Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
BeckyD@RodgersChevrolet
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons

Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-01-2009, 06:38 AM   #26
Unfair
Banned
 
Drives: 2001 Camaro SS
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 754
wasnt this why all the quality checks and holds were done? they still can't get it together?
Unfair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 06:50 AM   #27
pharmd
Master of Medicine
 
pharmd's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 VW GTI, 2007 TBSS, 2002 Camaro
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Morehead, Kentucky
Posts: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
Like I said, I'm not blaming. I'm sure they'll fix it.

It's funny, this morning Bonnie said, "give me the key to the office cause I'll obviously beat you there".

Hey, pharmd, did you test your car before the mods? I'd be curious what you started with. You may well have got even better times if your car started with our problem.
I ran 13.9 @ 102 2.21 60' DA +3000 bone stock, the stock dyno's were
317 rwhp/329rwtq (first pull), 321rwhp/332rwtq (2nd/final pull).

When I used the correction factor for my DA, it suggested I would have run
Altitude (in feet) Elapsed Time Factor MPH Factor
3000 .9640 1.0381

My corrected time...13.39/106.09

When I saw my times I was disappointed, I wanted a 13.6 @ 104-105, but considering the weather I didn't feel they were that far off, so when I calculated the correction times, I knew they were within reason of GM claims.
__________________
pharmd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 07:06 AM   #28
pharmd
Master of Medicine
 
pharmd's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 VW GTI, 2007 TBSS, 2002 Camaro
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Morehead, Kentucky
Posts: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGOS252382 View Post
It looks like a Lexus IS.
They come with two engines (204hp and 306hp - 09 models). You probably raced the 204hp model in your truck.
The 306hp Lexus IS is a quick car.

But his Camaro SS shouldn't have much trouble beating it.
I ran my BMW 335i (which we traded in on the SS) at the track the week before we traded it in...the weather was comparable to what I ran the SS in, it ran 13.9 @ 102....it is rated at 300hp.

You guys need to check your trap speeds...if other cars are trapping the same or more mph than yours, that is a pretty good indicator they are making as much or more power than you are, and suggests that if you were to get into a highway run, you'd get pulled at higher mph's.

I certainly don't condone street/hwy racing, but lets be honest, we know it happens. Having said that 0-60, and 1/4 mile times even don't tell the whole story...

I saw a thread on camaro vs challenger...some guys are getting the challenger into the low 13's @ like 104ish, most of the camaro auto's that are running low 13's/high 12's are trapping like 108 or something...you get these cars on the hwy and the camaro will put a beating on the challenger the higher the speeds climb. A manual tranny car will make this even worse.

Don't be so suprised if you are stock, to have cars that you wouldn't expect to keep up with you, hang in there.

You guys that are having problems keep us updated, and GOOD LUCK!! I certainly hope the dealers are fair with you guys.
__________________
pharmd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 10:12 PM   #29
leviticus88
Camaro Owner Soon!
 
Drives: Chevrolet Cobalt SS/SC S2 GMPP
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by pharmd View Post
I ran my BMW 335i (which we traded in on the SS) at the track the week before we traded it in...the weather was comparable to what I ran the SS in, it ran 13.9 @ 102....it is rated at 300hp.

You guys need to check your trap speeds...if other cars are trapping the same or more mph than yours, that is a pretty good indicator they are making as much or more power than you are, and suggests that if you were to get into a highway run, you'd get pulled at higher mph's.
I agree about trap speeds but Just make sure comparing the same "types" of vehicles. Such as rwd v8 (auto or manual) and similar weights. My 230whp fwd traps 101 with a 14.5 quarter. It doesn't have 300hp at all. lol But it weighs 2800 pounds.

Get my drift? Only compare cars that are close to the same weight and have the smae types of motors and drivetrains.
leviticus88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 10:37 PM   #30
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by pharmd View Post
I ran 13.9 @ 102 2.21 60' DA +3000 bone stock, the stock dyno's were
317 rwhp/329rwtq (first pull), 321rwhp/332rwtq (2nd/final pull).

