Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 (Mk VI) specs

Proof that the Hennessey Exorcist is NOT a tuner car...

"THE EXORCIST is available as a complete turnkey vehicle which includes the base ZL1 Camaro"

http://hennesseyperformance.com/vehicles/chevrolet-2/camaro/the-exorcist-hpe1000-supercharged-zl1/#:~:text=in%20your%20browser.-,THE%20EXORCIST%20by%20Hennessey%20Performance,already%20own%20a%20ZL1%20Camaro.

What is a turnkey vehicle exactly? Kit car company Ultima makes turnkey vehicles, too.

"A turnkey is basically that, a prefabricated ready to drive car. requires no work to drive."

https://www.google.com/search?q=turnkey+vehicle&rlz=1CABASQ_enUS954&oq=turnkey+vehicle&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i433i512j46i175i199i512j0i131i433i512j46i175i199i512j0i433i512j0i131i433i512j0i433i512j0i512l2.1864j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Certified manufacturers like FEV and Tucci Hot Rods also make turnkey vehicles. Even fully established luxury brands like Aston Martin, Jaguar and Volvo do (retro and resto mod cars, specificially).

Chevy fans, be blessed that you have AT LEAST an indirect competitor to likes of the Shelby Mustang Super Snake and Challenger SRT Demon!

((20600m/(250km/h/(182m*0.3048m))x(1829kg/638hp)/1.27g)x0.0095x0.95 = 7:29 for regular ZL1 models

((20600m/(250km/h/(182m*0.3048m))x(1829kg/638hp)/1.27g)x0.0095x0.925 = 7:17 for the 1LE version, which is very close to GM's verified 7:16 laptime record.

The ZL1 models match their claims in terms of estimations!

Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 (2017, automatic version):
Claimed Power: 650 bhp / 659 PS / 485 kW
Actual Power: 678 bhp / 688 PS / 506 kW
Estimated Weight: 1764 kg with driver and fuel
Source of Estimations: TorqueStats *with several adjustments
Imperial acceleration figures (for U.S.):**
▪ 0-30 mph: 1.629 s / 1.142 s
▪ 0-60 mph: 3.529 s / 3.042 s
▪ 0-100 mph: 7.200 s / 6.484 s
▪ 0-150 mph: 17.661 s / 15.459 s
▪ 0-200 mph: 52.170 s / 46.982 s
▪ Top speed: 206.343 mph / 202.879 mph ✳️
▪ 1/4 mile: 11.421 s @ 124.024 mph / 11.022 s @ 128.094 mph
▪ 1 mile: 27.816 s @ 177.857 mph / 26.726 s @ 184.183 mph
▪ 1' rollout: 0.291 s / 0.229 s
▪ VHT prep: 0.146 s / 0.304 s
Metric acceleration figures (for rest of the world):
▪ 0-100 km/h: 4.107 s / 3.767 s
▪ 0-200 km/h: 10.615 s / 9.905 s
▪ 0-300 km/h: 30.797 s / 28.964 s
▪ Top speed: 344.676 km/h / 341.980 km/h
▪ 0-380 m: 11.544 s @ 207.477 km/h / 11.240 s @ 211.375 km/h
▪ 0-400 m: 11.813 s @ 209.579 km/h / 11.510 s @ 213.582 km/h
▪ 0-1000 m: 20.811 s @ 268.499 km/h / 20.126 s @ 272.733 km/h

✳️ These two top speeds are estimated as average of both directions, each one for the same version of the ZL1 (see below)

** This is for the standard ZL1 with a factory set wheels and tires; results for one with a swapped set of wheels and tires from the ZL1 1LE model are posted next to each of the slash symbols; the full-figure ZL1 1LE is actually much slower in straight-line performance than the 'bare-bones' ZL1. Simply put, the latter results reflect an imaginary ZL1 1LE without the 1LE bodywork.

This car with "just" 650 horsepower actually is faster than both the Hellcat Redeye and the GT500. KUDOS, GM!! I wouldn't be surprised if they underrated it at that amount to prevent it from overlapping with either the C7 or C8 Z06 Corvette (disregard the C7 ZR1 model, that was technically limited-production).

Gentlemen purchased a ZL1 then MODIFIED it and had it shipped to England! LOL! ;)

Estimated Acceleration Stats: Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 (Sixth Generation; Manual/Automatic):
0-30 MPH: 1.8 sec/1.8 sec
0-40 MPH: 2.3 sec/2.5 sec
0-50 MPH: 2.9 sec/3.1 sec
0-60 MPH: 3.5 sec/3.7 sec (100 km/h: 3,7/3,9)
0-70 MPH: 4.4 sec/4.6 sec
0-80 MPH: 5.3 sec/5.5 sec
0-90 MPH: 6.3 sec/6.5 sec
0-100 MPH: 7.6 sec/7.8 sec
0-120 MPH: 10.7 sec/10.8 sec (200 km/h: 11,5/11,6)
0-150 MPH: 17.7 sec/18.1 sec (250 km/h: 19,5/20,0)
0-180 MPH: 31.3 sec/33.1 sec (300 km/h: 36,1/40,2)
0-200 MPH: 54.2 sec (manual)
Top Speed: 203.9734/194.2338 mph (328.2633/312.5891 km/h)

