[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Hmm, I didn't realize that people raced off of idle.

With an auto you do. Or a slight brake stall. Unless you’ve got a converter.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Hmm, I didn't realize that people raced off of idle.

If you don't wanna beat the shit outta your car...and if you have street tires and aren't lowering the tire pressure...then you start off idle. I do it all the time.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

With an auto you do. Or a slight brake stall. Unless you’ve got a converter.

Yup. The only time I did it in my 03 GT years ago was after I put a higher stall converter in it. And then I would bring it up to about 2200 and launch. I don't do it in my A10 at all. I go right off idle.

[R.C. Collins]

Originally Posted by SS 1LE

No point in closing the gap. You want a drag car, get an automatic, you want a fun track car get a manual...

You just want a fun car in general, get a manual. Every time I buy an automatic performance car, I get bored and sell it within a year. No more of that nonsense lol...

Well said.

[Zeke.Malvo]

Originally Posted by assasinator

here is the deal man.....

i have a similar issue in my turbo that the new STOCK GT will run into competing with the SS in A10 form....

the GT simply cant match the horsepower disadvantage from idle to wherever, in the powerband, the gt finally does match the SS.

until i am allowed to put a real transmission in the turbo i have to wait for boost.

the GT has to wait for power. my bet is the GT is giving up 80hp from idle to 4500 or even more maybe.

AND with essentially the same power to weight ratio, the GT is going to be down a handful of MPH that is going to get worse down the track.


it is going to take modifications to get the GT into the same horsepower level off the line. a BIG stall.


ford has printed that the gt head flow is comparable to the gt350. it should respond to mods.

Where are you getting these numbers from? Please post the dyno graphs you are comparing.

Just to play out your theory:
If Car A (SS) is making 450 TQ @ 3000 RPM, it's making 253 HP
If Car B (GT) is making 400 TQ @ 3000 RPM, It's making 228 HP

If Car A (SS) is making 460 TQ @ 4500 RPM, it's making 394 HP
If Car B (GT) is making 420 TQ @ 4500 RPM, it's making 360 HP

I just don't see your -80 HP scenario happening at any RPM. On top of that, how much HP is the SS down at 6800 RPM? 7000 RPM? 7400 RPM?


Again, please post your graphs.

[ChefBorOzzy]

"how much HP is the SS down at 6800 RPM? 7000 RPM? 7400 RPM?" irrelevant.

[trz174]

Low DA certainly gets the attention and triggers forum activity. I have run dozens of bone stock with stock GY tire runs in the 12.0s with higher DA in my 16 SS A8. Also have run at least a dozen in the 11.9s with good to fantastic DA. I am not the only one who runs these times by a long shot. No doubt our Mustang doppelgangers are out there doing something similar. Let’s get some bone stock Camaros and Mustangs at a good track with low DA in the Southeast during December. Let a magazine pay for the track day (better at night) and see who shows up and can run the best time. Ten autos and 10 manuals in the 16-18 years should answer the question and get some factory attention for future programs.

[assasinator]

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

Where are you getting these numbers from? Please post the dyno graphs you are comparing.

Just to play out your theory:
If Car A (SS) is making 450 TQ @ 3000 RPM, it's making 253 HP
If Car B (GT) is making 400 TQ @ 3000 RPM, It's making 228 HP

If Car A (SS) is making 460 TQ @ 4500 RPM, it's making 394 HP
If Car B (GT) is making 420 TQ @ 4500 RPM, it's making 360 HP

I just don't see your -80 HP scenario happening at any RPM. On top of that, how much HP is the SS down at 6800 RPM? 7000 RPM? 7400 RPM?


Again, please post your graphs.

lol MY 2011 gt when stock made 355 rwtq at 4700

it made 300 rwtq at 3000

thats 350 crank tq at 3000
ss.....455 crank tq at 3000

the new gt makes a few more lb-ft but still is 80-90 down on a SS until the powerbands match better at high rpms.

its common sense not nuthugging. reality is the new GT is down on power to weight.


the SS is long gone.

