1/4 mile calculations

I found this 1/4 mile calc tool and it seems pretty close to what other know cars can run.

So if a Camaro is 3860 and I assume you add the driver weight to that, most SS Camaro's will go 4,000#. with that said we should see low 13's stock and I bet low 12's with a cam and exhaust.

http://robrobinette.com/et.htm

I found this 1/4 mile calc tool and it seems pretty close to what other know cars can run.

So if a Camaro is 3860 and I assume you add the driver weight to that, most SS Camaro's will go 4,000#. with that said we should see low 13's stock and I bet low 12's with a cam and exhaust.

http://robrobinette.com/et.htm

Unless you're talking about a petite female/horse jockey driver and less than 1/4 tank of gas, it will be well over 2 tons. :yes:
I used 4110# for my calculations here:


2010 LS3 SS:
422HP/3860LBS (+)250LBS gas/driver
ET*/MPH: 12.44 @ 109.6

*ETs quoted are for optimum gearing, traction, and shifting. (i.e. optimum gearing for 1/4 mile, slicks/drag radials - no wheel hop, and powershifting/auto)

I know you're looking at that ET and thinking, "No way in hell." Make sure you read after the asterisk. The car will likely run low 13s/high 12s @ 109-110mph on street tires (like you said).

it will be possible to run bottom 12s or even high 11s with just bolt-ons. Starting with the 260hp iron head LT1, B-body folks have run as quick as 12.36@107 with just bolt-ons. Of course Pat was the exception to the rule. Only about 10 of us have been able to break into the 12s with bolt-ons. That is starting with cars that were high 14 to mid 15 second cars bone stock.

Remember folks 422hp is at the flywheel not rearwheel.

I put in 4150lbs for the weight at the track.

13.15's

I think the car will run a bit better than that but not a bad calculator. I hope 17% driveline loss is on the high side. We'll see what the IRS does for this car.

I'm interested in seeing how well the IRS launches... My SS weighed approximately 4100# with me in it at the dragstrip. It might have been making 360fwhp (due to -1100' density altitude) when it ran a 12.97@102.6 a few years back with a 1.70 sixty foot time. The LS3 in the same weather would easily be a nearly 450+hp engine. The L99 around 425hp.

I think we might see more drivetrain loss just due to the IRS and all of its joints. Remember the more joints, the more frictional loss. Im puttin my money on the low 13s, just from weight and the IRS Im not thinkin 12s showroom stock. JMHO, Eric L

The LS2 GTO cracked 12s bone stock with IRS and skinny rear tires. The SS should be able to match that, possibly beat it.

If a c6 with 436Hp and 3250lbs does 12.5 @ 115... I fail to see how the camaro can crack up a high 12s with 600lbs more and 20 less hp... maybe 109 mph is doable.. but... time... i don't think so... Mustangs are doing here locally 107s - 108s with MINOR bolt ons.

The ls3 is an almighty engine, but they are hauling... Hope the z28 fixes this... I'm holding myself to see what the z28 will be. Even if it comes in at 556hp like the caddy, if it carries the same caddy weight... i'm off of it...

I'm not sure, but i think I would have settled for a live axle to save weight.

Anyways... FWIW a 322rwhp camaro ls1 ss 2001 did 13.1 @ 108 with an awful driver (just a borla and lid, no programming) ... I see no point in buying the new camaro.

Now... if it came with a 7L engine.. even though its not an exotic one like the z06... then we would be on target to what the can do and become.

If a c6 with 436Hp and 3250lbs does 12.5 @ 115... I fail to see how the camaro can crack up a high 12s with 600lbs more and 20 less hp... maybe 109 mph is doable.. but... time... i don't think so... Mustangs are doing here locally 107s - 108s with MINOR bolt ons.

The ls3 is an almighty engine, but they are hauling... Hope the z28 fixes this... I'm holding myself to see what the z28 will be. Even if it comes in at 556hp like the caddy, if it carries the same caddy weight... i'm off of it...

I'm not sure, but i think I would have settled for a live axle to save weight.

Anyways... FWIW a 322rwhp camaro ls1 ss 2001 did 13.1 @ 108 with an awful driver (just a borla and lid, no programming) ... I see no point in buying the new camaro.

Now... if it came with a 7L engine.. even though its not an exotic one like the z06... then we would be on target to what the can do and become.

FYI - the LS2 C6 with the A6 tranny has gone 12.2 bone stock. I'm sure the LS3 C6 will go even quicker.

Edit: Actually after a bit of research, here are the fastest showroom stock LS3s so far:

11.71 @ 119.94 - AndrewZPSU - 08 M6
12.16 @ 116.54 - Vinsane112 - 08 A6 2.73
12.18 @ 117.72 - Hardhattg - 08 Z51 M6

So given that, I'd say it's very likely someone will hit 12s in a stock Camaro SS. A good driver at a track like Atco or E-town in good, cool air will get it done.

If a c6 with 436Hp and 3250lbs does 12.5 @ 115... I fail to see how the camaro can crack up a high 12s with 600lbs more and 20 less hp... maybe 109 mph is doable.. but... time... i don't think so... Mustangs are doing here locally 107s - 108s with MINOR bolt ons.

