Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Dyno Max
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Chevy Camaro vs...

Chevy Camaro vs... Comparison of Chevy Camaro versus its competition. *NO STREET RACING STORIES*

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-08-2013, 01:16 PM   #1
PHXLT1
 
PHXLT1's Avatar
 
Drives: black Z28
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: el mirage
Posts: 661
LS3 vs 5.0 yote? motor only comparison.

Not sure if this has ever been dicussed but which motor could bring the highest hp with maintaining street driveability and reliabilty? N/A of course. If anyone has hard facts please post em but if its just opinion , that's fine too.
__________________
I'm Fernando
94 Z28
Could be the end of the world.
I'd still be laid here on my own..........wasting my life away.
PHXLT1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2013, 01:17 PM   #2
bw26ss
Banned
 
Drives: ss camaro
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: usa
Posts: 877
any ls engine
bw26ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 04:40 AM   #3
2012 Mustang GT
 
2012 Mustang GT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Mustang GT, 1998 Cobra
Join Date: May 2012
Location: VA
Posts: 278
All motor...I would go with the LS, b/c it is just so deturned from the factory. 600-650 flywheel is probably all you will get from the Coyote and maintain drivability. After that you would have to spin it too the moon.
Boost...they are probably equal. But if you include the Boss engine the 5.0 wins for factory b/c of the forged internals.
2012 Mustang GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 04:08 PM   #4
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
The Coyote is a much better engine from a technical perspective for performance, but it is limited by cubic inches. If there was an LS7 sized coyote, that would be one bad engine. The LS engine is a great engine for durability, but nobody on the planet Earth uses push rods in engines other than GM, and for good reason: Over head Cams are much more sophisticated and efficient for performance. An LS would not have a prayer against a coyote if the LS was limited to 5.0 cubes. The LS only competes because it uses more cubes to make up for its obsolete push rod design. Push rods are obsolete much like the flat head design was obsolete by over head valves. I don't understand why GM insists on using push rod engines. Of course, I also don't understand why GM insists on using fiberglass on Corvettes. No car company on Earth other than GM uses fiberglass--its used on cheap replica cars and bass boats. By the way, I am not a Ford guy. I have always been a GM guy but I do like the old Fords and Mopars too. Just keeping it real and honest. By the way, I am looking into buying a Camaro 1LE.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 04:20 PM   #5
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
From just using quick and dirty math, a Coyote with cubes equal to an LS3 would put out around 550 HP and a coyote the size of an LS7 would put out over 600 hp with the same components (compression, etc.) as the current 5.0 coyote. That shows how much better the coyote is over the LS engine for performance. You can also look at the GT500 vs. the ZL1 to see the difference in HP, and it is well over 100 HP even thought the GT500 has the smaller cubes between the two. Chevrolet needs to dump push rods and go over head cam. Period. By the way, Ford was dumb to use an obsolete design solid rear axle on the Mustang when the Camaro used a much better independent rear suspension. Therefore, it is not just Chevrolet that was stuck in the past with obsolete designs. Of course, Ford learned from its mistake and is using an independent rear suspension the 2015 Mustang. Meanwhile, Chevrolet is still stuck with push rods in the new Corvette.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 04:43 PM   #6
hunter1660
 
hunter1660's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011ss/rs camaro
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: florida
Posts: 430
Most of the race cars and dragsters I see at the track have push rods
hunter1660 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 04:46 PM   #7
Ice Demon

 
Ice Demon's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,055
No replacement for displacement.
__________________
My car is stock.....ish
Ice Demon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 05:40 PM   #8
strych9
Nice rear end!
 
strych9's Avatar
 
Drives: Not a Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasChile View Post
The Coyote is a much better engine from a technical perspective for performance, but it is limited by cubic inches. If there was an LS7 sized coyote, that would be one bad engine. The LS engine is a great engine for durability, but nobody on the planet Earth uses push rods in engines other than GM, and for good reason: Over head Cams are much more sophisticated and efficient for performance. An LS would not have a prayer against a coyote if the LS was limited to 5.0 cubes. The LS only competes because it uses more cubes to make up for its obsolete push rod design. Push rods are obsolete much like the flat head design was obsolete by over head valves. I don't understand why GM insists on using push rod engines. Of course, I also don't understand why GM insists on using fiberglass on Corvettes. No car company on Earth other than GM uses fiberglass--its used on cheap replica cars and bass boats. By the way, I am not a Ford guy. I have always been a GM guy but I do like the old Fords and Mopars too. Just keeping it real and honest. By the way, I am looking into buying a Camaro 1LE.
Having owned a Cobra, and now my Camaro, I can tell you that there are a lot of advantages to the pushrod engine. Primarily, low-end torque. My Cobra really wasn't impressive until 4000 RPM. After that, hang on! Doesn't work well for 1/8th-mile racing (all that's available in my immediate area). You MUST get deeper gears for the Mustang, but then you end up with a smoke show instead of traction.

