cam ls1 vs gt500 super snake!?!?!
#81
#84
And also the 07-09 GT500s are turds... No faster than the 03-04s. They ran what, 12.8-12.9s? A bolt on LS1 should be a good match for that on the street and a cammed one shouldn't even be a race...
#85
The thing with 5.0s, is they are just like 4th gens; there are models that are faster than others. The automatics have 3.15 gears, and manuals can have 3.31s or 3.73s. The lightest models weigh ~3,450lbs, the heaviest add 300lbs to that. So "a 5.0" can means lots of things, just like "an LS1."
#86
The thing with 5.0s, is they are just like 4th gens; there are models that are faster than others. The automatics have 3.15 gears, and manuals can have 3.31s or 3.73s. The lightest models weigh ~3,450lbs, the heaviest add 300lbs to that. So "a 5.0" can means lots of things, just like "an LS1."
Very similar to the 4.6 4Vs. Depending how well the cams were degreed from the factory affected how well they performed. Almost like a "box of chocolate"...LOL
#87
The thing with 5.0s, is they are just like 4th gens; there are models that are faster than others. The automatics have 3.15 gears, and manuals can have 3.31s or 3.73s. The lightest models weigh ~3,450lbs, the heaviest add 300lbs to that. So "a 5.0" can means lots of things, just like "an LS1."
Think about this when your comparing times. 4th gen always had the hindrance of the 7.5 rear. Did anyone ever put a dr or slick on a bone stock 4th gen m6 to see what it could do?? If so link please. I would think 12.5's ~ would be a strong possibility.
#88
Edit: And the quickest time I've seen on t3h interwebs from a DR-only 4th gen was a 12.69 IIRC.
Edit 2: Here ya go;
#89
You gotta try to make an argument out of everything, don't you? The 4th gens also did not have the technology/options like the new Mustang does. The entire point of my post, which seems to have escaped you, is that the different models run noticeably different times. Just like the 4th gens. And it's "vary," btw.
Edit: And the quickest time I've seen on t3h interwebs from a DR-only 4th gen was a 12.69 IIRC.
Edit: And the quickest time I've seen on t3h interwebs from a DR-only 4th gen was a 12.69 IIRC.
And no one is arguing. Just posting another point of view.
#91
You gotta try to make an argument out of everything, don't you? The 4th gens also did not have the technology/options like the new Mustang does. The entire point of my post, which seems to have escaped you, is that the different models run noticeably different times. Just like the 4th gens. And it's "vary," btw.
Edit: And the quickest time I've seen on t3h interwebs from a DR-only 4th gen was a 12.69 IIRC.
Edit 2: Here ya go; stock Camaro SS 12.69 with DRs - YouTube
Edit: And the quickest time I've seen on t3h interwebs from a DR-only 4th gen was a 12.69 IIRC.
Edit 2: Here ya go; stock Camaro SS 12.69 with DRs - YouTube
#92
I actually commented on that video years ago that the claimed 1.9 60' really looked more like a ~1.7.
#94
There for making your statement not so 100% true.
BTW....the SS in the vid did not have the SLP dual dual and more than likely did not have the oe optioned SLP lid. It was also a t-top car. Vid was made in 07 and more than likely it had a well worn stock clutch is why the 60' was only a 1.9 on a mickey.
Now maybe some of you will understand why It's so close between these new 5.0's and the the old ls1 car.
#95
Not at all a 1.7.....I know what they look like/feel like at a 1.7. If you listen you can here the clutch slip. But it probably slipped into it's sweet spot netting the et. Clean off throttle shifts help the clutch live the rest of the pass w/o slip.
#96
Times didn't vary that much on 4th gens due to options. You would be looking at about 100lbs between the lightest to heaviest and no gear options for the m6. More so due to driver error/ day/ track prep. I've been around enough of them to know.
There for making your statement not so 100% true.
BTW....the SS in the vid did not have the SLP dual dual and more than likely did not have the oe optioned SLP lid. It was also a t-top car. Vid was made in 07 and more than likely it had a well worn stock clutch is why the 60' was only a 1.9 on a mickey.
Now maybe some of you will understand why It's so close between these new 5.0's and the the old ls1 car.
There for making your statement not so 100% true.
BTW....the SS in the vid did not have the SLP dual dual and more than likely did not have the oe optioned SLP lid. It was also a t-top car. Vid was made in 07 and more than likely it had a well worn stock clutch is why the 60' was only a 1.9 on a mickey.
Now maybe some of you will understand why It's so close between these new 5.0's and the the old ls1 car.
#97
Everybody knows the '07-'09 cars weren't very impressive. The issue here is the reputed "Super Snake," which is a minimum of 605hp. A sub-400rwhp full-weight F-body isn't going to run away from a 600hp GT500 from a roll like that.
So a slick-top M6 Z28 w/ no options (or a no-option Formula) and a fully-optioned automatic 2.73-geared Trans Am are going to be within 100lbs of each other and run the same times? Good to know. And btw, pointing out that there is more of a weight variance with the new 5.0s just solidifies what I originally said.
So a slick-top M6 Z28 w/ no options (or a no-option Formula) and a fully-optioned automatic 2.73-geared Trans Am are going to be within 100lbs of each other and run the same times? Good to know. And btw, pointing out that there is more of a weight variance with the new 5.0s just solidifies what I originally said.
#98
Not really......the 5.0 camp claims the 3.15 gear is better at times. I don't think you'll ever hear anyone with a auto 4th gen claim 2.73's are better. The weight of 4th gens did not very 300# either......that's a huge amount for the same basic model.
Think about this when your comparing times. 4th gen always had the hindrance of the 7.5 rear. Did anyone ever put a dr or slick on a bone stock 4th gen m6 to see what it could do?? If so link please. I would think 12.5's ~ would be a strong possibility.
Think about this when your comparing times. 4th gen always had the hindrance of the 7.5 rear. Did anyone ever put a dr or slick on a bone stock 4th gen m6 to see what it could do?? If so link please. I would think 12.5's ~ would be a strong possibility.
A 1.9 may have been doable on factory tires, but who's to say adding extra traction on an otherwise stock Camaro didn't cause it to bog off the line? I'm convinced there's more to that story anyway... look at the mph... 110+ is surely ALSO quite normal from a "well worn" Camaro...
We can say anything we want, but these cars simply were not running 12.5's back then, stock. That's merely wishful thinking.
Of course not... Nearly every car runs 11's factory stock and 10's by simply adding slicks... Yup, daily occurrence, no doubt.
Even the older GT500's were quite good, all things considered. They could've been better, but the best part was their ability to handle modifications. Far better than a 4th gen, to be sure.
Now maybe some of you will understand why It's so close between these new 5.0's and the the old ls1 car.
Realistically, it isn't "so close between" them at all. The quickest known factory stock 4th gen ran somewhere around 12.8 and the quickest known new 5L has run 12.3... 1/2 second looks like near eternity when you're racing. The average is fairly close, but the Mustang absolutely IS quicker, period.
#99
Realistically, it isn't "so close between" them at all. The quickest known factory stock 4th gen ran somewhere around 12.8 and the quickest known new 5L has run 12.3... 1/2 second looks like near eternity when you're racing. The average is fairly close, but the Mustang absolutely IS quicker, period.