96 3.8 vs 95 3.4 [Archive] - CamaroZ28.Com Message Board

MustangEater82

05-22-2002, 06:57 PM

I believe you, I have more hten once proven my drivng skills to overcome plenty of slightly modded 3.8L.

------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro
3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight: 3160
My fat ass: 260
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106

Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro
3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st

AIM: MustangEater82

bowtieracer6

05-23-2002, 12:51 AM

Ok you guys, he said stock for stock, and a stock 3.4 will lose to a stock 3.8. And why are you trashing on auto trannies? Look at most of the guys on this board with the fastest times, you'll notice they have a4's. An auto vs. a manual is not going to make up 40 hp and 25 #/ft.

------------------
'96 3.8 M5
Flowmaster 2.5" catback
SLP CAI
SLP takeoff LSD
Z28 driveshaft
clear corners
15.236@91.77
my car (http://www.geocities.com/sbking06/Camaro_page.html?1014543180740)

GrdLockV6

05-23-2002, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by 94Camaro:
Depends on the cars.

if the 3.4 is a manual and the 3.8 is an auto, and the 3.4 is a base model (no power) and the 3.8 is a base model (power crap thrown in) -- then the 3.4 will keep up, if not win..

manual over auto, no power accy over the extra weight in the 3.8. so dont just go sayin the 3.4 wont win.

dont believe me? i dont care.

-R

AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!! (http://www.fbody.com/members/u8dusst/drama.jpg)

When will everyone learn the fact that an AUTOMATIC IS NORMALLY FASTER THEN A STANDARD! Repeat after me everyone, automatics are faster then standards. One more time! Automatics are faster then standards.

There we go! We're moving right along now!

The car doesn't matter. A 3.8L will beat a 3.4L unless the 3.4L is decently modified, or the 3.8L has some major mechanical problems. Even if the 3.8L has power, etc and the 3.4L doesn't. Power stuff weighs a whole... hmm... 15-20 pounds max. That makes absolutely 0 difference. If you're gonna go that far, you could say the person that's driving the car who weighs less will win!

Not saying you're in high school, but it seems that every uneducated teengager (not saying anything bad about teens in general, I'm 18) these days has it in their heads from propaganda they hear from other people, that standards are faster then automatics. If these people see a person with an automatic, the first thing that pops out of their mouth is "Why the hell did you get an auto? Manual's are so much faster". The only case that a manual tranny is faster then an automatic, is if you're one of the few people in the world (usually only very good race car drivers) who can shift a manual as fast as an automatic tranny shifts. Maybe 1% of the people on this message board will be able to shift a stick as fast as an auto. Check out some performance parts webpages who are building very very fast/powerful f-bodies. All their cars have automatics. Check out Tbyrne Motorsports' sub-10 second Z28. It came stock a manual, but one of the first things they did to the car was put an automatic in it.

Not saying anything bad about sticks, they're fun as hell to drive... if I had my choice again, I probably would have gotten a stick just for the fun-factor. But it's a fact that an automatic is 99.9% of the time faster.

thelemur

05-23-2002, 07:31 PM

A Manual IS faster, there is less drivetrain loss, more power gets to the rear wheels. This is a fact.

------------------
'97 Z28 M6

Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R

Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft

V6white98

05-23-2002, 09:13 PM

Originally posted by thelemur:
A Manual IS faster, there is less drivetrain loss, more power gets to the rear wheels. This is a fact.



True, but what they are saying is that the time it takes to shift with a manual out weighs the fact that it has less drivetrain loss.

------------------
white 98 V6 A4 3.8l Camaro, t-tops, Leather, JVC stereo, Pioneer speakers, power antenna, dynomax muffler, K&N air filter, custome ram air, and a whisper lid.

thelemur

05-23-2002, 09:56 PM

I understand where he is coming from, but thats just not true unless the driver is HORRIBLE. its a significant difference in drivetrain loss. Plus, you can powershift a manual and have virtually no time lost to shifting.

------------------
'97 Z28 M6

Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R

Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft

GrdLockV6

05-23-2002, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by thelemur:
A Manual IS faster, there is less drivetrain loss, more power gets to the rear wheels. This is a fact.



Wanna bet? Go post it in the lounge. Anyone who knows what they're talking about will tell you the automatic is faster. Where do you get more drivetrain loss from an automatic? They don't have more drivetrain loss. The gears in an auto, and the clutch and all on a standard will be the same. And shifting wise, and automatic shifts almost instantly. Barely anyone with a manual could keep up with that. Sure, if you power shift... but then you're gonna f*ck your tranny up.