There's pros and cons for each. I do agree, though, that the Coyote engine is a sophisticated, well-engineered engine. The LS engines are good-ol', reliable small blocks.
__________________
Bye bye, Bumblebee!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
strych9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 05:50 PM   #9
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter1660 View Post
Most of the race cars and dragsters I see at the track have push rods
The only reason that they have push rods is because the rules favor them or prohibit overhead cams. For example, you have to use a push rod motor in NASCAR. Drag racing rules discourage over head cam motors with rules.

The more sophisticated forms of race cars (formula 1, etc.) do not use push rods, and no serious motor engineer will tell you that push rods have any advantage over over head cams for pure performance.

If push rods are the way to go, why does no other manufacturer on the face of the Earth not use them? Look at any sports car made other than GM and you will not find push rods--only over head cams.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 05:51 PM   #10
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by strych9 View Post
Having owned a Cobra, and now my Camaro, I can tell you that there are a lot of advantages to the pushrod engine. Primarily, low-end torque. My Cobra really wasn't impressive until 4000 RPM. After that, hang on! Doesn't work well for 1/8th-mile racing (all that's available in my immediate area). You MUST get deeper gears for the Mustang, but then you end up with a smoke show instead of traction.

There's pros and cons for each. I do agree, though, that the Coyote engine is a sophisticated, well-engineered engine. The LS engines are good-ol', reliable small blocks.
What was the cubic inches of the Cobra vs the Camaro? Most likely, the low end torque was from the extra cubes of the Camaro--not the design of the motor.

There are pros and cons to anything, but the pros of overhead cams greatly outweigh any cons versus a pushrod motor. It is not even close. Again, what other manufacture puts any push rod motors in their cars?

Last edited by TexasChile; 06-12-2013 at 06:16 PM.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 05:52 PM   #11
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Demon View Post
No replacement for displacement.
That is correct. Cubic inches is more power, all things being equal. That is just basic math.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 06:14 PM   #12
hunter1660
 
hunter1660's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011ss/rs camaro
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: florida
Posts: 430
At the gatornationals this year I watched pushrods engines producing horsepower in the thousands...watched the top fuel cars run over 300 mph in the quarter mile....didn't see any formula 1 cars there. Go NHRA
hunter1660 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 06:51 PM   #13
dekan513
chevy pride
 
dekan513's Avatar
 
Drives: 2ss/rs
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: pikeville ky
Posts: 2,145
ls cheaper to get the power and more c.i.d. but ls has been around for a while. i personally know 2 coyotes that #7 has failed. and one of them is about to go down again. using tons of oil. if u look on their forums they are droppin like flies .

the coyote is a good motor. but it limits out faster the a ls. go with what u know tho. if u like and know coyotes go with that. if u worked on ls stuff and like it go with them. its all it what u want and what u comfortable with.
__________________

check out ky speeds fb page https://www.facebook.com/kyspeed
dekan513 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:22 PM   #14
cbass

 
Drives: .
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 986
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasChile View Post
From just using quick and dirty math, a Coyote with cubes equal to an LS3 would put out around 550 HP and a coyote the size of an LS7 would put out over 600 hp with the same components (compression, etc.) as the current 5.0 coyote. That shows how much better the coyote is over the LS engine for performance. You can also look at the GT500 vs. the ZL1 to see the difference in HP, and it is well over 100 HP even thought the GT500 has the smaller cubes between the two. Chevrolet needs to dump push rods and go over head cam. Period. By the way, Ford was dumb to use an obsolete design solid rear axle on the Mustang when the Camaro used a much better independent rear suspension. Therefore, it is not just Chevrolet that was stuck in the past with obsolete designs. Of course, Ford learned from its mistake and is using an independent rear suspension the 2015 Mustang. Meanwhile, Chevrolet is still stuck with push rods in the new Corvette.

