Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
JDP Motorsports
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions

5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions General 5th generation Camaro topics not covered by other subforums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-02-2011, 10:31 AM   #1
kiteman

 
Drives: 2012 45th Camaro, 2SS/M6
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: At my computer
Posts: 1,186
L99 vs. LS3

in no way am i trying to start any type of bash thread, but i really don't understand these two engines and/or why they were used. the LS3 has quite a bit more horsepower than the L99, but is the camaro with the L99 lighter or slower (stock) than the LS3? why couldn't GM incorporate the LS3 for the auto trans too?
kiteman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:33 AM   #2
camslambam
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 SS, 06 SRT10 Ram
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: C. America
Posts: 1,660
L99 is simply a restricted LS3. Smaller heads, crappier cam, horrible tune and shorter pistons.

Main reason for L99 was to avoid gas guzzler tax.

Tune an L99 and you have an LS3, just with an auto transmission which, in reality, makes it faster than an LS3.

L99 also have a bit more torque down low than the LS3.
camslambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:34 AM   #3
aet08
 
Drives: c
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: c
Posts: 632
L99 has different lifters for the valves for the active fuel management, it disables 2 of the cylinders when under low load to increase MPG
aet08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:40 AM   #4
kiteman

 
Drives: 2012 45th Camaro, 2SS/M6
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: At my computer
Posts: 1,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by camslambam View Post
L99 is simply a restricted LS3. Smaller heads, crappier cam, horrible tune and shorter pistons.

Main reason for L99 was to avoid gas guzzler tax.

Tune an L99 and you have an LS3, just with an auto transmission which, in reality, makes it faster than an LS3.

L99 also have a bit more torque down low than the LS3.
but there is no gas guzzler tax on the ls3 either? is there? i sure as hell didn't pay any i don't think...

so let's just say stock for stock, is the ls3 still faster or is the l99 car actually lighter and they are comparable?

edit: i may have answered my question...i just found this:

Averages are fine, but the big difference is between the fastest LS3 and L99 stock.
12.58 compared to a 12.86. That's a world of difference.
kiteman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:47 AM   #5
1Camaro2SS

 
1Camaro2SS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS/RS L99
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: McHenry, Illinois
Posts: 1,426
LS3 should have been used for autos period. GM screwed this one up. No need for L99.
__________________
432 RWHP 391 RWTQ 12.37 1/4 mile on stock tires
1Camaro2SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:57 AM   #6
cab2g
love. my. car.
 
cab2g's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,387
it's all about the gas guzzler tax. To be honest, reading the tax code, we should've been hit with it...


Quote:
The IRS collects the tax directly from the manufacturer or importer of the vehicles. The following table shows the gas guzzler tax rates which have been in effect since January 1, 1991. The manufacturer or importer must pay this amount for each vehicle that does not meet the minimum fuel economy level of 22.5 mpg.

Combined fuel economy of: Amount
at least 22.5 mpg No tax
at least 21.5, but less than 22.5 mpg $1000
at least 20.5, but less than 21.5 mpg $1300
at least 19.5, but less than 20.5 mpg $1700
at least 18.5, but less than 19.5 mpg $2100
at least 17.5, but less than 18.5 mpg $2600
at least 16.5, but less than 17.5 mpg $3000
at least 15.5, but less than 16.5 mpg $3700
at least 14.5, but less than 15.5 mpg $4500
at least 13.5, but less than 14.5 mpg $5400
at least 12.5, but less than 13.5 mpg $6400
less than 12.5 mpg $7700
http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/guzzler/420f11033.htm

The 2010 Camaro SS manual and automatic have a combined fuel economy of 19MPG according to the EPA here (even the V6 should've gotten the tax @ 22MPG combined):
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Power...ro&srchtyp=ymm

GM either found a loophole, or is not passing the cost on to consumers outside of the MSRP like some manufacturers do.
__________________
cab2g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:58 AM   #7
camslambam
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 SS, 06 SRT10 Ram
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: C. America
Posts: 1,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Camaro2SS View Post
LS3 should have been used for autos period. GM screwed this one up. No need for L99.
L99 is a hell of an engine. The STOCK L99, yes is a screw up, but once you get it tuned, bolt ons and cammed then it is a nasty little bugger.
camslambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 10:59 AM   #8
camslambam
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 SS, 06 SRT10 Ram
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: C. America
Posts: 1,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteman View Post
but there is no gas guzzler tax on the ls3 either? is there? i sure as hell didn't pay any i don't think...

so let's just say stock for stock, is the ls3 still faster or is the l99 car actually lighter and they are comparable?

edit: i may have answered my question...i just found this:

Averages are fine, but the big difference is between the fastest LS3 and L99 stock.
12.58 compared to a 12.86. That's a world of difference.

