Quote:
Originally Posted by pharmd
Not trying to be a jerk, but your method of timing is not real scientific. Chevy's claim was 4.7, do you know how much user error is in the method your using...and how easy that would be to lose a couple tenths of seconds. Second, Chevy's times were achieved in "ideal" weather conditions, like I prefaced the video with, its still hot and humid, DA well over 2000 here. My original 13.9 @ 102 was in 3000DA weather, had it be run in the weather Chevy achieved their best times in, it would have be low 13's all day (stock), now I can assure you it is much faster than that.
I agree I am somewhat dissappointed with the performance, BUT the point of my original post, is that with 2 mods, not only will it sound the way it should have from the factory but you will achieve BETTER (not equal) performance as well.
There is a reason people like Motor Trend and Car and Driver don't use stopwatches (esp on a phone  ) to try to achieve accurate acceleration times. I suggest if you want to use your Iphone you purchase this app...
|
I think it is silly that you have spend that much money to make your Camaro faster only to have it still slower than GM's advertised times for the same vehicle.. Your title says you're a PharmD so you probably make enough extra money to spend on tunes and so forth which is great. If your car ran how it was supposed to, your tune would have yielded even better results.. My point is with the modification you did and the tune, you should be getting better results.