I disagree. I specifically went with the camaro because of a push rod motor.

Overhead cams put weight at the very top of the engine. A pushrod design does not.

There are advantages to displacement when it comes to driving on the street and across the entire power band.

Pushrod motors have less moving parts and thus less frictional losses meaning a bigger motor has the same fuel economy as a smaller overhead cam motor.

Packaging. Weight. Power output. Fuel economy. The camaro pushrod motor meets or exceeds the coyote in every category.

How is that not superior? Who cares if it achieves it with more displacement when the advantages are clear.

Look at this dyno chart of a LS3 vs a coyote. The camaro motor meets the top end horsepower while producing signficantly more power through huge portions of the powerband.

cbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:27 PM   #15
cbass

 
Drives: .
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 986
Quote:
There are pros and cons to anything, but the pros of overhead cams greatly outweigh any cons versus a pushrod motor. It is not even close. Again, what other manufacture puts any push rod motors in their cars?
That is actually not true. The reason manufacturers went to overhead cam motors was driven by taxes. There are countries that do or maybe did tax based on displacement. An overhead cam motor has advantages at high rpm traditionally (although looking at the redlines of the LS7 and LS3 they have managed to worked around that quite successfully). You could spin the engine at higher rpm to produce more peak hp and did not have to rely on displacement which has tax implications.
cbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:31 PM   #16
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed 2012 AGM 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasChile View Post
The Coyote is a much better engine from a technical perspective for performance, but it is limited by cubic inches. If there was an LS7 sized coyote, that would be one bad engine. The LS engine is a great engine for durability, but nobody on the planet Earth uses push rods in engines other than GM, and for good reason: Over head Cams are much more sophisticated and efficient for performance. An LS would not have a prayer against a coyote if the LS was limited to 5.0 cubes. The LS only competes because it uses more cubes to make up for its obsolete push rod design. Push rods are obsolete much like the flat head design was obsolete by over head valves. I don't understand why GM insists on using push rod engines. Of course, I also don't understand why GM insists on using fiberglass on Corvettes. No car company on Earth other than GM uses fiberglass--its used on cheap replica cars and bass boats. By the way, I am not a Ford guy. I have always been a GM guy but I do like the old Fords and Mopars too. Just keeping it real and honest. By the way, I am looking into buying a Camaro 1LE.
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:41 PM   #17
Irnwkrkev
 
Irnwkrkev's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Miami
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasChile View Post
The Coyote is a much better engine from a technical perspective for performance, but it is limited by cubic inches. If there was an LS7 sized coyote, that would be one bad engine. The LS engine is a great engine for durability, but nodody on the planet Earth uses push rods in engines other than GM, and for good reason: Over head Cams are much more sophisticated and efficient for performance. An LS would not have a prayer against a coyote if the LS was limited to 5.0 cubes. The LS only competes because it uses more cubes to make up for its obsolete push rod design. Push rods are obsolete much like the flat head design was obsolete by over head valves. I don't understand why GM insists on using push rod engines. Of course, I also don't understand why GM insists on using fiberglass on Corvettes. No car company on Earth other than GM uses fiberglass--its used on cheap replica cars and bass boats. By the way, I am not a Ford guy. I have always been a GM guy but I do like the old Fords and Mopars too. Just keeping it real and honest. By the way, I am looking into buying a Camaro 1LE.
I guess you've never heard of a Hemi engine huh? Or the Viper 10cyl?
Irnwkrkev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:44 PM   #18
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter1660 View Post
At the gatornationals this year I watched pushrods engines producing horsepower in the thousands...watched the top fuel cars run over 300 mph in the quarter mile....didn't see any formula 1 cars there. Go NHRA
You probably did not read the posts above or you would have seen that I already answered this. Drag racing has rules that work against any V8 overhead cam cars. In fact, if you read the rules, they prohibit overhead cams in the pro classes. Sort of hard to compete when the rules won't allow it. If you took one of those push rod engines and designed the same engine with an double overhead cam, it would produce more HP and dominate the drag racing class. That's why they don't allow them.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:46 PM   #19
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dekan513 View Post
ls cheaper to get the power and more c.i.d. but ls has been around for a while. i personally know 2 coyotes that #7 has failed. and one of them is about to go down again. using tons of oil. if u look on their forums they are droppin like flies .