The ls3 is an almighty engine, but they are hauling... Hope the z28 fixes this... I'm holding myself to see what the z28 will be. Even if it comes in at 556hp like the caddy, if it carries the same caddy weight... i'm off of it...

I'm not sure, but i think I would have settled for a live axle to save weight.

Anyways... FWIW a 322rwhp camaro ls1 ss 2001 did 13.1 @ 108 with an awful driver (just a borla and lid, no programming) ... I see no point in buying the new camaro.
Now... if it came with a 7L engine.. even though its not an exotic one like the z06... then we would be on target to what the can do and become.

I guess if all you are looking at is a drag car then you are right why buy a new Camaro, but if you are looing for a car that will be a much better car than the 4th gen I think its def. worth it. The 4th gen needed some work on comfort and quality the 5th gen I am sure will address all of this and the speed will be there. So in my opinion the 5th gen should be as fast or faster and be twice the car quality, comfort and maybe even fit a cooler in the trunk wise.

I'm thinking the 03/04 Cobra might be a good benchmark for the Camaro. The Cobra was rated 390 at the crank, but was underrated. Many people put down 360 to 370 rwhp bone stock. The Camaro is rated at 422, and will probably not be underrated if it's SAE certified, but will still put down 360 to 370 rwhp stock. The Cobra coupe's curb weight was 3665, whereas the Camaro will be 3860. So right there that's 200 lbs the Camaro gives up to the Cobra, which is worth about .2 and 2 mph in the quarter mile. The Cobra and Camaro both have IRS, and the Cobra I believe had 17 inch wheels while the Camaro will have 20 inch, both at 9 inches wide on the rear. So I'm thinking traction should be similar - it might be tougher for the Camaro with the 20 inch wheels. Another difference would be the weight distribution, which favors the Camaro 52/48 versus 57/43 for the Cobra. (I'm not sure how much weight distribution comes into play in drag racing - more weight on the rear wheels may = better traction?)

The only other factor I can think of is torque management. I don't believe it was much of a factor on the 03 Cobras, but we know that the LS2 GTOs had a VERY tough time because of computers pulling timing due to torque management - even on the 6 speed cars. I haven't seen a problem so far with the LS3 Vettes, so maybe GM has fixed that issue.

Given all that, if you look at what 03 Cobras ran, many were in the 13s stock with average drivers. But there were many in the upper to mid 12s in cool air with good drivers, and the fastest bone stock time for an 03 Cobra was 12.4 @ 114~ mph. Given that, it may not be unrealistic for the SS to run 12.6 - 12.8 @ 110 to 112 stock with a great driver in cool air.

Bench racing at it's finest. :o:lol:

Sorry man, im stickin with my prediction. 4000 lbs, 360-380 rwhp and an independent rear does not equal easy 12s. Some will probably trip 12s, some LS1 SS camaros did that as well. I agree on it being a lot more car, but this thread wasnt about that was it. When you compare the weight (similar) and rwhp (similar) to the challenger (which runs low 13s) I think its pretty obvious what the average quatermile time will be for tis car (same as the 4th gen ss) low 13s, with A LOT more comfort. Just my .02. Prorac1

Bench racing at its finest, I agree, lol. Hell were so good at bench racing we can bench race cars that havent even been built yet, lol.

Bench racing at its finest, I agree, lol. Hell were so good at bench racing we can bench race cars that havent even been built yet, lol.

:lol: Fun isn't it? :lol:

You make good points. A year from now, if the Camaro struggles to see 12s, it wouldn't surprise me. It's possible I'm being a bit optimistic with the 12.6 to 12.8 prediction.

Just one more thing to point out - the Camaro's power and weight will be similar to the Challenger, but the Camaro is a bit better. Also remember the Challenger hasn't been out that long yet, and this fall we will see cooler air and possibly better track times (and the Challenger only comes with an auto right now - a good driver in a 6 speed should be able to get a tenth or two and a couple mph better in a 6 speed than an auto). I have also seen claims on the internet of stock SRT8 300Cs and SRT8 Chargers running mid to high 12s. So maybe once broken in the Challenger will see better ETs. Hopefully GM didn't bog the Camaro down with too much torque management. That would be a bummer. :think::(

FYI - the LS2 C6 with the A6 tranny has gone 12.2 bone stock. I'm sure the LS3 C6 will go even quicker.

Edit: Actually after a bit of research, here are the fastest showroom stock LS3s so far:

11.71 @ 119.94 - AndrewZPSU - 08 M6
12.16 @ 116.54 - Vinsane112 - 08 A6 2.73
12.18 @ 117.72 - Hardhattg - 08 Z51 M6

So given that, I'd say it's very likely someone will hit 12s in a stock Camaro SS. A good driver at a track like Atco or E-town in good, cool air will get it done.

THose are some very impressive times and speeds for stock LS3 Vettes. Where did you dig up this info? I'm not doubting just curious to read more about them.

