06-24-2010, 08:30 PM | #71 | ||
Drives: V8 up front and 7-spd out back FTW Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 746
|
Quote:
Quote:
Now... I'm an engineer with the GM Performance Division. Well actually, I'm not. But see how easy it was to say that I am? Think about it this way... "Someone from an internet forum said he met a guy who claimed he worked for the GM Performance Division who told him secret inside GM information." Heh... Don't believe everything you hear or read on the internet (or anywhere else), there are millions of ways that info could be (and often is) flawed. If the said guy actually was what he said he was, he was either lying, or he is an idiot. The latter would put him right on par with many of the engineers I directly work with at NASA, no joke. Renke, two different dyno's giving you two different results is the norm. From what I've observed on a dyno, 87 octane does make my car knock and pull timing so I'm not saying your results are impossible, just invalid. Make the same test on the same dyno in the same conditions with the same setup (after running through a full tank of the different octane), then you'll have a clearer picture of what's actually going on. So much mis-information. It never ends. :( |
||
06-24-2010, 08:43 PM | #72 |
Drives: 1lt,rjt,m6 &2004 harley Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kendall ny
Posts: 96
|
with reguards toward... renke...and his dyno runs the fact that you have two differant types of dynos at two differant locations means you have no zero not a bit of usable information.
it would take a single dyno with many runs and with as little differances in weather conditions . switching from one octane to the other. this would still be a matter for debate but closer to the reality. just fyi..im trained on the dynojet dyno and use it every day...mototrcycles but for this conversation it dosent matter. ive seen the same bike produce differant power just by a day going by and barometric pressure, air temp and humidity changeing. i started useing 89 it seems to run better...but i cant prove it. |
06-24-2010, 08:46 PM | #73 |
Drives: 1lt,rjt,m6 &2004 harley Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kendall ny
Posts: 96
|
alltrbo ......you beat me to it sorry for the repete
|
06-25-2010, 11:45 AM | #74 |
IN10ZRS
|
For Spyderbuddy,
I actuall came up with the same number of 335 with 92 octane. The guys at St. Paul Automotive who ran the car on the Mustang dyno said to expect 20-30 HP less than the DynoJet results before we ran the dyno and when it came out to 264 rwhp they conld not believe it and ran it 4 more times. I realize that the runs were on two different dynos. Next year the 100 octane run will be on the same Mustang Dyno. For now I am not going to do anything to the car. Also to answer the person who doubted the GM engineer claim, he parked next to me in the lot at MID America Automotive and was driving the GM High Performance Semi and had the orange and black GM Performance clothes. Either way I will settle the issue for my car on the next dyno runs with 100 octane. The GM shop manuals provide a lot of the theory behind the design of the 3.2 L V6 and bears out the engineers story.
__________________
IN10ZRS
|
06-25-2010, 12:03 PM | #75 | |
Drives: 2010 Black Camaro 2LT/RS Auto Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Fernando Valley
Posts: 751
|
Quote:
Cool don't forget to let us know when you get that Dyno pull
__________________
BackInBlack
Performance:Vararam cold air intake |
|
06-25-2010, 12:05 PM | #76 |
IN10ZRS
|
Will do and I will scan all of the dyno sheets an post them.
__________________
IN10ZRS
|
06-25-2010, 01:20 PM | #77 |
Drives: 2010 RS Inferno Orange Metallic Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Albany, Ga.
Posts: 3,398
|
thanks
__________________
PCP Hideaway Headlight Covers, BBK Headers & High Flow Cats, ZL1 Add-ons Wicker Bill, TL1/ZL1 Hood Insert, Gen5 DIY Frameless Mirror, ABL Dash Lighting an My link Navigation, Blacked out Rear Bowtie, all Sylvania led Turn Signals, Ceramic Window Tint By Nicks, MBRP Exhaust tips, GEN5 DIY Virginia Legal DRL Harness, Painted Brake Calipers, Vittesse Throttle Controller, Heritage Grill, Diode Dynamics Led Lighting, Manual Shifter Boot, Paddle Shifters, CNC Throttle Body, Trifecta Tune, RX Catch Can & Breather, Trunk Black out and Side Grills, Chevorlet door Sills.
|
06-25-2010, 02:17 PM | #78 |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,943
|
Interesting stuff...