Engine speed @ maximum torque [rpm]
3600
Engine speed @ maximum power [rpm]
6600
Gear ratios [-] (m on top, a on bottom) Gearbox
2.289,1.611,1.208,1,0.818,0.536
4.70,2.99,2.15,1.80,1.52,1.28,1.00,0.85,0.69,0.64
Differential (manual/automatic)
3.73/2.85
Wheel static radius [m]
0.345
Driveline efficiency [-]
0.686; changed to 0.850 for manual only in gear VI
Wheel (tire) friction coefficient [-]
1
Rear axle load coefficient [-]
1 (manual); 0.75 (automatic)
Vehicle mass (curb) [kg]
1763 (manual); 1789 (automatic)
Driver mass [kg]
75
Aerodynamic drag coefficient [-]
0.364
Ambient air density [kg/m3]
1.202
Vehicle frontal area [m2]
2.07
Road slope [%]
0.00
Road load coefficient [-]
0.011
Engine speed points (full load) [rpm]
2500,3600,4400,5400,6000,6400
Engine static torque points (full load) [Nm]
803,881,881,803,771,723
Simulation time [s]
60

Manual standing quartermile time (no rollout): 3.5+7.6/(3.5+7.6)x12.5 = 12.05sec@127mph
Acceleration off the line (manual): 7.460482 m/s2 = 0.76 G = 0.3s rollout (11.75 dragstrip time)

Automatic standing quartermile time (no rollout): 3.7+7.8/(3.7+7.8)x12 = 11.85sec@125mph
Acceleration off the line (automatic): 7.24959 m/s2 = 0.74 G = 0.3s rollout (11.55 dragstrip time)

I will do ZL1 1LE next.

https://x-engineer.org/projects/vehicle-acceleration-performance-online-calculator/

I'll be honest, Camaros are pretty hard to work on for a simulator. Especially the modern ones (gens V and VI). For the initial run on a manual car, it showed a 3-flat 0-100km/h time and a virtually impossible 9.05s 0-200km/h time, even with the 0.85 driveline efficiency.

Having temporarily set the curb weight from 1763 to 2186kg, I see the 0-100 time increased to 3.65s and the 0-200 vastly increased to 11.2s; these results right here are accurate for a 6-speeder.

This ratio (650/2186) is roughly equal to 525/1763. So, by reverting the curb weight to 1763kg and reducing the driveline efficiency to 0.686 (which seems awfully low, but I'll explain more to this in a sec), I saw 0-100 in 3.7 and 0-200 in 11.5; X-Engineer seems to only care about dual-clutch turbocharged cars. But that top speed ended up being a little less than 300km/h.

376.0509 ci and "luxury car" (even though a ZL1 isn't actually one) = 2186kg
http://hpwizard.com/car-weight.html

Rounded corners I
High, rounded, flat bonnet
High scuttle, low wings
Bowed
Rounded
Constant width
Semi-fastback
Outward taper
Monocoque (RWD, front engine)
Perfectly smooth body, with mirrors
Best design
Closed cockpit
285-30-20 front and 305-30-20 rear tires
Production model (sport) with production lift
1897mm(x)1330mm
http://hpwizard.com/aerodynamics.html
= 0.364 Cd, 2.07m2 frontal area, 0.75m2 drag area, 0.41m2 lift area

Technically, the Camaro ZL1 has an even lower frontal area than the McLaren 720S.

I like how even the regular ZL1 can hang with supercars on a track.

Could you change power and torque to 650bhp and 650lb-ft
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-test-review

Currently this is the fastest Chevrolet top speed wise. With 318 km/h is faster than the Corvette Z06. The Corvette ZR1 has even higher top speed but it is not yet available.

0-100 kph: 3.8 s
0-130: 5.5 s
0-180: 9.2 s
0-200: 11.3 s
Top speed: 318 km/h
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dedethecollector/25046352568/

This is the first production car with 10 speed automatic gearbox.
Power is 650 BHP @6400 and torque is 650 lbft @ 3600 rpm.
Please correct it!
http://www.chevrolet.com/byo-vc/client/en/US/chevrolet/camaro/2018/camaro/features/capabilities/?section=Powertrain&section=Trailering%20%26%20Payload&styleOne=391524&styleTwo=391524&engineOne=LT4&bodyTypeOne=1&driveTypeOne=RWD

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-test-review
Power is 650bhp, torque is 650lb-ft
please correct it

Torque must be wrong! Isn't it 640lb-ft?

Probably just heavy with safety features like an Ftype or Vantage V12s which also look small in person.

So I just saw one of these this morning in a market lot, And good lord this thing looks good, They road presence is insane, Strangely I've seen one of these before a V6.. Either way a few things.

That splitter looks delicate, Sticks out all squaring like a son of a.

Those tyres, How in the he'll there not considered R Comps is beyond me.

And I have noticed a lot of the reviews have said the new Camaro is a big car....They must be frigging blind, This thing is in NO way big are all, It's small as shite, Shocked the he'll out of me how small it is.

