Cured from V8 Bug

[BubbaSS]

You guys can always get smaller rear gears to torque it up

[Henry G.]

Yohan love AB have all three albums! Seriously, you got to rev that thing, thats all it is. Get a catch can so youre not puking oil into the intake and let 'er rip!! I can hit about 100 in 3rd gear, this little car is under-rated! If there is a next Camaro, get the manual!!
What Simplegreen said too.

[butters]

Originally Posted by BubbaSS

You guys can always get smaller rear gears to torque it up

Wouldn't you want bigger gears for more torque? I believe the A6 is 2.97?

[Yohan]

Originally Posted by SimpleGreen

Your really comparing apples to cookies though.

It's hard to find spec's on the 4.7L but I know it makes atleast 315tq at 3400 RPM. Your Camaro only makes 278tq at 4800 RPM. That is exactly why it feels good at 4000RPM and up. If you aren't driving the engine where it makes power, then it just doesn't make power. There is no magic trick to making a V6 drive like a V8 short of serious power adders. Big motors make power down low, little motors make power up high. That's why those Hondas have tachometers that get awful close to double digits.

Great post, and yes those are the torque numbers for the '04 Sequoia 4.7L. With those torque numbers, even though its a brontosaurus at 4600lbs, it just jumps when u tap the throttle from dead stop, and gets up to speed quickly, effortless.

With our 1LT A6, at only 278ft lb tq, seems like it's kind of low for the weight of the car.

As noted on the SS---426hp/420 ftlb TQ, almost a 1:1 hp/tq ratio---it can effortlessly accelerate and doesnt need to be revved to 4000 rpm to feel alive getting normal driving or a little agressive, I'm sure.

However, for our V6, we only get 278, and wish it was more like 317-320 ft lb TQ, for a similar HP/TQ ratio of 1:1, like an SS.

So why only 278? Is because it was programmed from GM this way, shift points, etc., or the gearing is not as good?

In meantime, I've def learned so far that it's ok to be more agressive on throttle on this car---seems like it likes to revved as you said, and gets bored and sluggish w/ lower rpm, LOL.

[Yohan]

Originally Posted by Henry G.

Yohan love AB have all three albums! Seriously, you got to rev that thing, thats all it is. Get a catch can so youre not puking oil into the intake and let 'er rip!! I can hit about 100 in 3rd gear, this little car is under-rated! If there is a next Camaro, get the manual!!
What Simplegreen said too.

Henry, ABIII & Creed, man

For now, I'll defenitely drive it in Sport mode, and use more rpm. For city, I just get up to 45-50mph faster, accelerating at 3-4ooo rpm, and once it hits 4th I just let it coast and keep it around 1200rpm and watch those mpg avg numbers soar, as I blast "Broken Wings", lol

[Henry G.]

Get the exhaust and CAI if you can afford it. It will enhance a tune and/or intake if you decide later to pull those triggers. Honestly there is a nice gain from both.

[Yohan]

Originally Posted by Henry G.

Get the exhaust and CAI if you can afford it. It will enhance a tune and/or intake if you decide later to pull those triggers. Honestly there is a nice gain from both.

Got the CAI kit a few weeks ago, and lovin it. Now its a matter of making it more responsive in low end, and I think the ported TB should help.

Wish there were LFX programmers available already so I could play around with shift points. Someone mentioned that IFS Live reads the 2012? Wonder if hypertech is releasing something for our LFX anytime soon.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by butters

Wouldn't you want bigger gears for more torque? I believe the A6 is 2.97?

All V6s except the 2LS have 3.27 gearing.

Originally Posted by Yohan

.........

So why only 278? Is because it was programmed from GM this way, shift points, etc., or the gearing is not as good?

.......

Actually 278 TQ is not too bad for this engine. Sure, 300 TQ would be nice, but look at many other potent V6s out there and you will find their TQ numbers are quite a bit lower than their HP figure. My numbers aren't exact, but the mustang V6 makes around 273TQ, and even the all mighty 370Z makes no more TQ than our car does. But both of these cars offer lower gearing and weigh less and so their straightline performance is better.

Look at the new Cadillac ATS with the LFX V6. It has the exact same 3.27 gearing, but weighs only about 3460 lbs compared to the Camaro V6 3750 lbs. The ATS is rated at 5.4 seconds 0 - 60 while the Camaro was rated 4 or 5 tenths of a second slower to 60 than that. Put lower gearing or add bolt ons to that ATS and suddenly you could have a V6 that will do the 0 - 60 in under 5 seconds.

