willizm

iTrader: (10)

Cool story bro.....

M29_Formula

LMAO.

I'm gonna go ahead and back my race up with this little gem that happened last night:

mini_me

Pretty much verifies what we all have been saying. Something doesn't add up.

willizm

iTrader: (10)

Altitude and his car weighs 3000lbs. Makes sense to me.

mini_me

So you're telling me an NA car at that altitude is going to perform better than an FI car (CTS-V)? That Camaro did very well. I am assuming the 427rwhp is corrected.

willizm

iTrader: (10)

I never said that, you made in a very very vague statement. Keep in mind that you are comparing two completely different cars. A heavy CTS-v making a little more power against a far lighter fbody. Not only that, but those little balts on e85 make alot of steam with 1250+lbs less weight than a ctsv.

Sorry if things don't add up for you.

sick_tight

My cobalt had cai, full 3" exhaust, poly motor mounts, upper charge piping and a 93 octane tune going from 29psi spike to 27psi and I was pushing 311 whp 383wtq. With e85 (DI turbos LOVE) I could see him pushing 350whp+ to 400wtq+. I've seen those numbers before. Plus being 3000lbs is a big help

punishmentcycle

iTrader: (6)

fbody guy needs a little work with that shifter but damn good runs there!

TonyGXP

the NA f body at altitude hanging and slight pull on the cobalt just backs up that the V was subpar in every way...


Plus it's a cobalt (-300 pts for fwd)


JK....

V-seriesTech

iTrader: (5)

Indeed.

mini_me

Willzm, the above point is what I'm trying to make. I ran a full bolt on cobalt at 3000ft altitude and it was ugly for him when I was stock. Now he wasn't running E85 at the time but still.

I'm not saying the cobalt shouldn't win, but that was down right embarrassing. To top it off, then the NA fox body stayed with him and at times pulled. I'm just trying to put 2&2 together. I guess anything can happen on the streets.

8ty8 LS1

iTrader: (3)

^ i think you meant f-body lol but i agree

hugger1975

iTrader: (3)

Mods on your car?
Keep in mind I trapped 109 with dp and pump tune

Buff

wow... was the driver on life support or something

willizm

iTrader: (10)

So you expect all cobalt's to perform the same then? E85 makes a difference, the tune makes a difference and so does the driver of both cars. There are too many variables to say with certainty how two cars should always going to run. Hell even at altitude a turbo car is going to perform slightly better than a supercharged setup.

What tune was the cobalt on? Reason I ask is there a big enough difference between a gms1, trifecta, and custom hptuners tune.

V-seriesTech

iTrader: (5)

E85,...if anyone has not tried it...it is incredible.

My truck,...flex fuel,...has a "economical tune" in it from my Trinity(diablosport)(custom). It isn't tuned for E85...but, when I do run E,...the vehicle wakes up like you would not believe when I run it on E85 with no other changes. It feels like I picked up about 30 horsepower(very heavy vehicle).

Now my vetter,..on the old setup...making roughly 800rwhp on 93,...would have made around 900rwhp or above on E85....being tuned for it. If not more. The fuel is indeed amazing,...it smells kind of exotic....it does use much more fuel though. My Tahoe gets about 3mpg on avg less.

You can convert a vehicle to run both fuels,..just need to get a flex fuel sensor,..and wire it to your pcm. Run both,..or whatever. I have not set up a flex fuel sensor on my vette but....maybe one day I will. Fortunately, E85 stations are all over the place down here within reason.

Yes, I realize most of you know ^^^ but...for those of you that don't...... it's the Bee's Knee's. A real HOOT.

M29_Formula

Let's do some ricer math quick...

CTS-V - 556hp / 4250lbs
Usually dyno ~480rwhp stock
Subtract about 20% loss due to altitude, 6000ft and you end up with about 384rwhp UNCORRECTED.

So 384rwhp and 4250lbs is about a 11.1:1 power to weight ratio.

H/C/I LS1 Camaro - 426rwhp / ~3400lbs
Subtract only a ~15% loss due to increased volumetric efficiency helping negate effects of altitude and you get 362RWHP UNCORRECTED.

So you get 362RWHP and 3400lbs = 9.4:1 power to weight ratio.

Cobalt SS/TC on E85 with bolt-ons - Probably about 320whp UNCORRECTED and 3000lbs. (Don't know my dyno number, but most cars with a similar tune and mods make 340whp-360whp and around 400ft/lbs)

320WHP and 3000lbs = 9.38:1 power to weight ratio.

Races make sense, especially when you consider the CTS-V is a bone stock auto and I'm sure the torque abuse programming in the lower gears really hurts it because if you watch closely, the CTS-V doesn't fall back as hard once we are over 70 or 80 mph.

mini_me

You pulled that V as if he was trapping 99mph at most. NOT saying your car ain't running strong. My V is/was cammed, pullied, full exhaust, ported blower with supporting mods.

Pwebbz28

iTrader: (31)

Still a busted *** FwD cobalt. No one likes those pieces of **** anyways unless they already own one.

sick_tight

youre absolutely right, but after you own a SS turbo your mindset completely changes.

i would have kept mine forever if it was RWD. i cant really fit into a sky or solstice.

fastest FWD factory car to go around the ring... cant deny that. and they make crazy power with relatively inexpensive mods