I'm thinking the 03/04 Cobra might be a good benchmark for the Camaro. The Cobra was rated 390 at the crank, but was underrated. Many people put down 360 to 370 rwhp bone stock. The Camaro is rated at 422, and will probably not be underrated if it's SAE certified, but will still put down 360 to 370 rwhp stock. The Cobra coupe's curb weight was 3665, whereas the Camaro will be 3860. So right there that's 200 lbs the Camaro gives up to the Cobra, which is worth about .2 and 2 mph in the quarter mile. The Cobra and Camaro both have IRS, and the Cobra I believe had 17 inch wheels while the Camaro will have 20 inch, both at 9 inches wide on the rear. So I'm thinking traction should be similar - it might be tougher for the Camaro with the 20 inch wheels. Another difference would be the weight distribution, which favors the Camaro 52/48 versus 57/43 for the Cobra. (I'm not sure how much weight distribution comes into play in drag racing - more weight on the rear wheels may = better traction?)

The only other factor I can think of is torque management. I don't believe it was much of a factor on the 03 Cobras, but we know that the LS2 GTOs had a VERY tough time because of computers pulling timing due to torque management - even on the 6 speed cars. I haven't seen a problem so far with the LS3 Vettes, so maybe GM has fixed that issue.

Given all that, if you look at what 03 Cobras ran, many were in the 13s stock with average drivers. But there were many in the upper to mid 12s in cool air with good drivers, and the fastest bone stock time for an 03 Cobra was 12.4 @ 114~ mph. Given that, it may not be unrealistic for the SS to run 12.6 - 12.8 @ 110 to 112 stock with a great driver in cool air.

you have to remember that the Cobra also has a little better gearing. The majority of the SS's will be stuck in 13 land as were the GTO's. The avg LS3 corvette traps 115ish, the average SS will probably be 109's.

THose are some very impressive times and speeds for stock LS3 Vettes. Where did you dig up this info? I'm not doubting just curious to read more about them.

There's a list on Vetteforums.com :)

you have to remember that the Cobra also has a little better gearing. The majority of the SS's will be stuck in 13 land as were the GTO's. The avg LS3 corvette traps 115ish, the average SS will probably be 109's.

Forgot gearing.

Most people don't have the luxury of racing at sea level tracks like Atco or E-town. Most people aren't great drivers either. :o

you have to remember that the Cobra also has a little better gearing. The majority of the SS's will be stuck in 13 land as were the GTO's.

The majority of showroom stock 03-04 Cobra's live in that land too.

The majority of showroom stock 03-04 Cobra's live in that land too.

Very true.

Yeah and z06s have gone 10.89@13x.00 mph... its not the norm...

They are 12.4-12.5 car @ 115mph... same thing will happen to the camaro..

The 2006 Z06 according to MT was 11.7@125 and the c6 08 was 12.5@115. The camaro will not be an exception to physics.

I guess if all you are looking at is a drag car then you are right why buy a new Camaro, but if you are looing for a car that will be a much better car than the 4th gen I think its def. worth it. The 4th gen needed some work on comfort and quality the 5th gen I am sure will address all of this and the speed will be there. So in my opinion the 5th gen should be as fast or faster and be twice the car quality, comfort and maybe even fit a cooler in the trunk wise.
This is why I am waiting for the z28... I hope they don't address those issues as they add weight.. as a matter of fact I never complained on my camaro of any of those things. They were non issue. I had some suspension work done when it started to squeak and all was solved. Inside all my dash parts where solid and never rattled like other camaro's which means, mine was very well treated as a car...

Bench racing at it's finest. :o:lol:
Its all we can do because the camaro is not out yet.... or is it??? isn't the idea of the whole post to bench race the camaro?

If my 4700+ lb SUV can run low 12's, 11's will be a cakewalk with a cammed LS3 Camaro.

'Course.... There's only one way to find out :)

If my 4700+ lb SUV can run low 12's, 11's will be a cakewalk with a cammed LS3 Camaro.

'Course.... There's only one way to find out :)

Didn't you have some times and speeds of the pre-pro LS3 SS in action at GM? I remember them being quite quick.

:eek::eek::eek:

Yeah and z06s have gone 10.89@13x.00 mph... its not the norm...

They are 12.4-12.5 car @ 115mph... same thing will happen to the camaro..

The 2006 Z06 according to MT was 11.7@125 and the c6 08 was 12.5@115. The camaro will not be an exception to physics.

I don't think anyone is arguing the majority of SS Camaros are going to run 12s stock. All I've said is that the potential is there for the car to run 12s stock with a good driver in good air. There's nothing to argue really.

Its all we can do because the camaro is not out yet.... or is it??? isn't the idea of the whole post to bench race the camaro?

Yep that's pretty much all we're gonna get out of a thread like this.

Didn't you have some times and speeds of the pre-pro LS3 SS in action at GM? I remember them being quite quick.

It was all heresay.. But yes :) .

I have also seen claims on the internet of stock SRT8 300Cs and SRT8 Chargers running mid to high 12s. So maybe once broken in the Challenger will see better ETs. Hopefully GM didn't bog the Camaro down with too much torque management. That would be a bummer. :think::(

The SRT-8 Charger and 300C guys are nailing down high 12's left and right. Thats not to say that it is easy and personally I find its hard to pick out a stock SRT from one with a tune/intake/thermostat. (which many SRT guys have on the car within weeks of purchasing it).