[Yohan]

Did someone suggest a tune? Jeesshhh, this guy's peelin while upshifting have read and heard great things from Trifecta tunes. Will wait a little to see if there's a programmer out there for LFX to mess around with simple tunes myself. Not looking for fancy stuff--just need to upgrade those shiftpoints, and be able to "hide" the tune when going to dealer for SVC.

[Yohan]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Actually 278 TQ is not too bad for this engine. Sure, 300 TQ would be nice, but look at many other potent V6s out there and you will find their TQ numbers are quite a bit lower than their HP figure. My numbers aren't exact, but the mustang V6 makes around 273TQ, and even the all mighty 370Z makes no more TQ than our car does. .

The TQ is not bad, but our heavier Camaro v6 could use a boost in tq. But even a v6 Mustang with 305 hp and 273 tq = 1.11 ratio, where our Camaro has almost 1.17! Its the weight of our car that hurts us some, or the lack of torque.

[ParisTNDude]

I've had an L99 and currently have a 2012 SS M6. For kicks the other day, I went to the Chevy dealership and drove a V6 Camaro auto trans and I was very impressed by it's performance. I tried it at moderate throttle, wide open and in both manual and sport modes and it definitely has a lot of spunk for a V6. I wish I had the bucks for a second new car, it would definitely be one like yours.

[SimpleGreen]

Originally Posted by Yohan

Great post, and yes those are the torque numbers for the '04 Sequoia 4.7L. With those torque numbers, even though its a brontosaurus at 4600lbs, it just jumps when u tap the throttle from dead stop, and gets up to speed quickly, effortless.

With our 1LT A6, at only 278ft lb tq, seems like it's kind of low for the weight of the car.

As noted on the SS---426hp/420 ftlb TQ, almost a 1:1 hp/tq ratio---it can effortlessly accelerate and doesnt need to be revved to 4000 rpm to feel alive getting normal driving or a little agressive, I'm sure.

However, for our V6, we only get 278, and wish it was more like 317-320 ft lb TQ, for a similar HP/TQ ratio of 1:1, like an SS.

So why only 278? Is because it was programmed from GM this way, shift points, etc., or the gearing is not as good?

In meantime, I've def learned so far that it's ok to be more agressive on throttle on this car---seems like it likes to revved as you said, and gets bored and sluggish w/ lower rpm, LOL.

Because engines are still very much mechanical beings. It goes much deeper than computer work. Valve sizes, camshaft profiles, piston sizes, crank stroke, head flow, intakes, etc...the engine doesn't make high torque because that's not how small naturally aspirated V6s work. Its extremely common for a motor of the size to make more HP than TQ the way this one does. It's simply the nature of the beast.

The Ford Ecoboost 3.5L V6 makes 367HP at 5400 RPM and 420TQ at....2500 RPM. Because, among other things, they stuck twin blow dryers on it. That's the exception.

Yes, the 6.2L doesn't need to rev to 4000 to move because it makes far more power down low. You have to understand how an internal combustion engine works before you can compare to wildly different engines such as the LS3/L99 6.2L and the LFX 3.6L. They simply will NEVER act the same. They having nothing in common aside from running on gasoline. They make way different amounts of power in different places. No computer tune, CAI, exhaust, or rear end gears will make one act like the other. Short of $6K investment into forced induction a V6 is going to act like a V6.

278TQ isn't much for a 3700lb car, but if one drives that engine like GM designed it to be driven, it motivates these fat Camaros just fine

Stock for stock, it will never compare to a V8 but I wasn't spending $7500 more to get to a entry level 1SS and then paying even more on insurance than my already high truck premiums.

[Yohan]

Here's a vid of 0-60 on a v6: Sure I can hammer it like that get it to shift near redline, but that's not how I get out of my driveway to go work, man I'm talking more about normal daily driving, especially low end, pulling out from stop or turning into street and then accelerating, etc---that's when the lag or sluggish feel seems be at when compared to a v8. Perhaps it was just that I was expecting my A6V6 to respond lowend like a v8, more alive, but instead we just gotta rev it more.

[SimpleGreen]

Precisely. You MUST rev smaller motors to get power. Sad fact of life, lol.