[Bhobbs]

It would be nice if GM bothered to update its engines to match, even if it may be faster. I guess we have to wait and see the head to head comparisons for the results, but the recent changes to the Mustang have definitely narrowed the straight line lead the SS had.

[Zeke.Malvo]

Originally Posted by assasinator

lol MY 2011 gt when stock made 355 rwtq at 4700

it made 300 rwtq at 3000

thats 350 crank tq at 3000
ss.....455 crank tq at 3000

the new gt makes a few more lb-ft but still is 80-90 down on a SS until the powerbands match better at high rpms.

its common sense not nuthugging. reality is the new GT is down on power to weight.


the SS is long gone.

Just because you repeat something doesn't make it true. Nice sources BTW.

I'll post some since you're just talking out of your ass.


The LT1 makes: 5.0 Makes:
380 TQ @ 3000. 320 TQ @ 3000
380 TQ @ 3500. 340 TQ @ 3500
400 TQ @ 4000. 360 TQ @ 4000


That comes out to a difference of about 30 hp on the low end. Nowhere near the 80 hp you are claiming. Nice try LOL


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Bhobbs]

The issue with the LT1 is the torque curve falls on its ass well before peak torque. It’s already nosed over at 4800 rpm. I don’t know if it needs more cam or what but that needs to be fixed. Maybe they left headroom for further development.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

The issue with the LT1 is the torque curve falls on its ass well before peak torque. It’s already nosed over at 4800 rpm. I don’t know if it needs more cam or what but that needs to be fixed. Maybe they left headroom for further development.

I think that despite this it is still a solid car that accomplished everything it was set out to accomplish and then some. It certainly set the standard of what these cars should be capable of. Plus no matter how you design an engine it will have it's own faults. Manufacturers have budgets to keep and you can't just keep designing an engine until it is perfect. So far the SS is on top of the game with the engine it has. And the Camaro has been on top of the game for the vast majority of the past quarter of a century.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

The issue with the LT1 is the torque curve falls on its ass well before peak torque (I think you meant power). It’s already nosed over at 4800 rpm. I don’t know if it needs more cam or what but that needs to be fixed. Maybe they left headroom for further development.

Its all relative. Compared to the LS3, the LT1...

• makes 56 lb-ft more peak torque
• matches the LS3s 5,600 rpm peak torque at 2,600 rpm
• matches the LS3s 5,600 rpm peak torque at 6,100 rpm

The "nose over" is off a very meaty peak where it matches the 7.0L LS7 torque curve exactly until that 4,800 rpm peak.

My A8 appears to shift at 6,100 rpm and I can say that a 4th gear upshift in -500 DA feels like I got rear-ended. I'm never left feeling that it lacks in that area

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

And the Camaro has been on top of the game for the vast majority of the past quarter of a century.

1992-not on top of game
1993-2002 on top of game
2003-2009 not on top of game
2010-on top of game
2011-2015-not on top of game
2016-2017-on top of game

13 out of 26=%50 != vast majority or majority at all.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by hotlap

Its all relative. Compared to the LS3, the LT1...

• makes 56 lb-ft more peak torque
• matches the LS3s 5,600 rpm peak torque at 2,600 rpm
• matches the LS3s 5,600 rpm peak torque at 6,100 rpm

The "nose over" is off a very meaty peak where it matches the 7.0L LS7 torque curve exactly until that 4,800 rpm peak.

My A8 appears to shift at 6,100 rpm and I can say that a 4th gear upshift in -500 DA feels like I got rear-ended. I'm never left feeling that it lacks in that area

I am comparing it to the LS3. The LS3 carries its torque further in the band. The LT1 dumps it’s torque advantage by redline. If the LT1 carried its torque like the LS3 and LS7, it could be 10+ rwhp.