C6ZO6

Another thing real quick!!!

These 1/4 miles times say alot but they don't say it all.
The best way to compare cars is to race them from a roll. Then your comparing power and not hole shot or susp. Anyone who knows there stuff will agree.

Roll racing is gay and takes ZERO talent.

Just my personal opinion.

U.M.

Uncle Meat said:

Roll racing is gay and takes ZERO talent.

Just my personal opinion.

U.M.

Click to expand...

It depends on what you're trying to find out.... Which car is stronger, or which driver is stronger... Alot of times, dead-start racing doesn't tell you much at all about the car.

Hell, I beat my buddy at the track by a full length in my bone-stinking-stock 96 Cobra versus his '95 Supra Turbo 6-speed!!!

Any bozo who would walk away from the bleachers that night proclaiming that "96 Cobras are faster than Turbo Supras" would be an imbicile. My buddy simply couldn't drive worth a damn and bought the Supra for little other reason than trying to have a faster car than my modded '93 Corvette 6-speed (I won't even get into how badly I waxed him with the Corvette, I thought he was going to cry. I tried to tell him, when he showed up in my cul-de-sac doing laps in his new Supra, big sh**-eating grin on his face, that he didn't want a piece of the Corvette, but he just wouldn't listen... Then, when I eeked him in the far-slower Cobra, it was to the point that it was just funny...)

Poor guy, he's been driving SUV's and mini-vans ever since selling the Supra...

Uncle Meat said:

Roll racing is gay and takes ZERO talent.

Just my personal opinion.

U.M.

Click to expand...

I dunno...timing that 3rd honk with mashing the gas is pretty tough

RICKS said:

It depends on what you're trying to find out.... Which car is stronger, or which driver is stronger... Alot of times, dead-start racing doesn't tell you much at all about the car.

Click to expand...

So in other words, roll racing is a good way to avoid having a properly setup car and driving skill

Racing from a roll is like having robots play the superbowl. It would take training(properly setup car) and the human element (skill) out of the game.

(not to mention the legal ramifications)

I will admit though that a properly timed and fair roll race does have the potential of showing which of two cars has the most HP/TQ and better aerodynamics/gearing.

U.M.

Uncle Meat said:

I will admit though that a properly timed and fair roll race does have the potential of showing which of two cars has the most HP/TQ and better aerodynamics/gearing.

U.M.

Click to expand...

Well...I was being a smart @$$, but you made a great point.

mattkimsey said:

So in other words, roll racing is a good way to avoid having a properly setup car and driving skill

Racing from a roll is like having robots play the superbowl. It would take training(properly setup car) and the human element (skill) out of the game.

(not to mention the legal ramifications)

Click to expand...

Your point relies on the premise that drag racing is the ONLY kind of racing that counts, and that everyone should have their car set up for a sub-2 second 60-foot time.... If we were all die-hard competitive draggers, then that would be one thing... But I highly doubt that everyone here is going to drive home from the dealership in their new GT500, drop the sway bar, install drag shocks, drag radials out back, ... Now you've got a more "properly setup" car.... that wallows like a milk truck just getting out of the neighborhood...

Most street cars are compromises on the drag strip. If you aim to win all the drag races, you're going to have to accept getting embarrassed in the twisties, and vice versa.

You don't have to tell me about the skill involved in dead-stop drag racing, I've got a decent stash of Sportsman trophies in my attic, all of which I won on street radials with no real drag chassis setup (My '93 Corvette was a brutally good sub-2launcher, surprising how well it would transfer and lift the nose...) So it's not that I don't appreciate the art of drag racing. I just know that for certain vehicles, like my supercharged '97 S351 Saleen, a 1/4 run just isn't telling you much about the car. It flat STINKS on the drag strip, no matter how you try to skin it. 1st and 2nd gear is like putting your cat on an ice-skating rink, and then firing a gun... Does that mean the car isn't fast? Nope. Does that mean that I can't drive? Nope. Does it mean that if you want to see what the car can really do, you'll have to stay above 40mph to see it? Pretty much..., and throw a few corners in for fun..

The only way I could make that car show its potential on a drag strip, would be to neuter it's road-racing chassis setup. That would be just flat stupid.

Coming from this ex-drag racing junkie, there's more to a performance car than just drag racing. If you're up against a car that simply isn't set up for 0-30 quickness, it's not just about skill, it's also about physics. You can run low 12's without breaking 110 mph if you want to, and likely beat alot of impressive performance cars. But that doesn't mean that you won't get left choking on dust and rubber-haze when you go to leave the track and the car that you technically beat in the quarter mile comes past you like you're standing still.

Skill is one thing. But just because a car isn't set up for drag racing, doesn't mean it's not an impressive performing car. When I race for fun, It's usually me wanting to see how my car stacks up against another. I don't give a rat's patooty about the other driver's skill, I want to see if my ride can out-pull his. So if I think that the launch will be just a nasty comedy of wheelspin and gear flailing, I'll prefer a good 2nd or 3rd gear roll any day so that the cars can duke it out. I know I can launch well, and competitively, been there, done that. But when I line up next to a car that I've been DYING to have a try at... and then the driver just completely BLOWS it, I can't stand that. I wanted to race the car, not the dumb-a$$ driving it. So sometimes, a roll-start race eliminates the possibility of being disappointed by not having a good match, and you get to have a good tussle.

