6th gear start

[ALLTRBO]

It was very cold out the other night and my SS was feeling mighty torquey, so I decided to try something that I was sure wouldn't work...

Top Gear tested a C6 Z06 awhile back, starting out from 5th to prove a point that the Z06 is one torquey sunofagun. I wondered if I could match that 5th gear start... and I did, in a heavier car with less torque! Somewhere I read that a stock 2010 SS other than a disabled limiter hit 175mph on the salts, in 5th gear of course. 0-175mph capable in one gear! Wow!

So, having proven the Camaro worthy of the Top Gear "I can do pointless things with this much torque" test, I decided to try to beat it...

Level ground, 3/4 tank, 37* ambient. My only mod is a CAI.
I pulled up to the stop sign and put it in 6th (definitely 6th, not 4th). *deep breath*
After a little bit of arguing with the clutch and smelling some of its anger, I was oh-so-slowly accelerating away. Using the smallest amount of throttle I could get away with, I carefully worked my foot all the way off the clutch. Once up to about 25mph, the engine started to settle in slightly more comfortably, and by 40mph, it was cruising along like it hadn't a care in the world.

This car is amazes me in so many ways! I love it!

So, what have I learned from this absolutely pointless experiment? This car desperately needs a bigger cam.
Just though I'd share.

[DRKS1D3]

Originally Posted by ALLTRBO

It was very cold out the other night and my SS was feeling mighty torquey, so I decided to try something that I was sure wouldn't work...

Top Gear tested a C6 Z06 awhile back, starting out from 5th to prove a point that the Z06 is one torquey sunofagun. I wondered if I could match that 5th gear start... and I did, in a heavier car with less torque! Somewhere I read that a stock 2010 SS other than a disabled limiter hit 175mph on the salts, in 5th gear of course. 0-175mph capable in one gear! Wow!

So, having proven the Camaro worthy of the Top Gear "I can do pointless things with this much torque" test, I decided to try to beat it...

Level ground, 3/4 tank, 37* ambient. My only mod is a CAI.
I pulled up to the stop sign and put it in 6th (definitely 6th, not 4th). *deep breath*
After a little bit of arguing with the clutch and smelling some of its anger, I was oh-so-slowly accelerating away. Using the smallest amount of throttle I could get away with, I carefully worked my foot all the way off the clutch. Once up to about 25mph, the engine started to settle in slightly more comfortably, and by 40mph, it was cruising along like it hadn't a care in the world.

This car is amazes me in so many ways! I love it!

So, what have I learned from this absolutely pointless experiment? This car desperately needs a bigger cam.
Just though I'd share.

Do you mean 6TH GEAR???

[christianmotox]

Haha nice!

[ALLTRBO]

Originally Posted by DRKS1D3

Do you mean 6TH GEAR???

(I believe your questions was in reference to the top speed comment)

Nope, top speed is reached in 5th. 6th is a gas mileage gear. It's geared too long to pull the hp required. That applies to most cars with 6-speed manuals as well, actually.

[ChrisBlair]

car has little enough torque as it is. 4K pounds, 420 lb/ft? Pfft. My 2.0L 4-banger only had 80 less lb/ft than the 6.2L V8, at 3K pounds total

[ALLTRBO]

Yeah? Your 2.0L didn't make that torque from pretty much idle, either.
I have a 2.0 4-banger that makes 400 lb/ft as well, but it can only do that when it's fully spooled. It won't even take off in 4th on its own.

[ackeight]

Originally Posted by ALLTRBO

Yeah? Your 2.0L didn't make that torque from pretty much idle, either.
I have a 2.0 4-banger that makes 400 lb/ft as well, but it can only do that when it's fully spooled. It won't even take off in 4th on its own.

Bingo. It takes quite a bit of rpm for the "4 bangers" to match the v8s. No replacement for displacement.

[RollaMo]

Originally Posted by ALLTRBO

So, what have I learned from this absolutely pointless experiment?

You will be replacing the clutch soon if you keep those experiments up.

Originally Posted by ALLTRBO

Nope, top speed is reached in 5th. 6th is a gas mileage gear. It's geared too long to pull the hp required. That applies to most cars with 6-speed manuals as well, actually.

Just because you have another gear to go (6th on some cars), does not mean you will actually go any faster.
Even on the Corvette, top speed is reached in 5th.

Get up to 170 or so in 5th and shift into 6th and you will start slowing down.

[ChrisBlair]

Wait a minute. Suddenly you're acting as if I posted that 4 cylinder engines are torque monsters and that my 4 clyinder engine was "better". I said no such thing.

The 6.2 is not a torquey V8, not at 420 lb/ft @ 4600 rpm, and no, we don't make a ton of torque down low, as V8s go. I'm used to driving a 4000 lb car that makes 510 lb/ft at 2200 rpm. A lot of the LS3 curve is sitting at or below 400 lb/ft

The 4 cyclinder car was a Solstice GXP with the GMPP turbo upgrade. It made 260 lb/ft at about 2500 rpm stock before the upgrade, board-flat curve to 6000ish. With the upgrade it made 340 lb/ft at right around 3500 rpm. It made over 300 lb/ft from around 2500 to 5200 rpm. Nice curve.