When I used the correction factor for my DA, it suggested I would have run
Altitude (in feet) Elapsed Time Factor MPH Factor
3000 .9640 1.0381

My corrected time...13.39/106.09

When I saw my times I was disappointed, I wanted a 13.6 @ 104-105, but considering the weather I didn't feel they were that far off, so when I calculated the correction times, I knew they were within reason of GM claims.
That's better than mine runs allready. Thanx for the info.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unfair View Post
wasnt this why all the quality checks and holds were done? they still can't get it together?
Most of them I think are running fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHart View Post
what kind of car is she in?? that appears to be one of the newer model lexus' in your sig, and if it is i beat one in my truck(it was a friends car) to about 85 and they got side by side and couldn't pass me. my truck is no speed demon, so something must be up man.
It's the IS350. The faster of the original two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickfromMD View Post
My L99 feels like it was tuned by the Cadalic division
During the Q&A session at Carlisle, I praised the GM team for a job well done , and mentioning some of the things I really liked about the car, but then opened up into a question about my poor dyno run for my L99, and if I was seeing expected numbers or something outside the expected parameters. . Al came back and asked me what the numbers were (I did not initially mention the specifics as I did not want to seem bashing to an otherwise fine car in a public session) . I told them it was a conservative dyno (Superflow) but it only made 305 WRHP on its best pull. http://http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpost.php?p=613731&postcount=14
They did not have a lot of suggestions, and I did not want to back them into a corner, so I just praised the car and moved on. At least they were all there to hear my concern (Scott Settlemire, Cheryl Pilcher, John Fitzpatrick, Al Oppenheiser and John Cox ) as well as hundreds of others. Later (after the public session) I showed AL my dyno sheet. I mentioned that my dyno operator had run a LS3 car a few days before mine and had said the timing curve on the L99 was more conservative than the LS3. Al appeared to concur that the setting were less aggressive on the L99.
Al did say that he attends a teleconference each week with the dealers where issues are brought up that seem to be occurring regularly. He suggested I have my dealer look at it, and that if they have concerns that they bring it up during the call. (He also suggested I run in sport mode more, and although it des not seem to help in Engine performance, transmission shifting is somewhat better)
I plan to take the car to the dealer and mention they look at this avenue.
Scott what was your dealer specifically going to try and do?
I spoke to Al a bit about the limitations of the DOD, but there was a lot going on around us and we did not have the time to get into detail about it. I did get the impression that some of the tuning is there to help with the reliability of the AFM (DOD). I wish I had had a chance to explore that subject in greater detail, as well as Torque Management. Al said there is always the chance of updates to the computer tune, and that the performance parts group would likely offer performance tunes (I hope to hear more about that).
I hope to get mine to the track with 2 other guys (another L99, and an LS3). And hopefully run them all together and have some more data to compare.

The pic is with Al and myself... real smart guy!. (note rolled up dyno print outs in my hand). BTW - He brought his teenage son, boy, thats one lucky kid.
Cool. Let us know if you hear anything new.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGOS252382 View Post
It sounds like things are slowly getting to the people who can make some decisions.
The news of performance tunes for the L99's also sounds promissing. I've never heard of GM offering anything like that for the LS1's, LS2's or current
LS3's.

Maybe they already know something and they're making plans on correcting it?
(99 Cobra comes to mind).
Let's hope so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGOS252382 View Post
It looks like a Lexus IS.
They come with two engines (204hp and 306hp - 09 models). You probably raced the 204hp model in your truck.
The 306hp Lexus IS is a quick car.

But his Camaro SS shouldn't have much trouble beating it.
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 11:11 PM   #31
DeathChill

 
Drives: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mission, BC
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
Getting beat by subpar cars. In the same weather and road conditions. There is NO WAY Bonnies car should be beating me like she has. Right now my car is slower than the V6 Camaro. If I wanted the performance of an LT, I would have ordered one and saved about 8k
Curious what kind of car she has (year and model). It says the 2008 IS-F gets a 0-60 in 4.8 and the IS 350 in 4.9. Pretty close to the Camaro, especially when you got the 21" wheels which certainly hinder performance.

EDIT: See it's a 350. Yeah, it's .2/.3 seconds off from the SS' 0-60 but I don't know about the negative effect the 21" wheels have on performance.
DeathChill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 11:25 PM   #32
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathChill View Post
Curious what kind of car she has (year and model). It says the 2008 IS-F gets a 0-60 in 4.8 and the IS 350 in 4.9. Pretty close to the Camaro, especially when you got the 21" wheels which certainly hinder performance.

EDIT: See it's a 350. Yeah, it's .2/.3 seconds off from the SS' 0-60 but I don't know about the negative effect the 21" wheels have on performance.
The 21" wheels won't have ANY affect on performance as far as speed in a straight line. The outside diameter of the whole wheel is the same. Performance may be affected in other ways but straight line speed and power isn't one of them.

