Bolt on 5.0, beats 4th gen 427 stroker camaro SS
#421
I've already stated what I have changed......hell I bet one of your furd daddies can recite it for me.
LOL......DJ suck for tuning. I can see you liking inflated #'s though.
Just conversatin dude. If your gonna talk **** about how great your furd is then it should be all Ford.
I go deep in them.........very deep
LOL......DJ suck for tuning. I can see you liking inflated #'s though.
Just conversatin dude. If your gonna talk **** about how great your furd is then it should be all Ford.
I go deep in them.........very deep
Where did I get beat down??? I have a car with 200+whp deficit to these guys and running similar et/mph while still leaving on a 10bolt being n/a with just a bolt-on engine and leaving on a very streetable dr. Not to shabby IMO. All along none of them are n/a or even have a stock blower. Then after all their preaching they don't even build their sbf **** with ford parts when they were yakkin about their combo's. Proof is in the pudding bud.
But got the beat down????? Yea right.
But got the beat down????? Yea right.
#423
His car sounds right on par with my buddies base model with just a catback M6 that no one seems to believe is real.
#424
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
To me that's obvious due to looking at how your Camaro ran. You say 515-530whp would be easily attainable for you to get out of your 346ci LS6 with just a heads and can swap. Ok, that's fine. I'd actually say hats off to ya if you actually did it. But why jump all over my *** when I say nearly 500 crank hp (my bad for using the stock LS7 output as an example) is attainable with a bolt-on and tuned 2000 Cobra R? Which is really only about a 75-80hp gain. And that is not some wild guess I pulled out of my lucky hat. Those are the power increases I read many owners getting from their modded Cobra R's.
Last edited by R6cowboy; 03-02-2014 at 11:18 AM.
#425
To me that's obvious due to looking at how your Camaro ran. You say 515-530whp would be easily attainable for you to get out of your 346ci LS6 with just a heads and can swap. Ok, that's fine. I'd actually say hats off to ya if you actually do it. But why jump all over my *** when I say nearly 500 crank hp (my bad for using the stock LS7 output as an example) is attainable with a bolt-on and tuned 2000 Cobra R? Which is really only about a 75-80hp gain.
#427
#429
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
That wasn't my point...... I could careless what was on it on the time of the dyno I never said anything about your dyno numbers
Your CAR is filled with a bunch of non GM stuff......if you learned to read you'd realized I never said anything about your "Engine" until you brought up the Engine **** which in fact your car isn't fully GM again.....
Good try though Doug you almost thought you someone
Your CAR is filled with a bunch of non GM stuff......if you learned to read you'd realized I never said anything about your "Engine" until you brought up the Engine **** which in fact your car isn't fully GM again.....
Good try though Doug you almost thought you someone
#432
#433
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Me...as usual.
So 413sae yet you don't want to say what you changed? Yea because DJ sae numbers aka the most used numbers for comparison sakes on the web is inflated dyno #s . Highest number this car ever made was on a MD
My car has already been faster on a crappy pass.
So that is the only changes?
Would you like to compare factory parts?
My car has already been faster on a crappy pass.
So that is the only changes?
Would you like to compare factory parts?
And no you haven't.....but you have had the best weather of your year to do it.
Would like to compare stock atmosphere's?
To me that's obvious due to looking at how your Camaro ran. You say 515-530whp would be easily attainable for you to get out of your 346ci LS6 with just a heads and can swap. Ok, that's fine. I'd actually say hats off to ya if you actually did it. But why jump all over my *** when I say nearly 500 crank hp (my bad for using the stock LS7 output as an example) is attainable with a bolt-on and tuned 2000 Cobra R? Which is really only about a 75-80hp gain. And that is not some wild guess I pulled out of my lucky hat. Those are the power increases I read many owners getting from their modded Cobra R's.
You see GT......when these guys talk this kind of **** w/o backing it up on their own behalf the ownage stays with me. When you yak about n/a 5.4's and have a blower on your own personal 5.4 that says it all. No more needs to be said.
#434
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that completely but if your gonna compare the 5.4L to any lsx engine how about you compare it to the correct one instead of an outdated one..... thats like me comparing the ls7 to the 4.6L... not fair or right would you agree? So if its not a fare comparison lets not make that comparison because after all its a pointless comparison...
#435
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
That wasn't my point...... I could careless what was on it on the time of the dyno I never said anything about your dyno numbers
Your CAR is filled with a bunch of non GM stuff......if you learned to read you'd realized I never said anything about your "Engine" until you brought up the Engine **** which in fact your car isn't fully GM again.....
Good try though Doug you almost thought you someone
Your CAR is filled with a bunch of non GM stuff......if you learned to read you'd realized I never said anything about your "Engine" until you brought up the Engine **** which in fact your car isn't fully GM again.....
Good try though Doug you almost thought you someone
You point is if the n/a 5.4 or 4.6 was so ******* great you would be running n/a......but you're not
#436
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
I understand that completely but if your gonna compare the 5.4L to any lsx engine how about you compare it to the correct one instead of an outdated one..... thats like me comparing the ls7 to the 4.6L... not fair or right would you agree? So if its not a fare comparison lets not make that comparison because after all its a pointless comparison...
#437
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh and auto stop calling the 4.6 or 5.4L little its not the engine is bigger then the ls1/6. Both engines are designed differently which gives different cubic inches. While giving around the same bhp and trq numbers. GM would make an OHC engine if they thought that they needed to but apparently they don't need to. How ever i will admit i figured the new 5.0 would have made them do it considering all they success it has
#438
10 Second Club
Oh and auto stop calling the 4.6 or 5.4L little its not the engine is bigger then the ls1/6. Both engines are designed differently which gives different cubic inches. While giving around the same bhp and trq numbers. GM would make an OHC engine if they thought that they needed to but apparently they don't need to. How ever i will admit i figured the new 5.0 would have made them do it considering all they success it has
#439
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hio i seen some of that and i also see some of it on the GM side as well. I hate ford with a passion but i still give credit where credit is due. Not saying you don't i seen where you have but some people just don't or like to compare none comparable engines or cars. (YES im guilty of that too)