The stock 6.2 makes it's peak torque at well over 4 grand, isn't that true? Come on guys, let's not get dazzled by "high" numbers. At 1500 rpm, the LS3 Camaro SS is already making the peak torque of my Solstice GXP. The car also weighs 1K pounds more

At 2500 rpm the LS3 is making about 380 lb/ft. The GXP made about 310 lb/ft at that rpm with the full-factory tune. That's only a lack of ~70 lb/ft, and 1000 lbs less to motivate.

The V8 undeniably has the edge in torque numbers and at lower rpms, however the car is also 1000 lbs heavier.

I like torque and I like V8s too. That's why I've been wasting my time with pushrod V8s since 1989. Don't make my statements out to be something they are not. The LS3 could stand about 50 more lb/ft available in a car as heavy as our Camaros

[Fiveg56]

I feel bad for your clutch.

[SSFury]

I say "Congrats." Good experiment. Keep testing on your car, so we'll all know exactly what our cars can do, without damaging them ourselves!! Muahahah.

Just picking. Great write up, and good way to think out of the box.

[ALLTRBO]

Originally Posted by RollaMo

You will be replacing the clutch soon if you keep those experiments up.

Originally Posted by Fiveg56

I feel bad for your clutch.

Originally Posted by SSFury

I say "Congrats." Good experiment. Keep testing on your car, so we'll all know exactly what our cars can do, without damaging them ourselves!! Muahahah.

Just picking. Great write up, and good way to think out of the box.

I need an excuse to upgrade from that painfully heavy stock flywheel. What better way is there than to do pointless experiments for you guys so I have to go in there anyway?

Originally Posted by ChrisBlair

Wait a minute. Suddenly you're acting as if I posted that 4 cylinder engines are torque monsters and that my 4 clyinder engine was "better". I said no such thing.

The 6.2 is not a torquey V8, not at 420 lb/ft @ 4600 rpm, and no, we don't make a ton of torque down low, as V8s go. I'm used to driving a 4000 lb car that makes 510 lb/ft at 2200 rpm. A lot of the LS3 curve is sitting at or below 400 lb/ft

The 4 cyclinder car was a Solstice GXP with the GMPP turbo upgrade. It made 260 lb/ft at about 2500 rpm stock before the upgrade, board-flat curve to 6000ish. With the upgrade it made 340 lb/ft at right around 3500 rpm. It made over 300 lb/ft from around 2500 to 5200 rpm. Nice curve.

The stock 6.2 makes it's peak torque at well over 4 grand, isn't that true? Come on guys, let's not get dazzled by "high" numbers. At 1500 rpm, the LS3 Camaro SS is already making the peak torque of my Solstice GXP. The car also weighs 1K pounds more

At 2500 rpm the LS3 is making about 380 lb/ft. The GXP made about 310 lb/ft at that rpm with the full-factory tune. That's only a lack of ~70 lb/ft, and 1000 lbs less to motivate.

The V8 undeniably has the edge in torque numbers and at lower rpms, however the car is also 1000 lbs heavier.

I like torque and I like V8s too. That's why I've been wasting my time with pushrod V8s since 1989. Don't make my statements out to be something they are not. The LS3 could stand about 50 more lb/ft available in a car as heavy as our Camaros

Whoa now, don't take it the wrong way, I didn't mean anything like that.
All I was saying is that my Camaro has enough instant low-end to pull out from its highest gear without breaking much of a sweat, and I can almost guarantee that your Solstice couldn't have done that despite the fact that it weighs 1000 less, has much shorter gearing, and is more torquey than the average 4-banger turbo (though I'm willing to be proven wrong if anyone who owns a Solstice GXP wants to try it out).

Torque curves, weight, displacement, peaks, etc... Trust me that I know what you're talking about, but none of it was being argued.
I will say, though, that a statement like "The 6.2 is not a torquey V8" is inaccurate, because "torquey" isn't defined, that's purely subjective. To me, the 6.2 is a torquey V8. To you, the 6.2 isn't a torquey V8. Nothing wrong with either one. (For the record, I've also driven and owned V8 cars with much more low-end torque than the Camaro).

This car has more than enough low-end torque to satisfy me, I don't need one single more lb/ft. What it doesn't have enough of to satisfy me is high-rpm pull. That's where my cam comment came from. I'd be happy to lose the ability to start off in 6th gear to gain some eyeball-sucking powah up top.

[menendez1293]

Originally Posted by RollaMo

You will be replacing the clutch soon if you keep those experiments

Originally Posted by Fiveg56

I feel bad for your clutch.

that was my first though. I have done third in my V6 thinking it was first. Took me a second to realize but with some control I was able to launch without a problem.

[ALLTRBO]

I actually tried the 6th thing in my previous Camaro, a 2010 V6. It wouldn't do it. At all.