Notice how I put the little blurb about the crate hotcammed LS3 in parentheses and said "if you want to count it"? That was because I knew you wouldn't but I figured it was worth mentioning just so you knew it was out there. I didn't think you would get so offended by a mere mention of it.

In production cars, the 5.0 gets stomped in the torque department. Different companies make power different ways. HP/L is something a Honda owner would say when he wants to prove why his 1.whatever is better than your V8. Leave the stupid excuses out please, we've all heard the "but you have that much more displacement...and you have more valves and have to spin higher." IDGAF about those garbage arguments. Just line 'em up. Right now Mustang > Camaro, I am not afraid nor ashamed to admit it.

Did I disagree with you the first time?

...and the new Camaro is "supposed" to be on the Alpha platform and shave a lot of weight. I'll believe both when I see them. I could care less what company is "supposed" to be coming out with what. When there is official word, I will believe.

I guess I have been mistaking you for someone with a little more moxie than that, delving into the childish retorts so quick? When did you become one of "those" guys?

I've heard, albeit second hand, that Cali cops will pull you over for anything that is mildly loud. I don't know, just scares me. I also have little motivation for tourist crap. Vegas on the other hand.........

I brought it back up, he didn't. Read it again.

 

Basically, FOG is getting uncharacteristically bent out of shape over a common argument, and it boils his blood so bad that he resorts to name calling when someone posts something "against" him. I realize there are a lot of people that spew bullshit that is hard to swallow around here, but I could hard characterize what I wrote as any of that. Wonder what his deal is?

Great breakdown Tsi.

 

"Car has went 10s now. Just cant find the video". [QUOTE]


I call Bull ****. Until I see the vid. Must be great air down in Tx. You wouldn't get out of high 11's here in KC.

 

Thats a sweet looking GTO man

 

When talking about STOCK N/A production engines a lot of people care. You think the C6Z06 would be very popular if it only made 200hp?

That is quite possibly one one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. In a N/A engine, displacement and RPM determines the maximum amount of air flow theoretically possible for an engine. The more cubic inches the more possible airflow the high the RPM the more airflow. Head design and flow determines what percentage of the theoretically possible air flow that the engine actually does flow.

A 5.0 engine making 88 hp /L is more efficient at utilizing its available air than a 6.3 making 68 hp/L. That means better head flow and better engine design.

I was talking about the efficient use of the air available to the engine by virtue of its displacement and rpm.


The 5.0 more efficiently moves and uses available air from its displacement than the 6.3 does. The 5.0 makes 30% more power per cubic inch than the LS3 does. And as you aptly pointed out air flow is what makes that power difference possible.

That relies in a large part to the aero, weight, gearing and engine and we weren't discussing that just how well or efficiently the engine converts the air available to it into power.




Again you are off topic for the post.

We aren't talking about fuel efficiency we are discussing how efficiently the engine convert the liters of air it can flow at a given rpm to power. Theoretically a 6.3 Liter engine can flow 42.840 liters of air at 6800 rpm. A 5.0 can flow 34,000 liters at the same rpm and 39,000 at 7800 rpm. Now you tell me which is more efficient at converting the available air into power?




Off topic





Talk to your friend

 

Not in the least I just enjoy in presenting the facts to LS3 is god fanbois. And YOU were the fist to call someone gay.

 

Nobody said the 5.0 wasn't an effiecent motor. Both engine designs have there pros and cons. The DOHC 4v makes more power with less displacement for obvious reasons. The OHV motor hits the wall of limitation at a time later than that of the DOHC. I like big cubes and alot of N/A torque but hey thats just me. A discussion is better than an argument guys.

 

Seriously, what crawled up your *** recently? You think I'm an LS fanboy? It is my prefer ed engine of choice, but that wouldn't stop me from buying something else with a different powerplant (that would make someone a fanboy). You must be eyeball deep in **** if you think I'm a fanboy. Goddamn that is laughable.

WRONG. Did you say you were gay? Nope, just that what you said was. I mean, you even went back and quoted me and you still got it wrong.

 

You don't like visiting nice places Oookkkk! to each his own.

I have family from KC, MO and Witchita, KS. I remember visiting as a kid and thinking 'how in the heck do these people live in this place, there is like nothing at all out here.' I was soooo happy to get back to Cali.

 

The OHC engines can have more efficient head designs because they can have straighter runners and more valves and they can use variable cam technology. They have the potential of higher red lines because of less reciprocating mass.

Most car manufacturers have made the switch. GM and Dodge are holding out. I suspect that economics has something to do with it. It costs a lot to change engine designs and we all know Dodge and GM aren't that healthy. The big cube vs small cube argument has been going on for a long time and will continue a long time.

