Because it is the only 3D GPS-verified database with millions of global uploads from actual owners doing the best they can. It's proven accurate to better than 1/100th of a second, it is public, and basically impossible to cheat because the charted g profile of the run needs to match other users' acceleration profiles. Everything else is trash talk, inaccurate, and/or paid advertising.

A better question is why hasn't GM allowed Dragy uploads for the C8. They know its going to happen. Especially after Edmunds said the car doesn't even come close to GMs claims.

Price as tested: $83,825
Date of test: 10/28/2019
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Odometer: 3,640
Powertrain: 6.2L V8 | 8-Speed Auto-Clutch Manual | RWD
Horsepower: 495 hp @ 6,450 rpm
Torque: 470 lb-ft @ 5,150 rpm
Weight: 3644 lbs

2020 Corvette Acceleration
Test Result
0-60 mph 3.4 sec

In the Edmunds video, they essentially admitted to relaxing their standards even to publish 3.4 secs.

 

After reading all this I'm glad that I can't afford to compete in the "bragging rights" wars! Take it to drag strip and have it out!

 

​​​​​​The OP's question was, why so slow?

The answer, in a nut shell, is the F-Type's Dragy 3D-verified 2.85 sec 0-60 (VAP 2016 R) and 3.27 sec (stock 2016 R) is not slow. Certainly not for a great GT.

Jaguar created a lot of confusion by including OEM all season passenger car tires. Summer street slicks like Cup 2s are the norm on cars of this HP class. Thus, the 3.9 sec manufacturer spec and Jeremy Clarkson riding side saddle.

 

I think the answer is mostly in the weather conditions in UK and the northern-middle part of Europe. 3/4 of the year streets are wet, it's raining here very often and the meteo has nothing in common with US Florida. I would agree with you because in my case with the convertible I will mostly be a good weather driver. But a lot of people with coupe want the car for every day drive and on my every day car I have also 4 seasons (Goodyear vector4) the full year. What would you do with slicks on snow or even worser, freezing ice ? So, could be nice to offer the choice to the owner, but I bet they would sit on a hudge unsold stock of slicks in this case.

 

Been reading AutoWeek, Car & Driver, Motor Trend, Road & Track magazines for over 30 yrs.
Never heard of Dragy before.

But I stand corrected, as Car & Driver mag has both 2020 models: F-type: 3.4 seconds & C8 Vette: 2.8 seconds
https://www.caranddriver.com/jaguar/f-type-r-svr
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a2...60-mph-tested/

 

Yeah I remember that article where MT also went full send that the C8 put down 640 HP, backing it up with their published dyno results. They later retracted the whole thing as botched.

In my experiemce about half the people at any given drag strip are using Dragy, and most of the test and tuners. Its more accurate, data rich and cheaper than vBox and embeds the DA and G chart in the run record itself. In fact, I was large speedway a few Saturdays ago where I could not get a validated 0-60 or 1320 run because of the track's down slope. So I personally don't believe anything but a validated Dragy run. Certainly not advertising.

 

Still rides/drives like a Datsun. I wouldn’t own one at any price. Yes... superior inline performance, but does that qualify it as a super car?

 

RE: Dragy:
Public information, published by an independent company, uploaded by private individuals using their personal cars: How can GM block uploads? There's obviously something I'm missing. This did prompt me to pop in to a Corvette board and got rapidly disgusted by the few rational people responding to a flood of stupid comments by knuckleheads. Apparently, moving the engine is a sign of the apocalypse. Sigh.

No confusion. You gave the answer yourself. It's a GT, not a sports car. A GT needs to be able to take me on a weekend getaway, and if I hit a patch of cold weather I'd rather not end up in a ravine.

 

Dragy is not scientific. If you understand the scientific process, the mere thought of random people uploading Dragy data is the anti-pattern of a a scientific approach. It's random people doing random tests in random conditions. There are a whole slew of parameters that are not the same for every test and many test variables that you cannot identify via an OBDII port. At best, Dragy data is "observation data" but it is definitely not scientific data.

With that, the device itself is great. And when used in conjunction with an actual scientific process, is good. Random people using the device? Not scientific.

They aren't blocking anything, C8's having gone into production yet. The few that are on the roads today are the pre-production vehicles given to GM staff to drive around. Production is suppose to start officially start this month (even though the official first production C8 was just auctioned off about 2 weeks ago for $3 million).


First, it was 3.2 sec and they admitted they only had 91 octane rather than the recommend 93:


We'll see numbers vary based on conditions and surfaces but we'll see 2.8 - 2.9's with the Z51 package once they start arriving in people's hands. This is being done under $100k (base with Z51 package is $66k), under 500hp, and with 2wd. Not multi-differential magic which increases complexity. Just basic physics of weight placement of the engine. You may not like the C8. I'm not buying one myself, but it's a marvel for it's price for performance.

