BREAKING: 2012 CAMARO ZL1 - 6.2L LSA Supercharged - 6MT Revealed!

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by Shurenuff

What's the CTS-V auto tranny rated for as far as power? I still believe that when final numbers are released, they will be exceed 550hp by a nice margin. Perhaps the tremec manual tranny is rated for higher power than the auto tranny to accommodate this?

Auto Tranny specs for cts-v. It can handle the ZL1

2010 Hydra-Matic 6L90 Transmission ( MYD ) 06/05/2009
Type: six speed RWD / AWD, electronically controlled automatic overdrive transmission with torque converter clutch. Clutch-to-clutch architecture, with integral Electro / Hydraulic Controls Module
Maximum engine power: "452 bhp ( 337 kW ), Diesel: 300bhp ( 223kW ) - Truck
555 bhp ( 414 kW ) - Passenger car"
Maximum engine torque: "531 lb-ft ( 720 Nm ), Diesel: 520 lb-ft ( 705 Nm ) - Truck
550 lb-ft ( 746 Nm ) - Passenger car"
Maximum gearbox torque: 885 lb-ft ( 1200 Nm )
Gear ratios: MYD
First: 4.03
Second: 2.36
Third: 1.53
Fourth: 1.15
Fifth: 0.85
Sixth: 0.67
Reverse: -3.06
Maximum shift speed 6200 rpm
Maximum Validated Weights: ( Target ) GVW: 15000 lb ( 6803 kg ), GCVW: 21000 lb ( 9525 kg )
7-position quadrant: P, R, N, D, X, X, X ( X = available calibratable range position )
Case description: 3-piece ( Bell, main, extension )
Case material: die cast aluminum
Shift pattern: (2) Three-way on/off solenoids
Shift quality: Five variable bleed solenoid
Torque converter clutch: Variable Bleed Solenoid ECCC
Converter size: 300mm ( reference )
Fluid type: DEXRON® VI
Fluid capacity: w/ 300mm converter 300mm: 13.0L ( 10.8kg )
Transmission weight: w/ 300mm converter Wet: 109kg ( 240lb ) estimated
Pressure taps available: line pressure

[Darkflow]

Originally Posted by Shurenuff

What's the CTS-V auto tranny rated for as far as power? I still believe that when final numbers are released, they will be exceed 550hp by a nice margin. Perhaps the tremec manual tranny is rated for higher power than the auto tranny to accommodate this?

Well the specs are posted by another user right above my post. So there you go but personally, i dont think ive seen a GM car put down more HP to the wheels then what they have been rated at. Yet we hardly ever get to see it because ppl slap mods on them well before 10 to 15k miles or so, when we would really know the engine is fully broken in. Maybe we can find some dyno numbers on stock cts-v's and see what they put down and judge what the zl1 may do.

This kind of stuff has never stopped GM from putting out a car though. 4th Gens, 1st Gen CTS-V's had weak rear ends. Trailblazer SS's had weak transmissions. G8's rears werent that strong, most guys upgrade to the 2010 rears. 2010's have there issues. Now maybe ever since the bankruptcy and etc. GM has gotten there sh*t together but idk. I just really think, if you dont slap an AutoTrans in there. Your going to miss out on sales because there really are ppl who would just rather have an auto then a manual.

[VcrusaderV]

I love the car, and I am so happy it is coming. I like the ZL name, but it really should have been the Z/28. If they wanted a real ZL-1 they should have used a 1SS, stripped down and the true 427 from the Vette crammed in. In other words, stick to the roots but make it affordable by just making it a 1/4 mile beast. Dont get my wrong here, I love this car but I think the Z/28 would have been more appropriate since it is upgraded in every area (suspension, exhaust, braking). A ZL had NOTHING but a huge motor. No real creature comforts or improvements to suspension etc. Regardless I will still try and gather the $ to buy this car even though it will mean trading in my current car which is about as perfect a Camaro that you can buy.

[thePill]

The only way to truly defeat the king of the pony cars is not to just offer the 6L90 but to offer the automatic with an optional GT500 front fascia. Buyers will be confused....



THE ZL-500, or we can call it the ZLby GT500.

[thePill]

The only thing that would hold GM back from going beyond 556hp/550tq and a NO GO auto option is the gas guzzler tax. The CTS-V's MPG rating is 12 city/18 highway with the auto when compared to the 14 city/19 highway on the manual. As stated on the EPA website, the Gas Guzzler Tax for each vehicle is based on its combined city and highway fuel economy value. The combined value is based on 55% city driving and 45% highway driving and is conducted on a dynometer so aerodynamics and weight have NO penalty. Estimating the CTS-V's auto averages 14mpg and the manual averages 16mpg is a difference between a $5400 tax and a $3700 dollar tax. So expect the ZL1 to produce similar MPGs and if you were hoping weight and aerodynamics would help the ZL1, you would have been wrong...

