Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Vector Motorsports
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion

General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion Come chat about other cars.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-29-2013, 09:16 PM   #76
Truck Norris
Thread Mover
 
Truck Norris's Avatar
 
Drives: a Monte Carlo
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sierra Nevada
Posts: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
ecoboost is a fail.
I know!

A 90whp gain from a tune and downpipe on a new gasoline truck is a total FAIL.

__________________
In the market for something fast
Truck Norris is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 09:29 PM   #77
big hammer

 
Drives: 2002 ws6
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: manitoba
Posts: 984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truck Norris View Post
I know!

A 90whp gain from a tune and downpipe on a new gasoline truck is a total FAIL.


you figured out what a turbo is?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black GT View Post
Couple months ago we a few of us were at the track playing with one of my buddies 2010 Z06 automatic.Between 4 of us NO ONE was able to get out of the 12's.

I believe torque managnent was killing us that night, when launching the car would take off and fall flat on it's face.
big hammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 09:37 PM   #78
Rapid Runner
 
Drives: 2012 Audi TT-RS
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 133
Why does everyone keep hating on the Ecoboost?.. It's annoying

I've seen one make 12's... can't beat the output these motors put out
Rapid Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 09:52 PM   #79
willhe64

 
willhe64's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Vert, 2011 4x4, 9sec Vega
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,886
Because Ford is over complicating their engines. DOHC, turbo V6, it's all marketing hype. Their answer to the econ/horsepower wars is to make small engines with big ponies, and it's not working. They are making peak horsepower numbers but fail at where everyone drives them normally.

I demo'd an ecoboost for an entire weekend before I bought my silverado 6.2 (I owned a Ford Fusion AWD sport at the time and loved it! 260hp V6, no gimmicks). When I got the truck it had 4800km on it and the average fuel economy showed at 16.8l per 100km(canada). The power was not impressive.

Test drove the 6.2 and loved it. My trucks average economy now sits at 14.8l per 100km, this is 13% better mileage and 405 horsepower and gobs of torque. I haul a race car and trail every other weekend too.
__________________
I feel it only fair to warn you, I have a black belt in CAPS LOCK.
willhe64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 09:58 PM   #80
Rapid Runner
 
Drives: 2012 Audi TT-RS
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by willhe64 View Post
Because Ford is over complicating their engines. DOHC, turbo V6, it's all marketing hype. Their answer to the econ/horsepower wars is to make small engines with big ponies, and it's not working. They are making peak horsepower numbers but fail at where everyone drives them normally.

Well

I wouldn't call DOHC's, Turbo V6's marketing hype... considering mostly all manufactures are downsizing and turboing smaller engines

I think in my opinion, Ford missed the mark on the MPG factor and critics are making a field day out of it, otherwise... where is the fail...
Rapid Runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 09:59 PM   #81
Truck Norris
Thread Mover
 
Truck Norris's Avatar
 
Drives: a Monte Carlo
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sierra Nevada
Posts: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by willhe64 View Post
They are making peak horsepower numbers but fail at where everyone drives them normally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
you figured out what a turbo is?
Yup, i'm on my 4th factory built turbo pick up and the low end torque sucks.

Im thinking about removing it and increasing displacement just like the 454 in my old motorhome.

There's no replacement for displacement.
__________________
In the market for something fast
Truck Norris is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 10:13 PM   #82
willhe64

 
willhe64's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Vert, 2011 4x4, 9sec Vega
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truck Norris View Post
There's no replacement for displacement.
Try and tell the Ford fanbois here that.
__________________
I feel it only fair to warn you, I have a black belt in CAPS LOCK.

Last edited by willhe64; 06-29-2013 at 10:29 PM.
willhe64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 10:35 PM   #83
willhe64

 
willhe64's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Vert, 2011 4x4, 9sec Vega
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid Runner View Post
Well

I wouldn't call DOHC's, Turbo V6's marketing hype... considering mostly all manufactures are downsizing and turboing smaller engines

I think in my opinion, Ford missed the mark on the MPG factor and critics are making a field day out of it, otherwise... where is the fail...
Gah, "Ford missed the mark on the MPG factor".
So they made a 3.6 litre twin turbo that got 40 less horsepower and 13% less fuel mileage than a pushrod V8. I'd call that a total fail. Now the Ford forums a are rife with problems with these engines. Over complicted BS.
__________________
I feel it only fair to warn you, I have a black belt in CAPS LOCK.
willhe64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 11:32 PM   #84
Inferno LSX
Supercharged LSX
 
Inferno LSX's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS Black/Carbon Fiber
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: City of Angels
Posts: 6,569
What GM should really do is make a RCSB Duramax/Allison 2500HD. The MPG, HP, TQ, 0-60 would be very nice. LOL.
__________________
Inferno LSX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 01:20 AM   #85
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid Runner View Post
... can't beat the output these motors put out
Except with all the Gen V GM V8s, a good many of the current gen V8s, Ford's own 5.0L V8, and Chrysler's Hemis.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid Runner View Post
I think in my opinion, Ford missed the mark on the MPG factor and critics are making a field day out of it, otherwise... where is the fail...
It's right in your own post. That the entire purpose of all that extra cost and complexity, and increased potential of large repair bills down the road was all in the name of fuel economy, and it did not deliver the fuel economy. That is the fail.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 01:27 AM   #86
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by willhe64 View Post
Try and tell the Ford fanbois here that.
I'll agree. No replacement for displacement. (Though you could argue that a turbo is just a special form of displacement, if you really think about it).