If you don't believe that, head over to a timeslips page, like the one on www.firebirdv6.com (http://www.firebirdv6.com) . All the fastest cars are automatics. All the fastest cars in my car club are automatics. All the fastest cars you'll see at your local dragstrip will normally be automatics.

If it's a FACT that there's sooo much drivetrain loss in an automatic that it's gonna be slower, show me this equation? Prove it. An automatic has the same, if not less drivetrain loss then a manual.

[This message has been edited by GrdLockV6 (edited May 23, 2002).]

thelemur

05-23-2002, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by GrdLockV6:
Wanna bet? Go post it in the lounge. Anyone who knows what they're talking about will tell you the automatic is faster. Where do you get more drivetrain loss from an automatic? They don't have more drivetrain loss. The gears in an auto, and the clutch and all on a standard will be the same. And shifting wise, and automatic shifts almost instantly. Barely anyone with a manual could keep up with that. Sure, if you power shift... but then you're gonna f*ck your tranny up.

If you don't believe that, head over to a timeslips page, like the one on www.firebirdv6.com (http://www.firebirdv6.com) . All the fastest cars are automatics. All the fastest cars in my car club are automatics. All the fastest cars you'll see at your local dragstrip will normally be automatics.

If it's a FACT that there's sooo much drivetrain loss in an automatic that it's gonna be slower, show me this equation? Prove it. An automatic has the same, if not less drivetrain loss then a manual.

[This message has been edited by GrdLockV6 (edited May 23, 2002).]

Ok, this conversation MIGHT be intresting if you even had a clue what you are talking about. YES a modded car with an auto with a converter is gonna be faster, but STOCK vs STOCK a manual has LESS drivetrain loss then an AUTO. that is COMMON KNOWLEDGE. Do you even know what a torque converter is or how it works? Have you ever looked at the dyno numbers on auto's vs manuals when they are stock??? I suggest you read up and stop making a fool of yourself...

http://web.camaross.com/bb/Forum1/HTML/094606.html
http://web.camaross.com/bb/Forum1/HTML/099430.html
http://web.camaross.com/bb/Forum1/HTML/100325.html

------------------
'97 Z28 M6

Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R

Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft

White 97 RS

05-23-2002, 11:00 PM

Some kids will never learn!!!!

thelemur

05-23-2002, 11:08 PM

http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/driving/articles/44824/article.html
http://www.howstuffworks.com/torque-converter.htm

------------------
'97 Z28 M6

Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R

Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft

camaros_4_lfe

05-24-2002, 12:23 AM

automatic will be faster if u buy a very expensive one stock for stock manual is faster

Slappy3243

05-24-2002, 12:36 AM

It doesn't even matter in this situation which transmission is faster. Let the damn 3.4 have a manual and it will still get smoked very easily. STOCK FOR STOCK

-Adam

------------------
2000 Firebird
Y-87 Package
Borla Cat-Back Exhaust
SLP RAM-AIR Hood
KVR Rotors
KVR Carbon Metalic Pads
Pics: http://photos.yahoo.com/slappy3243/

GrdLockV6

05-24-2002, 12:49 AM

Wow, thanks for the lesson in how a car's drivetrain works, and the 15/20 rule! Fortunately, I was already aware of both of these, as well as how a torque convertor works.

You were too caught up in you having to be right, that you missed my whole point. The 15/20 rule on a V6 Camaro makes NO noticeable difference.

So...

3.8L:
Automatic: 160hp
Manual: 170hp

3.4L:
Automatic: 128hp
Manual: 136hp

Now, the 15/20 rule isn't always completely accurate. Drivetrain loss of a manual can be as low as 15, or as high as 18%. That of an automatic can be as low as 16%, or as high as 20%.

Now, on an f-body, 10hp is equal to approximately .08 seconds on the 1/4th mile, give or take a hundredth or so. Now, this small amount in ET is nothing, as it can be eliminated in RT, conditions of the car, engine temp, any of 100 tiny factors can make this 10hp nothing.

Now, given that 15/20 could be as much as 18/16, which means that it's POSSIBLY that the automatic could lose LESS then the manual. Unlikely, but possible.

So the fact remains, that the drivetrain loss for a V6 comes out to so close to NO difference, that it isn't even a factor. The speed of shifting, however, is. A typical manual driver will shift a good amount slower then an automatic transmission, as the gears have farther to travel in a manual, and the automatic's gears consist of rings that are already basically together, and just have to be moved into a different position to change gears.

Plus, driver error can play a much larger factor in a manual, as since the manual is firmer, tire spin off the line is more likely, as well as missed shifts, etc.