Stock for stock, if the LS3 driver can shift, the LS3 will win. This is expected... An L99 is simply a dumbed down LS3.
camslambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:04 AM   #9
kiteman

 
Drives: 2012 45th Camaro, 2SS/M6
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: At my computer
Posts: 1,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by camslambam View Post
Stock for stock, if the LS3 driver can shift, the LS3 will win. This is expected... An L99 is simply a dumbed down LS3.
sure, understood. most people don't tune though, so that's good to know.
kiteman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:11 AM   #10
MyIBMssRS

 
Drives: 10 IBM SS RS/12 RAV4
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by aet08 View Post
L99 has different lifters for the valves for the active fuel management, it disables 2 of the cylinders when under low load to increase MPG
Active fuel management disables 4 cylinders.
MyIBMssRS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:12 AM   #11
Scott@Bjorn3D


 
Scott@Bjorn3D's Avatar
 
Drives: Kami, 2013 2SS LS3 Luvin
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Eufaula, Alabama
Posts: 5,898
Send a message via MSN to Scott@Bjorn3D
The L99 will shut down to 4 cylinders under light load, NOT 2. Tune it and it is fun as hell.
__________________
2013 2SS, GM Strut Tower Brace, CAI Intake Black, VMAX TB, Elite Catch Can, Hotchkis Chassis Brace, Hurst Shifter, 3.91 1LE Complete Rear End, NPP, 1LE Track Pack,Factory Reproductions Style 41 ZL1 Fitment Wheels 10" on all 4 corners
Scott@Bjorn3D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:22 AM   #12
kiteman

 
Drives: 2012 45th Camaro, 2SS/M6
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: At my computer
Posts: 1,186
tune is not that common of a thing though. seems crazy gm got away with charging more for a less powerful engine!
kiteman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:44 AM   #13
JWoj3540
 
JWoj3540's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 2SS/RS M6
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteman View Post
tune is not that common of a thing though. seems crazy gm got away with charging more for a less powerful engine!
The reason the L99 costs more is because an automatic transmission is much more costly to manufacture than a manual transmission...it's not because of the engine itself, although this may play some small factor.
__________________
Bowtie or die
JWoj3540 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:48 AM   #14
daveagogo1
TRI COUNTY TAMPA
 
daveagogo1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 1SS/RS VR/BLK A6
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Trinity, Florida
Posts: 6,532
The two have very little difference in the real world. The l99 is quicker off the line but a tad slower up top. This is why the avg quarter times are so close. They are pretty dead even overall.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by HufferSS View Post
Fast cars have rubber on the quarter panels...you sissies need to knock it off.

daveagogo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:55 AM   #15
camslambam
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 SS, 06 SRT10 Ram
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: C. America
Posts: 1,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveagogo1 View Post
The two have very little difference in the real world. The l99 is quicker off the line but a tad slower up top. This is why the avg quarter times are so close. They are pretty dead even overall.
They aren't that dead even.... On average an L99 runs mid to high 13s. An LS3 low 13s. Big difference and that's only in 1/4 mile. Go for a straight mile and the LS3 will have the L99 by a bus or two.

Tune your L99. Best. Mod. For the money. On some points in the curve it picks up as much as 40 torque....
camslambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 12:00 PM   #16
daveagogo1
TRI COUNTY TAMPA
 
daveagogo1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 1SS/RS VR/BLK A6
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Trinity, Florida
Posts: 6,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by camslambam View Post
They aren't that dead even.... On average an L99 runs mid to high 13s. An LS3 low 13s. Big difference and that's only in 1/4 mile. Go for a straight mile and the LS3 will have the L99 by a bus or two.

Tune your L99. Best. Mod. For the money. On some points in the curve it picks up as much as 40 torque....
Care to lay some cash on that? I ran 13.2 stock out of the box. I am 7-0 vs ls3 stock to stock. At pony wars with only an intake i went 3-0 vs ls3. Lost to eventual c bracket winner. Also an l99 with just a cai. Fyi Every ls3 that lined up in quick 16 c bracket was tuned and still lost to the l99's that day. Power means nothing if you cant put it to the ground.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by HufferSS View Post
Fast cars have rubber on the quarter panels...you sissies need to knock it off.

daveagogo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 12:19 PM   #17
camslambam
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 SS, 06 SRT10 Ram
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: C. America
Posts: 1,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveagogo1 View Post
Care to lay some cash on that? I ran 13.2 stock out of the box. I am 7-0 vs ls3 stock to stock. At pony wars with only an intake i went 3-0 vs ls3. Lost to eventual c bracket winner. Also an l99 with just a cai. Fyi Every ls3 that lined up in quick 16 c bracket was tuned and still lost to the l99's that day. Power means nothing if you cant put it to the ground.
And I ran 13.2 stock also. Twice. Only twice. Every other time I ran was 13.4+.

