[Number 3]

Originally Posted by DenverTaco07

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.

No, I know guys that calibrate engines for the OEMs. I know the parameters that they work under and I know the dyno based durability schedules. I also know the vehicle based drivability, durability and performance requirements. And that's the short list.

The good "tuners" (re calibrators) are simply taking things to the limits that GM chooses not to do or can't legally do. There is no person selling you an aftermarket calibration that is doing better than an OEM. They are just doing different than the OEM by making different trade offs that results in more HP. No tuner does in 2 weeks what the OEM takes years to do. There are calibrations for the new Camaro now, right?

The refinements are ongoing. Why do you think that most OEMs do an "at least" HP number? It's because they aren't done yet.

Trust me if GM didn't have to worry about the Big 3, Durability, Fuel Economy, and Emissions, two of which are Federally tested and one legally mandated (VW cough, cough) the HP would be there.

So it isn't a business model other than warranty based on Durability.

Don't misunderstand, the re calibrators aren't creating hand grenades. But it is much less likely statistically that they are meeting the OEM durability requirements. And although I've had "discussions" with some on line that claim they improve durability and FE and emissions with their calibrations, I can only throw the BS flag because I know better.

We could have a lengthy discussion on the Stress - Strength curves but that would be a bit technical but would explain my point. The re calibrator is not making any of the parts stronger (Strength) but is adding HP and torque which puts higher loads on the driveline (Stress). Making the stress on the engine and driveline parts higher with more HP increases the overlap between Stress and Strength curves. This overlap is the area of FAILURE and the larger the overlap the more likelihood of FAILURE. And anyone that thinks adding HP via calibration isn't adding stress to the whole driveline is kidding themselves.

Soap box put away now.

[01Camaro]

Originally Posted by Number 3

No, I know guys that calibrate engines for the OEMs. I know the parameters that they work under and I know the dyno based durability schedules. I also know the vehicle based drivability, durability and performance requirements. And that's the short list.

The good "tuners" (re calibrators) are simply taking things to the limits that GM chooses not to do or can't legally do. There is no person selling you an aftermarket calibration that is doing better than an OEM. They are just doing different than the OEM by making different trade offs that results in more HP. No tuner does in 2 weeks what the OEM takes years to do. There are calibrations for the new Camaro now, right?

The refinements are ongoing. Why do you think that most OEMs do an "at least" HP number? It's because they aren't done yet.

Trust me if GM didn't have to worry about the Big 3, Durability, Fuel Economy, and Emissions, two of which are Federally tested and one legally mandated (VW cough, cough) the HP would be there.

So it isn't a business model other than warranty based on Durability.

Don't misunderstand, the re calibrators aren't creating hand grenades. But it is much less likely statistically that they are meeting the OEM durability requirements. And although I've had "discussions" with some on line that claim they improve durability and FE and emissions with their calibrations, I can only throw the BS flag because I know better.

We could have a lengthy discussion on the Stress - Strength curves but that would be a bit technical but would explain my point. The re calibrator is not making any of the parts stronger (Strength) but is adding HP and torque which puts higher loads on the driveline (Stress). Making the stress on the engine and driveline parts higher with more HP increases the overlap between Stress and Strength curves. This overlap is the area of FAILURE and the larger the overlap the more likelihood of FAILURE. And anyone that thinks adding HP via calibration isn't adding stress to the whole driveline is kidding themselves.

Soap box put away now.

Yes and no. GM must think of X breakdowns/100,00 cars made (or 1 million or 10,000, or whatever) . Gven statistical modeling and FMECA/risk analysis, they set their models to have a projected 10%, 1%,0.1%0.01%, etc. failure rate. then, based on profit/loss, they calibrate to project whatever it deems as the optimal failure/HP output ratio and executes.

However, on an individual basis, it is probably safe to assume that a 1,3,5% HP increase in one's individual car will not cause significant issues, especially since GM likely uses a safety factor assuming that each engine puts out its targeted HP plus X% allowed for motor variances based on manufacturing tolerances. So to most individuals wanting a tune and simple bolt ons, there would be no ill affects. However, to SOMEONE, there will be a detrimental affect, just likely to someone else. Its like playing the lottery...SOMEONE will win, just it really ain't going to be you. But there is always a chance...

[01Camaro]

Originally Posted by 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

Performance exhaust or no? Did you test a difference between the exhaust activated and not?

[four0nefive]

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.

No offence, but this is a pretty stupid post. On the Corvette Forums, the GT350 has gotten nothing but praise. Is a GT350 TP a tad bit faster than a Z51? Maybe, but the gap is very small, especially since the C7 weighs over 300 pounds less.

