Quote:
Originally Posted by headpunter
i talked to Al Oppenhieser FACE TO FACE and he said the manual is faster. end of story.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAG UR IT
at Indy they told us the #'s have been steadily increasing...hp was going to "most likely creep up from there" meaning the 422hp LS3. There was a lot. I know that's what has been put up so far... and that is RIGHT... according to GM and the solid proven #'s they have right now. But, we were told they have gone faster. So, it's more of a wait and we'll see thing.
Welcome to the site SScattergunSS and thanks for jumping in! Glad to have you aboard! 
Those are some pretty good #'s, huh! 
This is where I need headpunter...or Hylton...to refresh my memory. I remember being told the LS3 went 4.6....right headpunter? Hope I'm right on this.... |
Headpunter is dead on - any performance numbers that have been published thus far are from cars which were not production tuned. Al has said that there is no difference to this car vs. any other car which offers an automatic and manual version - the manual version is always quicker.
How can a 400hp, slush box with a 3:23 gear be faster than a 422hp, manual 6 speed with a 3:42 gear? Yes an automatic can shift gears faster than a human but this speed cannot compensate for the A) 22 HP difference, B) loss in HP from automatics due to the fact that the power is actually transferred through liquid and not direct mechanicals as a manual and C) automatic cars will have a taller rear end gear.
Now - as indicated earlier, if an electronically shifted sequential gearbox was offered as an automatic (as in the M3), with the same HP and rear end gear ratio as the manual was offered, I would agree that it would be faster.
The laws of physics will win out everytime. For those who are not convinced, look at the performance numbers of a 2002 SS Camaro where the LS1 had the same HP regardless of which transmission you had.
Wait for the production cars to be tested by the magazines.