Also, we don't know if that one 12.99 time was the best of 20 runs in forty degree weather with a midget drag racing champion at the wheel and 1 gallon of gas in the tank at 500 ft below sea level.

But check out this weird piece of info. HOTROD did a writeup recently on a Challenger SRT-8, where they added an intake, exhaust, custom diablo tune, and even DRAG RADIALS, and only managed to squeek out a corrected time of around 13.0

We can bench race all we want, but we will never truly know until we line'em up and run them. However if I had a gun to my head and had to guess, I would put my money on around 13.1-13.3 stock. And twelves possible with a tune and exhaust.

I think if this LS3 is truly identical to the Corvette version then we should see some pretty consistent high 12s once they hit the streets. At first glance you see the curb weight is slightly higher than an LS2 GTO with 22hp more so maybe the new Camaro SS 6 Speed will be a 12.7 second car with a good driver, but low 13s for most (just like the LS2 GTO). However, you must remember that LS3 Corvettes dyno in the 380-390rwhp range, not the 340-350rwhp range of the LS2. I think excellent drivers will pull off mid 12s since LS3 Corvettes are into the 11s stock.

Also, we don't know if that one 12.99 time was the best of 20 runs in forty degree weather with a midget drag racing champion at the wheel and 1 gallon of gas in the tank at 500 ft below sea level.

:lol:

I think if this LS3 is truly identical to the Corvette version then we should see some pretty consistent high 12s once they hit the streets. At first glance you see the curb weight is slightly higher than an LS2 GTO with 22hp more so maybe the new Camaro SS 6 Speed will be a 12.7 second car with a good driver, buit low 13s for most (just like the LS2 GTO). However, you must remember that LS3 Corvettes dyno in the 380-390rwhp range, not the 340-350rwhp range of the LS2. I think excellent drivers will pull off mid 12s since LS3 Corvettes are into the 11s stock.

you have to remember that the LS3 in the camaro will be 8-14 hp less, so it will probably fall in the 370-375 range. given the weight, im expecting about 1-1.5 mph faster than the GTO.

Just found this out - the Lexus ISF which weighs ~3820 pounds and has 416 HP, 371 torque, and has narrower rear tires (255) than the Camaro, ran 12.7 @ 113 mph in a MT test. Pretty close comparison as far as power/weight to the Camaro SS, and pretty close to what I guessed for the fastest stock times you might see out of the SS.

Just found this out - the Lexus ISF which weighs ~3820 pounds and has 416 HP, 371 torque, and has narrower rear tires (255) than the Camaro, ran 12.7 @ 113 mph in a MT test. Pretty close comparison as far as power/weight to the Camaro SS, and pretty close to what I guessed for the fastest stock times you might see out of the SS.
choosing to compare it to the ISF is a pretty poor comparison. That car doesn't even have ONE overdrive in it's first SIX gears. That car is geared just about PERFECTLY for the 1/4, and in an automatic to boot. The camaro, on the otherhand, will be kinda poorly. And it weighs 3780, which is nearing 100 lbs lighter than even a manual camaro. The transmission in the ISF is highly tauted.

The ISF comparison isn't a bad one. Power to weight is close as the Camaro SS is heavier but makes more power and torque. Yes the Lexus does have some numerically higher trans ratios but it's final drive is only a 2.937 to the A6 SS's 3.27 and the 6M 3.45. So the total ratios are not as far off as they appear from the trans only.
The LS3 and its higher low torque but higher rpm hp peak is probably better suited for the higher gear ratios that it has.
As long as the 5th Gen doesn't have the annoying trans/gear ratio that makes the driver shift to 4th ~100ft before the stripe like the 4th Gens did will be a definite improvement.

The ISF comparison isn't a bad one. Power to weight is close as the Camaro SS is heavier but makes more power and torque. Yes the Lexus does have some numerically higher trans ratios but it's final drive is only a 2.937 to the A6 SS's 3.27 and the 6M 3.45. So the total ratios are not as far off as they appear from the trans only.
The LS3 and its higher low torque but higher rpm hp peak is probably better suited for the higher gear ratios that it has.
As long as the 5th Gen doesn't have the annoying trans/gear ratio that makes the driver shift to 4th ~100ft before the stripe like the 4th Gens did will be a definite improvement.

Your forgetting about tire size. And the 5th gen won't even touch 4th gear in the 1/4, that's pretty horrible for a manual. The ISF is at the mid-top of 4th when it crosses the traps IN AN AUTOMATIC. BIG BIG difference in gearing, especially when the auto is the one that is outgearing the manual. that's the whole advantage of even running a manual!

Gearing:
Car........1st..... 2nd.... 3rd..... 4th....
ISF........39...... 66...... 96...... 123
SS A6....39...... 66...... 102..... 136
SS M6....54...... 79...... 114..... 163

The SS A6 is close (the gearing in the GM A6 is pretty good, reason the G8 is quicker than what one would think) but in order to match the power to weight ratio of the ISF, it would need 30-35 more HP. That's a BIG chunk of change.

And TQ is overrated in these cars, both have more than enough to over power street tires. If they were both running slicks, it would be a real legit variable, but on street tires, its barely negligible.