 

Thanks for clarifying. The note that GM was blocking uploads seemed like hogwash. I saw references to "production VINs" on the forum I visited, but the quality of information there was not great.

 

Edmunds online article says "0-60 3.4 secs." They go on to say they subtracted 0.2 secs for 1 ft rollout and later in the article say, "Our SAE weather correction, and the weather, dealt us another blow by actually adding some time to the run (+0.2 sec) because of the higher-than-usual barometric pressure.​​​​​​" It's unclear if that correctionis in the 3.4 secs result, or if the reader should apply it.

And as you point out, it appears they are using OBD data which is garbage anyway. Anyone who's used OBD for" performance measurement" knows it not even ballpark. Torque Pro measures my car at 1200 horsepower from OBD data, about double the 560 WHP dyno.
​​​
This is why the gold standard and all that matters that is Dragy or vBox, but vBox is unverified so you can go downhill and the DA is not recorded. It's completely unclear what, how, where, or why magazines say what they say and it rarely matches reality.

The only thing we know is GM's 2.8 sec claim was wrong. There are still no Dragy results for the car despite many user reviews, hand-picked by Chevy with restrictions on what they can say or not say.

Again, this is not performance measurement, it is marketing/advertising. Thats why the Daytona last place finish was so interesting, because it was the first time the car was measured objectively.

I never said I don't like the C8. I think GM's marketing strategy has been a disaster for the car, turning very respectable results into big disappointments, and requiring people to take their word for performance claims being rapidly dialed back in chunks equating to 100s of HP, long after orders were placed.

This is what physics models say, as a reality check:

3644 lbs
DCT
RWD
0 to 60 mph in 2.8 secs requires 673 HP

3644 lbs
DCT
RWD
0 to 60 mph in 3.524 secs requires 495 HP
​​​​​​
Jag did exactly the opposite. To the point of frustration, frankly, but no one doubts Jags claims.

 

I'm pretty sure I can hit 60 mph standing still with OBD data, but forgive me for not wanting new tires today.

 

With what tires?

 

There are no "user reviews" really. Just like with the Supra, GM has invited "car journalist" to preview the car and generate reviews. The real reviews will start when the production vehicles start shipping.

You are just making your arguments look worse by continuing to relate race cars which have zero to do with production cars.

You are going to be quite surprised when the production cars start hitting the floors.

Stock Z51 tires.

 

Anyone who was alive when the Chevy Citation came out knows never to trust tests of GM pre-production models!

 

For fair comparison, trying to compare the Two 2 door coupes with absolutely no options, just base V8 vehicles with destination fee:
$59,995 2020 Corvette Stingray Coupe (6.2L V8 8-speed Auto w/1LT)
$102,825 2020 Jaguar F-Type R Coupe (5.0L V8 Supercharger AWD 8-speed Automatic)

For the $42K difference in 2020 base pricing, with factory tires, all stock factory equipment right off the dealer lot.
Forget the 0-60 times, dragy times, What's the real world G-Forces as I step on the gas when accelerating as the light turns green...?

 

There are several youtuber C8 reviews, but GM muzzled them from posting any performance data. In Matt Farah's first track test he was forbidden from even speaking, which forced us to listen to that memorable screeching under steer.

You're in luck. I have the Z51 upgraded tires on my car, Michelin MP4S 305/30 255/35 r20s . It was only 61F this morning with zero heat in the tires, so maybe add .05 for a 80-90F day. This car is so beautifully balanced with its perfect weight distribution, it hangs tenaciously neutral at the limit.

 

Every manufacturer does that with pre-production models. You must not have followed the Supra launch. It was the same thing. And the "YouTuber reviews" are the "car journalists" that I mentioned. They just don't pick from car magazines any longer, the manufacturers understand how times have changed and there are some important personalities to the car world on YouTube.

 

Yep. I can vouch for that first hand as a manufacturer. I am not in the car industry but its the same in every industry now. Not only is the multi-thousand dollar dinners and the multi-year ad agreement just to get a review a perverse zero-sum game, the citizen-media is magnitudes more effective.
Regardless of the dirty politics, the old-guard is simply not effective anymore. And in a strange twist no longer trusted. We have declined awards by big media!!

 

Oh, NavyBlue, maybe you were asking about longitudinal Gs. Dragy charts every run to aid in verification of gearing, etc. I don't like that the Dragy app will verify a run with up to 1.00% downslope, seems it should require level or better. Some 1320 tracks I've run fail to verify even with that leeway.

Here's Dragy's leading F-Type's chart. It is VAP tuned on MP4S with a verified 2.86 sec 0-60.


Here is a stock R. It has a verified 3.27 sec 0-60. Checkout the up slope.


For fun, here is the fastest stock, RME, RWD, DCT, 720 HP, 3168 lb McLaren 720S. It has a verified 0-60 of 2.85 secs.



The C8's reported 0.99 max long g is more proof the car complies with the laws of physics and is not on the same planet as 2.8 secs.