[Memphis43]

Originally Posted by 01Camaro

So it seems that GM is underrating the LT1 , which is putting out nearly 500 HP (15% rule of thumb drivetrain loss)? That explains the ridiculous quarter mile reduction and increase in trap sped over the gen 5 430 HP SS. 500 HP...WOW!

I don't think so. I believe it has more to do with drivetrain loss is jus a lot more efficient in these cars now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[huggercamaro21]

Originally Posted by 01Camaro

So it seems that GM is underrating the LT1 , which is putting out nearly 500 HP (15% rule of thumb drivetrain loss)? That explains the ridiculous quarter mile reduction and increase in trap sped over the gen 5 430 HP SS. 500 HP...WOW!

No. Just no.

[BradfordCamaro]

Originally Posted by 01Camaro

So it seems that GM is underrating the LT1 , which is putting out nearly 500 HP (15% rule of thumb drivetrain loss)? That explains the ridiculous quarter mile reduction and increase in trap sped over the gen 5 430 HP SS. 500 HP...WOW!

The power ratings are SAE certified. It has been discussed before.

[huggercamaro21]

Originally Posted by Curr

Every forum has "those guys". Even this one.

The vocal minority on forums like these usually don't represent the majority.

I'm with Number 3 in this. As much as I'd like it to be a "thing". All this shows is that particular Camaro has slightly higher output than that particular Corvette, discounting the inherent inaccuracy of the given measurements. I figured I wouldn't be the first guy with some stats background to bring it up.

Cool experiment though, props to JDP.

I wasn't talking about forum guys. I was talking about going to car shows, or talking with Vette guys. A big majority are negative towards camaros.

[ilirg]

Those tube headers count for something after all

[JDP Sales]

Biggest advantage the Camaro has is the Torque under the curve. The peak numbers don't really do the actual results justice. Look at the above dyno sheet and you'll see, there are times where the Camaro is making more than 20 lbs more RWTQ.

As far as the power these engines are actually making: They under rate engines all the time. Being SAE certified doesn't mean that the engine can not make more. If you go by 15% loss (which is what manuals are traditionally calculated by) the Cars are making 490 (Corvette) and 495 (Camaro) HP at the crank. Even if you used 12%, the Camaro is still at 478 at the crank. We are living in the Golden Age for these cars. I want to call them muscle cars but they are proving to be so much more now. Kudos to GM for building us these machines

All the best,


Jared Royce
888.308.6007

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

At least one shop already has...tune alone produced roughly 15HP/10TQ gains peak to peak.

I'm curious as well, a few people have said they don't expect huge gains like in the past due to Chevy getting the tune "closer to right on" this time around.

With only a rare exception, GM has pretty much always got the calibration right on. What the aftermarket guys have the luxury of doing is to focus on only a single thing.......HP gains.

The OEM must protect emissions, FE, drivability in every condition from -40 to +120, pouring rain, snow, dust...........oh and durability. There is always easy HP to gain. It's why GM can have a team working on a dyno for 6 months to get a drivable calibration, then a whole new team working for another 6 months to get a really good calibration and then 6 more months finalizing it and an aftermarket guy can get you 15 HP in a week after launch. Trust me, if there was HP on the table you would get it. There isn't unless you make the trade offs the OEM can't.

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Seems like everything pisses Vette guys off lately.

A Mustang (GT350TP) that handles as well as a Z51 Stingray? Butthurt

Camaro getting the same power ratings as a C7 for $20k less (1SS M6)...butthurt

I can't tell if Corvette owners are just insecure or really that easily excitable.

Yeah, let's not get too carried away here. A lot of folks here get butt hurt too. Why else run this test? Everyone wants their car to be better. And just like the guy or gal that spent an extra $20,000 on a Corvette wants it to be GM's best performance car, there is a whole crew here who doesn't understand why the Camaro can't be better than a Corvette for less money.

Originally Posted by huggercamaro21

*This is only my opinion*

Vette guys seem to be a very 'holier than thou' bunch. Most speak very down to other GM performance cars. Again this is just a generalization and some could be made for Camaro guys as well. I think it made them angry when they didn't de tune the LT1 in the SS. Now it's going to be worse to see that it's put ting down more power.

I could go on and on about the Porsche crowd that GM has been trying for years to lure away into a Corvette. There was even talk (and still is a bit) to make Corvette it's own brand so that Corvette buyers didn't have to socialize with Cruze and Spark owners. If you spend $100,000 on a Z06, you have every reason to get treated as well as any dealer around including luxury dealers and certainly a Porsche dealer.

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

If the Camaro LT1 has try-Y headers, and the Corvette still uses the same old design, then I have to somewhat disagree with the few here who act as if this test wasn't worth doing. I think it was.

The headers are likely adding a small amount of power and tq.

So there's that.

But no only that....the people asked for it. This wasn't just some useless exercise JDP put together for Camaro owners to pound our chests over...it was a comparison that hadn't be done before, directly, on the same day and same dyno, and put some speculation to bed.