As for the M6, that's pretty horrid gearing for a manual. ****, it would even be pretty damn bad if it were capable of 160 in 5th let alone 4th. 1st gear is closer to 2nd on both the A6 and the ISF! Even if the manual matched the gearing of the ISF, the ISF would still out accelerate it with the minimal lost time between shifts, trapping higher.

I see 109-111's in the M6's future, with the A6's 108-110's.

choosing to compare it to the ISF is a pretty poor comparison. That car doesn't even have ONE overdrive in it's first SIX gears. That car is geared just about PERFECTLY for the 1/4, and in an automatic to boot. The camaro, on the otherhand, will be kinda poorly. And it weighs 3780, which is nearing 100 lbs lighter than even a manual camaro. The transmission in the ISF is highly tauted.

The gearing may be different, but as far as power to weight goes they are VERY close. MT stated the ISF came in at 3820, and the manual SS should come within 40 to 50 pounds of that. I'd say the comparison is pretty good for what's out there. Unless you know of any other cars with ~420 HP that weigh 3800 - 3900 pounds. Please enlighten us if you do. :)

Your forgetting about tire size. And the 5th gen won't even touch 4th gear in the 1/4, that's pretty horrible for a manual. The ISF is at the mid-top of 4th when it crosses the traps IN AN AUTOMATIC. BIG BIG difference in gearing, especially when the auto is the one that is outgearing the manual. that's the whole advantage of even running a manual!

Gearing:
Car........1st..... 2nd.... 3rd..... 4th....
ISF........39...... 66...... 96...... 123
SS A6....39...... 66...... 102..... 136
SS M6....54...... 79...... 114..... 163

The SS A6 is close (the gearing in the GM A6 is pretty good, reason the G8 is quicker than what one would think) but in order to match the power to weight ratio of the ISF, it would need 30-35 more HP. That's a BIG chunk of change.

And TQ is overrated in these cars, both have more than enough to over power street tires. If they were both running slicks, it would be a real legit variable, but on street tires, its barely negligible.

As for the M6, that's pretty horrid gearing for a manual. ****, it would even be pretty damn bad if it were capable of 160 in 5th let alone 4th. 1st gear is closer to 2nd on both the A6 and the ISF! Even if the manual matched the gearing of the ISF, the ISF would still out accelerate it with the minimal lost time between shifts, trapping higher.

I see 109-111's in the M6's future, with the A6's 108-110's.

I don't see what's so bad about the gear ratio's for the M6. It's right in line with what the C6 Z51 has. In fact better by a touch 3.01 first gear in the Camaro to 2.97 in the Vette.
C6 Z51 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
26.9 dia, 52 75 108 155

We have seen what the LS3 C6 can do at the strip.

In all of these cases and your Cobra there is a need to shift into 4th just before the stripe.
Unless the SS proves to be more stout on the stip the we expect. I agree with the 109-111mph traps for the M6 and 108-110's for the A6 it will be hitting the stripe right near redline in 3rd. The goal for drag racing is always to be at the top of the gear in the trap. Sure it would be nicer if that was 4th gear but these are street cars.
So only two shifts for the 1/4 mile for the Camaro and hit the traps right at the top of third. Almost seems like GM thought about this...

Torque is never overrated. Yes both cars and the Vette or your Cobra can blow the street tires right off but I think when we talk about 1/4 mile calculations we don't mean John Force peddle contests. We mean good launches and shifting. Torque is a very big factor in this comparison especially with the LS3's broad and flat torque band it's going to be our best friend when trying to get all 4000+ lbs of race weight moving.

I don't see what's so bad about the gear ratio's for the M6. It's right in line with what the C6 Z51 has. In fact better by a touch 3.01 first gear in the Camaro to 2.97 in the Vette.
C6 Z51 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
26.9 dia, 52 75 108 155

We have seen what the LS3 C6 can do at the strip.


Also, I believe the quickest stock pass in a LS2 C6 was 12.5 or 12.6 before it switched to the A6 tranny. Then we started seeing 12.2 - 12.3 with the only difference being the transmission swap. :cool:

I don't see what's so bad about the gear ratio's for the M6. It's right in line with what the C6 Z51 has. In fact better by a touch 3.01 first gear in the Camaro to 2.97 in the Vette.
C6 Z51 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
26.9 dia, 52 75 108 155

We have seen what the LS3 C6 can do at the strip.

In all of these cases and your Cobra there is a need to shift into 4th just before the stripe.
Unless the SS proves to be more stout on the stip the we expect. I agree with the 109-111mph traps for the M6 and 108-110's for the A6 it will be hitting the stripe right near redline in 3rd. The goal for drag racing is always to be at the top of the gear in the trap. Sure it would be nicer if that was 4th gear but these are street cars.
So only two shifts for the 1/4 mile for the Camaro and hit the traps right at the top of third. Almost seems like GM thought about this...

Torque is never overrated. Yes both cars and the Vette or your Cobra can blow the street tires right off but I think when we talk about 1/4 mile calculations we don't mean John Force peddle contests. We mean good launches and shifting. Torque is a very big factor in this comparison especially with the LS3's broad and flat torque band it's going to be our best friend when trying to get all 4000+ lbs of race weight moving.

that's the thing, i think the vette, for the most part, underperforms in the 1/4 compared to what it's really capable of.

