So we get stuck with low end Tremec?

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

You know.. this has always bugged me.. that rear was perfectly fine for the way the car came from the factory.

It's not GM's responsibility to over-engineer parts so that people can run slicks, add blowers, or do other changes to the car.

I found it fascinating that someone would add slicks, toss on a 200 shot of nitrous and then complain that the "crappy" rear blew apart. lol

ive blown 10bolts on street tires with only a CAI on the car.

but looking at it from GM's pov at the time, it was a cheap and easy rear to throw in the car that would not be destroyed by 90% of the buyers for the car.

Originally Posted by brandotron

I disagree.

I understand not having to engineer stock parts for people with FI, nitrous, etc in mind, but SLICKS? Come on now, there are countless horror stories on ls1tech about people blowing up their rear ends on sticky tires and STOCK POWER. There are also a few about DONUTS on street tires killing 10 bolts. The way I see it, durability involves the purposeful over engineering of a wear item. The fourth gen wasn't an economy commuter car - why would they design a rear end that could juuuuust barely handle 300-350hp on street tires?

axle flex is a bitch. but you dont hear about the numerous people who HAVENT blown their rears. also, how many miles are on the rears of the cars getting the rear blown over on tech? how many passes down the track?

[CamaroFan1]

If you were GM, or Tremec, what incentive would you have to rate the trans above the maximum HP of the car? Now, if you add an sc or other mods, they just say the trans was not rated for that HP to get out of warranting the repair.

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

axle flex is a bitch. but you dont hear about the numerous people who HAVENT blown their rears. also, how many miles are on the rears of the cars getting the rear blown over on tech? how many passes down the track?

Haha, perhaps 'tech was a bad example - enthusiasts are far more likely to blow the rear than your average joe nutsack.

That being said, age and mileage can be a factor, but I was in highschool (graduated '99) when the fourth gens were new and I heard about rear end problems then.

...I say "heard about" because I was still walking to school. With zero ladies. I was pretty metal.

[Hylton]

These trannies are fine. The only thing I've been told by guys in the know is not to power shift them while the rear tires are spinning.

[patriotpa]

Agreed. Don't believe us? Search Trannies on Google.

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by patriotpa

Agreed. Don't believe us? Search Trannies on Google.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by Hylton

These trannies are fine. The only thing I've been told by guys in the know is not to power shift them while the rear tires are spinning.

Yes.. it's the price we pay for a very smooth trans.

The death knel is if you do a first gear burnout and then, while the car is stationary, you shift to second. That little deal is VERY hard on the tranny.

I was told to just start in second if you HAVE to do this.

Second just can't take that hit..

It's different if the car is moving..

We road raced and autocrossed a 2010 a couple of weeks ago and the trans work flawlessly.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by brandotron

I disagree.

I understand not having to engineer stock parts for people with FI, nitrous, etc in mind, but SLICKS? Come on now, there are countless horror stories on ls1tech about people blowing up their rear ends on sticky tires and STOCK POWER. There are also a few about DONUTS on street tires killing 10 bolts. The way I see it, durability involves the purposeful over engineering of a wear item. The fourth gen wasn't an economy commuter car - why would they design a rear end that could juuuuust barely handle 300-350hp on street tires?

That's because you don't hear about all the people that didn't break there rear ends. lol

Hey, they were the weak links in the chain, but again, it's not GMs job to make the car stand up to drag racing and certainly not doing donuts.. lol

It's the same reason they didn't come painted (and thus rusted).. because it saved GM a few bucks and let them give you Corvette performance at Camaro prices.

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

That's because you don't hear about all the people that didn't break there rear ends. lol

Hey, they were the weak links in the chain, but again, it's not GMs job to make the car stand up to drag racing and certainly not doing donuts.. lol

It's the same reason they didn't come painted (and thus rusted).. because it saved GM a few bucks and let them give you Corvette performance at Camaro prices.

Haha, fair enough. Good writeup in your mag last issue, BTW...or was that two issues ago?

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by brandotron

Haha, perhaps 'tech was a bad example - enthusiasts are far more likely to blow the rear than your average joe nutsack.

That being said, age and mileage can be a factor, but I was in highschool (graduated '99) when the fourth gens were new and I heard about rear end problems then.

...I say "heard about" because I was still walking to school. With zero ladies. I was pretty metal.

in '99, 4th gens were already 6 years old lol. but I know what you're saying. but with those cars you were hearing about, how many were running slicks? power adders etc? the 10 bolt was a POS from the start. it was made to deal with the power the car made, but once you start dead hooking, they dont last.

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

That's because you don't hear about all the people that didn't break there rear ends. lol

Hey, they were the weak links in the chain, but again, it's not GMs job to make the car stand up to drag racing and certainly not doing donuts.. lol

It's the same reason they didn't come painted (and thus rusted).. because it saved GM a few bucks and let them give you Corvette performance at Camaro prices.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by brandotron

Haha, fair enough. Good writeup in your mag last issue, BTW...or was that two issues ago?

The new issue just came out so it's two ago.. they all start to blend together at some point. Thanks though!

I have a 2010 in my garage right now.. it's mine to mod for four months. After spending some time behind the wheel I really like it. Good solid performer. I can't wait to start modding it.

And it did real well against other cars at the road track and autocross.

[EVS Motors Inc.]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

do you think GM is going to put a transmission in there that can juuuuuuuuuuuuust barely support the existing power of the motor?

Yes they do, ask the Vette guys. Not necessarily just the tranny, but the driveshafts and diffs love breaking.

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by EVS Motors Inc.

Yes they do, ask the Vette guys. Not necessarily just the tranny, but the driveshafts and diffs love breaking.

Don't bother man, the Vette guys will all deny it.

[wavrun2000]

Originally Posted by Hylton

Don't bother man, the Vette guys will all deny it.

It is going to be hard for them to considering most all M6 Vettes have to get a new tranny at 100k. Take my dads for example at 110k it took its last breath. It is not necessarily the tranny in the vette, it's the long input shaft that put unnecessary wear on the syncros. It is a fact of life with rear mounted trannies.