I've driven EcoBoosts, and I agree with the statements many have already made about a lack of low-end grunt. I was not at all impressed (disappointed in fact given all the hype) with the lower end of the 3.5 EcoBoost torque curve. The 5.0, all the GM LS engines I've had a chance to drive, and even the older 4.6 3-valver felt stronger down low.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 04:49 PM   #87
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,383
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
I've driven EcoBoosts, and I agree with the statements many have already made about a lack of low-end grunt. I was not at all impressed (disappointed in fact given all the hype) with the lower end of the 3.5 EcoBoost torque curve. The 5.0, all the GM LS engines I've had a chance to drive, and even the older 4.6 3-valver felt stronger down low.
420 tq @ 2500 rpm? how is that "lack of low end grunt"?
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 05:40 PM   #88
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
420 tq @ 2500 rpm? how is that "lack of low end grunt"?

that is mid range grunt
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 05:44 PM   #89
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
You just did. Your every comment will be permanently saved in a 100 zetta-byte data center in Utah.



Well, yes, actually. If what you are looking for in a car is a cushy ride for long highway trips, an F-150 Raptor is probably not the best choice. An Impala would be wiser.

That was my point. If you want the driving characteristics of a car, you don't want a truck.

Major difference there bud - trust me I tow with trucks daily and the Raptor absolutely sucks at towing period. let me reiterate they suck at hauling too. So where are the truck features you describe - if you love them that much my son in law has one he will sale you so he can buy a real truck. Baja is not truck.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 05:46 PM   #90
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 ABM LT/RS, 06 Chevy Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 9,079
Not really sticking up for one side or the other, but making 400 or so TQ at around 2,000 rpm is not "mid range" grunt.

Anyways, this topic is going off topic as usual when it comes to V6 anything around here.

Fact is, this Tremor is a low 13 high 12 truck with a tune. That said...its no lightning and not really a "sports truck"
__________________
IPF Tune, Custom Magnaflow Exhaust, Vararam intake, MACE Ported Manifold, RX Ported TB, "Black Ice" manifold insulator, Elite Catch Can, ZL1 repro wheels, ZL1 Springs, DRL Harness, Front GM GFX, Heritage grill, Street Scene lower grill, NLP Spoiler, ZL1 rockers and much more!
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 06:05 PM   #91
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
Not really sticking up for one side or the other, but making 400 or so TQ at around 2,000 rpm is not "mid range" grunt.

Anyways, this topic is going off topic as usual when it comes to V6 anything around here.

Fact is, this Tremor is a low 13 high 12 truck with a tune. That said...its no lightning and not really a "sports truck"

2000 is not but 2500 is - engine speed is critical in truck applications the more RPMs the more heat, the more heat yada yada yada but you all have this figured out with your assumptions this old geeser will but out.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 06:20 PM   #92
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
420 tq @ 2500 rpm? how is that "lack of low end grunt"?
I don't care what the numbers on paper are. I've driven them, and they don't feel any stronger driving around town and merging onto the interstate than the NA 3.5s. Maybe they start to put out if you put your foot all the way to the floor, but having to whip it to get anything out of it doesn't exactly give a sense of a strong engine. If the way they tune these EcoBoosts is such that their power delivery is like an on/off switch, they can keep them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 05stram View Post
Major difference there bud - trust me I tow with trucks daily and the Raptor absolutely sucks at towing period. let me reiterate they suck at hauling too. So where are the truck features you describe - if you love them that much my son in law has one he will sale you so he can buy a real truck. Baja is not truck.
Here's the important difference between how the Raptor and Lightning are being sold:

The Lightning was a truck trying to be a sports car, and it wasn't. The Raptor is a truck meant to be a hard-core, high performance 4x4, and that's exactly what it is. The Raptor greatly excels at its intended function. The Lightning was just mediocre.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 06:24 PM   #93
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
Fact is, this Tremor is a low 13 high 12 truck with a tune. That said...its no lightning and not really a "sports truck"
Seriously? The Camaro LS3 is a high 12 car with summer tires and good conditions. You honestly think a full size pickup with 60 fewer horses with an empty bed pressing down on all-seasons will run even with it?
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 06:55 PM   #94
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
I don't care what the numbers on paper are. I've driven them, and they don't feel any stronger driving around town and merging onto the interstate than the NA 3.5s. Maybe they start to put out if you put your foot all the way to the floor, but having to whip it to get anything out of it doesn't exactly give a sense of a strong engine. If the way they tune these EcoBoosts is such that their power delivery is like an on/off switch, they can keep them.



