Quote:
Originally Posted by SummoneR
Ah gotcha I see it now  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorphWS6
If GM wants to target the GT500, they need to put something besides the LSA in the car. The GT500 will dyno near 500hp at the rear wheels. This car needs an engine with forged internals that can be built for 700+ rwhp easily. The LSA does't fit that bill.
|
Why? LSAs are putting down from about 450 (A6) through 500 RWHP (M6). Though it would be bad@$$ to have that potential, how many would really need it? How much more would that cost? If Z28 comes with about 500 RWHP stock, getting another hundred to the tire should be pretty dang easy, and it still keep most of the reliability/durability of the OEM pieces.
That's just me though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViperTomcat
The LS9 wouldnt be bad..except for the fact that it is built by hand and would raise the price of the Camaro too much.
The GT500 puts down closer to 470 at the wheels, not 500. Will the GT500 still be able to outrun it? probably, but it will be drivers race as both will be 6 sp manuals.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye
The LSA features forged internals...the GT500 doesn't dyno that high....and why does it need to be built from the factory to handle that sort of power?  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23
or a slightly hotter cam.
|
LS9?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert91RS
The LSA makes 550hp without trying. GM could turn it up to 600 with a tune and boost adjustment. So where is the problem?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JusticePete
Is it really a HP contest? I own a Mustang and a Camaro. They are very different automobiles. The Mustang is much smaller maybe 80 or 85% the size of a Camaro. The rear seat in the Mustang is tiny by comparison. The Mustang is lighter. The Camaro is more comfortable. The Camaro has a state of the art IRS. The front sub-frame on the Camaro runs full on forward. The front sub-frame on the Mustang stops a foot short of that.
We have engineered complete suspension solutions for the Camaro and the Mustang, though we have not yet released the Mustang bits. Pedderised, they are both strong performers on the track. With similar RWHP the Mustang has a slight advantage do to weight.
Speaking of weight, we had to move the battery from under the hood to the trunk for weight distribution on the Mustang. That is stock on the Camaro. The advantage for OEM brakes goes to the Camaro. We did design a couple of chassis braces for the Mustang based on necessity and OE chassis design. We offer no chassis braces for the Camaro because there is no need for them.
Which is a better car? Tough question. The ride quality and vehicle dynamics for the IRS Camaro are a huge plus. A NBA coach cannot coach a player taller. He can teach them to compensate, but make the same player with the same skill set taller and they are better. The Mustang is lighter. That allows the driver to compensate for the three link rear.
Beating a whatever Mustang is not all about the engine. The Camaro has a fabulous ZETA chassis. We should be building the Z28 around the suspension, brakes and modest HP gains leveraging the strengths of the vehicle. If GM can take out a couple of hundred pounds with carbon or aluminum...
|
That's a lot of cool information. What do you mean when the front subframe runs on full forward though?