All these factors combined will make an automatic faster. Once again, if you don't believe me, CHECK THE DAMN TIMESLIPS!!!! Freakin ignorant people like you get on my nerves, as you're so stuck on being right, you can't admit it when you're wrong. If a manual was faster, why would the majority of cars that are truly fast and powerful at the dragstrip have automatic's in them? If a manual was faster, don't you think these thousands of people, who were knowledgable enough to build these cars, would use one? Or do you know some huge secret that EVERYONE else doesn't? Please, share! Enlighten the thousands of automatic owners with sub-10 second cars!

With all this crap from you floating around, we'd all better pick up our cans of BS Repel (http://www.fbody.com/members/u8dusst/bsrepel.jpg)!!

EDIT: Lastly... if manual's are faster, why will a stock 3.8L with an automatic beat a stock 3.8L with a manual each and every time? Same with an LS1, etc. Stock for stock, the automatic wins every time. It's a known fact dude. Go look THAT up http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif

------------------
Kyle M
--------------
SICK-SIXX MEMBER
2000 Metallic Pewter Camaro V6 A4 (http://camarov6.netfirms.com/)
Performance: Flowmaster 80 w/ WS6 tips, FlowTech cutout, custom ram-air, custom whisper lid, K&N
Appearance: blue neon underbodies, blue reflective concepts
Times:
60': 2.091
1/8: 9.511
1/4: 14.946 @ 90.1MPH

[This message has been edited by GrdLockV6 (edited May 24, 2002).]

bluecmaro96

05-24-2002, 02:12 AM

reaction time has nothing to do with the et. It only has something 2 do with it if you are bracket racing. so no amount of time can be made up by someones r/t for their et.

MustangEater82

05-24-2002, 03:10 AM

how high can you get the RPMs on a launch in a stock auto? 2.5K?

I can rev mine up 5500, and launch at 4000-4500 RPMs. In my 5-speed.

When I powershift, my rpmes spike for the .00005 seocnds it takes for me to shift. I am no expert on 4L60E, but I shift alot faster in my T5 then any of my Th700r4s ever did.

reson why the fastest times are autos is cuz most of the guys are juicing, something a missed shift can cause some serious engine problems.

i have drag raced both auto and manual, manual is better, the only problem is perfecting the launch. Thats the only advantage a auto has over a manual, easier to launch, and you jsut keep it floored down the track. Auto has the best shift points in STOCK form, but once oyu start modding and the pwoer band changes it things change, I eliminated this on my cars by shifting form 1-2-3, then cruise over the finish line.

also not sure but aren't the first couple gears better geared then in Autos?

------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro
3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight: 3160
My fat ass: 260
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106

Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro
3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st

AIM: MustangEater82

thelemur

05-24-2002, 09:31 AM

>>Where do you get more drivetrain loss from an automatic? They don't have more drivetrain loss ... If it's a FACT that there's sooo much drivetrain loss in an automatic that it's gonna be slower, show me this equation? Prove it. An automatic has the same, if not less drivetrain loss then a manual.<<

>>Wow, thanks for the lesson in how a car's drivetrain works, and the 15/20 rule! Fortunately, I was already aware of both of these, as well as how a torque convertor works.
You were too caught up in you having to be right, that you missed my whole point. The 15/20 rule on a V6 Camaro makes NO noticeable difference.
<<

I answered your questions, and you continue to debate This is not worth my time to argue. Bye.

------------------
'97 Z28 M6

Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R

Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft

[This message has been edited by thelemur (edited May 24, 2002).]

CODY BEHNKE

05-24-2002, 09:52 AM

Unless your running better than stock gears the auto first is way lower.

bluecmaro96

05-24-2002, 10:06 AM

No affense and i hate to burst your bubble but magnus ran 13.8 with bad tuning n/a i doubt a 3.4 will do that n/a manual or not. I dont care how you shift, like stated above no matter the shifting technique you wont make up a 40 hp difference

GrdLockV6

05-24-2002, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by MustangEater82:
how high can you get the RPMs on a launch in a stock auto? 2.5K?

I can rev mine up 5500, and launch at 4000-4500 RPMs. In my 5-speed.

When I powershift, my rpmes spike for the .00005 seocnds it takes for me to shift. I am no expert on 4L60E, but I shift alot faster in my T5 then any of my Th700r4s ever did.

reson why the fastest times are autos is cuz most of the guys are juicing, something a missed shift can cause some serious engine problems.

i have drag raced both auto and manual, manual is better, the only problem is perfecting the launch. Thats the only advantage a auto has over a manual, easier to launch, and you jsut keep it floored down the track. Auto has the best shift points in STOCK form, but once oyu start modding and the pwoer band changes it things change, I eliminated this on my cars by shifting form 1-2-3, then cruise over the finish line.

also not sure but aren't the first couple gears better geared then in Autos?



