L99 performance issues

[larietrope]

Been reading some are experiencing what they believe is a "lack of performance issue" with their L99.
My 1SS feels very strong and from the seat of the pants experience I am very satisfied.
With that said, I bought a 1992 Mustang 5.0 new. I had ridden in a bone stock 91 and it was fast.
From day one nothing I did, gears, roller rockers, tuning, would make that car run with other 5.0's. It was just slow from the factory. I ended up frustrated and selling it soon after.
I recall some time in the recent past Mustang Cobra owners complained enough to Ford that their cars were not putting out the advertised horsepower and finally Ford did a recall to fix the problem.
Don't know if that is the situation, or it's emissions, CAFE, or what compromises G.M. has built into the cars. I think compromise is a key word.
As much as we'd like to think it's 1969 again, the feds are all over todays cars.
Let's hope there is a solution. Car guys are smart, they figure things out.
But I'm of the mind that I paid for 400 H.P. and that's what I should get.

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by larietrope

Been reading some are experiencing what they believe is a "lack of performance issue" with their L99.
My 1SS feels very strong and from the seat of the pants experience I am very satisfied.
With that said, I bought a 1992 Mustang 5.0 new. I had ridden in a bone stock 91 and it was fast.
From day one nothing I did, gears, roller rockers, tuning, would make that car run with other 5.0's. It was just slow from the factory. I ended up frustrated and selling it soon after.
I recall some time in the recent past Mustang Cobra owners complained enough to Ford that their cars were not putting out the advertised horsepower and finally Ford did a recall to fix the problem.
Don't know if that is the situation, or it's emissions, CAFE, or what compromises G.M. has built into the cars. I think compromise is a key word.
As much as we'd like to think it's 1969 again, the feds are all over todays cars.
Let's hope there is a solution. Car guys are smart, they figure things out.
But I'm of the mind that I paid for 400 H.P. and that's what I should get.

The only way you will know is to take it to the track or get it dynoed. But I wouldn't go to the track when its 95 degrees and humid.

Your car should dyno around 320 rwhp range (some higher some a little lower based on dyno calibration). I think the highest numbers I've seen from a stock
L99 A6 is 337 rwhp.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

The only way you will know is to take it to the track or get it dynoed. But I wouldn't go to the track when its 95 degrees and humid.

Your car should dyno around 320 rwhp range (some higher some a little lower based on dyno calibration). I think the highest numbers I've seen from a stock
L99 A6 is 337 rwhp.

The highest from a dynojet that I have seen has been 325 rwhp.

So far the average L99 is at 318 rwhp.

I don't think there is issues with the engine, it's an SAE Certified engine in there. I think Chevy just built a really inefficient driveline. Maybe that rear end in there really can take the pounding some say it can, but at the cost of RWHP. Kinda like a 9" Ford vs. an 8" or even an 8.8".

That, and tq management... and maybe some spark retard.

[Ace]

My A6 seems fine, I have not taken it to a track but 0-60 comes really fast on it, I've had a buddy time it a few times and we keep on averaging around 5 - 5.3 seconds and all I am doing it stomping the gas in Sport mode.

But, if GM could come out with some re-programming like they did for the G8 that would be awesome. This board is filling up with complaints about the L99 and I think anyone from GM on this board should take notice because eventually it could be some bad publicity for the Camaro once word gets out from this forum...where are the GM reps?????

[RyanSSaddict]

I'm very unhappy with the performance of my Auto! I won't even take a chance of getting beat by a Mustang! This car is suppost to be have 400 HP, well it doesn't act like it. I bet a Hyundai Genesis could beat it off the line. I hope someone at GM is listening. I don't care about my MPG's, just don't let me get beat by a Mustang.

[toehead93]

Wait until it cools down and those times will be faster. It is also a little tricky to launch the car. I really think most of the complaints are due to heat and average launches. Remeber, the 4.7 second 0-60 was run by a professional driver in cool weather. Not by people who think they are professional drivers in the middle of sumer.

If you can launch the car you will not lose to a stock Mustang. I raced my friend's Challenger R/T and lost bad the first time. I figured out the trick to launching the car and pulled him in 4 straight 1/4 mile races at the track by 1-second.

