okay, gm advertised 325 hp for the 2002 camaro ss & 422 hp for the 2010 camaro ss, correct me if im wrong but thats right at 100 hp difference right??? there are alot of people saying its only gonna have 50-60 hp difference instead of the 100 hp difference gm advertises.....
are they false advertising??? also people are saying the 325 hp was way underrated, why would gm underrate their product??? with just a lid and k&n my 02 put 304 to the wheels that would be real close to 325hp at the crank with a lid and k&n right??? maybe the lid and k&n gave me 10-15 more hp so it would put the 325hp around 340hp at the crank, so 304 to the wheels sounds about right doesnt it??? so will they have 100 more hp or not

 

The 02 SS has the same motor as the 02 Corvette but GM could not use the same HP ratings or more people would have bought a Camaro SS instead to save $10,000.So I would say the 2010 Camaro SS LS-3 has the same HP as the 2008 Corvette 436 hp.But once they are out we will see.

 

GM under rated their car for financial reasons. If the car was rated over 325, they had to pay a higher tax on the car. I believe it was a gas guzzler tax. If it was rated 325 or under, then they were ok. Since the camaro's were at the end of their line, GM threw corvette pieces on the LS1 engines so that they could save money and not have to cast more "old intakes". Hence '01's and '02's having ls6 intakes, and some having LS6 blocks.


As far as the '10 is concerned, it'll be a fun car, but if you factor in a 20% drivetrain loss, then the car will really be putting down about 337.6 RWHP.

 

gass guzzler tax is based on mpg not hp....

 

true...but with horsepower, you usually guzzle a bit more gas. You dont see 150hp civice with gas guzzler tax.

*EDIT* It may not have even been a gas guzzler tax, but thats what I thought i remembered reading. I may/can be wrong.

 

GM has always underated there cars .I can't see them overating there cars.I was told it was for insurance purposes.

 

They underrated the Camaro to not **** off the old vette guys.

 

To the OP the LS3 is rated at 422 hp and the L99 is rated at 400 hp. These numbers are probably underrated but we will let that be our little secret lol.

 

my 02 ss m6 was stock except for a lid and k&n and i had 304rwhp to me i would assume the 325hp it was advertised at was right on,..... also i dont get the whole 20% drive train loss thing take a 350 hp car it would put down 280rwhp w/ 20% loss, then do some mods to that same car with the same drivetrain to put it at 700hp would it have the same 20% loss??? that would be 560rwhp so, with a car that has twice as much hp it would lose twice as much hp through the drivetrain right??? to me that dont make sense i would think if it takes 40hp to turn the drivetrain it doesent matter if you have 200, 400, or 700 hp it would be the same 40 hp loss with the same drivetrain right??? if not then why would a 350 hp car lose 65hp and a 700hp car lose 140hp??? it dont add up to me

 

the percentage is not an exact number or science, just like Dyno machines.

An automatic will suffer higher driver train loss, then a manual trans. Also a larger/stronger rearend will cause more drivetrain loss.

It all comes down to rotational mass. More parts, heavier parts and larger parts cause more loss.

 

Thats what I heard from a GM rep back in 99.

 

My Vette went from stock power, getting 32-33mpg to 409rwhp with bolt ons, heads,cam, LT's and get the exact same as before(not by DIC but by calculating) and on the highway sometimes on a long trip with little to no city driving i will get 34.
O/P the car will likely put about 345-350rwhp as i'm willing to bet GM underrated these ones too just a thought

 

Not always true, gearing and weight have to do with gas mileage more than power does.
GM used the "skip shift" feature on the 6 speed cars to help avoid the gas guzzler tax, and these cars are getting better gas mileage than many weaker cars (like the S2000, EVO, STi, etc. etc.) because of gearing.

Manuals usually have a 15% drivetrain loss, give or take. Thats 304 X .15 = 45.6. So your car theoretically makes 349.6hp at the flywheel.

 

As others have said, on paper the new car will be 100hp more than the old car (manual versus manual that is, the 2010 autos are rated lower).
But the new car, though maybe ever so slightly under rated will likely NOT be as under rated as the 4th gen V8 cars were/are when measured on a dyno at the rear wheels so that's where the smaller gap numbers that you're seeing some speak about are coming from.
I'm betting that a 2010 manual V8 Camaro will dyno (Dynojet) in the 375-385rwhp range with manuals coming in at roughly 355-365rwhp.

Also, most 4th V8 F-bodies were not even rated at 325hp as you've stated, the base cars (Formula/Trans Am/Z28) were rated at 305hp (1998-2000) and 310hp (2001/2002), only the specialty models (WS6/SS/Firehawk etc.) were rated higher but in reality they likely made very little more at the rear wheels than the base cars did.

 

Many of thestock manual LS3 corvettes with the exact same engine, maybe slightly different exhaust, same transmission and a similar IRS rear end, are putting down 385 to 390 rwhp on dynos ive seen. The average ls1 puts down close to 300 stock. So the new camaro has about 90 more horsepower at the wheels. Not to bad if you consider the IRS of the corvette and camaro might suck up a few hp.

 

Sommer86...Ive got a news flash for you...LS3 corvette M6's are putting down 370-390 rwhp stock.

 

Either way, i still wouldn't care. I was just passing along something i read. My stock little ls1, is putitng down 341 to the wheels and it's an A4.

some cars got it. some cars dont.

Which vette's have the LS3's? what were they supposed to be rated?

 

are you saying your car is a completely STOCK ls1 and it has 341rwhp through an automatic transmission???

 

08 c6's and newer have the ls3. Vettes usually lose 50hp give or take 5hp, through the irs rearends.

I find that hard to believe that ur car a stock a4 puttin 341 down.

 

Hey OP, sorry for the

I guess it's not completely stock. It's got a lid, K&N, and a dyno mouth exhaust. No tune, no headers, no pulleys, no head work. Granted, my car's an '01 so it's got an LS6 intake.

Those were the numbers from my first dyno pull. The second, about a month later, was 336. The shop manager said that the dyno was calibrated the day before, and the rep. told him it was reading "exactly" 10 horses low, who knows.

That's the story. Now, my buddy has a lid and hooker LTs and he puts down 370.

So it's really not too far out in left field that i'm putting down the numbers that I am, if i compare my car to his.

Last nightI even raced a friends cammed & tuned LS1. He pulled on me all night, but he was just barely pulling on me. I've been told it's a freak.