Stalling your car to an RPM as high as 5500 is a great way to earn yourself a very worn clutch... not to mention you're gonna need some super-heated up drag radials to not spin like crazy.

The majority of auto's aren't faster because they're juicing, etc. My car, 100% bone stock ran a 15.2. Find me one, just ONE other Camaro with a manual that ran that same time stock. Can't do it, can ya?

Lemur... I continue to debate because you are wrong. Once again... show me timeslips. Checkout timeslips pages on V6 f-bodies. All the fastest ones, including NA and power adders, are automatic's. Coincidence? I think not. That's proof enough right there. You can argue all day long with formula's and your technical crap, but IMO actual real-world timeslips make for a much better arguement then what you had. Once again... find me a manual 3.8L that ran a 15.2 bone stock.

------------------
Kyle M
--------------
SICK-SIXX MEMBER
2000 Metallic Pewter Camaro V6 A4 (http://camarov6.netfirms.com/)
Performance: Flowmaster 80 w/ WS6 tips, FlowTech cutout, custom ram-air, custom whisper lid, K&N
Appearance: blue neon underbodies, blue reflective concepts
Times:
60': 2.091
1/8: 9.511
1/4: 14.946 @ 90.1MPH

CODY BEHNKE

05-24-2002, 12:38 PM

Ummmm, Theres a 1996 Camaro 3.8 5-Speed that runs 15.1 bone stock, and a 1997 Firebird with an exhaust that runs 15.06 also a 5-Speed.

I made 3 of the 15.1 runs in the Camaro.

Around here your 3.8 better run 15.5 or better.

I have yet to see one go slower, unless it's out of tune or beat.

[This message has been edited by CODY BEHNKE (edited May 24, 2002).]

camaros_4_lfe

05-24-2002, 12:50 PM

if u ask any REAL gear head they will mostly all say standerds are for fun and the street autos r for the track
even ask the ppl with the first and second gen f bodys at camaros.net

muckz

05-24-2002, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by GrdLockV6:
Stalling your car to an RPM as high as 5500 is a great way to earn yourself a very worn clutch... not to mention you're gonna need some super-heated up drag radials to not spin like crazy.

What's your point? Who cares about worn clutch or not? It's completely not the argument here. And yes, when you drag race, you do burnouts to preheat your slicks/tires.

Originally posted by GrdLockV6:
The majority of auto's aren't faster because they're juicing, etc. My car, 100% bone stock ran a 15.2. Find me one, just ONE other Camaro with a manual that ran that same time stock. Can't do it, can ya?

Find me another auto that runs 15.2 in stock form. Find one. Just ONE other Camaro with auto that runs 15.2 in completely stock form. This means absolutely nothing. There is variance in factory productions that make some cars factory freaks, and that's what you have.

Originally posted by GrdLockV6:
All the fastest ones, including NA and power adders, are automatic's. Coincidence? I think not. That's proof enough right there. Once again... find me a manual 3.8L that ran a 15.2 bone stock.


Listen, this is what you yourself said earlier: "only case that a manual tranny is faster then an automatic, is if you're one of the few people in the world". I think that you yourself sealed up the matter: manual is faster than auto. Stop contradicting yourself.

What you later resort to is driver error and driver skill. Cheap excuse?

You really don't know the reason why most drag cars are automatic. It's for consistency and convenience. It is very, and I repeat, very hard to shift manual consistently. Autos are easier. Also, when you make 9 second runs, you better have both hands on the steering wheel and let auto do the shifting. Because when you have to shift, and you have to spray, and you only have 1 to 2 seconds between shifts, there isn't much time left for juicing and shifting. As someone said, one of the reasons is missed gear, something they want to avoid. The ideal way in racing is to eliminate as many potential problems as you can. And going to automatic is a very good choice in drag racing.

If your claim is true that autos provide the same amount of power to the rear wheels and are significantly better than manual, take your argument to Le Mans, formula one, Indycar, Nascar and all other racing. I guess they need you to come and tell them they're in the dark, and you need to enlighten them on the superiority of automatics.

All stock cars automatics transfer LESS power to the rear wheels than manuals, with some exceptions. Some poorly designed manual transmissions also have significant power loss, but these are mostly start up companies (like Kia, Hyundai). But getting back to our fbodies, engine power output variances make up for the difference sometimes, and that is why you may see one auto dyno similar numbers as manual. This has nothing to do with transmission.