I know how powerful these cars are, but LS3s get much more power. On full bolt ons I am beating every car in this country. And we don't run 1/4, we run 1/2-1 mile.

But a properly driven LS3 will beat an l99 stock for stock.
camslambam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 12:24 PM   #18
Shardik2SS
How U Doin?
 
Drives: #21,644
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Californication
Posts: 24,577
Here we go again.....

Shardik2SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 12:29 PM   #19
daveagogo1
TRI COUNTY TAMPA
 
daveagogo1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 1SS/RS VR/BLK A6
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Trinity, Florida
Posts: 6,532
I cannot speak to anything over a 1/4. I am sure the ls3 will pull ahead beyond a quarter but, most of the world runs quarter or less. From actual tracl experience i have found they are very much equals. The biggest issue for ls3 is launching and shifting. We all know most drivers are not even close to as good as they think they are. At any rate they are much closer than you are making it sound. High 13's l99 needs a fuse pull and some better gas.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by HufferSS View Post
Fast cars have rubber on the quarter panels...you sissies need to knock it off.

daveagogo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 12:32 PM   #20
Rock-It Man
376 cubic inches of fun
 
Rock-It Man's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS A6
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Posts: 848
LS3 has higher peak horsepower, but, below 4000 rpm, the L99 has higher torque and so delivers more horsepower in most real world driving conditions.

Horsepower is just the product of torque and engine speed.
Rock-It Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 01:14 PM   #21
slick rick
SoCal Mayhem
 
slick rick's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 1SS/RS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Foothill Ranch, CA
Posts: 5,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteman View Post
but there is no gas guzzler tax on the ls3 either? is there? i sure as hell didn't pay any i don't think...
There isn't because of CAGS aka skip shift (1 to 4 shift)
__________________
slick rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 01:15 PM   #22
aet08
 
Drives: c
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: c
Posts: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyIBMssRS View Post
Active fuel management disables 4 cylinders.
thats right, i've had mine disabled for so long I forgot.
aet08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 01:29 PM   #23
SSGUNNER
Chu no guat a hasa is?
 
SSGUNNER's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 2SS/RSL99No Longer Stock
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Some where in So Cal
Posts: 3,913
L99 FTW!!!


JK....driven both and love both. LS3 not convenient for me and my commute. As it is i hate being stuck in traffic.
__________________
AAC Plasma DRL's,Plug n play harness,Elite CC,Tint: 35% & 5%, LED Dome light, Show-N-Go Plate Holder, Flowmaster AT, C.A.I. Intake, VMAX CNC Spiral Ported TB
SSGUNNER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 02:03 PM   #24
S3XPanther
by Odeon
 
S3XPanther's Avatar
 
Drives: '12 SS/RS A6 IOM SOLD, '13 1LE IOM
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Good question
Posts: 1,723
I think aet08 might have something to say about LS3's being faster lol. You did do an LS3 conversion, right? No way those AFM litters are keeping up with 950whp, my God!
__________________
"It works 60% of the time, every time."

"Some say it's a waste of time, others say it's an incredible waste of time."

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."

2013 IOM SS/RS - 1LE. Born 5/6/2013 (1 of 32 1SS IOM 1LE's)
S3XPanther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 02:42 PM   #25
bill2129
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2085 Trans AM COBRA
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chester County PA
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Camaro2SS View Post
LS3 should have been used for autos period. GM screwed this one up. No need for L99.
THIS!!!!!!!!!!!


Both 4th gens 6speed and A4 had an LS1. And I'm an auto guy. I might be getting the new 5.0 when it comes time to pick between them....
bill2129 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comprehensive L99 to LS3 conversion parts list DieselDork Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 17 03-05-2012 08:33 PM
LS3 engine specifications Tran Wiki 3 10-06-2010 10:56 PM
LS3 vs L99? SGOS252382 Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 34 09-18-2010 03:55 PM
Watched a 2011 5.0 GT at the track. JJ#48Racing Chevy Camaro vs... 143 07-21-2010 06:56 PM
L99 engine specifications Tran Wiki 0 10-19-2008 11:40 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.