[IOMike]

Torque curve is beautiful. It doesn't fall on its face at 4800, it just makes a shit ton of low and mid range torque where the ls3 and especially the 5.0 do not.

This dynograph shows why the LT-1 is going to be such a beast in the Camaro.

[IOMike]

Originally Posted by Noob

hm, I would rather have a 6.2ltr. DOHC with 84.6hp/ltr. in that 2016 Camaro instead of "only" 74,2hp/ltr. due to old 2valves/1cam design.
My brothers AMG C63 is that engine which cranks out 525hp in his 2009 Mercedes. It revs 7200rpm and was "engine of the year" 2 times.
It weighs 439lbs.....i read.
http://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/2...ne-weight.html

Perhaps Chevy know the selling numbers of V8´s will fall as tax and gas prices increase. So they decide not to spend mch more money in further developing of a given and surely proofed design. A direct fuel injection is a small intervention adn cyl..deactivation helps saving fuel on an old design which normally drink 1-2ltr more per 100km compared to a newer design with less capacity but equal hp.

Your screen same explains it all. You don't seem to have a clue, to put it nicely.

[bdavies11]

Originally Posted by ilirg

See what's easier to get 600 N/A horsepower out of, a pushrod LS or DOHC 5.0, then rethink what's more flexible.

Ever seen a Sprint Cup engine on the dyno? 5.8 Liter pushrod making 900hp.

[DiGiam]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

If it had an engine like the AMG 6.2, it wouldn't start in the mid 30s.

Your not going to tell him anything. He got shot down on his, 5.0 is best rant so he had to step up to a motor that's VERY expensive and not practical is a $30k-$40k car. Next it will be a Ferrari engine and how its better as well. Ive had both a 5.0 and the 6.2. There is a reason that these heavier, equal horsepower cars still compete and run right with 5.0's. Its called torque and average power. In both categories the 6.2 LS3 wins. The 5.0 is a turd in around town driving. The lack of torque below 3500 rpm is a joke. Not everyone wants to turn 5000 rpm everywhere they go just so the car will get up and go. Ive owned 5 mustangs including an 03 cobra so I will tell you this. I don't care how much electronics you put on that 5.0 its still only 5.0 and can only make so much torque. This was made even worse with the 2015 mustang that gained weight and still is torque less below 3500. This was my main reason for the switch to a 14 1le. SO much more enjoyable in everyday around town driving. Not nearly as high strung as my mustang

[obzidian]

Exactly.

The 5.0 while in itself a solid performing engine is still a 5 liter engine; there is only so much you can do.

Now.. whal we all should be discussing is that the lt1 is nearly on par with its output to the 7liter ls7. What noobs like noob fail to understand is that much like the camaro 6 design is an evolution of the previous gen, the chevy sb is also following the same principle.

[Noob]

Originally Posted by LesserO2Evils

Noob is of this mindset(like the Pony boys) that Pushrod engines are old, dont make power, and are for "pickups". He was blasted pretty hard for this the other day, and thoroughly educated, but it appears to have fallen on deaf ears.

haha, the same i was told in the Stang Forum when i named their shit rear axle "truck axle".

i found a nice 2009 CL63 here with only 55000km on it.
Looks nice except the wheels and costs 7000€ less than a new Stang GT premium.
http://suchen.mobile.de/fahrzeuge/de...7&pageNumber=1

[LesserO2Evils]

Originally Posted by Noob

haha, the same i was told in the Stang Forum when i named their shit rear axle "truck axle".

i found a nice 2009 CL63 here with only 55000km on it.
Looks nice except the wheels and costs 7000€ less than a new Stang GT premium.
http://suchen.mobile.de/fahrzeuge/de...7&pageNumber=1

I wholeheartedly encourage you to buy it. And join their forum.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Noob

haha, the same i was told in the Stang Forum when i named their shit rear axle "truck axle".

i found a nice 2009 CL63 here with only 55000km on it.
Looks nice except the wheels and costs 7000€ less than a new Stang GT premium.
http://suchen.mobile.de/fahrzeuge/de...7&pageNumber=1

Some things for you to consider

1) The LT engine is the most technologically advanced OHV engine ever produced. Variable cam timing, cylinder deactivation, direct injection

2) Fuel economy up to 12.7 Kilometers per liter in the Corvette

3) Cost of 93 octane fuel is only 0.75 euro per liter here

4) The US does not punish the use of large displacement engines with taxes

5) Chevrolet has a strong aftermarket parts following based on the ability to inexpensively modify the V8 engine for high performance.

6) Over head valve engines can produce far higher power and torque.

Something I know from working for German companies for 22 years, watching my German colleagues living here in the US and having lived in Germany.

1) Germans buy German cars. Mustang sales will be nothing in your country

2) The average German will never own a V8 car of any manufacture because they are taxed so high

3) A small turbo diesel is very fun on the Autobahn so you don't really need a V8 to get your ya yas

[wakespeak]

Anyone have a good link to a dyno pull for an LS3 with headers, CAI, and a tune?

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by wakespeak

Anyone have a good link to a dyno pull for an LS3 with headers, CAI, and a tune?

Wish I knew where I put my old graph.

Mine put down 435 rwhp with 2 inch stainless works longtubes, ORX, flowmaster AT cat back, cold air inductions cai and under drive crank pulley.

[wakespeak]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Wish I knew where I put my old graph.

Mine put down 435 rwhp with 2 inch stainless works longtubes, ORX, flowmaster AT cat back, cold air inductions cai and under drive crank pulley.

Wow I would like to see that overlay on the graph. I think that is more apples and apples since the LT1 has factory shorties and better intake.

I am wondering also if GM left some growth headroom on the table for the LT1 since that power curve flattens so much. Maybe there will be a model with 475-500 hp in a year or two with just a tweak to the VVT and ECM.

[obzidian]

Originally Posted by wakespeak

Wow I would like to see that overlay on the graph. I think that is more apples and apples since the LT1 has factory shorties and better intake.

I am wondering also if GM left some growth headroom on the table for the LT1 since that power curve flattens so much. Maybe there will be a model with 475-500 hp in a year or two with just a tweak to the VVT and ECM.

Of course. The cam profile is "smaller" than the LS3's and yet the engine has a higher output with the same displacement.

What I find inquiring is that with the same 6.2L's this engine can match a LS7 in torque and with the right tweeks in horsepower as well. Granted, the displacement of the LS7 will eventually garner higher power outputs but still doesn't take away just hope productive the new LTx is.

The goal posts, imo, have been moved... and now with a lighter/tighter packaged camaro (and heavier mustang! haha!!) it seems the stang fan boys are in for a rude awakening!

[DevilDawgSS]

Help me understand guys, when you have a lighter car that makes more power, exactly why is the huge fuss about torque drop off after 4800 RPM? At that point, your light car is moving and picking up HP pdq.

THE Last Post Winner

[DevilDawgSS]

Originally Posted by wakespeak

Anyone have a good link to a dyno pull for an LS3 with headers, CAI, and a tune?

I put down 408 each with just that. Vararam intake and SW 1 7/8 headers.

THE Last Post Winner