the coyote is a good motor. but it limits out faster the a ls. go with what u know tho. if u like and know coyotes go with that. if u worked on ls stuff and like it go with them. its all it what u want and what u comfortable with.
For reliability, I do prefer the LS, but that has nothing to do with it using push rods. The LS engine is a proven reliable motor. No doubt about it. In fact, that is one reason I am considering getting a Camaro 1LE. I tend to keep my cars a long time and I require long-life reliability. The Ford coyote is not proven in that regard yet.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:47 PM   #20
cbass

 
Drives: .
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 986
Quote:
The Coyote is a much better engine from a technical perspective for performance, but it is limited by cubic inches.
It's limited by cubic inches because overhead cam motors have packaging problems that a push rod motor does not. They are much wider. Take a look how much space a coyote motor takes compared to the ls3.
cbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:50 PM   #21
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irnwkrkev View Post
I guess you've never heard of a Hemi engine huh? Or the Viper 10cyl?
You got me on that one. I was thinking about that driving home from work after I made the post that you quoted. I forgot about Dodge. Of course, the V10 is again doing it with cubic inches.

I change my statement above to say no car on Earth beside GM and Dodge uses push rods. And I still stand by my statement that the pushrod motor is obsolete and does not match up with the overhead cam in performance with the same cubic inches. It is not even close.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:54 PM   #22
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbass View Post
That is actually not true. The reason manufacturers went to overhead cam motors was driven by taxes. There are countries that do or maybe did tax based on displacement. An overhead cam motor has advantages at high rpm traditionally (although looking at the redlines of the LS7 and LS3 they have managed to worked around that quite successfully). You could spin the engine at higher rpm to produce more peak hp and did not have to rely on displacement which has tax implications.
No you have that backwards. An overhead cam motor produces more HP per displacement, and thus to get the power from smaller motors (that were required by the laws you cite), they had to use over head cams, turbos, etc. The Japanese used overhead cam 4 cylinders when they came to the US and made the American 4 cylinders look way under powered. The overhead cam is the better design.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:55 PM   #23
cbass

 
Drives: .
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 986
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasChile View Post
I change my statement above to say no car on Earth beside GM and Dodge uses push rods. And I still stand by my statement that the pushrod motor is obsolete and does not match up with the overhead cam in performance with the same cubic inches. It is not even close.
Why do you only care about cubic inches? It doesn't even have an impact on fuel economy as a bigger displacement push rod motor has less frictional losses and thus the same fuel economy.

What advantage does smaller displacement give you?

There are so many other factors that matter in the real world to the performance of a motor that a push rod motor is superior.

Cost
Weight
Packaging
Fuel economy
Weight distribution
Power throughout the powerband

How are all these trumped by displacement when it has no bad impact on weight and fuel economy?
cbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:58 PM   #24
TexasChile
 
Drives: Toyota
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbass View Post
It's limited by cubic inches because overhead cam motors have packaging problems that a push rod motor does not. They are much wider. Take a look how much space a coyote motor takes compared to the ls3.
They are wider because they are using 4 valves per cylinder and two cams per head, which is a much better design than 2 values per cylinder and one cam way down in the block and connected to the values with lifters, pushrods, and rocker arms (lots of valve train wasted energy). I don't think the overhead cam engine is limited on cubic inches. Ford just did not design the coyote to be a large displacement engine. Ford used to have a 427 big block overhead cam engine way back in '60's as a special race engine, so overhead cam motors can have large displacement.
TexasChile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2013, 07:58 PM   #25
cbass

 
Drives: .
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 986
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasChile View Post
No you have that backwards. An overhead cam motor produces more HP per displacement, and thus to get the power from smaller motors (that were required by the laws you cite), they had to use over head cams, turbos, etc. The Japanese used overhead cam 4 cylinders when they came to the US and made the American 4 cylinders look way under powered. The overhead cam is the better design.
Yes, but who cares about hp per displacement unless you live in some stupid country that taxes based on it?

The bigger motor when compared to the smaller motor has the same peak hp and more throughout the entire powerband than just at a very few rpm at the top and yet still manages to consume no more fuel with larger displacement and weight less.
cbass 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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:04 AM.


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