And again, just because AUTO is the preferred tranny in drag racing, doesn't mean it's faster or provides better timeslips. It provides better CONSISTENT timeslips. You may have auto run 15.4 all day long. You may have manual run 15.5 to 15.7 all day long, but once or twice he makes a run with 15.3.

Drag racers use automatic transmissions for consistency and convenience reasons, not because they're faster.

MustangEater82

05-24-2002, 12:59 PM

Uhm... Actually I run Cooper Cobras, 235s on salad shooters. I do have LSD but other then that stock rear suspension. I almost never spin. where out your clutch? Thats the first thing you think about when you are drag racing?

let me guess you have 3.42s, higher then any rear gear ratio a car with 3.23s ever came with?

I'll admit I could only get my dad's 2k down to a 15.4-15.5. stock if I had driven it for more then one week. But who is to say your car isn't one of the freakish ones.

As for the really fast guys, they are not going to be able to do it on a T5. only rated soemthing like 250 lbs of torque. Ever notice the 3.8L is probable the biggest motor it was ever put on, other then a tpi 305. It was never on a 350. Because it could not hhandle the torque.

------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro
3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight: 3160
My fat ass: 260
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106

Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro
3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st

AIM: MustangEater82

GrdLockV6

05-24-2002, 02:45 PM

Ya know, I'm not gonna drag this thread out anymore. It's a totally pointless (http://www.fbody.com/members/u8dusst/arguing.jpg) arguement. We each have our own points and arguements, but no matter what, no one will admit they're wrong. Automatic owners will usually think auto's are better, and manual owners will usually think sticks are better. Each has their ups and downs, each has their variances, and in reality, I don't think one is better then the other. Sometimes one will be faster, sometimes the other will be faster.

Anyways, I'm done with this thread.

muckz

05-24-2002, 05:01 PM

I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.

Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.

You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.

V6white98

05-24-2002, 06:22 PM

http://web.camaross.com/bb/biggrin.gifSo then we all agree the automatic is faster.

------------------
white 98 V6 A4 3.8l Camaro, t-tops, Leather, JVC stereo, Pioneer speakers, xeneon headlights, power antenna, dynomax muffler, K&N air filter, custom ram air, and a whisper lid.

thelemur

05-24-2002, 06:51 PM

Originally posted by muckz:
I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.

Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.

You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.

Well said!

------------------
'97 Z28 M6

Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R

Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft

bluecmaro96

05-24-2002, 09:53 PM

No wonder this site lost so many members to the other site, people here are so childish. How did this go from which car is faster 3.8 or 3.4 to my stick is faster than your auto or my stick transfers more power than your auto http://web.camaross.com/bb/rolleyes.gif this thread should be locked

TheV6Bird

05-24-2002, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by bluecmaro96:
No wonder this site lost so many members to the other site, people here are so childish. How did this go from which car is faster 3.8 or 3.4 to my stick is faster than your auto or my stick transfers more power than your auto http://web.camaross.com/bb/rolleyes.gif this thread should be locked

Yeah, I totally agree. HellSpawnT/A asked a question, and some people changed the whole darn topic.

I will add my $.02 anyway: I drive the 3.4 in the sig. My brother (Marky82 on here) has a 97 A4 3.8 Camaro convertable w/ a Flowmaster 80. Yes, I know the vert is heavier. After driving his car before the Flow 80, I felt the car was noticable faster. It had a stronger pull around 3000 RPM. I'm sure if he put a CAI on it will really wake up. I know my 3.4 woke up after my Moroso CAI. So yes, the 3.8 is faster.

------------------
--David--
1995 white Firebird 3.4 V6 A4 w/ T-tops
Mods:Kenwood KDC516S stereo, front and rear Alpine speakers, Flowmaster 80 series, Firebat (http://www.firebatscave.com) and Autografics (http://www.caprok.net/gtachuck/pages/4thbirds.htm) decals, Moroso CAI, Rally Foglights, Painted interior (Silver Metallic), BMR STB, Zaino, !speed, !horsepower Help CT get a dragstrip! (http://www.petitiononline.com/JayHass/petition.html)

GrdLockV6

05-25-2002, 02:18 AM

Originally posted by muckz:
I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.

Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.

You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.

Actually, I backed off because the arguement wasn't going anywhere. We could all sit here for days argueing over this topic... I had done said my points in my previous posts, therefore I'm done, and have nothing else to say. No, I'm not saying I'm wrong. And actually, I wasn't argueing about opinions... I was argueing over real-world stuff.

And, umm... nowhere did I say that you had difficulty admitting you're wrong.