And yes the IS350 is really quick but she shouldn't beat me by 9 car lenths.
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 11:35 PM   #33
DeathChill

 
Drives: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mission, BC
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
The 21" wheels won't have ANY affect on performance as far as speed in a straight line. The outside diameter of the whole wheel is the same. Performance may be affected in other ways but straight line speed and power isn't one of them.

And yes the IS350 is really quick but she shouldn't beat me by 9 car lenths.
Holy crap, 9 car lengths? That's ridiculously awful. Beat your dealer to death until they fix this (or just for fun).
DeathChill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 11:39 PM   #34
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathChill View Post
Holy crap, 9 car lengths? That's ridiculously awful. Beat your dealer to death until they fix this (or just for fun).
lol Yah, my dealer is really cool actually.

But yup, about 100 feet. Not sure how far we raced but i had a buddy drive hers and we got a simultanious jump. Was over 1/4 mile cause I was doing 120 when I started breaking.
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 02:17 AM   #35
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
The 21" wheels won't have ANY affect on performance as far as speed in a straight line. The outside diameter of the whole wheel is the same. Performance may be affected in other ways but straight line speed and power isn't one of them.

And yes the IS350 is really quick but she shouldn't beat me by 9 car lenths.
21" wheels will have a negative impact on performance if the wheels are heavier than stock.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 03:17 AM   #36
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N View Post
21" wheels will have a negative impact on performance if the wheels are heavier than stock.
Only about 60 lbs. heavier. Not gonna be much of a measurable difference. At least not a full second.
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 08:38 AM   #37
SGOS252382


 
SGOS252382's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: S.W. Florida
Posts: 6,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
Only about 60 lbs. heavier. Not gonna be much of a measurable difference. At least not a full second.

Each wheel is 15 lbs heavier? If that's true, that's a huge difference in rotating mass. The larger diameter wheels also move that rotating mass further out, even when using tires with the same outside diameter as stock.

So your car will definately be affected by this. And my guess is it would run several tenths slower down a 1/4 mile track.

I've read many different things about rotating mass. I heard anywhere from a
1-2 ratio all the way to a 1-10 ratio. Basically each 1lb of ratating mass added needs to be multplied. So the overall weight added to the vehicle is much more than just the original increase in rotating mass.

I chatted with a guy that went from 38 lbs (stock wheels) to 43 lbs (aftermarket wheels) and he said there was a noticeable difference in his car's performance (didn't give me any specific numbers). But his said he could tell his car was noticably slower. And that's with only 5 lbs per wheel (20 lbs total) of rotating mass.

Your car still shouldn't be running 7.0 sec, 0-60mph, but it will definately be negatively affected 0-60mph and 1/4 mile.
__________________
SGOS252382 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 08:40 AM   #38
patriotpa
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 02 Silverado, 09 Vue, 10 1SS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tired of apologizing when we should be kickin' butt!
Posts: 1,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGOS252382 View Post
Each wheel is 15 lbs heavier? If that's true, that's a huge difference in rotating mass. The larger diameter wheels also move that rotating mass further out, even when using tires with the same outside diameter as stock.

So your car will definately be affected by this. And my guess is it would run several tenths slower down a 1/4 mile track.

I've read many different things about rotating mass. I heard anywhere from a
1-2 ratio all the way to a 1-10 ratio. Basically each 1lb of ratating mass added needs to be multplied. So the overall weight added to the vehicle is much more than just the original increase in rotating mass.

I chatted with a guy that went from 38 lbs (stock wheels) to 43 lbs (aftermarket wheels) and he said there was a noticeable difference in his car's performance (didn't give me any specific numbers). But his said he could tell his car was noticably slower. And that's with only 5 lbs per wheel (20 lbs total) of rotating mass.

Your car still shouldn't be running 7.0 sec, 0-60mph, but it will definately be negatively affected 0-60mph and 1/4 mile.
...so what would be the best combination of tire/wheel to get the lowest rotating mass while keeping the OD and width of the tire the same? Titanium is light as hell.
patriotpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 09:20 AM   #39
MuscleCarz
 
Drives: 5.4 3v
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Lake
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGOS252382 View Post
Each wheel is 15 lbs heavier? If that's true, that's a huge difference in rotating mass. The larger diameter wheels also move that rotating mass further out, even when using tires with the same outside diameter as stock.

So your car will definately be affected by this. And my guess is it would run several tenths slower down a 1/4 mile track.

I've read many different things about rotating mass. I heard anywhere from a
1-2 ratio all the way to a 1-10 ratio. Basically each 1lb of ratating mass added needs to be multplied. So the overall weight added to the vehicle is much more than just the original increase in rotating mass.

