lighter than it is? Perhaps
>> > swapping
>> > out aluminum parts for magnesium?
>> Ummmm... magnesium is lighter than aluminum but not as strong for
>> its
>> weight. And although it casts well and can can be machined it
>> doesn't
>> form very easily in other production processes. I think in most
>> cases a
>> good aluminum alloy is stronger for its weight than a magnesium
>> alloy,
>> and also likely more cost-effective. Magnesium's also more
>> vulnerable to
>> corrosion than aluminum.
>>
Don't forget its ability to crack at any time it wants to because of
the corrosion, not on my list of improvements (?).
>
> There's probably an alloy waiting to be found with magnesium to make
> it
> a viable, lighter alternative? Here's what I found on the web:
>
> Specific Weight:
> Auminum: 2.55-2.80
> Magnesium: 1.73
>
>
> Young's Modulus:
> Aluminum 69
> Magnesium 45
>
>
> So taking 2.55 for aluminum, and 1.73 for Mg, Magnesium is about 67%
> lighter, yet 65% weaker. So, you'd save yourself maybe 2% in weight
> savings when you thicken the magnesium beams to match aluminum
> strength? Perhaps that's not right since volume, hence weight goes
> up
> by a cube, and strength goes up the the square (cross sectional
> area.)
>
> There has to be some alloy out there.
>
> As far as rust goes, the new Pagoni Zonda F uses magnesium rims
> instead
> of aluminum rims for weight savings. Maybe owners of a Zonda don't
> care about rust and having to replace their rims every 6 months? I
> doubt it. There has to be room for some kind of magnesium
> application
> in a vette. Right?
>
>>
>> > What do you think guys? How can they impvoe on this car?
>> Hard to do at the cost - it's awesome.
>
>
> Yeah, for the cost, it's awesome. Maybe they can work on the
> interior
> some. Perhaps they will make a environmentally friendlier Vette by
> introducing displacement on demand, a 'new' engine technology GM is
> developing. Which would be cool: imagine a vette that also does
> 32mpg
> highway cruising.

Which it does now without the garbage that would be added for DOD. I
wonder if that has anything to do with the cost that makes it so
awsome?
>
> thanks for your thoughts.
>

Dad wrote:
> "DaLoverhino" > wrote in message
> That happened in the last century, you need to catch-up with the
> present day Corvette before you start making it better.
>

Yes indeed. You recommend any Corvette history books? I've just been
fed a bunch of German crap from friends and ads for awhile, that one
day, I was just browsing cars, and started reading about the Vettes.
And I looked at the numbers and prices and went, "HOLY COW!"

> There was also magnesium wheels available as an option for the C5,
> didn't sell well and was dropped.
>

Why? Were they ugly?


> > Perhaps they will make a environmentally friendlier Vette by
> > introducing displacement on demand, a 'new' engine technology GM is
> > developing. Which would be cool: imagine a vette that also does
> > 32mpg
> > highway cruising.
>
> Which it does now without the garbage that would be added for DOD. I
> wonder if that has anything to do with the cost that makes it so
> awsome?

Really? I've read it does 26mpg, I think on edmonds. If it does
better than that, that's pretty cool. My 2004 BMW 6 is quoted at doing
26mpg too, but in reality it does much less, like 19mpg, no matter how
much I try to feather the gas. It's 4.5L displacement is less than a
Vette, but the Vette gets better mileage! Wow. (That and the fact
that my BMW is a slug compared to the Vette.)

> > thanks for your thoughts.
> >

"DaLoverhino" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Dad wrote:
>> "DaLoverhino" > wrote in message
>> That happened in the last century, you need to catch-up with the
>> present day Corvette before you start making it better.
>>
>
> Yes indeed. You recommend any Corvette history books? I've just
> been
> fed a bunch of German crap from friends and ads for awhile, that one
> day, I was just browsing cars, and started reading about the Vettes.
> And I looked at the numbers and prices and went, "HOLY COW!"