[camarossrs2150]

Originally Posted by toehead93

Wait until it cools down and those times will be faster. It is also a little tricky to launch the car. I really think most of the complaints are due to heat and average launches. Remeber, the 4.7 second 0-60 was run by a professional driver in cool weather. Not by people who think they are professional drivers in the middle of sumer.

If you can launch the car you will not lose to a stock Mustang. I raced my friend's Challenger R/T and lost bad the first time. I figured out the trick to launching the car and pulled him in 4 straight 1/4 mile races at the track by 1-second.

whats the trick

[rpepka]

Originally Posted by RyanSSaddict

I'm very unhappy with the performance of my Auto! I won't even take a chance of getting beat by a Mustang! This car is suppost to be have 400 HP, well it doesn't act like it. I bet a Hyundai Genesis could beat it off the line. I hope someone at GM is listening. I don't care about my MPG's, just don't let me get beat by a Mustang.

Mine is the same, SLOW I took it to the dealer and they said everything is fine. They said I could take it to a dyno and bring the results back.

[Muscle Master]

Maybe you guys need a good ol' tune

[TheNetGarage]

When I test drove an auto SS I too felt the same thing. I thought maybe it was just that it was so tight and smooth that it "Felt" slow but was fast. I know what you guys are saying. I am glad I went with the LS3 6 Speed Manual! I would dyno the auto's and see what you guys get. If it is under 325RWHP , i would make a stink!

[pharmd]

I really think that Chevy did a poor job of optimizing this L99. G8's "seem" to be dynoing better stock despite being rated for less power, being a smaller motor etc. Their 1/4 mile times are equally impressive for simple mods. Many are running in the 12's with minor bolt-ons. I don't know how the situation could be rectified, especially with the financial position GM is in, but its a shame. You will be able to make your L99 run VERY well, but honestly, to do so, you will have to void your powertrain warranty.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by pharmd

I really think that Chevy did a poor job of optimizing this L99. G8's "seem" to be dynoing better stock despite being rated for less power, being a smaller motor etc. Their 1/4 mile times are equally impressive for simple mods. Many are running in the 12's with minor bolt-ons. I don't know how the situation could be rectified, especially with the financial position GM is in, but its a shame. You will be able to make your L99 run VERY well, but honestly, to do so, you will have to void your powertrain warranty.

The G8's, from what I've seen, put down ~300 rwhp. But they also have smaller wheels/tires, smaller brake rotor diameter (fraction of a hp? I dunno) and a different differential.

Both are SAE Certified engines, so they should be VERY accurate in relation to their rated power at the flywheel.

Those could be the culprit. Unless GM is busting a Ford '99 Cobra on you guys.

[JBsC6]

FWIW...320 rwhp is about right for the automatic transmission...figuring a 20% drivetrain loss figure...

This reminds me of a car I drove years back...a 1992 mazda miata..that little convertible felt lightning fast.. It was really more an impression rather than reality..My other car was a 1999 c5..LOL

The miata chassis had flexibility...(lack of structural rigidity) which gave the car a sense of speed as it raced forward to its 10 second zero to 60 mph..

the reason I speak of the miata is because.......a lack of structural rigidity gives the impression of speed ...

The new camaro is such a solid beast... with excellent structural ridigity...

Thats what is giving you the sense that the new L99 camaro SS is not quick..

Don't bother dynoing the car ...just take it to the strip.. turn off traction control and put it in competitive mod..line up and accelerate down the track..(no brake ...just tag the acceleartor and enjoy)

You'll run the times GM is quoting and then leave a happy owner of an L99 Camaro..

The only thing that might be a factor that I am not mentioning...is to put the traction control in the competitive mode...as wheel spin even on the street will throw the car into a limp mode as soon as the computer senses your tires starting to slip..

Thats the other potiental issue you didn't mention...

Trust me when I tell you a car that is well balanced doesn't not have the same "sense Of speed" as a car thats a flexiy flyer..

Thats a good thing when it comes to road racing too..

Smooth always wins..

JMO

[Restroom]

Originally Posted by larietrope

Let's hope there is a solution.

Hey, hey, knock that off! If there was a "solution," we couldn't sit in here and bitch all day!!