I'm was simply trying to stop the arguement, as it obviously wasn't going anywhere. I mean hell, we're all supposed to be on the same team anyways, I'm just trying to not get people pissed at each other, as there's no reason.

MustangEater82

05-25-2002, 12:24 PM

Well back to the 3.4L-3.8L matchup, I have only lost to 1 3.8L, he ran a 14.9. I know there are alot out ther that will hand me my ass, but I have beaten a dozen or more, on the street and the strip. and yes I have pulled better stock times then guys in 3.8Ls with stock times. And yes I have driven 4th gen autos, and evne one possible Y87 (97ish RS), but that was before I knew what Y87 was, and didn't feel anythig special about it.

I have ownded 2 autmatics both TH700R4s, one in a 4.3L, one in a 2.8L, Basis of the 4l60E, and I prefer my T5, and if possible I may never get another automatic car again.

problem is only cars left that are manual, is the Cavalier, Extreme and the vette. So it looks like I will be dealing with more used cars for awhile. I think and prefer Stick is much better that I would even consider getting a Mustang in the future.

BTW us 3.4L guys love being told that we are wasting our times with our 3.4L we should get a 3.8L, just because there are a few really fast guys that are not you out there with 3.8L, doesn't mean you have the greatest car in the world. Its very similar to the average V8 guy coming around asking why are you wasting your time on a v6, you should have bought a v8.

------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight W/out driver: 3160
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
AIM: MustangEater82

Droopy

05-25-2002, 02:59 PM

grdlockv6...i would love to know where you get your info from? if this is from personal knowledge, then you need to get out more.

all things being equal the 3.8 will eat up the 3.4.

as for the manual/auto tranny arguement, you are out of touch with reality on that. the auto tranny robs the car of some power. just like a 12 bolt/9" rearend will do.
although the difference is minimal to you on a stock car putting out less than 200 hp, it makes a difference when you start driving something with a little more power.

it seems you start one arguement and when that is proven to you, you being to argue something else. noone is picking a fight here, but we are trying to help give better info.
in general, you will get similar results with the same car expect for tranny's. you might squeeze out a tenth or 2 and an extra couple mph.(again...ALL conditions being equal)!

im sure my post will do nothing to your overall opinion to this arguement, but i am still trying to grasp your points in this conversation. all the cars in your club that are auto may be the fastest...but dont you think that is prolly the end result of the modifications and money into the car?

------------------
97 SILVER SS #1402 M6
MY Site (http://www.ssmoked.homestead.com/)
Strange 12 bolt w/ 3.73's.
heads, cam, Hooker LT's
6pt wolfe cage and...
100 shot of Love Juice
AIM dcdroopy

bluecmaro96

05-26-2002, 12:21 AM

Eric who were you talking to? I never said my 3.8 was the fastest but when its done this summer i guarantee i will be in the running with james and magnus.

MustangEater82

05-26-2002, 01:20 AM

not intended for anyone specific, ehll I rarely even read the name of who talks, just every thread I get involved in, with a 3.4L vs. a 3.8L thread, they I hear people say blah blah, magnus, hit a 14.00 flat, no 3.4L ever did that, hell I see peopel say it and they have posted times slower then mine in there sig, and still have the balls to say thats why the 3.8L is better then the 3.4L. I know my car is modded but I doubt my home made intake, pepboys exhaust, and crank pulley made up 40 HP. not even by import magazine standards.

------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight W/out driver: 3160
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
AIM: MustangEater82

nikkev

08-27-2002, 04:27 AM

Originally posted by MustangEater82:
not intended for anyone specific, ehll I rarely even read the name of who talks, just every thread I get involved in, with a 3.4L vs. a 3.8L thread, they I hear people say blah blah, magnus, hit a 14.00 flat, no 3.4L ever did that, hell I see peopel say it and they have posted times slower then mine in there sig, and still have the balls to say thats why the 3.8L is better then the 3.4L. I know my car is modded but I doubt my home made intake, pepboys exhaust, and crank pulley made up 40 HP. not even by import magazine standards.



Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif Anyway,the auto's usually are faster at the track and between 2 equally hp'd cars,the auto will have the lower ET.Why?If you look at hp numbers you always want to look at trap speed and not ET.That's because ET can be affected by a lot of little things.So an auto (mine for example) may run a 8.5 @ 83 mph while a friend's M6 with almost the same dyno numbers (My 275 to his 273) runs an 8.8 @ 84mph.I have yet to see a perfect shift out of anyone and I spent that past 7 months at the track every Friday night.You might get more HP to the ground on a manual but the auto uses it better http://web.camaross.com/bb/wink.gif http://web.camaross.com/bb/biggrin.gif
Kevin

Edit: I forgot,look at the stock dyno numbers on the 3.4/3.8 and you'll see that the 3.4 puts down a whopping 125-135 to the wheels on average while the 3.8 puts down around 150-155.That's just based on bone stock numbers that I have seen in person.