Here's the important difference between how the Raptor and Lightning are being sold:

The Lightning was a truck trying to be a sports car, and it wasn't. The Raptor is a truck meant to be a hard-core, high performance 4x4, and that's exactly what it is. The Raptor greatly excels at its intended function. The Lightning was just mediocre.

you are exactly correct they are meant for a Baja style of ride nothing more nothing less. I was just pointing out the statement it was meant to excels as a truck role is incorrect. Trucks are meant for work and this truck was meant for play. And I will agree it does do it's job at that.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 08:06 PM   #95
Silverlsinva


 
Silverlsinva's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Fiat 500 Abarth Grigio
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Manassas, Va
Posts: 3,022
I think the Tremor with the 4.10 gears will prolly feel pretty stout in the low end grunt dept. Cause it seems most of the f150s around here at dealer ships have the 3.55 or 3.73 so im thinking that might be the lack of low end grunt.
Silverlsinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 09:45 PM   #96
big hammer

 
Drives: 2002 ws6
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: manitoba
Posts: 984
Quote:
Originally Posted by willhe64 View Post
Because Ford is over complicating their engines. DOHC, turbo V6, it's all marketing hype. Their answer to the econ/horsepower wars is to make small engines with big ponies, and it's not working. They are making peak horsepower numbers but fail at where everyone drives them normally.

I demo'd an ecoboost for an entire weekend before I bought my silverado 6.2 (I owned a Ford Fusion AWD sport at the time and loved it! 260hp V6, no gimmicks). When I got the truck it had 4800km on it and the average fuel economy showed at 16.8l per 100km(canada). The power was not impressive.

Test drove the 6.2 and loved it. My trucks average economy now sits at 14.8l per 100km, this is 13% better mileage and 405 horsepower and gobs of torque. I haul a race car and trail every other weekend too.
same. I found the ecoboost to be doggy. bought a 6.2 gm with the max tow package--- this thing is an animal with great fuel economy to boot. lov this truck.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black GT View Post
Couple months ago we a few of us were at the track playing with one of my buddies 2010 Z06 automatic.Between 4 of us NO ONE was able to get out of the 12's.

I believe torque managnent was killing us that night, when launching the car would take off and fall flat on it's face.
big hammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 10:01 PM   #97
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 ABM LT/RS, 06 Chevy Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 9,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
Seriously? The Camaro LS3 is a high 12 car with summer tires and good conditions. You honestly think a full size pickup with 60 fewer horses with an empty bed pressing down on all-seasons will run even with it?
Please go back and re-read my post that you quoted.

I said with a tune. If a crew cab f150 can do mid 13s or better, and if a Flex that weighs 5,000 lbs with a tuned ecoboost can do 12s (which has been done more than once) then this truck is capable of low 13s or high 12s.

In stock form I'd expect low to mid 14s.
__________________
IPF Tune, Custom Magnaflow Exhaust, Vararam intake, MACE Ported Manifold, RX Ported TB, "Black Ice" manifold insulator, Elite Catch Can, ZL1 repro wheels, ZL1 Springs, DRL Harness, Front GM GFX, Heritage grill, Street Scene lower grill, NLP Spoiler, ZL1 rockers and much more!
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 12:44 AM   #98
big hammer

 
Drives: 2002 ws6
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: manitoba
Posts: 984
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
Please go back and re-read my post that you quoted.

I said with a tune. If a crew cab f150 can do mid 13s or better, and if a Flex that weighs 5,000 lbs with a tuned ecoboost can do 12s (which has been done more than once) then this truck is capable of low 13s or high 12s.

In stock form I'd expect low to mid 14s.
fun fact: my reg cab 5.3 6 speed with 3:42's was exactly no faster than my 4 door 5.3 6 speed with 3:42's.

this "tremor" will be lucky to do mid 14's at best.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black GT View Post
Couple months ago we a few of us were at the track playing with one of my buddies 2010 Z06 automatic.Between 4 of us NO ONE was able to get out of the 12's.

I believe torque managnent was killing us that night, when launching the car would take off and fall flat on it's face.
big hammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 10:02 AM   #99
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
nope. dodges truck 6.4 has less power than gm's 6.2.
In HD form For some reason Dodge always gives the HDs a lower power rating than 1500s, if they offer that engine on a 1500 the power rating would be higher, if they offer it in a sports trucks it will no doubt be the full 470/470.
Stew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 10:25 AM   #100
willhe64

 
willhe64's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Vert, 2011 4x4, 9sec Vega
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
same. I found the ecoboost to be doggy. bought a 6.2 gm with the max tow package--- this thing is an animal with great fuel economy to boot. lov this truck.

Yes sir! I tow a race car and trailer that weighs 4450lbs total. The 6.2 is a bit of overkill. Tows it like it's not there.

The max tow package is the best bargain going. $1600 gets you the 6.2, a bigger diff. A hitch and integrated brake controller.
__________________
I feel it only fair to warn you, I have a black belt in CAPS LOCK.
willhe64 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 11:26 PM.


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