SRT Viper GTS vs Chevrolet Corvette ZR1! - Head 2 Head

[Ambalanche]

This is a moot point since the C7 was just introduced. For the Viper to be going against the 2013 ZR1 and for the ZR1 to be doing so well against the brand-new Viper, the C7 is all that More awesome!

[Ambalanche]

Forget about the ZR1, I'm excited to see the new Corvette stingray go up against the new viper!

[69gtsdart]

Giles has mentioned that the New ACR will have 1500lbs of Down force. that's a 500lb Increase from the 2010 ACR, that means its gonna have some massive Power update for a top trim Viper to have that amount of downforce

What everyone is failing to realize, the Vipers that's being Driving and Tested by Magazines are Pre-Production Vipers, Thats why they dont have the Production Seats giles mentioned on Twitter Viper #001 is the Metallic Red GTS Viper ( the one thats was built to giving to the person who won the Auction on Barrett Jackson) and the 50+ Inaugural GTS Viper (blue /w white strips) will be the 1st Production Vipers. . Both versions just started production last week.

[spd98]

Not really embarrassing at all. Just two different ways to get to nearly the same performance capability.

People can make light of how they accomplished it, "SRT has 2 more liters" or "The Chevy had to use a super charger with X pounds of boost".

What matters at the end of it all is how well it performs on the intent. They both seem to have done pretty well.



That phrase, "there's no replacement for displacement" has been proven wrong so many times its well past old. Need evidence, compare what you have here a NA 8.4 liter versus the FI 6.2, both within 2HP. Given this scientific validation most would come to a conclusion that forced induction is a fine alternative for substitution of displacement.



Sure you can, they just did in the head to head posted by the OP.

Technically you add the displacement of the blower to the motor. TVS 2300cc = 2.3l so that makes the ls8 more like an 8.5l. Of course there are a lot of factors like the fact the blower is better at compressing air than the engine...

[DenaliHD66]

I love the new Viper, but seriously, ZR1's been out for 5 years now and this Viper's brand new..

Oh and I just noticed that the headlights on the Viper are part of the hood... wtf?

[Slideways]

Technically you add the displacement of the blower to the motor.

No you don't, that's absurd. Nobody I've ever come across in the automotive industry has ever attempted to do such a thing. It may change the way the engine acts, but adding a centrifugal supercharger or a turbo doesn't alter displacement any more than a a positive-displacement supercharger does. If anything, the amount of boost is what more closely relates to the effect of additional displacement. Adding 14.7 pounds of boost without any losses due to heat is like doubling the displacement of an engine because it's getting twice the air as it would have naturally aspirated. Further, a positive-displacement supercharger can be overdriven or underdriven, increasing or decreasing the volume of air pumped through on each revolution.

[69gtsdart]

I love the new Viper, but seriously, ZR1's been out for 5 years now and this Viper's brand new..

Oh and I just noticed that the headlights on the Viper are part of the hood... wtf?

The ZR1 is 5 years old but within that 5 year period, it been improved and upgraded. But seriously A Base Viper (again Pre-Production) lost to a Top Trim Vette, Thats not a Embarrassment for SRT. and what wrong with headlights being part of the hood?? Its a Clam Shell Hood for crying out loud.

[Slideways]

The ZR1 is 5 years old but within that 5 year period, it been improved and upgraded. But seriously A Base Viper (again Pre-Production) lost to a Top Trim Vette, Thats not a Embarrassment for SRT.

I completely agree. Let's also not forget that Viper got screwed by Daimler and it very easily could have never been built after going on hiatus. The SRT guys rock for coming back with such a good-looking, kick-ass track car!

[63GrandSport001]

The one thing that I would say that I find impressive is even though the ZR1 Corvette is softer then the Viper it still managed a better lap time.

[69gtsdart]

The one thing that I would say that I find impressive is even though the ZR1 Corvette is softer then the Viper it still managed a better lap time.

With Randy Driving of course.... I got a saying, Dont let a Polo athlete ride a Rodeo Horse, lol.

[63GrandSport001]

With Randy Driving of course.... I got a saying, Dont let a Polo athlete ride a Rodeo Horse, lol.