I chatted with a guy that went from 38 lbs (stock wheels) to 43 lbs (aftermarket wheels) and he said there was a noticeable difference in his car's performance (didn't give me any specific numbers). But his said he could tell his car was noticably slower. And that's with only 5 lbs per wheel (20 lbs total) of rotating mass.

Your car still shouldn't be running 7.0 sec, 0-60mph, but it will definately be negatively affected 0-60mph and 1/4 mile.
I think 1:10 is pretty widely accepted and the faster they spin the more the force. It is exponential. Increase the mass, increase the force. Go faster, increase the force exponentially.

Rotational, unsprung weight is a bish.
MuscleCarz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 09:34 AM   #40
SGOS252382


 
SGOS252382's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: S.W. Florida
Posts: 6,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by patriotpa View Post
...so what would be the best combination of tire/wheel to get the lowest rotating mass while keeping the OD and width of the tire the same? Titanium is light as hell.

If your worried about performance (drag racing), I'd go with the lightest wheel possible (but it needs to be strong enough), and stay with the original wheel diameter (stay away from + plus sizes). But the real light weight wheels can get expensive. There's lots of good wheels out there.

In a racing forum,I read a comment from a 34 time NHRA Champ that said he ran .5 (1/2 second) slower in the 1/4 mile, when he added wheelsthat weighed 20 lbs more each (80 lbs increase in rotating mass). That just shows how much of an effect a small increase in rotating mass can affect a cars performance.

Why did he put the heavier wheels on his car. They were a present from his son (17'' Konig wheels). So he put them on his car and took it to the track and it ran .5 sec slower than it used to run.
__________________
SGOS252382 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 09:35 AM   #41
BackinBlackSS/RS
Go Blue!!!!!
 
BackinBlackSS/RS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Cruze LT
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 23,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
Only about 60 lbs. heavier. Not gonna be much of a measurable difference. At least not a full second.
15lbs a wheel and 21 inch wheels is going to have more impact on performance than you think. Probably not the full second, but certainly you will not be getting the advertised times from GM. Having said that, I still believe the problem is in the PCM/TCM tuning.
BackinBlackSS/RS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 09:39 AM   #42
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGOS252382 View Post
Each wheel is 15 lbs heavier? If that's true, that's a huge difference in rotating mass. The larger diameter wheels also move that rotating mass further out, even when using tires with the same outside diameter as stock.

So your car will definately be affected by this. And my guess is it would run several tenths slower down a 1/4 mile track.

I've read many different things about rotating mass. I heard anywhere from a
1-2 ratio all the way to a 1-10 ratio. Basically each 1lb of ratating mass added needs to be multplied. So the overall weight added to the vehicle is much more than just the original increase in rotating mass.

I chatted with a guy that went from 38 lbs (stock wheels) to 43 lbs (aftermarket wheels) and he said there was a noticeable difference in his car's performance (didn't give me any specific numbers). But his said he could tell his car was noticably slower. And that's with only 5 lbs per wheel (20 lbs total) of rotating mass.

Your car still shouldn't be running 7.0 sec, 0-60mph, but it will definately be negatively affected 0-60mph and 1/4 mile.
Well, I was just guessing on the 60lbs. Maybe more, Maybe less. But rotating mass works in all directions of rotation. What effect it may have one one side will cancel it's self out on the other side.

My freind went up from 16" wheels to 19" wheels on his 300Z and actually said he felt it was faster. The times were identical to before the swap but I gaurantee his wheels were heavier than previous. Maybe a circumfrance difference negating the would be ill effect on his but I don't beleive my wheels will slow the car down.
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 09:43 AM   #43
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by BackinBlackSS/RS View Post
15lbs a wheel and 21 inch wheels is going to have more impact on performance than you think. Probably not the full second, but certainly you will not be getting the advertised times from GM. Having said that, I still believe the problem is in the PCM/TCM tuning.
I just can't see any more than maybe .1 sec. to 60 as far as straight line acceleration when we're talking about a 13 or 14 second car. Get to the 10s and 11 second cars and maybe you lose a half a second but we're not gonna run those times with stock Camaros.
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 10:02 AM   #44
slowerthanu
 
Drives: 2ss on order, 06 f-150
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah
Posts: 42
What is clear is that not one single person on this forum (so far) knows what the hell is going on. Some of us have good suggestions and others pull ideas out of thin air.