The gearing may be different, but as far as power to weight goes they are VERY close. MT stated the ISF came in at 3820, and the manual SS should come within 40 to 50 pounds of that. I'd say the comparison is pretty good for what's out there. Unless you know of any other cars with ~420 HP that weigh 3800 - 3900 pounds. Please enlighten us if you do. :)

The 03-04 cobra made ~420 hp and weighed 200 lbs. LESS and had a little better gearing (although MAYBE a wash because it's not into 4th too long) and they only trapped 110-112, on average. They've hit as high as 114 stock, but it's stupid to compare the cream of the crop runs, where the planets are aligned just right.

That's the closest I can come to a comparison to the M6 Camaro.

The SS A6, the closest I can think of is a G8. it traps 102-104's on average and weighs 100 lbs more while making 40 hp less. Add 5 mph to trap, there you go.

I think these arguements are pretty funny and people have become so jaded.

These cars are capable of exceeding every speed limit in the country, by the 1/8th mile...

Ya, but we want to do it in a 1/16th not an 1/8th.

that's the thing, i think the vette, for the most part, underperforms in the 1/4 compared to what it's really capable of.

Faster is always better I agree but we've now seen some LS3 Vettes running low 12's and a 11 sec pass in stock trim. Per HOTCIVIC's digging. Those times don't seem like an underachievement to me.
What would you consider a respectable time for an LS3 Vette?

Faster is always better I agree but we've now seen some LS3 Vettes running low 12's and a 11 sec pass in stock trim. Per HOTCIVIC's digging. Those times don't seem like an underachievement to me.
What would you consider a respectable time for an LS3 Vette?

With their power to weight ratio, they should be above 114-115 more consistantly (auto's). The gearing really messes them up.

With their power to weight ratio, they should be above 114-115 more consistantly (auto's). The gearing really messes them up.

I didn't know that they didn't hit 114-115 on a consistant pace. Guess I've only read or heard about the manuals and they certainly do hit that speed if not more.

I didn't know that they didn't hit 114-115 on a consistant pace. Guess I've only read or heard about the manuals and they certainly do hit that speed if not more.

they do hit 114-115, but they should be more consistantly at 116+. Its that terrible rear end gear the auto's have that negates that great gearing the transmission has.

they do hit 114-115, but they should be more consistantly at 116+. Its that terrible rear end gear the auto's have that negates that great gearing the transmission has.

I take it you're not a fan of the 2.56. I can only surmise that GM wanted to give the A6 good low end acceleration around town hense the trans ratios being taller than those on the M6 but had to worry about fuel economy too. The M6 gets a rated 16/26 and the A6 gets 15/25. Had they stuck a 2.73, 3.07 or 3.23 in the back the mileage may have suffered. To that I would've said drop the ratios on the 5th and 6th gear overdrive. Maybe it wasn't an option.

It's interesting that GM has different trans ratios for the M6 in the Z51 C6 that almost match the 2010 SS and are different from the more normal ratios seen on the Z06/Standard C6. Those ratios have been the standard 6 speed ratios for the 4th gen's, 03-04 Cobra and C5's.

http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette/specifications/

Without a doubt the 5th Gen will run high 12s M6 and A6

I will bet the A6 will out perform the M6 at the 1/4 drags. Gearing is a factor here people. Also ... look at the 425hp dodge that goes 13.1-13.2 at 4100 lbs. your SS will be 300-400 lbs lighter.

GM is conservative with it HP numbers the cars will have the same motors as the VETTES. Look back to the 4th gen Z28 vs. C5 vettes ... the auto 4th gens were running the best times with the 3.23 rears... even though the vette was lighter than the 4th gen camaro.

Also... look at the C6 vettes with A4 vs. the newer A6 6.0 vettes... the A6 vettes are .2-.3ths faster.

I have raced a few A6 6.2 vettes... although they had air intakes and tune. they run BOTTOM BOTTOM 12s to high high 11s with 115-117mph.

FACE it most guys cant drive a M6 as good as the writers from MT, C/D, R&T etc... we certainly can NOT out drive the pros. Only a few will be able to shift the M6 to the mid 12.5-12.4 range in a new 422HP SS 5th Gen. Most will only manage 12.9-12.8....

I bet the A6 SS will be the car to have for DRAG racing...

BTW... all you anti IRS drag race fans...

My cam only LS1 C3 with 3.23 and TH350 cut 1.7 60ft times with a FOOT BRAKE !! 12.2 @112:lol:

Without a doubt the 5th Gen will run high 12s M6 and A6

I will bet the A6 will out perform the M6 at the 1/4 drags. Gearing is a factor here people. Also ... look at the 425hp dodge that goes 13.1-13.2 at 4100 lbs. your SS will be 300-400 lbs lighter.

GM is conservative with it HP numbers the cars will have the same motors as the VETTES. Look back to the 4th gen Z28 vs. C5 vettes ... the auto 4th gens were running the best times with the 3.23 rears... even though the vette was lighter than the 4th gen camaro.

Also... look at the C6 vettes with A4 vs. the newer A6 6.0 vettes... the A6 vettes are .2-.3ths faster.