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/guzzler/420f06042.htm

Edit: and if your crossing your fingers that the EPAS will tip the scales heavily in the ZL1s favor, remember the GT500 only saw a measly 0.5mpg increase from 22.5 ($1000 dollar tax) to a 23mpg and half of that gain was combined with Plasma Arc cylinder walls... so figure a good 0.25mpg increase with a 6-8hp increase.

[blaSSt]

Originally Posted by Darkflow

So there you go but personally, i dont think ive seen a GM car put down more HP to the wheels then what they have been rated at. Yet we hardly ever get to see it because ppl slap mods on them well before 10 to 15k miles or so, when we would really know the engine is fully broken in. Maybe we can find some dyno numbers on stock cts-v's and see what they put down and judge what the zl1 may do.

I don't think I've ever seen a manufacturer put out HP at the wheel ratings. They always use engine HP.

[OldScoolCamaro]

Originally Posted by thePill

The only thing that would hold GM back from going beyond 556hp/550tq and a NO GO auto option is the gas guzzler tax. The CTS-V's MPG rating is 12 city/18 highway with the auto when compared to the 14 city/19 highway on the manual. As stated on the EPA website, the Gas Guzzler Tax for each vehicle is based on its combined city and highway fuel economy value. The combined value is based on 55% city driving and 45% highway driving and is conducted on a dynometer so aerodynamics and weight have NO penalty. Estimating the CTS-V's auto averages 14mpg and the manual averages 16mpg is a difference between a $5400 tax and a $3700 dollar tax. So expect the ZL1 to produce similar MPGs and if you were hoping weight and aerodynamics would help the ZL1, you would have been wrong...

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/guzzler/420f06042.htm

Edit: and if your crossing your fingers that the EPAS will tip the scales heavily in the ZL1s favor, remember the GT500 only saw a measly 0.5mpg increase from 22.5 ($1000 dollar tax) to a 23mpg and half of that gain was combined with Plasma Arc cylinder walls... so figure a good 0.25mpg increase with a 6-8hp increase.

Hi, there was a goal in mind for GM manufacturing this car. It was to crush the GT 500. That goal has been met. As with all things produced, costs are passed on to the consumer. I am the consumer. I am not really interested in how much of a penalty will be placed into the final product based on it's fuel economy. It's a race car. Race cars eat gas like there is no tomorrow. I hope Chevy wrings out as much HP as it possibly can from the LSA by at least tweaking and tuning the entire air intake and exhaust system. If that produces an additional 25 to 35 HP and puts it even higher on the guzzler tax schedule than so be it. I can say with confidence there are other buyers who feel the same way as I do. Make the car using the off the shelf LSA, tweak it and dyno it to the max, offer an automatic and a rear axle ratio option like a 4:10. I am not concerned about the EPA and taxes, built it and they will come. They will not have any problem selling this car even with a heavy surchage added into the MSRP. They won't be able to make enough of them. Anybody like hotcakes???

[thePill]

Originally Posted by OldScoolCamaro

Hi, there was a goal in mind for GM manufacturing this car. It was to crush the GT 500. That goal has been met. As with all things produced, costs are passed on to the consumer. I am the consumer. I am not really interested in how much of a penalty will be placed into the final product based on it's fuel economy. It's a race car. Race cars eat gas like there is no tomorrow. I hope Chevy wrings out as much HP as it possibly can from the LSA by at least tweaking and tuning the entire air intake and exhaust system. If that produces an additional 25 to 35 HP and puts it even higher on the guzzler tax schedule than so be it. I can say with confidence there are other buyers who feel the same way as I do. Make the car using the off the shelf LSA, tweak it and dyno it to the max, offer an automatic and a rear axle ratio option like a 4:10. I am not concerned about the EPA and taxes, built it and they will come. They will not have any problem selling this car even with a heavy surchage added into the MSRP. They won't be able to make enough of them. Anybody like hotcakes???

I like hotcakes, I just don't want to pay an extra tax for my hotcakes when a hotcake dealer down the road sales em tax free. If GM wants to stay competitive, they will remain that way on all levels. The GG tax could place the ZL1 well over an GT500 SVT PP alone. At this rate, the MSRP would have to be $47k just to remain competitive before the GG tax is paid.

GM is "trying" to build this car to crush the GT500, they haven't crushed anything yet, unless you have some behind the scenes testing numbers you would like to share. In order to win the war, you gotta go to battle.. which will still be another 12 months before the ZL1 armors up.

Off topic: With a 4.02 1st gear ratio that the auto comes with, 4.10s are not needed and might actually be worse. I would stay 3.73's and go to a much smaller wheel.

It is an easy task to add power to beat the CTS-V and GT500, The CTS-V is expensive and is out of the ZL1s class. The GT500 has traction issues and as many drivers will tell you about their "race cars".. They could care less about stock tires, 15 inch Bogarts usually go on the GT500s right over the stock OEM rear disc. Have fun squeezing 15s over your 14.5 inch disc brakes, but it's possible I guess.