RICKS said:

Skill is one thing. But just because a car isn't set up for drag racing, doesn't mean it's not an impressive performing car. When I race for fun, It's usually me wanting to see how my car stacks up against another. I don't give a rat's patooty about the other driver's skill, I want to see if my ride can out-pull his. So if I think that the launch will be just a nasty comedy of wheelspin and gear flailing, I'll prefer a good 2nd or 3rd gear roll any day so that the cars can duke it out. I know I can launch well, and competitively, been there, done that. But when I line up next to a car that I've been DYING to have a try at... and then the driver just completely BLOWS it, I can't stand that. I wanted to race the car, not the dumb-a$$ driving it. So sometimes, a roll-start race eliminates the possibility of being disappointed by not having a good match, and you get to have a good tussle.

Click to expand...

All good points... the only real skill required in roll racing is the ability to keep the car straight and not blow the shift! Unless of course you have an A/T... then it's kind of like an auto-focus camera... just point and shoot.

U.M.

I have seen some people completely botch racing from a roll too. People that mess up racing from a roll usually make the mistake of not selecting the proper gear. For example, someone cruising along at 55 mph in 5th and only downshifting into 4th before running. Or there are others who are afraid of running their RPMs too high, and shortshift themselves into a loss.

Of course if you are able to set up the conditions of the race before the run, then this may not be an issue. I guess I am referring to the random encounter on the freeway where people have done what I mentioned.

The most common roll mistakes I see guys make is starting out in too LOW of a gear, i.e. they're sitting there only 500 rpm shy of the redline, way out of the sweet-spot of the torque-curve, and facing an upshift almost instantly after the pedals drop.

Choosing the right gear is choosing the gear that puts you right in the meat of your power-band at the speed you're rolling. Any gain you would realize in being one gear down higher up on the tach usually gets negated by the additional upshift.

I don't recall ever seeing that happen myself, but I certainly understand how selecting too low of a gear is a bad idea too.

mattkimsey said:

So in other words, roll racing is a good way to avoid having a properly setup car and driving skill

Racing from a roll is like having robots play the superbowl. It would take training(properly setup car) and the human element (skill) out of the game.

(not to mention the legal ramifications)

Click to expand...

I agree with this exept for the robots and superbowl thing but I'd bet my house we were talking about car performance and not personal driving skills?? But please correct me if Im wrong!

Ps. If I had robots playing the superbowl they'd be well designed and have the most up to date software "training(properly setup car)" along with a 1,000,000 Ghz Remote control "Human element(skill)".

Rock36 said:

I don't recall ever seeing that happen myself, but I certainly understand how selecting too low of a gear is a bad idea too.

Click to expand...

I see it happen all the time. Mostly with smaller ci, Higher HP cars that Rev through the RPM's much faster than others.

Lambo's and 430's do it all day tryin to keep up with the Z06 and GT.

What about Autocross? The SCCA has regional clubs all over the place. Show up early, run on street tires or race tires. Pay your 30 bucks for 4 to 8 runs on a tarmac with cone course, chicanes, sloloms, decreasing radius turns, -all the elements of a road course without the chance of swapping paint. Your car gets measured against others in its category based on stock and power to weight ratio. A stock 97 Prelude, like I use to autocross, will be 'E' stock, whereas an S-2000 would be A or B.

Time trials around a short track measure driving skill, HP, suspension, the whole works. I just can't get excited about roll-on street racing or even 1/4 mile after doing autocross for a few seasons.

I'm not saying it's a better measure, but if you're only looking at straight line acceleration, you're missing out on what these machines can really do.

Chuck

Chietala said:

I agree with this exept for the robots and superbowl thing but I'd bet my house we were talking about car performance and not personal driving skills?? But please correct me if Im wrong!

Ps. If I had robots playing the superbowl they'd be well designed and have the most up to date software "training(properly setup car)" along with a 1,000,000 Ghz Remote control "Human element(skill)".

Click to expand...

You missed the point. If all the robots are setup exactly the same -- they are all equals. When humans play football, some players train harder, thus an athlete can properly set himself up to perform better than other humans.

Think of it as one of those cheap football video games where the players have no names and all teams are equally as good -- and you set it for "computer vs computer."

RICKS said:

Your point relies on the premise that drag racing is the ONLY kind of racing that counts, and that everyone should have their car set up for a sub-2 second 60-foot time....

Click to expand...

No no, my comment is in regards to the significance of racing two stock cars from a roll or stop just the way the factory decided to set them up. Of course different cars can be setup by their owners to do other things besides drag racing, but that doesn't make racing from a roll any more legitimate. You can never setup two cars equally from a roll or stop. Someone could take a auto. foxbody, gut it, throw in built BB with a 300 shot and murder most cars you'd see on the highway. Their car wouldn't cut a good 60' or turn well, but it would have massive amounts of power that could only be used in highly illegal races on the highway. The roll race would tell you little about the cars actual capabilities.

