05-27-2009, 01:43 PM | #71 | |
Account Suspended
|
Quote:
|
|
05-27-2009, 02:00 PM | #72 | |
Banned
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
|
Quote:
|
|
05-27-2009, 02:03 PM | #73 | |
Banned
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
|
Quote:
But I do agree in that I've seen the average right around 270 as well though. |
|
05-27-2009, 02:53 PM | #74 | |
Master of the V6
|
Quote:
f you want to compare apples to apples... at 8% driveline loss, an SS camaro @ 426bhp should be damn near breaking the 400rwhp mark out of the box (392rwhp at 8%). As well all know, it doesn't Feel free to find me examples of this though...provided you actually understand the metric of which you are posting...which as of right now, you don't seem to be getting. |
|
05-27-2009, 03:04 PM | #75 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
05-27-2009, 03:10 PM | #76 |
Drives: 2012 LS M6, Black Join Date: May 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,045
|
Mr. Maxx, you might want to state the position that an 8% driveline loss is LESS than any production car, right?
Can't wait to see a write-up of the supercharger installation/dyno/driveability. Keep up the good work. John B.
__________________
12 LS M6, IPF S/C, ASA GT-5 wheels, VMax PTB
1995 Mitsubishi Montero SR 1987 Dodge Raider Turbo Project 1986 Mitsubishi Montero 2.4l FI Transplant |
05-27-2009, 03:12 PM | #77 |
Drives: 2012 LS M6, Black Join Date: May 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,045
|
Forgot to ask and I didn't remember reading either way, but will this installation be intercooled?
John B.
__________________
12 LS M6, IPF S/C, ASA GT-5 wheels, VMax PTB
1995 Mitsubishi Montero SR 1987 Dodge Raider Turbo Project 1986 Mitsubishi Montero 2.4l FI Transplant |
05-27-2009, 03:14 PM | #78 |
Master of the V6
|
Always possible, if they aren't SAE certified....but most likely it's just the wonderful world of variables when measuring <X>.
If a 300bhp mustang GT laid down nearly 300lbs/tq stock, they'd be running a hellova lot faster times then they are. Easiest way to spot bullshit numbers is to review the quarter mile times associated with them. Take a look at ANY of these high numbers posted on forums, you'll immediately get "hmmm.. thats far higher than anyone else stock thus far" or "what type of dyno" as the first statements. Law of averages apply -- if the bulk of the cars run at XXX, and one runs noticeably higher, then the two most likley factors are 1) dyno operator error or 2) lying (even if they didn't mean to -- such as "Oh..I forgot it had a CAI, or exhaust was done when I got it...). Nothing new Been down this road with everything from a 40hp Mini to twin turbo vipers man. Always take a graph as a glimpse into the power potential, but never an unequivocal measurement. |
05-27-2009, 03:23 PM | #79 | |
Account Suspended
|
Quote:
|
|
05-27-2009, 03:49 PM | #80 | |
Master of the V6
|
Quote:
2) Not using a load bearing dyno / not using the correct corrections 3) Operators trying to make a buck with big numbers. Doesn't change the fact that they ARE NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE achieving <9% driveline loss. Sorry bud, just ain't happening. Since we're talking mustangs... you may actually want to read some of these threads where graphs are posted. You'll find that other folks, often who have been doing this for quite some time, call the numbers posted into question. http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showthread.php?t=474064 ^ Start reading. Magnaflow had a hard time getting above 300rwhp with an exhaust change... on a 2010 (315bhp rating and a much better factory tune), etc. Again, no one is arguing what a motor can or can't do, rather that the correction method you are implying (8% as "normal") simply isn't accurate. If a S197 mustang was rocking 280RWHP, she'd turn a far better time than a low 14 in the quarter. In reality, the S197 mustang puts down around the low 250hp mark (fordmuscle pulled the same number) which falls directly in line with it's power readings. Cheers! |
|
05-27-2009, 04:01 PM | #81 |
Master of the V6
|
Oh, and just a reminder: Pull was made on 20" RS wheels Again, I don't want people to be too taken by the first set of numbers... they really don't mean a whole lot at the moment.
|
05-27-2009, 06:51 PM | #82 | |
Banned
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
|
Quote:
|
|
05-27-2009, 06:54 PM | #83 | ||
Account Suspended
|
Quote:
Quote:
p.s: that link you provided just confirmed everything i have said lol thanx |
||
05-27-2009, 07:00 PM | #84 |
Drives: 2011 2SS RS, 1968 ragtop Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,850
|
How 'bout you clowns quit the bickering? "My johnson is bigger than your johnson blah blah blah". Let it go or find another forum, geez.
Someone's always faster, tough guys...
__________________
1968 Camaro Convertible LS1, T56
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
V8 Camaro Performance Upgrades List | Milk 1027 | Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons | 93 | 08-30-2021 05:56 PM |
Camaro Laws | ChevyNut | Off-topic Discussions | 107 | 11-09-2016 05:40 PM |
Camaro SS 2010 on dyno makes 364 whp & 371 rwtq !! Vid inside | UCF w00t | Camaro Photos | Spyshots | Video | Media Gallery | 128 | 03-20-2011 10:27 PM |
GM memo to dealers | Moose | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 41 | 02-04-2010 07:33 PM |
Car and Driver drives V6 Camaro! | Xanthos | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 63 | 08-26-2008 09:21 PM |