Looks like there is finally proof, the Manual IS Quicker....

[headpunter]

Originally Posted by Wm Holden

Me too.

we will be well below by the time we are done with our mods WM.....

[MrKrisSullivan]

The Auto's time has got to be faster than that... The 6.1 Hemi Challenger is running 4.7 pretty consistent and that thing weighs a few-hundred pounds more... The GTO is running 4.6 and 4.7 on auto's too... I don't see how the new Camaro will be slower than a 2005 GTO with an LS2... Doesn't make much sense to me...

[swifttal]

Originally Posted by MrKrisSullivan

The Auto's time has got to be faster than that... The 6.1 Hemi Challenger is running 4.7 pretty consistent and that thing weighs a few-hundred pounds more... The GTO is running 4.6 and 4.7 on auto's too... I don't see how the new Camaro will be slower than a 2005 GTO with an LS2... Doesn't make much sense to me...

They've had time to test those cars since they're actually out - typically the pro drivers in the magazines tend to be able to get better than factory numbers

[SilverTurtle]

Originally Posted by MrKrisSullivan

The Auto's time has got to be faster than that... The 6.1 Hemi Challenger is running 4.7 pretty consistent and that thing weighs a few-hundred pounds more... The GTO is running 4.6 and 4.7 on auto's too... I don't see how the new Camaro will be slower than a 2005 GTO with an LS2... Doesn't make much sense to me...

4.7 seconds in an auto SRT8 Challenger? really? show me a link to a timeslip or something... last I checked, the best time I had seen was 5.1... which was right on par with what Dodge had been broadcasting.

[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by JJ#48Racing

I hope the 4.6 0-60 for the M6 turns out to be true, but I'll be skeptical of any times until a few production cars are tested.

At the Indy meeting, was I the only one that heard the comment..." 0-60 in 4.6, altho my personal best is 4.5"

[MrKrisSullivan]

Yo Turtle!!! New Camaro bro.... Dude you've got to read up on the competion if you want to beat them man... That's why Im here... I've joined the "DARK-SIDE" LOL...
R/T Challenger's with the 5.7 pushing 370hp are laying down 5.1 0-60's...
I've seen that in a few different mags now...
I almost bought an LS2 GOAT a few months ago and almost bought an LS1 C5 vert...
But I was waiting to see what the Challenger did as I love the LOOKS... but as I've said before "I like fast cars"...
Pontiac advertised the LS2 auto as 4.6 so I really don't see why this LS3 which is a beast can't put that down...

[Kyle2k]

Originally Posted by MisterCamaro69

At the Indy meeting, was I the only one that heard the comment..." 0-60 in 4.6, altho my personal best is 4.5"

You fail to neglect that 4.6 and 4.5's are PERSONAL bests, the automatic drivers will have a much greater consistency than any manual owner could achieve. For all we know the personal best for this ENTIRE site of enthusiasts could be 4.8...it just all depends where like I said before the auto has a much greater consistency.

[Rallyman6]

Originally Posted by SS4EVER

Sweet... This news makes me happy seeing I'll be getting a 6-spd.

So the same should apply with the Aisin 6spd manual for the V6?

Awesome - and with some mods maybe we'll see 4.0?

[Mblock66]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

You fail to neglect that 4.6 and 4.5's are PERSONAL bests, the automatic drivers will have a much greater consistency than any manual owner could achieve. For all we know the personal best for this ENTIRE site of enthusiasts could be 4.8...it just all depends where like I said before the auto has a much greater consistency.

And for all you know this guy sucks at driving. May have had only a few chances behind the wheel of this new car. And although the auto may be more consistant it will be just as hard to launch right and the average auto driver will be like 5.2 so it goes both ways. There will be a few guys that will turn a fast time but not everyone.

0-60 is only one shift for either car. With lauch control in place it gives the advantage to the MT......only place to screw up is 1 to 2

[Kyle2k]

Originally Posted by Mblock66

And for all you know this guy sucks at driving. May have had only a few chances behind the wheel of this new car. And although the auto may be more consistant it will be just as hard to launch right and the average auto driver will be like 5.2 so it goes both ways. There will be a few guys that will turn a fast time but not everyone.

0-60 is only one shift for either car. With lauch control in place it gives the advantage to the MT......only place to screw up is 1 to 2

GM wants to get the highest average 0-60 possible, its a specification that has the chance of selling a few more cars so he probably doesn't suck at driving. This is why they get professional drivers for things like Nurburgring lap times. Just, because you have launch control doesn't mean it will give an advantage over the automatic (we have stall converters). I love how I give a conservative best of 4.7 to 4.8 and you assume an average automatic will be over half a second slower than tested. Someone's a little biased to the manual.

[Mblock66]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

GM wants to get the highest average 0-60 possible, its a specification that has the chance of selling a few more cars so he probably doesn't suck at driving. This is why they get professional drivers for things like Nurburgring lap times. Just, because you have launch control doesn't mean it will give an advantage over the automatic (we have stall converters). I love how I give a conservative best of 4.7 to 4.8 and you assume an average automatic will be over half a second slower than tested. Someone's a little biased to the manual.

Honestly you couldn't be more wrong I have never personally even owned a manual. I have driven them but never bought one. I am just being realistic. The stock stall won't do anything for this car. Now if you went out an bolted on a higher stall then yea you are absolutely correct. But then you aren't playing apples to apples. I know what autos can do since I have always wound up buying them when it came to the final purchase.

97 Z28 - Wound up with Auto
Acura CL Type S - wound up with Auto
2005 Legacy GT - wound up with Auto

Every single one of them was substancially slower then the manual counterpart (stock for stock that is). And it isn't like I am talking about old technology autos here. The Acura and Legacy had "paddle" shifters and performance shift modes. Still they can't keep up.

Launch control and no lift shift will more or less eliminate the "skill" from having to drive a stick fast. So I am not an auto hater, quite the opposite but people on here need to be realistic that it will be slower good driver or bad driver.

Look at the vettes. The stick is running 11.8's stock and the auto can't beat 12.3 ish and those are the BEST times put down with no launch control or no lift shift. Same engine, same trans as this car.

I will get a stick in this car however b/c it is just more fun. 2-3tenths isn't going to make much of a difference to anyone on here since practically no one here will even remotly know how to use 422 HP correctly. The first mod anyone here should do is driving school, it would be the most bang for the buck

[radz28]

I think some tinkering with the PCM with shift points and especially Torque Management will lessen any gap that may exist. 4th. Gen.-wise, I've never seen a 100% OEM auto' run faster than a manual, and I think a lot of that had to do with the gear spacing on the 4L60 because the spread between 1st and 2nd was so big, among other things. Comparing two six-speed cars (autos') is going to be a close race, I think. When someone throws a stall at that auto', that manual is going to be left in the dust.

These guys make great converters: http://www.converter.cc/testimonials/martins/

I have an SS3800 for my car and she'll run well into the mid-12s with a lid, catback, stall, and DRs and low 12s with LTs. The converter is responsible for most of the improvement as it keeps the RPMs right a peak power and, in my combination, they never fall below 5300-5400 RPMs between shifts. No more lagging down to below 4000 RPMs between shifts.

Back to the point - the manual being quicker is not much of a suprise to me. I think any TM that the manual has is way less than the auto' has and that's one hand tied behind the autos' back.

[Kyle2k]

I'm honestly surprised no one has built up a 6L80e yet, then again the A6 'vette has only been out for something around a year.

[swifttal]

Heavier car - 22hp = slower