A nice handy referance book is the Corvette Black Book, available from
Amazon. Also take a look in
http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/portal/
>
>> There was also magnesium wheels available as an option for the C5,
>> didn't sell well and was dropped.
>>
>
> Why? Were they ugly?
>
There you go again, why do they need to be ugly? They were expensive,
I think around $3,000, but a good looking wheel, YMMV.
>
>> > Perhaps they will make a environmentally friendlier Vette by
>> > introducing displacement on demand, a 'new' engine technology GM
>> > is
>> > developing. Which would be cool: imagine a vette that also does
>> > 32mpg
>> > highway cruising.
>>
>> Which it does now without the garbage that would be added for DOD.
>> I
>> wonder if that has anything to do with the cost that makes it so
>> awsome?
>
I have to admit that I was working at getting good mileage on a 625
mile trip when it got 33.8. Most of the time it stays between 28/30
after it had 10K on it.

> Really? I've read it does 26mpg, I think on edmonds. If it does
> better than that, that's pretty cool. My 2004 BMW 6 is quoted at
> doing
> 26mpg too, but in reality it does much less, like 19mpg, no matter
> how
> much I try to feather the gas. It's 4.5L displacement is less than
> a
> Vette, but the Vette gets better mileage! Wow. (That and the fact
> that my BMW is a slug compared to the Vette.)
>
Not many machines on the road that are made better than the BMW, just
not my bag.

--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd

You mean GM should pump the price up to $189,000 and go back to the old
5.5 liter engine? Hmmm, and you think that will improve sales?!

LoneGunman wrote:
> Take a look at the Mosler MT900S, and you'll see how GM could improve,
> and lighten the vette.
>
> http://www.moslerauto.com
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Dec 2005 12:14:02 -0800, "DaLoverhino" >
> spewed forth:
>
>
>>Man, the more I read about the Z06, the better it gets! I'm wondering

I would hope the car is less of a "work in progress" than the web
site--long on menus, fotos and Flash, short on content!

--
…PJ
’89 HookerCar, ’02 E-blu 6-spd Coupe

"LoneGunman" > wrote in message
...
>I didn't mean GM should copy the MT900, but the could learn alot in
> how to save weight, since the Z06 is a bloated 3000+ pound car, and
> the MT900 weighs in at 2300 pounds.
>
> Oh, and the LS6 is a 5.7L engine, plus the 7.0L engine will bolt
> right
> in too, we're running one of those in the yellow car.
>
I think the C6R weighs in at 2,425 with the '05 Z06 steel frame and
can't imagine how the mt90 can be that heavy and be competitive. May
just be their choice of engines that keep them in the running. They
need to go to GM and find out how to build a car that is affordable
and forget that bloated feeling they are driving.

--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd

So what is your relationship to Warren?


"LoneGunman" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 07:28:17 -0800, PJ > spewed
> forth:
>
>>LoneGunman wrote:
>>> Take a look at the Mosler MT900S, and you'll see how GM could improve,
>>> and lighten the vette.
>>>
>>> http://www.moslerauto.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 Dec 2005 12:14:02 -0800, "DaLoverhino" >
>>> spewed forth:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Man, the more I read about the Z06, the better it gets! I'm wondering
>>
>>I would hope the car is less of a "work in progress" than the web
>>site--long on menus, fotos and Flash, short on content!
>
> Try http://www.mt900.de the german site is brand new, although the
> specs do vary a bit in the US.
>
>
>

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:53:29 -0600, Bob I > puked:

>1. They already make a convertible.
>and
>2. Aluminum doesn't like being flexed so they aren't going to cut the
>top off the Z06.

I could live with some type of roll bar or whatnot....


>
>Bchbound wrote:
>> In article .com>,
>> says...
>>
>>>Man, the more I read about the Z06, the better it gets! I'm wondering
>>>how can Cheverolet improve on it? Like what's the next model gonna be
>>>like?
>>>
>>>Here's the things I can think of, I'm probably way off base, but I like
>>>to dream:
>>>
>>>1. Mid-engine Corvette
>>>2. Carbon Fiber body frame
>>>3. Sequential Manual Gearbox
>>>4. Supercharged
>>>5. Carbon fiber driveshaft
>>>
>>>How can they make this car any lighter than it is? Perhaps swapping
>>>out aluminum parts for magnesium?
>>>
>>>What do you think guys? How can they impvoe on this car?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> CONVERTIBLE!

--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?