2000 Camaro Z28 vs. 2010 Camaro SS
#61
11 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kansas
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HP per pound is just as worthless as ricer math hp/liter.
How the car is setup is much, much more important than it's "rated hp"
Gearing, aeros, powerband, suspension, etc are much much more important than a "rated peak hp" number. A good indication of this is the "only 505hp" Z06 that absolutely destroys cars with much higher hp levels.
Your theories may apply to mustangs though
How the car is setup is much, much more important than it's "rated hp"
Gearing, aeros, powerband, suspension, etc are much much more important than a "rated peak hp" number. A good indication of this is the "only 505hp" Z06 that absolutely destroys cars with much higher hp levels.
Your theories may apply to mustangs though
#62
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: 805-818
Posts: 3,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lets say that both the 2002 ss and the 2010 SS are losing 15% hp. The 2002 SS weighs in at 3,614 lbs with 345 hp, the 2010 camaro SS weighs in at 3,849 with 426hp. With the 15% loss of hp that puts the 2002 SS at 293 rwhp that leaves the the LS1 making .08 rwhp per pound. Now the 2010 with the 15% loss is making 362rwhp and .09 hp per pound so your really looking at a pretty even race "drivers race"...and ive also heard that that the new camaro's have a greater loss than 15%.....just my funny way of looking at things..oh and all number are rounded
#63
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hahaha im down for a race whenever but its seems like the only LS guys that want to run in DFW are fully moded....so why would i set something up that will only get me drug and then posted on here and laughed at ive said any LS1 with = mods lets line them up i dont care
#65
hahaha im down for a race whenever but its seems like the only LS guys that want to run in DFW are fully moded....so why would i set something up that will only get me drug and then posted on here and laughed at ive said any LS1 with = mods lets line them up i dont care
#66
Staging Lane
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#68
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
lets say that both the 2002 ss and the 2010 SS are losing 15% hp. The 2002 SS weighs in at 3,614 lbs with 345 hp, the 2010 camaro SS weighs in at 3,849 with 426hp. With the 15% loss of hp that puts the 2002 SS at 293 rwhp that leaves the the LS1 making .08 rwhp per pound. Now the 2010 with the 15% loss is making 362rwhp and .09 hp per pound so your really looking at a pretty even race "drivers race"...and ive also heard that that the new camaro's have a greater loss than 15%.....just my funny way of looking at things..oh and all number are rounded
Newer SS are 3850lbs rated(I never saw one on a scale..) and are closer to 375rwhp like someone said here...
Truth is that no 4th gen ever trap 111mph...My money is on the manual 5th gen, about autos, theyre not worth a dime in stock form.
#69
Staging Lane
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#70
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lets not start this crap again haha il run an LS1 on this site with = mods as mine or a stock one since yall dont think i can take a stock one...we can put it on vid and post it i dont care
#71
10 Second Club
#74
How about a stock 109 mph Z from a roll? Off the bottle? I have less mods then you.
#75
11 Second Club
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True. 60 ft might have to do with the 4th gens getting great ets but the MPH goes to the 5th gen even though stock there are more running 12's than the 4th gens. Automatics seem to have the down fall of having such a heavy tranny. I wonder if they are stronger than the 4L60's..
#76
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Alamo Heights, Texas
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, 3650 is a crazy ****** weight.. My 01 is like 3500 with me in it(205 lbs).. I don't have much weight taken out, and full option car.
I think the only weight I have missing is, exhaust(Very light exhaust set up), and no EGR/AIR, or any of that kinda junk.
I think the only weight I have missing is, exhaust(Very light exhaust set up), and no EGR/AIR, or any of that kinda junk.
#77
was the TA a 02? some had the ls6 block/intake and it also matters on miles, gearing,weight, MODS, condition. and some other crap i cant think of. was it a firehawk?
Last edited by IROC-ZR1; 01-18-2010 at 07:16 AM.
#80
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (13)
Another 12.6 run has come up. 12.61 at 111...actually a little better than the nhra stocker time. And it was a 1.95 60ft I think. This car will do 12.5 or maybe even 12.4 eventually....then you nay sayers will really have to eat crow.
This time it is bone stock to the filter . LSR performance has the car. It was the baseline run for the company car....so nobody better even try and say that they would smudge the results...that would be idiotic.
So...less than a year into production and we have two 12.6 runs and 111 trap speeds. Several sub 13 passes. 13.0 passes at 111 in magazines for god sake and with cars that probably have a few ponies in them after a good break in.
(to compare apples to apples) In just about every review I have seen of ls1 cars in mags they ran between 13.4 and 13.8. Usually trapped 104-107. Except for the famous Evan Smith test where they got a 12.89...and now I guess that means that everyone can run that. I seen hennessey test the new camaro and they literally granny shifted the car, short shifted the car, pulled a 2.1 60 ft I believe and still ran a 13.6 at 108. Just check youtube....the lsr time is their and so is the hennessey
What is it going to take? I love 4th gens also, I owned and loved one for 3 years...but jesus christ....you have to be an idiot to still keep telling yourself a 4th gen is faster than a 5th. This same EXACT BS went around when the LS1 came out. I cant count how many times I heard the quote " I just know my LT1 feels faster" or "I blew the doors off one of those new ls1's"
Now I am not doubting anything the poster said...anything can happen on the street or at the track for that matter. And just because you beat someone in a race...even badly...does not mean you have the faster car...there are just so many variables.
In my humble opinion people who are calling the new camaro slow are in some MAJOR denial.
This time it is bone stock to the filter . LSR performance has the car. It was the baseline run for the company car....so nobody better even try and say that they would smudge the results...that would be idiotic.
So...less than a year into production and we have two 12.6 runs and 111 trap speeds. Several sub 13 passes. 13.0 passes at 111 in magazines for god sake and with cars that probably have a few ponies in them after a good break in.
(to compare apples to apples) In just about every review I have seen of ls1 cars in mags they ran between 13.4 and 13.8. Usually trapped 104-107. Except for the famous Evan Smith test where they got a 12.89...and now I guess that means that everyone can run that. I seen hennessey test the new camaro and they literally granny shifted the car, short shifted the car, pulled a 2.1 60 ft I believe and still ran a 13.6 at 108. Just check youtube....the lsr time is their and so is the hennessey
What is it going to take? I love 4th gens also, I owned and loved one for 3 years...but jesus christ....you have to be an idiot to still keep telling yourself a 4th gen is faster than a 5th. This same EXACT BS went around when the LS1 came out. I cant count how many times I heard the quote " I just know my LT1 feels faster" or "I blew the doors off one of those new ls1's"
Now I am not doubting anything the poster said...anything can happen on the street or at the track for that matter. And just because you beat someone in a race...even badly...does not mean you have the faster car...there are just so many variables.
In my humble opinion people who are calling the new camaro slow are in some MAJOR denial.
Last edited by UltraZLS1; 01-31-2010 at 07:12 AM.