Either way good job Chevy, Good job

Surprisingly the manual was faster in the corners but once it hit the straight the auto caught up, Interestingly enough the very last 3s the manual passed the auto n that's what allowed it to win, I don't get that at all, Something doesn't seem right in that test, Maybe the auto was loosing power some how, Because it should have pulled away much faster every chance, Not like Randy was power shifting or anything., Something is off.

I'm surprised the manual was quicker at Willow Springs as well. They even mention how the 10-speed auto uses very close-ratio gearing. Maybe Randy Pobst is just that good...

Yeah it made no sense, the manual was faster even in a straight line. I mean, it could be just that the gearbox is rubbish in the sense, too much power is lost in the complex conversions while the manual is a more power efficient delivery. (Which it usually is)

I dont believe its faster then a Pdk, But given how fast trannys are this day and age, Can people actually tell? Either way there so fast that the difference is negligible, Downshifts were the last ones noticeable aspect, Its still not the smoothest, But even against a Pdk id say its similar. Problem is its got so many gears, 10, Thats its constantly shifting, If it were perfectly geard for a 10 speed, Thats a gear shift every 20mph, And i dont think thats a good thing, Hell the Auto in the ZO6 has 2 overdrive gears, And with the manual you wouldnt have to shift since the gears are longer. But one of the more interesting things i noticed, Is vs the manual, On the straights, Or atleast the very last 5s of the vid, The Auto was moving 6mph slower....

Either way, for a 3900lbs 62k car, This thing is incredible, Both on road and track, It beat a Turbo S, 570S, AMG GT, GrandSport, Which are all much lighter, more powerful(Sans C7) Have Dct(Again C7) And are much more expensive(C7) With competition tyres, And seats 4, That in itself is something amazing.

yeah chevy say it's faster than PDK... faster as in maybe for an upshift spcificaly from 2nd to 3rd. Then not only is everything else is slower, the downshifts are much slower, etc. it's just BS.

It's not rubbish at all given the review, I believe it's down to the gearing for the track, Same thing with the ZO6 there, Chevy always gears it's performance cars absolutely horrible, The shifts are fast, But the shift speed on each gear is highly different, Listen to 2nd 3Rd n 4th, And they say it's faster or faster then Pdk, Yet there acceleration tests barely offer any improvement from the manual, Unlike a vast improvement from its German counterparts.

how did the Manual lap go faster than the 10 speed auto? is the 10 speed auto a bit rubbish or... auto's are not much faster, and the slower down shifts and too many gears make it slower?

Its starts at $76,595 for the QV, And $38,735 Usd today i found out for the lesser model, And most likely around 20k+ with full options on both, Although double the price on whats practically the same car in that price range is somewhat silly, But i was damned close with my $80k estimate, Still $13k more then an M3, I dunno how much the QV will be fully loaded, But an M3 fully done is already $101k, So there are alot of options at that price range.

I was wrong. The Giulia QV is 10000 USD more than this in the US.

I agree and both disagree, on it being an "Instant Classic" I can see anyone from any time period paying full price and more for the 4C, But i dont think its price will get a jump, Plus for the most part limited edition cars usually do rise in price, But people these days are either greedy or just stupid to pay certain amounts for certain cars.

@Hyper

Damn, I cant remember the last time i visited the Alfa site, The price is listed there, Its 60k here, 5k more then the M3, Not sure how much either is fully done at the moment, But i think in just about every market, The price will be within 30k of each other.

@BR2 Btw the 8C looks like one of the clearest examples of "instant classic" - collector's car right from the moment it left factory. Just googled prices in Europe and it seems like 8C owners could buy and drive it for tens of thousands of kms and get full money back + profit after just 5-6 years (provided the car was in pristine condition).

That doesn't happen to BMW M3/M4s... Even M4 GTS will not appreciate in just 6 years.

Italian cars is where the money's at. Even Maseratis (brand known for its depreciation on newer models) are climbing up in value. And I mean the 80s and 90s Maseratis which used to be viewed as "worthless" 5-10 years ago.

It's just a pitty I am not rich and can't buy up some :)

In Europe, Giulia QV starts at €72.000 and gets up to €90.000 with everything on, and M3 starts at €73.000 and gets up to €110.000 with everything on. Both manual transmission and carbon-ceramic brakes. Giulia QV>M3

I dont see the QV being less then the M3, Hell the Alfa 4C "Starts" at 55k there, And the last Alfa Romeo sold there was the 8C, And that went for 235k, Albeit a limited edition model and it marked the return, But i dont see the Top model Giulia being less then 80k, Starting price. But we''ll see soon enough, I dont think a price has been set, Anywhere?..

I don't think the QV could be sold for lot more than an m3 in the US. For example in some european countries the Alfa is cheaper.
So the Alfa could be close to this in price.

But it's not a track monster, It's everyday use ability for the everyman that just happens to have big power, And not many cars achieve that, The only cars that come even remotely close to that are a Carrera S and GTRs, along with the QV, And those are pushing 100k usd, Dunno bout QV.