0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

Discussion in '1997 Callaway C7R' started by LanciaDeltaIntegraleS4, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. With 660hp pushing 2200lbs, this car has better power-weight than a McLaren F1. I would be surprised if it took more than 3 seconds to get to 60 in this baby. Maybe the gearing sucks, and the drivetrain robs lots of power. Still...<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    I'm astonished by the weight of this C7R.
    It's based on a Corvette which weights at least 1.3 ton , so how can it weight 300 Kgs less with the weight of a supercharger ?
     
  3. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    it probably has traction problems, or the information is wrong, or its only an estamite<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    These cars are geared for high speed with acceleration more important in the middle gears. First gear is just to get out of the pit and to get going from a spin.

    It weighs less because it's not an actual Corvette, it's a purpose-built tube-frame race car with the C7 body style, like the Chevrolet C5R, the body is just formed panels, the bonnet, fenders, and front fascia are one piece that come off, as is the rear glass, quarter panels, and rear fascia (I don't think you could even consider a rear deck lid on a Corvette, but that too). The doors actually include half of the roof (it looks like a T-top when the doors are open), so when you open them, you don't have to duck to get your helmet in the car. I believe the doors are gull-wing, but you'd have to check with Callaway on that one.

    Somwhere out the is a picture of the car without the front or rear body pieces and open doors, but it's pretty small, though you can still make it out. Looks pretty cool, if you asked me.
     
  5. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    ya kno they prob took out the weight and replaced it with a supercharger all that other stuff that was keeping the corvette down was probably just replaced with the engine <!-- Signature -->
     
  6. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    i doubt there is anything wrong with the engine just made for higher acceleration like dude said b4 the first gear isnt important while racing its really the 3rd and 4th gear when u need speed to catch up..... <!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    The acceleration stats are wrong the 0-60 time is really 2.7sec or less, because it is 2.7sec. on regular c7s so why would it be less on a raceing version.
     
  8. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    we been through that already
     
  9. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    I agree with slickshift. These cars are NOT geared to do 3 sec out of the pit and after a caution. These cars run at high speeds constantly. There would be no point in gearing it to make it do 3 sec. I think it is VERY capaple of doing 3 sec or less. It also seems strange that its 0-60 in 4.0 seconds...Yes it can be done but its a 1 in 9 chance it would be 4.0 flat. They prolly just rounded it off or gave an estimate.
     
  10. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    Obviously the 0-60 is wrong. OBVIOUSLY
     
  11. Re: 0-60 in 4.0? I think not.

    This One?
     

Share This Page