Hell, GM could make the ZL1 750hp and it would win for sure, although it would get 9mpg and be useless on a road course anyway (most S/C'd engines are) and after you pay the $7700 GG tax, you could end up paying $60k+ for a ZL1 with no options, when you could have built an SS for cheaper. Its gonna take a little more than a showing of a 70% completed ZL1 at an auto show to start fist pumping... Its a good start, hell of alot better than 12 months ago... as long as you keep faith in the idea that Ford won't do anything....

[Darkflow]

Originally Posted by blaSSt

I don't think I've ever seen a manufacturer put out HP at the wheel ratings. They always use engine HP.

They dont and your right, they use engine rated HP but some ppl are thinking the car will put out more then this 550hp estimate GM throughout. Whether its 550 or more, your still not putting that down to the wheels where IMO, it really counts. Ill wait for dyno numbers to come out and GM can rate the engine hp at whatever they want, ill take it for a grain of salt....

[thePill]

Originally Posted by OldScoolCamaro

Hi, there was a goal in mind for GM manufacturing this car. It was to crush the GT 500. That goal has been met. As with all things produced, costs are passed on to the consumer. I am the consumer. I am not really interested in how much of a penalty will be placed into the final product based on it's fuel economy. It's a race car. Race cars eat gas like there is no tomorrow. I hope Chevy wrings out as much HP as it possibly can from the LSA by at least tweaking and tuning the entire air intake and exhaust system. If that produces an additional 25 to 35 HP and puts it even higher on the guzzler tax schedule than so be it. I can say with confidence there are other buyers who feel the same way as I do. Make the car using the off the shelf LSA, tweak it and dyno it to the max, offer an automatic and a rear axle ratio option like a 4:10. I am not concerned about the EPA and taxes, built it and they will come. They will not have any problem selling this car even with a heavy surchage added into the MSRP. They won't be able to make enough of them. Anybody like hotcakes???

In my research, I found another BIG reason the GM will not go beyond the 556hp/551tq rating the LSA has now. The current TR6060 MG9 transmission is only rated at 560ft lbs which is only 9tq away from exceeding the Tremec rating. The closest GM has got to a maximum rated transmission was with the LS3s TR6060 M10, that carried a 430ft lb rating on a 425tq rated LS3. It's a safe bet that the ZL1 will max out at 555tq and maybe 561hp... Regardless of what the transmission can really take, GM WILL NOT exceed the transmission manufactures recommended torque limit.... I'm calling 560hp/555tq on the ZL1...

[chain777]

I don't know exactly how they rate these transmissions, or how vehicle weight comes into the equation, but the MT82 manual in the 5.0 Mustang has a max torque rating of 383 lb-ft, and the 5.0 makes 390.

Just something to think about.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by chain777

I don't know exactly how they rate these transmissions, or how vehicle weight comes into the equation, but the MT82 manual in the 5.0 Mustang has a max torque rating of 383 lb-ft, and the 5.0 makes 390.

Just something to think about.

Yeah, that is true.. but Ford's got b@lls. When have they ever operated within the transmissions rating? This time its not as bad though, the MT-82 was produced via Ford/Getrag Germany so in many respects, Ford produces both transmissions used in the 5.0. The Getrag is just better than the current 6060, gearing is better, interior strength is better, it only weighs 109lbs, Shift gates are closer and more precise, cost a fraction of what a 6060 cost, is All Wheel Drive application available so it is very much global and again, it is co-created by Ford so the cost to repair/replace is cheap. Where GM is kinda slave to an outsourced company like Tremec, if GM exceeds the rating and the transmission fails, guess who is responsible for repair cost? If the Getrag fails, Ford is paying it either way and only Ford/Getrag know the real limit so that is more than likely why Ford just ignores the rating. Since the MT82 has supported 10 second runs and 600+ hp from Lethal , I would say that it is well over 500tq just as the 6060 M10 is (rated at 430). The MT82 is only rated at 500Nm or 368.73ft lbs, underrating has more advantages than overrating... If the product breaks in the aftermarket, and you are running a modded 5.0.. It makes warranty vouchers more difficult... It is more of a conservative rating where Tremec uses a more moderate rating to absorb more confidence from the market...

But good eye anyway, that was a concern of mine too...

Edit: The MT82 is so global in fact, that the 3.7 liter V6 Mustang uses the same MT82.. Now thats pinchin' a penny. Ford also created the automatics using the Ford/Livonia 6R60 Automatic for the V6 and V8 that use the same transmission... 4 cars+ the Boss 302 and two transmissions.... the GT500 uses a Tremec 6060 MGW, just another reason the 5.4 and the GT500 is going bye bye...

UNLEASH THE TERMINATOR!!!

[Milk 1027]

[DanSS24]

Originally Posted by thePill

The only way to truly defeat the king of the pony cars is not to just offer the 6L90 but to offer the automatic with an optional GT500 front fascia. Buyers will be confused....



THE ZL-500, or we can call it the ZLby GT500.

OMG!!! That is just wrong....but very funny!!!