2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia All 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015 Camaro news, photos, and videos

Turbo SS

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-20-2009, 03:15 PM
  #16  
Registered User
 
SSCamaro99_3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ballwin, MO
Posts: 1,182
21.5% power loss through the drivetrain is dreadful.
SSCamaro99_3 is offline  
Old 08-20-2009, 07:50 PM
  #17  
Registered User
 
HAZ-Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: TX Med Ctr
Posts: 4,000
Originally Posted by JasonD
I wonder if they dyno'd on a Mustang Dyno, which is almost always lower. My L99 2010 Camaro dyno'd at 321 on a Mustang Dyno that as set up rather conservatively.
Exactly what I was thinking.
HAZ-Matt is offline  
Old 08-20-2009, 07:57 PM
  #18  
Admin Emeritus
 
JasonD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Nashville, TN area
Posts: 11,157
Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt
Exactly what I was thinking.
Oh yeah, to add to that my numbers were almost exactly what many LS3 Pontiac G8 GXPs put down on the same dyno.
JasonD is offline  
Old 08-20-2009, 09:38 PM
  #19  
Super Moderator
 
JakeRobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
Jason makes a good point -- we don't know what kind of dyno. DynoJets read high -- Mustang dynos read a lower and more technically accurate number. To compare two cars' dyno numbers, you need to test them back to back on the same dyno, same day, same operator, and the operator can't pull any tricks. There are all kinds of ways to make a dyno read higher or lower than it would normally read.
JakeRobb is offline  
Old 08-20-2009, 10:54 PM
  #20  
Registered User
 
CLEAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Texas
Posts: 2,576
Yeah, I'd forgotten all about those dynos w/ that other name attached. They always seem to be down on power don't they?
CLEAN is offline  
Old 08-21-2009, 02:33 AM
  #21  
Registered User
 
christianjax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 881
Would be nice if a tuner would take the stock car to a track and get a baseline ET, then one after thier mods.
christianjax is offline  
Old 08-21-2009, 10:41 AM
  #22  
Registered User
 
ronssito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 201
I assume the price includes a pair of ear plugs for that insane turbo whine!





ronssito is offline  
Old 08-21-2009, 10:56 AM
  #23  
Registered User
 
30th_ANNIV_Z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Goldsboro, NC/ Roseville, MN
Posts: 133
woot woot
30th_ANNIV_Z28 is offline  
Old 08-21-2009, 11:46 AM
  #24  
Super Moderator
 
JakeRobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
Originally Posted by CLEAN
Yeah, I'd forgotten all about those dynos w/ that other name attached. They always seem to be down on power don't they?
That's not the right way to look at it. Yes, Mustang dynos generally give lower numbers than what DynoJets give, but it's because they measure power in a different way. The fact is that their way is a more accurate way than what DynoJet uses, but that's not the point. Dynos are tuning tools. Make a run, change something, make another run, and see if you made it better or worse. That's all they're really good for.

You can brag about your dyno numbers and compare to other people's numbers if you want, but if you do, you're being foolish (unless you limit yourself to bragging to / comparing with people who also dyno'd their car on the same dyno on the same day).
JakeRobb is offline  
Old 08-21-2009, 09:14 PM
  #25  
Registered User
 
QATransAm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 243
looks pretty slow...nice car though
QATransAm is offline  
Old 08-21-2009, 09:20 PM
  #26  
Registered User
 
Ed 2001 SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami, Fl USA
Posts: 499
Originally Posted by ronssito
I assume the price includes a pair of ear plugs for that insane turbo whine!





If I went turbo, I'd probably want it as loud as that.
Ed 2001 SS is offline  
Old 08-22-2009, 08:58 AM
  #27  
Registered User
 
CLEAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Texas
Posts: 2,576
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
That's not the right way to look at it. Yes, Mustang dynos generally give lower numbers than what DynoJets give, but it's because they measure power in a different way. The fact is that their way is a more accurate way than what DynoJet uses, but that's not the point. Dynos are tuning tools. Make a run, change something, make another run, and see if you made it better or worse. That's all they're really good for.

You can brag about your dyno numbers and compare to other people's numbers if you want, but if you do, you're being foolish (unless you limit yourself to bragging to / comparing with people who also dyno'd their car on the same dyno on the same day).
Actually, I was trying to make a joke about the FORD MUSTANG being down on power. Not sure if the last paragraph was for me or not, but if it was, I'm not one to brag about such things, if I were, it would be in my sig.
CLEAN is offline  
Old 08-24-2009, 05:21 PM
  #28  
WTF
Registered User
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Central Mass
Posts: 207
That's pretty sick....how long will that engine last under boost?
WTF is offline  
Old 08-25-2009, 12:26 AM
  #29  
Registered User
 
bozobuttz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 205
bozobuttz is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
95blkss
Parts For Sale
2
09-22-2015 03:18 PM
cmsmith
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
09-14-2015 09:09 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
09-14-2015 02:02 AM
sleeperZ96BT
Parts For Sale
0
09-10-2015 08:01 AM
LeftoverChinese
Parts For Sale
0
07-23-2015 03:57 PM



Quick Reply: Turbo SS



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:05 AM.