What it is going to take is all of the owners that feel their vehicles are underpowered, need to get out to their respective dealers and make an official report with GM QC. Until then we will all be left either guessing or voiding our warranties
slowerthanu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 10:09 AM   #45
speedster
SST...
 
speedster's Avatar
 
Drives: SST Camaro 2010
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: East Coast of Florida
Posts: 6,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by patriotpa View Post
...so what would be the best combination of tire/wheel to get the lowest rotating mass while keeping the OD and width of the tire the same? Titanium is light as hell.

Just something to think about - Top Fuel, Funny Car and Pro Stock all use 16" rims. They do that because of rotating mass/inertia issues. Most drag racers use 15" rims for the same reason. Plus these combos allow for correct sidewall flex.
__________________
speedster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 10:46 AM   #46
PQ
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,729
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowerthanu View Post
What is clear is that not one single person on this forum (so far) knows what the hell is going on. Some of us have good suggestions and others pull ideas out of thin air.

What it is going to take is all of the owners that feel their vehicles are underpowered, need to get out to their respective dealers and make an official report with GM QC. Until then we will all be left either guessing or voiding our warranties
I am so efing busy during the days I can't even describe. My business requires that I be here so It's hard but I think I'm on to something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedster View Post
Just something to think about - Top Fuel, Funny Car and Pro Stock all use 16" rims. They do that because of rotating mass/inertia issues. Most drag racers use 15" rims for the same reason. Plus these combos allow for correct sidewall flex.
Soooooo then why don't they use titanium rims? If it's circular mass slowing them down and the weight is multiplied then it would seem the wheels would become the most important part of the car where weight is concerned. Those dragsters and other high speed racers need their rubber to expand. I am a racing idiot. I don't know?
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 11:14 AM   #47
SGOS252382


 
SGOS252382's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: S.W. Florida
Posts: 6,281
We know the V6 Camaro dynoed 246 rwhp, so if Scott's SS got beat by a
V6 Camaro, I can only imagine how much rwhp its putting down?

That's why I would love to see some dyno numbers from some of these
"slow" L99s.
Someone needs to bite the bullit and get their car on a dyno.


It seems that most of the "normal" L99s are coming in around 320 rwhp.
__________________
SGOS252382 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 11:34 AM   #48
MTron
 
Drives: 99 Grand Prix
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by irpq11 View Post
I just can't see any more than maybe .1 sec. to 60 as far as straight line acceleration when we're talking about a 13 or 14 second car. Get to the 10s and 11 second cars and maybe you lose a half a second but we're not gonna run those times with stock Camaros.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BackinBlackSS/RS View Post
15lbs a wheel and 21 inch wheels is going to have more impact on performance than you think. Probably not the full second, but certainly you will not be getting the advertised times from GM. Having said that, I still believe the problem is in the PCM/TCM tuning.
You should swap PCMs with another L99 to see if the issue gets better
MTron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 11:53 AM   #49
pharmd
Master of Medicine
 
pharmd's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 VW GTI, 2007 TBSS, 2002 Camaro
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Morehead, Kentucky
Posts: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by leviticus88 View Post
I agree about trap speeds but Just make sure comparing the same "types" of vehicles. Such as rwd v8 (auto or manual) and similar weights. My 230whp fwd traps 101 with a 14.5 quarter. It doesn't have 300hp at all. lol But it weighs 2800 pounds.

Get my drift? Only compare cars that are close to the same weight and have the smae types of motors and drivetrains.
That's why I used my 4 door BMW for comparison, not crazy weight difference, same weather, both rwd, both auto etc. ;-)
__________________
pharmd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2009, 12:07 PM   #50
SGOS252382


 
SGOS252382's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: S.W. Florida
Posts: 6,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by pharmd View Post
That's why I used my 4 door BMW for comparison, not crazy weight difference, same weather, both rwd, both auto etc. ;-)

I ran 13.3 @ 100 mph with 225 awhp in my 02 WRX. With 300 awhp, it ran 12.7 @ 108 mph. You definately need to compare apples to apples (similar weight and setup).
__________________
SGOS252382 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
What is the difference between a Sports car and a Muscle car (whats your opinion) Camaro Man 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 33 02-15-2011 11:15 PM
Think about this and the Z28 5th gen 13F20 Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics 41 09-04-2010 12:59 AM
My Dealer says Your Dealers are all ripping you off! Captain Awesome Camaro Price | Ordering | Tracking | Dealers Discussions 59 06-08-2009 10:44 AM
Top 10 dou*hebag cars 09'Z28 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 7 04-30-2008 10:36 AM
Top Gear - Dodge Challenger & American Muscle Cars Tran General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 8 04-24-2008 10:48 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:06 PM.


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