Filed under: MPG, Chevrolet, Green Daily, UK
Corvette Z06 wins MPG Marathon in the UK
Click above to enlarge
At first glance, a Corvette may seem like an odd choice for a vehicle to enter into an event aimed at fuel economy. At second glance, and when one realizes that the Corvette in question is the Z06, which happens to be powered by a 7.0-liter V8 engine that offers up over 500-horsepower, the choice looks positively insane. Perhaps it isn't. Any car can be driven in an economical fashion, even one powered by an extremely large-displacement eight cylinder engine. It helps that the 'Vette has a six speed manual transmission and makes plenty of stump-pulling torque right off idle, so its driver can shift quickly at very low RPMs. When properly driven, the Z06 is actually capable of delivering rather good mileage. In fact, the Z06 won the annual Fleetworld/ALD Automotive MPG Marathon in the U.K. by averaging 30.96 mpg over the trip's two-day, 411-mile route. That mark represents an improvement of 61.26-percent over the Z06's official European combined mileage figures and is a new record for the MPG Marathon. Maybe the V8's got some legs left after all.
[Source: GM]
PRESS RELEASE:
CORVETTE WINS MPG MARATHON
* Iconic supercar wins eco-driving challenge
* 61.26 per cent improvement over combined mpg figure
* Responsible driving brings huge cost benefits
An educated approach to driving can bring huge benefits to owners of all types of car, proving that you don't necessarily need a fuel-sipping supermini to cut your motoring costs.
And to illustrate the point, the legendary Corvette was crowned the overall winner in the annual Fleetworld/ALD Automotive MPG Marathon, recording a record 61.26 per cent improvement over the official combined figure in the two-day, 411-mile economy driving event.
Driven by Press Association journalist Richard Hammond, the Corvette Z06 achieved a combined mpg figure of 30.96mpg over the challenging route, proving that even a 198mph supercar can achieve fuel economy similar to that of a modern family hatchback if driven with a sensible approach to road and traffic conditions.
MPG Marathon organiser Ross Durkin said: "Driving economically is possible in whatever car you own – all it takes is consideration of prevailing road conditions and an educated approach to how you drive your car. The Corvette's success proves that any driver can improve their fuel economy if they think in advance and anticipate road conditions."
Using Total Excellium high octane petrol at a cost of 109.9 pence per litre, the Corvette used £66.41 worth of fuel over the route, a saving of £40.54 compared to if it had achieved its official combined figure of 19.2mpg.
The Corvette Z06 '505 hp' is available in the UK now, priced from £54,995.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
as2k 12:32PM (10/11/2008)
Wow, a whole 30mpg in a relatively lightweight aerodynamic vehicle? Why is this something to applaud? Yes, you can drive with a light foot in any car and get better-than-EPA (or Euro) estimates.
This is nothing but a GM press release.
Reply
jeff 2:00PM (10/11/2008)
Come on guys, don't pretend you're not surprised that a 500hp car managed an average of 30mpg. I think it's plenty impressive.
Was it THE Richard Hammond? Or is that a second Richard Hammond with the car in that photo?
tankd0g 4:46PM (10/11/2008)
I assume that's 30 imperial MPG. Many Corvette fanboys on Autoblog claim to get better than that on a daily basis. It does not surprise me, You can probably start that car off in 4th gear like it was 1st in a Honda. Halling around 7.0L of engine to only use 100hp of it doesn't seem like the brightest way to buy a car of course, but I doubt anyone is actually getting 30 mpg every day with one.
Snowdog 1:08PM (10/11/2008)
I assume this win is based on how much you beat your own EPA (or equiv) rating, but not by gettting the best mpg.
Reply
tankd0g 1:17PM (10/11/2008)
Show up there with a Hummer on some skinny tires and you could clean up at this thing.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 3:10PM (10/11/2008)
What are you talking about? Aerodynamics and weight do matter for mpg.
tankd0g 4:11PM (10/11/2008)
What am I talking about? I RTFA. This isn't a contest of MPG, it's a contest of exceeding the rated MPG. The lower your rated MPG, the fewer MPG increase you need to beat this guys 60% improvement. This is why MPG sucks as a way to compare the cost of driving different cars.
why not the LS2LS7? 12:20PM (10/12/2008)
MPG isn't really any worse than GPM. You just get different percentages. If you increase MPG 50%, you do only decrease costs per mile by 33%. But this is true no matter whether you start at 9mpg or 50mpg. So in this case of 61% increase in fuel efficency, the Vette decreased fuel consumption 38% (1 - (1/1.6126)) and a HUMMER would have to do the same 38%.
