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

[MajorTom]

Originally Posted by Dan

Seems like you are all getting excited for nothing. Autos will beat a manual most of the time unless the driver of the manual is really good.

I hate to say it, but this is the case. I've raced A4 05s and the launch was the deciding factor always. Not necessarily the shifts, but the launch. Although it's a well known fact that the GTO's launch is a tricky one.

Originally Posted by Wm Holden

alot more rubber required.....

When you get a super the launch control will be "edited" out....I'm 99% sure of this...

so your 4.6 will turn into 5.5 as you spin your way through first and second...

It's what happens when you hit over 400 hp....and 600 is just sick.

This is personal experience speaking.


PS. I don't think we will see a stock camAro doing 12s...driven by anyone...anywhere...even ATCO...

I dunno why you think the launch control would be edited out. Are you implying it'd be because of the new tune? I doubt that. I do think however that it won't be very effective.

And on the subject of launch control, I was pretty sure it had a set RPM. You didn't have to select it, it had a set one where you dump the clutch. As simple as pressing a button, flooring the gas and dumping the clutch. Couldn't be easier. The ECU will modulate the throttle to keep the wheelspin to a minimum by controlling engine power.

Also, you say a Camaro won't run 12s even at atco. I'm pretty sure some stock GTOs ran 12s at atco. Granted ATCO is a freak track, but it's fair to assume that at least at ATCO with the better suspension, launch control and power of the Camaro, it could break into 12s. And the GTO is not a 13.9 second car at a decent altitude. I was in Tennessee at some track there and ran consistent 13.3s and 13.4s. That's with a manual transmission by the way. At our crappy track here in MO which is a KNOWN slow track, i average like 13.8 so track conditions have a lot to do with it. Stock Mustang GTs run mid to high 13s at every track but can't bust outta the 14s at Gateway. Cars with heavy mods will run near their factory estimated performance. A guy with a Z06 couldn't do better than like 12.3. Besides, before I bought the car every review I read said M6 versions were good for low 13s so if I could hit those at the right track where other cars were running what seemed like normal times, it seems fair enough to call it a low 13 second car. Most importantly, GMHTP drove it to low 13s and couldn't quite break into twelves at a reasonable track. All stock. So calling it a low 13s car is very fair.

All that said, I do think getting excited over the MT version being a few ticks faster is a little silly. This guy who drove it to a 4.6 0-60 and whatever 1/4 mile time is clearly a good driver right? The average driver is going to be a few tenths behind those until he can shift right. No arguments here, that is fact.


And just to reiterate... I'm a diehard manual transmission lover. The autos are fast and all, but the manual is where it's at for driver involvement and enjoyment as far as I'm concerned. But I had no problem believing the 6 speed auto was faster to 60 at least because of gearing and prior experience in the GTO world. Only really good stick drivers can consistently beat autos in LS coupes with IRS (or so it seems). Like I said in my first paragraph, after racing my buddy in an 05 A4 around 15-20 times. He'd taken more than half the races because of the launch. Launch control will make it easier to launch as well as no wheelhop, but that doesn't guarantee you will outrun an auto car.

[MajorTom]

Originally Posted by CWIweldace

Now if I'm not mistaken, I read somewhere that the SS manual will have something around 3:45 gears where the SS automatic will have closer to the 3:73s which will give it improved economy but sacrifice a bit of power put to the ground. The manual SS, with more HP and shorter gears will be at least half second quicker.

What you're saying and the numbers you're quoting seem to conflict.

The SS manual will have 3.45s like you said. The SS auto will have 3.27s. Which are a taller ratio like you said. Higher numbers means shorter gears. I assume you knew this, but I wanted to clarify for someone who may not have known. I'll include a link that i got from this site for tech specs with gearing. Fun fun.


http://www.camaro5.com/forums/images/camarospecs.pdf

[kevin2323]

Originally Posted by camaro_corvette

Thats .3 seconds master, you just as well compare that to night and day on 0-60 times.

you guys are getting it wrong it isnt .3 its nothing. challenger auto does 4.8 0-60(tested)

the manual has yet to be tested by car and driver so I expect 4.6 so expect the camaro to be even but probably .1 faster than the challenger.

[headpunter]

Originally Posted by MajorTom

What you're saying and the numbers you're quoting seem to conflict.

The SS manual will have 3.45s like you said. The SS auto will have 3.27s. Which are a taller ratio like you said. Higher numbers means shorter gears. I assume you knew this, but I wanted to clarify for someone who may not have known. I'll include a link that i got from this site for tech specs with gearing. Fun fun.


http://www.camaro5.com/forums/images/camarospecs.pdf

i cant wait till the 3.73's come out

[CWI]

Originally Posted by MajorTom

What you're saying and the numbers you're quoting seem to conflict.

The SS manual will have 3.45s like you said. The SS auto will have 3.27s. Which are a taller ratio like you said. Higher numbers means shorter gears. I assume you knew this, but I wanted to clarify for someone who may not have known. I'll include a link that i got from this site for tech specs with gearing. Fun fun.


http://www.camaro5.com/forums/images/camarospecs.pdf

I apologize, brainfart.My birthday was today so maybe I lost a few more brain cells. You are right though, I had it backwards for a moment. At 3:27 you have a taller gear which will take more power to turn which will make L99, which already has less power, slower than LS3 unless the .67 6th gear in the 6L80 can make up the difference.

[matt55]

Some thing to think about ,
In some cases lower gears = more shifts = slower times
and with lower gears its easier to spin vs hooking up and going
So a lower gear is not allways better

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by CWIweldace

OK, Nothing against you Spike or you Holden. I, like pretty much everyone one here hope you eat your words. I am expecting times of mid to high 12's.