 

I bet I have owned more LS engines than you have I'm just more realistic about the pros and cons of their design.

And did I include your name ... no I didn't so if the shoe fits wear it if it doesn't don't get your blood boiling. .



OK that is just Gay to split hairs like that.

 

Not being rude but I know how an OHC motor works and its pros and the cons. I was just hoping to get away with typing a short general paragraph and not a detailed essay on the function/pros/cons/etc... between the two engine designs. They are both good motors, both can be built to maje good power. It's a persons choice on how he wants to get it.

 

[QUOTE=06blackGTO;14879943]"Car has went 10s now. Just cant find the video". Can call bullshit if want i dont care. I have seen it. Bring that GTo and im sure they will race you for some money. They have some turbo cars that run even faster. They build cars for one reason to embarrass V8s and go fast. They have a couple AWD cars making over 600 and 700whp. That have destroyed every type muscle car there is and at drag strip.

And yes there is faster cars then theirs here also. And other places. Just telling you what the shop has done.

As far as good air depends when come. Winter times you can see - DA's and summer DA's can be over 3000 with the 115* weather.

 

True and I never said the LS3 was a bad engine. Its just that the 5.0 is a better design and the LS3 are getting long in the tooth using out dated technology and covering it up with big cubes. If the 5.0 was the same size as the LS3 and made its 88 hp/L as it does as a 5.0 it would be making 554 hp.

 

Your response is so mind-bogglingly facepalming, I don't even know where to start.

What are you talking about? I said "no one, besides ricers, gives a **** about which engine makes more power per cube." That, by itself, makes no practical difference AT ALL.

People give a **** about power and fuel economy.


So, according to you, my comment "All that horsepower boils down to is airflow. If one engine flows more, it will generally make more power.", was one of the dumbest things you have ever heard, and your attempt to prove me wrong was basically repeating exactly what I just said.

Do you know what 'practical' means? It means useful, as in "it's useful that my 6.2L pushrod engine gets 29mpg while also giving me 430hp when I need it."

How is it useful at all to talk about efficiency in terms of HP/L? That literally has no benefit in the real world...besides ricer excuses.

Define "better" in practical terms. An LS3 is 6.2L, btw.





I had a feeling something was off with your comments....but I couldn't put my finger on it until this.^


Do you not know how engines even work?

Two engines with the same displacement, but with different head designs and RPM limits will NOT have the same amount of air in the cylinders.

Converting airflow to power is your measure of efficiency? The only efficiency in that respect comes from the air/fuel ratio and spark.

Displacement is only a part of how much airflow there is. If an engine's head isn't efficient enough at high RPMs, it doesn't matter

Let's posit a scenario:
There are two engines, one is a Chevy 350 making 300ft/lbs of torque at 2000rpm and 200hp at 4500rpm. The other is a Honda K20 making 120lb/ft of torque at 2000rpm and 220hp at 8000rpm.

At lower RPM, the larger displacement engine will make more torque because it has enough time to fill the larger cylinder up with air. If its heads don't flow the air quickly enough at higher RPMs, it won't have time to fill the cylinder completely with air, and therefore won't be able to produce as much torque at that RPM that it could at lower RPM. If it doesn't have much torque at high RPM, it won't have much power.

The Honda engine, however, has an efficient enough head that it can pack the cylinder with enough air at high RPM to produce decent enough torque at high RPM and have a good horsepower rating (torque x RPM).

Clearly, the amount of air in a cylinder is NOT constant with displacement. The amount of air in a cylinder is entirely dependent on how well the head flows, especially at higher RPM.

By your logic, two turbocharged engines with the same displacement and same boost pressure will always have the same amount of air in the cylinders.

In reality, the engine with a more efficient turbo will, at the same boost pressure, make more power because there is more air being flowed into the cylinder than the engine with a less efficient turbo.



All this ^ doesn't matter as much as my point on practical vs ricer efficiency.

 

You have it wrong. The 5.0 is better than the old 5.4, not the LS3 though.

 

I think we have covered all the areas now guys. Too many people trying to prove they know more than someone else here.

FWIW, we should be praising the Mustang's light weight. The LS3 still makes more power, who gives a **** about this hp/L ****, power is power. Drop an LS3 in the 2011 body and mod it..

 

Wasn't offended just pointing out it isn't relevant.

So why do people whine about FI engines?







I became one of "those guys" after you bragged about real estate then whine can we stop talking about real estate.


So you just had to answer him.

 

The Boss makes 440 HP stock

 

Wrong its better than the 5.4 AND the LS3