I have raced a few A6 6.2 vettes... although they had air intakes and tune. they run BOTTOM BOTTOM 12s to high high 11s with 115-117mph.

FACE it most guys cant drive a M6 as good as the writers from MT, C/D, R&T etc... we certainly can NOT out drive the pros. Only a few will be able to shift the M6 to the mid 12.5-12.4 range in a new 422HP SS 5th Gen. Most will only manage 12.9-12.8....

I bet the A6 SS will be the car to have for DRAG racing...

BTW... all you anti IRS drag race fans...

My cam only LS1 C3 with 3.23 and TH350 cut 1.7 60ft times with a FOOT BRAKE !! 12.2 @112:lol:

the hemi cars are ~200-240 lbs more than their equiv. counterpart.

and the 422hp LS3 will be SAE certified, so there won't be any "conservative" GM rating. that's all it will make in stock form.

the hemi cars are ~200-240 lbs more than their equiv. counterpart.

and the 422hp LS3 will be SAE certified, so there won't be any "conservative" GM rating. that's all it will make in stock form.

2009 Dodge Charger SRT8 Technical Specs
Curb Weight AT
4160
Ground Clearance
5.1
Height
58.2
Length
200.1
Top Type (Standard)
Hard Fixed
Top Type (Optional)
Not Applicable
Track (Front)
63.0
Track (Rear)
63.1
Weight Distribution AT (Front)
54
Weight Distribution AT (Rear)
46
Weight Distribution MT (Front)
N/A
Weight Distribution MT (Rear)
N/A
Wheelbase
120.0
Width
74.5
Doors (Standard)
4
Doors (Maximum)
4


OK so your saying NOW the 5th Gen Camaro weighs 3920?? Funny seems a little high for me. From what the general said.

SAE corrections asisde... do you think they will be a Difference in the MOTOR from a 6.2 in a C6 corvette, or 6.2 GTX G8, or Camaro SS? not talking exhaust systems.... strickly the motor??

2009 Dodge Charger SRT8 Technical Specs
Curb Weight AT
4160
Ground Clearance
5.1
Height
58.2
Length
200.1
Top Type (Standard)
Hard Fixed
Top Type (Optional)
Not Applicable
Track (Front)
63.0
Track (Rear)
63.1
Weight Distribution AT (Front)
54
Weight Distribution AT (Rear)
46
Weight Distribution MT (Front)
N/A
Weight Distribution MT (Rear)
N/A
Wheelbase
120.0
Width
74.5
Doors (Standard)
4
Doors (Maximum)
4


OK so your saying NOW the 5th Gen Camaro weighs 3920?? Funny seems a little high for me. From what the general said.

SAE corrections asisde... do you think they will be a Difference in the MOTOR from a 6.2 in a C6 corvette, or 6.2 GTX G8, or Camaro SS? not talking exhaust systems.... strickly the motor??

nice CHARGER. based on information around, the CHALLENGER is said to weigh 4040-4140.

As for the LS3 available to the GXP and SS, i think will be the same as the corvette. But to get the power to the C6 (430-436 hp), it will mean it is modified.

nice CHARGER. based on information around, the CHALLENGER is said to weigh 4040-4140.

As for the LS3 available to the GXP and SS, i think will be the same as the corvette. But to get the power to the C6 (430-436 hp), it will mean it is modified.

these cars still have overall better gearing than the vette. even though the vette is lighter. the gearing will make up some distance for the light weight.

the cars will run 12s

Without a doubt the 5th Gen will run high 12s M6 and A6

I will bet the A6 will out perform the M6 at the 1/4 drags. Gearing is a factor here people. Also ... look at the 425hp dodge that goes 13.1-13.2 at 4100 lbs. your SS will be 300-400 lbs lighter.

GM is conservative with it HP numbers the cars will have the same motors as the VETTES. Look back to the 4th gen Z28 vs. C5 vettes ... the auto 4th gens were running the best times with the 3.23 rears... even though the vette was lighter than the 4th gen camaro.

Also... look at the C6 vettes with A4 vs. the newer A6 6.0 vettes... the A6 vettes are .2-.3ths faster.

I have raced a few A6 6.2 vettes... although they had air intakes and tune. they run BOTTOM BOTTOM 12s to high high 11s with 115-117mph.

FACE it most guys cant drive a M6 as good as the writers from MT, C/D, R&T etc... we certainly can NOT out drive the pros. Only a few will be able to shift the M6 to the mid 12.5-12.4 range in a new 422HP SS 5th Gen. Most will only manage 12.9-12.8....

I bet the A6 SS will be the car to have for DRAG racing...

BTW... all you anti IRS drag race fans...

My cam only LS1 C3 with 3.23 and TH350 cut 1.7 60ft times with a FOOT BRAKE !! 12.2 @112:lol:
c6s where never ever a4s. And C5s where not that much lighter than ls1s 4th gens... 200 lbs at most? Its not like now that we have a 600-700lb punishment.

these cars still have overall better gearing than the vette. even though the vette is lighter. the gearing will make up some distance for the light weight.

the cars will run 12s

No they dont, not the manual camaro's. The base corvette has basically the same horrid overally gearing while the Z51 is a little better than the manual camaro's.