So while we SHOULD expect similar outputs, its also important not to simply discount this as a "Duh...what did you expect?" experiment as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the data is there now. It's just that having been a Test Engineer at one point in my career, I can tell you that without a proper R&R on the equipment and scientifically repeatable temps in the engines and another full set of driveline tests (on and on), this is just a very interesting indicator that shows the engines are pretty close.......which they should be.

Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy

Does it really? Or are you pulling things out again? Proof? If anyone gets pissed off and defensive easily, it's Mustang boys.

Vette people have nothing to worry about with the Camaro.

Nope, Corvette is the true sports car. Camaro is getting closer, just have to remove the last vestige of that rear seat and they'll be there.

Camaro is and should be something different than a Corvette and it certainly shouldn't be the better sports car.

Originally Posted by 01Camaro

So it seems that GM is underrating the LT1 , which is putting out nearly 500 HP (15% rule of thumb drivetrain loss)? That explains the ridiculous quarter mile reduction and increase in trap sped over the gen 5 430 HP SS. 500 HP...WOW!

Originally Posted by huggercamaro21

No. Just no.

Originally Posted by BradfordCamaro

The power ratings are SAE certified. It has been discussed before.

Originally Posted by ilirg

Those tube headers count for something after all

Yep, not under rated. You might find some within statistical variance that make more and less, but SAE procedures are followed.

[DenverTaco07]

Originally Posted by Number 3

With only a rare exception, GM has pretty much always got the calibration right on. What the aftermarket guys have the luxury of doing is to focus on only a single thing.......HP gains.

The OEM must protect emissions, FE, drivability in every condition from -40 to +120, pouring rain, snow, dust...........oh and durability. There is always easy HP to gain. It's why GM can have a team working on a dyno for 6 months to get a drivable calibration, then a whole new team working for another 6 months to get a really good calibration and then 6 more months finalizing it and an aftermarket guy can get you 15 HP in a week after launch. Trust me, if there was HP on the table you would get it. There isn't unless you make the trade offs the OEM can't.

Your statement seems 100% right on...BUT...with that said, do you also think that there is a limit based on GM's business model and the economics behind it...and do some of the quality shops pick up from there?

for me though, one more reason to spend the extra $$$ for a ZL1 for those that want more power with the backing of the OEM and all that comes with it...like a warranty.

[huggercamaro21]

Originally Posted by Number 3

I could go on and on about the Porsche crowd that GM has been trying for years to lure away into a Corvette. There was even talk (and still is a bit) to make Corvette it's own brand so that Corvette buyers didn't have to socialize with Cruze and Spark owners. If you spend $100,000 on a Z06, you have every reason to get treated as well as any dealer around including luxury dealers and certainly a Porsche dealer.

This is the problem. The corvette is still a 55k dollar car. Which really isn't the end all to be all as far as money goes. You can get an Escalade into 6 figures too. Corvette guys (or really anyone buying a GM product) needs to stop and think what they are buying. If you want to be pampered with the experience, go buy a base 911 or 100k and get murdered in every single way possible by the base Vette.

[pdoherty972]

Originally Posted by Curr

Every forum has "those guys". Even this one.

The vocal minority on forums like these usually don't represent the majority.

I'm with Number 3 in this. As much as I'd like it to be a "thing". All this shows is that particular Camaro has slightly higher output than that particular Corvette, discounting the inherent inaccuracy of the given measurements. I figured I wouldn't be the first guy with some stats background to bring it up.

Cool experiment though, props to JDP.

The problem is this is likely to be easily repeated. This isn't the old days of ringers and dogs; engines are SAE-rated now. So the outcome should be largely the same with any random Vette or Camaro. IOW it's extremely unlikely this is a case of a statistical outlier great Camaro vs a statistical outlier dog Vette.

[VADER SS L99]

I guess no one thought about the fact that these two cars have completely different drivetrains or that the difference in power could actually be a variance in engine output of one engine vs the other.

I can remember the 4th gen F body vs C5 dyno test and no one wanted to hear me talking about the drivetrain power robing percentage differences there either. The only thing this test proved to me is that both cars are making about the same power within 1% and that the Camaro engine might (emphasize might) be making more torque at the crank but for sure makes more at the rear wheels. One thing people need to realize though is not all cars have the same drivetrain loss.

[13vertss]

Isn't SAE ratings just to show what the minimum hp/tq the engine will put out? It doesn't say it can't have more, but it can't have less.

[01Camaro]

Originally Posted by huggercamaro21

No. Just no.

WTF???

[01Camaro]

Originally Posted by Memphis43

I don't think so. I believe it has more to do with drivetrain loss is jus a lot more efficient in these cars now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you think that in just a few years, the drivetrains loss has gone from 15% down to 7.5%. In engineering terms, that is a quantum leap. I guess possible, but to me, there is some level of underrating going on here.

If the drivetrain was made 50 % more efficient, there would be no need for the "standard" differential and tranny coolers, as there would be 50% less heat produced throughout the drivetrain.

I say slight drivetrain improvement, significant HP underrating. I bet an accurate rating would be more like 475 - 485 HP.