------------------
1998 Black Z28 A4
-------1/8-------
8.548 @ 83.64 MPH
Pics (http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/nikkev1/lst?.dir=/New+Camaro&.view=t)
Camaro/Firebird Birthday Bash (http://www.corvettemuseum.com/registration/f-body/agenda.shtml)

[This message has been edited by nikkev (edited August 27, 2002).]

fiz

08-27-2002, 07:41 AM

First off, in my opinion the reason it seems most autos are faster, is because a LOT more people have auto trannys than manuals. It seems everywhere I look theres an auto.

I like my manual because I have more control over the engine. I can really wind my engine out, and get the best from its performance instead of just shifting at a stock shift point with an auto.

Powershifting has been tested, and doesn't put any extra wear and tear on the engine, according to ls1info.com.

grdlock, you're saying that a stock 3.8auto will beat a stock 3.8 manual EVERY time? put a good driver in there, I'm sure the case will be different. A huge factor that autos seem faster than manuals, is because the drivers suck. It takes no skill to drive an auto, just step on the gas. Shifting involves driving skills.

The 2nd and 3rd fastest N/A F-bodies on firebirdv6.com are manuals: 14.417, and 14.480 ( http://timeslips.firebirdv6.com/timeslips/mike_huff.jpg )

And plus, even if you are right about the auto vs manual, I'd rather have a manual any day. They're cheaper, more fun to drive, and get better gas mileage.

ImportKILLER

08-27-2002, 11:45 AM

First off, in my opinion the reason it seems most autos are faster, is because a LOT more people have auto trannys than manuals. It seems everywhere I look theres an auto.

Eh? Automatics seem faster because more people have them? I fail to see the logic behind that...

...more fun to drive...

Your own personal opinion, not a fact.

A huge factor that autos seem faster than manuals, is because the drivers suck.

Are we talking about the manual driver here sucking? If thats the case, its the drivers fault for not knowing how to drive.

Oh well...gotta get to class. Back to the topic though, 3.8L still wins.

------------------
-Nathan
1996 Camaro
3.8L Series II, SLP CAI, Catco cat, Taylor 8mm wires, LSD, 3.42 gears, Borla catback.
1995 Dodge Stealth R/T
Twin Turbo Intercooled 3.0L AWD M6,A'PEXi AVC-R boost control, HKS Blow-off valve, K&N FIPK, Denso Iridium plugs, 245/40/18 Kumho Supra, Borla Catback, Mobil 1 fluids.
*VVvvTTttFFff* TNC since 1981!

[This message has been edited by ImportKILLER (edited August 27, 2002).]

99blackSS

08-27-2002, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by nikkev:
Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif Ya all you need is 20-25hp more TO THE GROUND I would like to see a mod that puts all its hp to the ground.

------------------
99 Black SS A4 t-tops a ton of factory options plus white face gauges which have a disputable hp gain. (formerly V6white98, changed cars)

Perfecto

08-27-2002, 08:20 PM

Just reading through and I seen alot of good points and also some bad points. I have an automatic now but I used to have a stick. It was in a four banger but the stick was more fun. I liked the control of the stick but the auto seems smoother. It seems 3.4s have beat 3.8s, 3.8s have beat 3.4s, autos have beat sticks and sticks have beat autos. I guess racing is more than 3.4s or 3.8s and autos or standards. As for the original post. I think if the same person drives either car, 3.4 or 3.8 he will think the 3.8 is faster. But its just my opinion.

------------------
Black 94' 3.4l Camaro A4

nikkev

08-27-2002, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by 99blackSS:
Originally posted by nikkev:
Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif Ya all you need is 20-25hp more TO THE GROUND I would like to see a mod that puts all its hp to the ground.

A 3" cat-back puts down 14 rwhp on a V6.That's dyno proven numbers,not a guestimate.And that's only 1 mod http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif
Kevin

------------------
1998 Black Z28 A4
-------1/8-------
8.548 @ 83.64 MPH
Pics (http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/nikkev1/lst?.dir=/New+Camaro&.view=t)
Camaro/Firebird Birthday Bash (http://www.corvettemuseum.com/registration/f-body/agenda.shtml)

Infernal

08-27-2002, 10:59 PM

Well, I wont get into the stick vs auto argument because I think each has its own virtues.

But I will say that I have serious doubts that a typical stock 3.4 of any transmission type will beat a stock 3.8 of any transmission type with equal drivers.