Some that hasn't even been mentioned on here is gear ratios. A quarter mile ET has a lot to do with HP but maybe just as much to do with gear ratios, both tranny AND rear end.

Let's say you have two cars with the exact same engine and HP. One has a manual with 4:10 rear gears and the automatic has 3:73 gears. A expert driver runs both thru the 1/4. He will get better times with the manual every time. The higher ratio of the 3:73s will take some of the HP, it takes more power to turn taller gears to get the same speed. Simple physics. It's easily possible for a car with less HP to be quicker than a car with more HP just by gearing.

Now if I'm not mistaken, I read somewhere that the SS manual will have something around 3:45 gears where the SS automatic will have closer to the 3:73s which will give it improved economy but sacrifice a bit of power put to the ground. The manual SS, with more HP and shorter gears will be at least half second quicker.

Think mid to high 12s for manual and low 13s for automatic. I have a good bit of experience at the track. My first 8 cars I owned were all V8s and all saw track time. My '68 had 3:56 butt gears, couldn't tell ya the ratios on the M22 Muncie, and 375HP 396ci. I got impressive hole shots for tall gears. 396 had good torque which translates into good starts off the line.

Any way, enough said, there's much more to it than HP. I expect to see GT 500s in my mirror. Even at 1000feet.

Originally Posted by CWIweldace

I apologize, brainfart.My birthday was today so maybe I lost a few more brain cells. You are right though, I had it backwards for a moment. At 3:27 you have a taller gear which will take more power to turn which will make L99, which already has less power, slower than LS3 unless the .67 6th gear in the 6L80 can make up the difference.

one thing you are forgetting is the transmission gears added into this argument. yes the auto has a taller gear in the rear, but thats always been the case, esp given the fact that with an auto, everything is controlled by the transmission when leaving from a stop. the manual with its lower gear allows the motor to spin more times than the rear to keep the driver from stalling out when trying to move.



lets look at the line up

Manual gear ratios
1st 3.01
2nd 2.07
3rd 1.43
4th 1.00
5th 0.84
6th 0.57

final ratio 3.45

Auto gear ratios
1st 4.03
2nd 2.36
3rd 1.53
4th 1.15
5th 0.85
6th 0.67

final ratio 3.27

that 4.03 1st gear ratio is why the Auto can be faster 0-60.

damn, i feel like ive said this before.... oh wait..... i have.




the auto's trans gearing makes up for the taller rear ratio. its going to be a close match. it might all come down to the driver. tho with tapshift, the auto is changing gears faster.


im betting both auto and manual will be running 12s

regardless, they will be both fun vehicles to drive.

[AirGoya]

CWIweldace, HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!

But back on topic...

[fierodeletre]

Spike, good points. I just did a similar comparison between the CTS and the LT over in the V6 forum. You've got to hammer out the multiplication, Final Drive * each gear for overall flywheel to rear axle ratio. But if they're close, even in the 6L80's favor, remember the parasitic loss from the front pump and added weight of the auto versus manual. (I don't think it's as much as that comaprison used to be, in fact I just checked it on chevy's website and they have the auto listed as only 53 lbs heavier, but it needs to be factored in since we're splitting hairs ) Yes, the shifts on the auto are going to way faster, you're right, but the added weight, parasitic front pump losses and decreased horsepower of the L99 might tip the scales in favor of the Manual. Sounds like the engineers have already confirmed this though.

[fierodeletre]

Manual gear ratios
1st 3.01 10.38
2nd 2.07 7.14
3rd 1.43 4.93
4th 1.00 3.45
5th 0.84 2.90
6th 0.57 1.97

final ratio 3.45

Auto gear ratios
1st 4.03 13.18
2nd 2.36 7.72
3rd 1.53 5.00
4th 1.15 3.76
5th 0.85 2.78
6th 0.67 2.19

final ratio 3.27

And there we have it.

[CWI]

In post#87 I did mention tranny gearing. Right now though I dont care which SS model is .2 or .5 quicker, It's going to be close, but I am still getting stick with short throw linkage. I will be dissapointed if speed shifts are difficult with that setup.

My 68' had bolt up traction bars so it NEVER wheel hopped. I'm anxious to see how this new car does launch. 40 years of technology should be huge improvement. '68 also had custom suspension so it was a blast to drive backroads. New car should be just as fun but with A/C and killer stereo and better seating.

It's gonna be a long LESS THAN 6 MONTHS NOW!!!!!!!!

Actually we would all be better off if instead of arguing between ourselves, we focus on being quicker than other brands, ie: Mustang. We're already fairly sure we will be faster than Mopar.

[fierodeletre]

It's only that pesky Shelby that keeps getting our goat. Like I say though, it's still a mustang. I'd rather drive an SS than a GT500 any day. It's a sophistication thing. Shit, I'd rather drive an LS with steel wheels, cloth seats and IVER interior.

[Wm Holden]

Well...I have high HOPES for your twelves...it just doesn't equate in my mind....
but time will tell...

Good luck with stock 12s is all I can say at this point.

and... I've said it before....you can always "FORCE" the car to "over perform" with a stick....but at what cost?

Hole shots, no lift shifts, all takes it's toll.
When I'm dragin' the A4...I "roll" into the pedal to reduce drive line "Shock" and pull 1.7 60 fts...11.7 quarters are hard to find.

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by CWIweldace

Actually we would all be better off if instead of arguing between ourselves, we focus on being quicker than other brands, ie: Mustang. We're already fairly sure we will be faster than Mopar.

we dont need to focus on being quicker than the other brands... we already are


and our v-6 is more powerful than their v8...