Pullies

[ender2664]

fuel trims?
i assume that was all done on the same car with same octane?

[12WhiteLS]

Originally Posted by rtcat600man

When you say intake system are you refering to these?

I paid $273 for my INJEN shipped to the door. And at the time it was one of the best listed, producing over 14 RWHP at peak. I would say this was a decent bang for the buck.

Yes and your INJEN didn't cost $400 did it?

[ender2664]

17 rwhp seems like allot, not saying it is a lie, It just seems like alot for an intake on a motor that is already so efficient.
Why would GM go through the trouble of designing a whole new way to get exhaust out of the motor if they could have picked up more just by freeing up some flow in the intake?

[kjkjr27]

I know a lot of people say the pulleys aren't worth it but I plan on getting the SLP 25% underdrive pulley, not sure when though.

[DSX_Camaro]

Originally Posted by ender2664

17 rwhp seems like allot, not saying it is a lie, It just seems like alot for an intake on a motor that is already so efficient.
Why would GM go through the trouble of designing a whole new way to get exhaust out of the motor if they could have picked up more just by freeing up some flow in the intake?

And why would you possibly think that GM comes anywhere near maximizing an engine when they have emission laws to abide by?

[ender2664]

Originally Posted by rtcat600man

It was done by an independent company who tested all those seen on the list. GM has to meet certain criteria for everyone involved who buys the camaro, including sound, which is why there are all those baffles and extra bulbs hanging off the stock system. As for why design the engine for a different exhaust, have you noticed that those are great places to now hang those twin turbos from.

Didn't think about the turbo, good point

[ender2664]

What is "fuel trims" measuring?

[12WhiteLS]

I guess you missed what I was trying to say...
There are a lot mods on the market that cost a lot more with not that much more of gain.
Underdrive pullies would be a great benefit to anyone wanting to stay N/A.

[ender2664]

Originally Posted by DSX_Camaro

And why would you possibly think that GM comes anywhere near maximizing an engine when they have emission laws to abide by?

Because of competition and that this motor (i think) has the highest n/a hp/liter of any petrol motor GM has produced.

[DSX_Camaro]

Honestly, what they should have done is spec the LFX in the Camaro for premium fuel... That would put it in the 350 crank range. Regardless, no, its the V6 model. The V8 is the good model, the small engine is just to say you have a Camaro, honestly.

[ender2664]

Agree with the 91 spec.
...disagree with the rest.

[BlackoutLFX]

Originally Posted by ender2664

What is "fuel trims" measuring?

This is misleading. Does it ever say if it is long term fuel trims or short term fuel trims? - and + mean two different things. Basically the ltft's job is to keep the short term fuel trim at 0. So if these numbers are ltft's then the + number would represent a lean conditon and the negative numbers would mean a rich condition.

[ender2664]

Then why if the AFR is basically the same on stock as the others would there be such a radical difference in the fuel trims?
And why would they tune the car so that in stock trim it is running rich?

[etmx183]

I have a Camaro, there I said it. I have the small engine to the tune of over 400 RWHP and 12.20 1/4 mile ETs and 26 MPG. HONESTLY

Originally Posted by DSX_Camaro

Honestly, what they should have done is spec the LFX in the Camaro for premium fuel... That would put it in the 350 crank range. Regardless, no, its the V6 model. The V8 is the good model, the small engine is just to say you have a Camaro, honestly.