He probably needs a lot more seat time with the Viper in order to get a real good feel for the car, he has driven the C6 Corvette for what almost a decade now. Though as far as the Viper in the configuration used being faster then the ZR1 in the configuration that it used is something that I doubt. The tires that the ZR1 have proven capable of 1.12Gs on a skid pad (2.0Gs at the ring in Germany), those carbon ceramic brake disc also will not fade nearly as soon as the Vipers. The magnetic shocks is what allows the Corvette to be as soft as it is and yet also perform as well as it does.

Though I would expect the ACR Viper with its down force and adjusting the suspension for the track should easily beat the ZR1's lap time (as it should in that configuration).

[germeezy1]

I will admit that this victory was much to my chagrin because I actually thought the Viper should be able to match or beat the outgoing C6 ZR1.

[Motors Man]

I would be more than glad to have either or both in my garage. Beautiful beautiful cars.

[hrcslam]

Not exactly. All things being equal, a larger engine will make more torque, but it needs more total airflow to make more overall power. If you can't move more air through the valves and heads the increase in torque will just shift the power band to a lower RPM range.

A larger engine inherently has a huge advantage to building power than a smaller one. A 2 inch bore has 1/3 the surface area of a 4 inch bore. Put them both on the same stroke and the 4 inch bore will push almost 3 times the torque at the same rpm. Sure it can't rev as high from the additional mass, but it doesn't need to to beat the 2" bore in power output.

Remember all things being equal means that as you scale up the bore the stroke should be too, and the intake runners, paths, exhaust etc. Which should equal that same port velocity between the two engines, but the larger one will move more air because it has more volume. That means more power.

But even if it wasn't all equal the larger engine can use smaller runners and move more air from higher air velocity. Of course that goes into design and all things being equal get's tossed.

But from some real world examples we have the 4.8L, 5.3L and 6.2L engines -all from the exact same architecture- where they grow in power as the engine grows in displacement. Same can be said of the Ecotec 1.4T to 1.6T to 2.0T, and the Ecotec 2.2L to 2.4L. Lets look at the HFV6's 2.8L to 3.0L to 3.6L all the exact same result. Growth in power with a growth in displacement.

The thing that doesn't follow suit is fuel economy. The 5.3L is bigger and more powerful but gets better gas mileage than the 4.8L (even without AFM).

There are many more examples, but the fact does remain, there is no replacement for displacement. Boost an engine, then boost the bigger one the same amount and the bigger one see's a greater horsepower gain, every, single, time.

No you don't, that's absurd. Nobody I've ever come across in the automotive industry has ever attempted to do such a thing. It may change the way the engine acts, but adding a centrifugal supercharger or a turbo doesn't alter displacement any more than a a positive-displacement supercharger does. If anything, the amount of boost is what more closely relates to the effect of additional displacement. Adding 14.7 pounds of boost without any losses due to heat is like doubling the displacement of an engine because it's getting twice the air as it would have naturally aspirated. Further, a positive-displacement supercharger can be overdriven or underdriven, increasing or decreasing the volume of air pumped through on each revolution.

I completely agree here. I think that adding displacement from boost comes from the boost pressure it's self and not the displacement of the boosting device. A 6.2L @ 7psi of boost from a 2.3L screw supercharger should equal about 9.3L, not 8.5L. But a NA motor will always run at a higher VE than a boosted one so that would have to be factored in too.

A GT500 is a 5.8L running 14psi of boost takes it to a 11.32L (assuming a 100% VE). The LSA from the Camaro runs 9psi on a 6.2L which equals a 9.99L (assuming 100% VE).

[Slideways]

Remember all things being equal means that as you scale up the bore the stroke should be too, and the intake runners, paths, exhaust etc.

No, that's not all things being equal, that's all things being optimized for the larger engine, and that's the part I disagreed with. If you were to literally keep the same heads, ports, cam, and valves and simply increase displacement, for example going from a 327 to a 383, then you'd have the same airflow capability through the engine and the same overall horsepower, but the torque would come on earlier and be higher. Like this.
http://www.truckinweb.com/tech/engin...d/viewall.html

Which should equal that same port velocity between the two engines, but the larger one will move more air because it has more volume. That means more power.

Now that part I agree with.