You just end up with a different meaning of percentages. Which is a perfectly normal thing. We all know you cannot reduce the price of something more than 100% but you can increase it 200%, 300% or more.
Also, the article says it's about driving style, you aren't allowed to change to skinny tires as you suggest.
I see your point about how since the original vehicle rating comes into play, you can start with a less efficient vehicle (like a HUMMER) and still compete.
Kinda funny you picked an opportunity to bitch about mpg versus gpm when the winning figure in this case is actually almost exactly the same in both systems.
tankd0g 12:32PM (10/12/2008)
Now WTF are you talking about? I said nothing about GPM.
why not the LS2LS7? 3:52AM (10/15/2008)
GPM is mathematically the same as l/100km.
If you are bitching about MPG, what else could you mean other than a consumption (inverted from mpg) figure such as GPM or l/100km?
tankd0g 11:23AM (10/15/2008)
Presumptive today aren't we? All that matters to anyone is cost per mile or cost per 100 miles. A rating that reflects this would be better than anything currently available. Plus in the current cost per gallon and away you go. People would be quite surprised to see how little difference there is between a Prius and a non-hybrid Civic.
why not the LS2LS7? 12:36PM (10/20/2008)
So tankd0g, now you suddenly ARE talking about GPM?
Do you have a point here at all?
tankd0g 3:29PM (10/20/2008)
Umm... what? How does cost per 100 miles have anything to do with GPM?
Scatter 3:40PM (10/11/2008)
Wait up people. There were two winners. One was best improvement, the other was best overall which I believe was won again by a diesel Aygo (although i'm struggling to find a link at the moment). Looks like they haven't updated the website yet...
http://www.mpgmarathon.com/
Reply
Noz 7:46PM (10/11/2008)
What amazes me the douchebags who are gasping in surprise that this is a fast car with a freaking 7L...7 LITER ENGINE.
BFD....let's see GM compete with Ferrari with a 4L V8...ehhh...yeah I didn't think so...
I won't even start with the issue of quality and reliability...too embarrassing.
Reply
jmsdzero 3:17AM (10/12/2008)
i don't think the douchebags are gasping in surprise because this is a fast car; rather, the fact that this fast car, with 500hp, displacing 7 litres no less, happen to be able to get 30mpg.
for the purposes of the mpg marathon: so what if ferrari can achieve better performance displacing only ~4 litres? can they achieve that performance while getting 30mpg?
you would think that with 40% less engine displacement you would have similarly less fuel consumption, so why does gm's best, with more displacement, consume roughly 40% less than maranello's finest?
500hp, driven in anger, consumes 500hp worth of fuel, regardless of the engine making it (more or less: a ferrari's bsfc isn't going to be that much better than the chev's)...
why not the LS2LS7? 12:27PM (10/12/2008)
I agree. A Ferrari fan would not do well to try to argue about reliability when up against a small block V8.
As to the displacements, you show incredible ignorance by trying to compare engines on displacement. Although Ferrari's engine is indeed smaller in this case, comparing displacement is very misleading. For example. GM's 505HP 7.0L V8 here is smaller, lighter and more efficient than the 400HP 4.5L OHC V8 (previously) used in the BMW M5. This is quadrupling the number of cams, doubling the number of valves, adding a huge timing chain and adding the entire structure up high to contain the overhead vales adds a ton of size, weight and friction loss to a motor.
Of course when compared to the 500HP 5.0L V10 in the current M5, the GM engine is much smaller, lighter, cheaper and more efficient, and of course still makes about the same HP.
Before you start judging the tech and performance of companies' efforts, you should understand the issues yourself.
tankd0g 12:39PM (10/12/2008)
I'd wager this car never produced 500hp once during this competition, so the fact that it can is irrelevant. When it's making 500hp it's making single digit millage numbers.
gorr 8:17PM (10/11/2008)
He probably didn't get onto the highway, because he have to get over the minimum limit, LOL.
Reply
Jhon 1:31AM (10/12/2008)
I think that is normal for that kind of car (manual gear box with manual cluch and very low weight like a toyota yaris), style of drive and conditions. Unfortunately most cars in USA are heavy weight, 4 speed automatic and V8 or V6 engines, and you can't save fuel in that kind of cars and SUVs. You must chage your car for a 4 cilinder type to obtain that kind of fuel mileage in real life driving without change your 4-8 automatic gearbox an style of drive.
Reply