So for the new GT500 owner, instead of dropping the sway bar, drag shocks, drag radials etc., they would need to add massive amounts of HP in order to match the BB fox. In either case, they would need to modify the car -- the only difference is that one form of racing is fully legal and relatively safe....the other is highly illegal and more likely to be dangerous. If you want to win all the roll races, you’ll have to make compromises. For example, look at the players on the street-racing scene – 900hp+ EVOs, 1000hp++ Supras, LSx cars, TT GTs, Vipers, built Hondas, built foxes etc. All have massive amounts of power and suspensions that allow them to go straight – this is great for racing from a roll, but they would all get smoked in the twisties by cars with half the power. Anyway, if you want to have a fast “roll” car, it’ll need to be highly prepped to say the least.

After the dust clears and the HP war is settled (roll race)....what has been proven? You find out who has more power, but that is about it. Why not just compare dyno sheets? The BB fox will put a hurtin' on the GT500 which does everything else better. Maybe it's just me, but I consider 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 etc far more informative. Keep in mind the original statement that was made:

The best way to compare cars is to race them from a roll. Then your comparing power and not hole shot or susp. Anyone who knows there stuff will agree.

Click to expand...

Personally, I would much rather see how a Z06 and GT would stack up racing from a dead stop up to various speeds. If one car "pulls" a car length racing from a roll up to 170mph, I couldn't care less.

In this case we aren't comparing a hole-shot car and a road racer. We are comparing a Z06 and a GT -- both cars are setup the way GM and Ford made them. If GM better sets the Z06 up for launching than credit goes to GM and vice versa.

You wouldn’t go road racing and see who could get around the track faster without using their brakes. The brakes, suspension and driver all work together. In a roll race between a GT and Z06, you essentially eliminate the suspension and driver thus creating a power plant comparison. Does one car pulling from a roll mean it’s more capable? Capable of what….going faster from a robot-like roll?

Ok well there's way to many points trying to be made here. All I was trying to get across is that when comparing straight line performance between 2 cars is to start the race from a roll. Eliminating Driver's skill, tire traction, and or hole shot performance. Thats all!

Lots of good points though guys. I agreed with most!

Yes, the 1st 60 feet is indeed part of the "full story" of how a car performs, but let's be real... When you're out at the track with a street car, you're just having fun seeing what the car can do within the parameters of that format. But your street car is like bringing a butter knife to a gun fight. For their power/weight ratios, Ford GT's and Z06's run crappy e.t.'s. They're outfitted to perform in the real world, and on a road course. Worrying about how well cars like that launch from a dead start, I mean, who cares?? Racing streetlight to streetlight is Honda-boy fodder. When you own a car like a Z06, you commonly have fun hauling a$$ on back roads, nailing it through a few gears on straightaways, always getting that good 2nd gear pull leaving businesses, and basically enjoying the car everywhere you drive. BUT ASK YOURSELF... How many times do you do a FULL DRAG LAUNCH from a flippin' stop light or stop sign? How about, pretty much NEVER.... That 60-feet of tactil skill and applied engineering never really gets played with at all on the street, so how is it relevant to evaluating a car that you're going to primarily street-drive??

My drag racing days are past me, it gets damn boring after awhile. These days I care about how athletic the car is, how strong it feels seat of the pants. I'm far more impressed when I lay into the throttle to pass a slow-moving truck and the car pulls so strongly I can't see clearly..., and it stops, and it handles.... real-life useable performance.

Whether or not it can knock my fillings into my sinuses from a standstill just doesn't turn me on. Even when I'm feeling my froggiest behind the wheel, I'm not doing 3,000rpm clutch-drops or clutch-feathers out on the road...

I believe that the excitement of a straight line race IS when one car can pull a length on another. There's nothing more exciting than watching a car that gets hole-shot and has to play catch-up, eventually reaching and overtaking his prey. For example, if you went to the track and saw a Ford GT race a purpose-built drag racer that ran 12's, you would watch the GT get left-behind for dead in the first 1/8th mile, and then the crowd would start hollering as they watched that GT build-up steam and suck-in and spit-out the geared & slicked but out-powered purpose-car.

Watching street cars launch at a drag strip is like watching paint dry. Even a 2.0 second 60-foot looks pathetic watching from the stands. The drama is when the cars are out of the gates, hooked-up, and full-power boogying. Then, "it's on", and that close race where one car nudges another is alot of fun to watch.

I always get the biggest kick out of how many respond to these threads with magazine stats when 95% of the people don't even own the cars being argued.

I would have gone with the same choice as Racer X did and I am Mustang guy myself.

All aluminum 427 dry sump 505 bhp; I applaud GM. Adj cam in block on their other engines... I applaud GM.

Ford always seems to be late to the game when it comes to performance; atleast for any vehicle of theirs that I can own.

I am talking stock vs stock, not how much money I can sink into it.