I'm not sure why any Corvette owner would be butt hurt about the Camaro having the same amount of power (or a bit more to the wheels as seen from this dyno test). Even if the Camaro makes a bit more power (the difference was what, 8 HP?), it still weighs more and has skinnier tires. That means the C7 is going to be faster by a good margin. Heck, the fastest stock C7 run is like 11.4 (and that was with a 6 speed auto). I hate to say it, but I doubt the Camaro will run 11.4 bone stock on stock tires.

At the end of the day, the Camaro and Corvette are both great cars. It's not like it's a bad thing that Chevy is offering the Camaro for less than a Vette with nearly the same performance. The A8 C7 will do 0-60 in 3.7 and the A8 Camaro does 0-60 in 3.9, not a super big difference. The M7 C7 does 0-60 in 3.8 and the M6 Camaro will do it 4.0 seconds.

If you buy a Camaro, you'll most likely buy it as a daily driver or for the drag strip. The Vette on the other hand is much better for tracking and canyon carving on the weekends.

[b4z]

If Chevy feels that the gt350 is too close to the performance of the Corvette they will just add a few more hp, wider or different compound tires(easily done), tweak gear ratios, or find a way to take a bit more weight out.
GM did amazing things with the C6 and will do the same with the C7.

[b4z]

Originally Posted by JDP Motorsports

The cars we're both in 4th which is 1:1. I don't think that had any effect on the outcome.



The cars both had factory NPP and they were both in track mode.





We've seen all of the comparisons and speculation. We decided to see what would happen on the same dyno, the same day with the same fuel. The spread wasn't as much as a lot of the comparisons showed and they were very close.



The weight delta isn't that great between the cars and at that power level traction wasn't an issue.



They were both brand new under 20 miles each... The conditions, temperatures and fuel were the same for both cars.



I agree the cars were very close and the spread wasn't as large as you've seen with some of the video's and test online. The Camaro did make more power in all four runs but as you stated the engines are virtually the same with the exception of the manifolds; the Camaro made considerably more torque through the entire range. I believe this is due to the tri-y design of the manifolds.

Kind regards,

Jordan Priestley
888.308.6007

is it possibly to make tri Ys fit the corvette? I feel that the tri Ys gave the LS7 a little extra edge in the Z28 vs the c 6.

[four0nefive]

Originally Posted by b4z

is it possibly to make tri Ys fit the corvette? I feel that the tri Ys gave the LS7 a little extra edge in the Z28 vs the c 6.

It's possible. I think the problem is getting the headers though. I doubt GM will sell them. If the do add them, I'm certain it will be on the 2017 C7s. I guess we'll find out in April.

Originally Posted by b4z

If Chevy feels that the gt350 is too close to the performance of the Corvette they will just add a few more hp, wider or different compound tires(easily done), tweak gear ratios, or find a way to take a bit more weight out.
GM did amazing things with the C6 and will do the same with the C7.

The thing is, Chevy has the C7 Z06, so they really have nothing to worry about.

[huggercamaro21]

Originally Posted by 01Camaro

WTF???

Wtf? You can't really underrate SAE engines lol. And 15 percent is an old number. It's more like 10ish now. And some dynos are happier than others. Doesn't mean that it's putting out any more than the SAE 458.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Funny that the corvette is rated at 465 torque with the NPP. Camaro is 455. But the Camaro has an obvious edge in torque.

Also consider the Camaro is spinning 20 inch wheels and the driveline set up in the Camaro has more moving parts/less efficient than the corvette.

And...from what people have seen so far the air intake is more restrictive on the Camaro.

Obviously the Camaro is making a bit more power with the tri-y headers.

My car with have full exhaust, CAI and tune pretty quickly so doesn't matter to me...still cool though.

[Knein]

Has anyone put an NPP vs Non-NPP camaro on the dyno the same day? Just wondering if it makes any real difference.

[08z51c6]

Originally Posted by 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

Nice, not going to bother with headers then if the factory headers work this well. Hopefully some gains can be made by going to a high flow X Pipe.

[SkipNWis]

WOW!!! I wonder what the Battle will show when they finally do a ZL1 to a Z06?

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by 08z51c6

Nice, not going to bother with headers then if the factory headers work this well. Hopefully some gains can be made by going to a high flow X Pipe.

16 rwhp from the kooks prototypes with no tune. Will probably see ~30rwhp after tune.

A lot of gains are in the scavenging effects from the length of long tube headers.

The best designed mid or shorter length headers in the world will still leave some on the table.

[08z51c6]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

16 rwhp from the kooks prototypes with no tune. Will probably see ~30rwhp after tune.

A lot of gains are in the scavenging effects from the length of long tube headers.

The best designed mid or shorter length headers in the world will still leave some on the table.

I don't doubt the long tubes will make more power but the question is how much does the 16 rwhp cost? I also don't think your going to see that much of a gain with the tune but time will tell.

I also want to keep my warranty so I'll stick with the stock headers till the warranty is up.