Even if there is some truth to this 100 octane story, wouldn't you think there is a probability that the factory tune of the ECM might hold back your results? Maybe this GM tech dude meant to say more of what the engine may be capable of with (what I'll call) an 'unlocked' tune, versus what GM has on it from the factory? There are some here whom think the computer is basically only allowing so much torque, and unlocking that barrier would open up all new possibilities. Also, assuming the high octane myth is true, shouldn't other guys here who are running CAI, exhaust, headers, and tune AND 93 octane be dynoing at nearly 290 to 300 rwhp if your stock car did 264? They're not. I'm not saying I don't at all believe there isn't some key yet to be found to unlocking the V6's potential, but I just think in your case that the possibility of moving from one dyno to another (plus some help from the 02 octane) is more likely the cause of seeing the big number changes. Lets not forget that the new ford V6 also produces quite a bit more HP than TQ numbers, just like our V6. What is it about these engines that causes them to produce much high HP numbers than TQ, when traditional engines produced higher TQ than HP?? (for example, the outgoing ford 4.0. 210 horse, but 240 TQ!) Is ford holding back that engine as well? Or is it just the design and thats that?
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
06-25-2010, 03:16 PM | #79 |
Drives: 2011 Mustang V6 Automatic Join Date: May 2010
Location: NY
Posts: 657
|
|
06-25-2010, 04:03 PM | #80 |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,943
|
I agree with you...but thinking about it lead me to thinking about more stuff which I posted above lol...so I just wrote out all my thoughts!
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
06-25-2010, 04:08 PM | #81 |
IN10ZRS
|
The difference of 23 HP is from 87 to 92 Octane and it shows up in the higher RPM's (3000 to 6500). The torque numbers are basically flat from 2000 and up due to the VVT 10 degree advance which comes in at 2000. The V6, in my opinion was meant to be a road car because the power is only available above 2000 RPM, where the V8, push rod high torque low RPM design is the old style muscle car.
During the Hot Hod Power Tour, in TN I was folowing 4 late model corvette's and a Mustang GT 500. For 30 plus minutes I was running in second and third between 2000 and 6300 RPM and nobody was able to pull away from anyone else. It was like living a road race video game. I only had to tap the brakes twice. It is amazing how the engine pulls through the curves and slows the car when you let off the gas. My point is it is really a first class road car with the V6, but trying to due burnouts with the V6 A6 is embarrising at times. I have had the experience of blowing out a torque converter and I do not want to do this to my new car. The only thing I would change is the color to Aqua Blue. Very nice car above!
__________________
IN10ZRS
|
06-25-2010, 04:27 PM | #82 |
IN10ZRS
|
Dyno sheets
First is with 87, 2nd and 3rd are 92 Octane.
__________________
IN10ZRS
|
06-25-2010, 04:42 PM | #83 | |
Drives: V8 up front and 7-spd out back FTW Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 746
|
Quote:
As I went on to say earlier, even if he was a GM Performance Division engineer, he's lying or he's an idiot. I patiently await your 100 octane results. That might prove informative even though it won't give you anywhere near 70 extra horsepower vs. 87 octane. I wish I had 100 octane around here. I'd do it next week. |
|
06-25-2010, 09:19 PM | #84 |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,943
|
renke...thanks for the comments on my ABM color! I think your car looks dang sharp too! I have a few nice blown up shots of my car on my profile page..check em out!
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
V6 Camaro Performance Upgrades | rtcat600man | Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons | 387 | 09-19-2019 06:53 PM |
GM nears completion of twin-turbo V6 (LF3) to combat Ford’s new EcoBoost engine | Tran | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 91 | 01-11-2011 07:37 PM |
V6, A6 Guys, I think I found the MPG sweet spot | Maurdib | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 23 | 05-11-2010 06:31 PM |
Lowering springs and rear gears V6 information | macwest | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 12 | 04-30-2010 10:58 PM |
2010 Camaro SS & V6 Line Lock/Roll Control | Meister@Torq | Suspension / Chassis / Brakes | 0 | 02-23-2010 11:27 AM |