Every 3.4 I see at the track, modded or stock, is in the 16s or sometimes even 17s. Now before the flames begin, I'm saying this is what I've typically seen. Obviously not every 3.4 is in the 16s and 17s. Similarly, most 3.8 cars I see at the track, stock or bolt ons, is in the low to high 15s, with an occasional low 16.

MustangEater82

08-27-2002, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by nikkev:

A 3" cat-back puts down 14 rwhp on a V6.That's dyno proven numbers,not a guestimate.And that's only 1 mod http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif
Kevin



Screw that, unhook exhaust behind the CAT, and unhook the air filter. I think tha will make up the HP differnecnce.

yes I have seen my car run a 15.6(I was in it), and I ahve seen my roomate run a 16.8 in his 99 3.8L 5-speed. I have also seen a 3.8L 5-speed run a 14.9 nad a 3.4L auto run a 17.2.

ITs jsut the driver.

------------------
-Eric
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Stock blocked, boltons only.
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507 Best 60' 2.078
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
3.4L F-body where 15s are fast....
www.fbodyv6.com
www.firebirdv6.com
www.camaroz28.com
AIM: MustangEater82

99blackSS

08-28-2002, 01:30 AM

Originally posted by nikkev:

A 3" cat-back puts down 14 rwhp on a V6.That's dyno proven numbers,not a guestimate.And that's only 1 mod http://web.camaross.com/bb/tongue.gif
Kevin

You either misread or misunderstood or both of the above. I said I wanted to see a mod that puts down ALL OF ITS HP. By that I mean a mod that produces 25hp at the crank as well as 25hp at the wheels.

My point is it will take more then 25hp at the crank for a 3.4 to beat a 3.8 assuming that not all 25hp get to the ground.

------------------
99 Black SS A4 t-tops a ton of factory options plus white face gauges which have a disputable hp gain. (formerly V6white98, changed cars)

nikkev

08-28-2002, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by 99blackSS:
You either misread or misunderstood or both of the above. I said I wanted to see a mod that puts down ALL OF ITS HP. By that I mean a mod that produces 25hp at the crank as well as 25hp at the wheels.

My point is it will take more then 25hp at the crank for a 3.4 to beat a 3.8 assuming that not all 25hp get to the ground.



Umm,exactly.That's 1 mod and puts down 14 hp to the wheels,not the crank.I never said this mod put all it's hp to the ground http://web.camaross.com/bb/confused.gif You'll never see a mod that makes the same hp at the crank and at the wheels.It's impossible due to driveline loss.Maybe I missed something you were saying?Anyway,all I'm saying is that this argument is stupid.A 3.4 and 3.8 aren't that far apart.It's like the stupid argument over the LT1/LS1.I have been humbled by many,many LT1's.It mostly comes down to a driver's skill and driver error.The 3.4 is a great block and it's used as the motor of choice for off-road and Baja racing.

------------------
1998 Black Z28 A4
-------1/8-------
8.548 @ 83.64 MPH
Pics (http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/nikkev1/lst?.dir=/New+Camaro&.view=t)
Camaro/Firebird Birthday Bash (http://www.corvettemuseum.com/registration/f-body/agenda.shtml)

99blackSS

08-28-2002, 05:30 AM

Originally posted by nikkev:
You'll never see a mod that makes the same hp at the crank and at the wheels.It's impossible due to driveline loss.Maybe I missed something you were saying?
That was the first point I made, guess I could have straight out said it, but wasn't this funner? http://web.camaross.com/bb/wink.gif

------------------
99 Black SS A4 t-tops a ton of factory options plus white face gauges which have a disputable hp gain. (formerly V6white98, changed cars)

96fbirdA4

08-28-2002, 08:19 AM

I just thought I'd add that the reason the fastest V8 cars on these boards have automatics is

1) They don't eat clutches
2) They don't eat clutches
3) They are more consistent at the track for bracket racing

I also thought I'd add that the LS1 M6's on average dyno 10-15rwhp higher than a similarly equipped A4. They will also have a trap speed 3 or 4 mph higher than an auto. So the M6 has a lower drivetrain loss on average.

------------------
- Steve - 1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (http://www.geocities.com/sigmachi03/index.html)
LS1 A4, 2.73's, Kumho Ecsta Supra 712 245/50/ZR16's, Direct Flow Lid, GMAF, !FRA, Loudmouth, 3" Y-Pipe, AIT Mod, Fan Switch Mod
13.774 @ 103.33, 300.5rwhp & 308.6rwtq, 97+ RPO Codes (http://www.geocities.com/sigmachi03/misc/rpocodes.html)