The auto camaro's do have better gearing than the auto corvettes, but will suffer from both the weight issue AND a considerable less amount of power. The auto camaro will make up some distance on the manual camaro's though with that gearing, I completely agree with you on that.

c6s where never ever a4s. And C5s where not that much lighter than ls1s 4th gens... 200 lbs at most? Its not like now that we have a 600-700lb punishment.

well, they were A4's (LS2's), just never with the LS3.

No... they were A5s on 2005 (ls2) a6s with the ls2 on 2006 up.

No... they were A5s on 2005 (ls2) a6s with the ls2 on 2006 up.

in '05 they used the 4 speed 4L65-E, which is a revised version of the 4L60 for more tq and higher shift points.

Just to throw some Corvette FACTS in the mix:

2005 C6 Corvettes autos had the 4L65-E A4 (Not A5). It came with a 2.73 rear or optional "performance" 3.15 rear.

2006 and up autos had the A6.

C6 A6 Vettes come with 2.56 rear ends. Starting in 2008 with the A6 you could get an optional "performance" 2.73 rear which is also part of the Z51 package for automatic cars.

And some published weights for "Normal" (non vert or Z06) Corvettes:
C5 3,246 lbs.
C6 3,179 lbs.

in '05 they used the 4 speed 4L65-E, which is a revised version of the 4L60 for more tq and higher shift points.

YES...what he said. still 4 forward gears.

chevy doesnt make a 5 speed auto


BTW. I was referring to the auto cars. Not the Manual. The Z51 LS3 with a M6 is the money making for sure... if you can launch and make it stick. I am not saying the cars will be able to out perform the C6 vettes... NO WAY. But both M6 and A6 SS Camaros will make high 12s in the 1/4

And some published weights for "Normal" (non vert or Z06) Corvettes:
C5 3,246 lbs.
C6 3,179 lbs.

Thats about 70lbs of Big Beautiful C5 ASS :p
and eyes that wink...;)

Got a love a girl with a nice ASS.:yes:

i prefer my girls to weigh a lot less than 3,200lbs. but to each their own........

I drove my "CAI only" Z28 to a 13.0 - on DR's. I have no doubt I'll get my next Camaro to run deep 12's, if not faster. 380ish rwhp got me 11.9's w/ a 3650 raceweight.

Sadly my TBSS nearly trumps that time weighing almost 1k #'s more. Add to that it makes 20 more rwhp with just a cam.

Isn't technology fun?

I drove my "CAI only" Z28 to a 13.0 - on DR's. I have no doubt I'll get my next Camaro to run deep 12's, if not faster. 380ish rwhp got me 11.9's w/ a 3650 raceweight.

Sadly my TBSS nearly trumps that time weighing almost 1k #'s more. Add to that it makes 20 more rwhp with just a cam.

Isn't technology fun?

its not "CAI only" if your running drag radials too.

i prefer my girls to weigh a lot less than 3,200lbs. but to each their own........

Well... My car actually weighs in at 3150 w/o me.;)

SEXY C3 Curves... packed with a LS1 punch:cool:

If we're bench racing this hard.....
I'm paying most attention to the gains made by the LS3 C6 guys with very minimal mods..... CAI, headers and tune seem to make this motor crazy!!! Let alone if you swap cams....

How many of us didn't at least put those mods on our 4th gen cars? Hell, I think its almost required after purchase.

A lot of LS3 C6 guys with those three mods are seeing 400/415rwhp. Run that through the drag calculator and see what you come up with!

its not "CAI only" if your running drag radials too.

Drag radials didn't help much.. I only cut 1.9X 60's.

My TBSS cuts low 1.7's on 20inch Yokahamas though. ;)

Drag radials didn't help much.. I only cut 1.9X 60's.

My TBSS cuts low 1.7's on 20inch Yokahamas though. ;)

1.9's is very different than cutting 2.1-2.2's on street tires. its almost .5 seconds in the 1/4.

1.9's is very different than cutting 2.1-2.2's on street tires. its almost .5 seconds in the 1/4.


For being such an expert on drag racing, why is your cars 1/4 mile time and speed so low for so much RWHP?

My last car had 368 RWHP and turned 12.6 at 116 and I cant shift at all.:D

1.9's is very different than cutting 2.1-2.2's on street tires. its almost .5 seconds in the 1/4.

I've seen tons of people cutting 1.9s on stock tires.

My car is lid-only (unless you count a Pro-5.0 shifter) and ran 13.15@109.60 on factory Goodyears. The 2.2 60-foot time indicates this is an easy 12-second car if I could launch. Granted this was at a well-prepped track in good air but I am looking forward to seeing what the fifth gen with a better power/weight ratio can do at that track.

I think the car will run a bit better than that but not a bad calculator. I hope 17% driveline loss is on the high side. We'll see what the IRS does for this car.

I'm betting 9 to 11% , not because of some super killer lube, but the static 15% or so absorbtion most people site just starts to break down on high HP engines.

For being such an expert on drag racing, why is your cars 1/4 mile time and speed so low for so much RWHP?

My last car had 368 RWHP and turned 12.6 at 116 and I cant shift at all.:D
i got kicked off the track, only one botched run in. i need a cage.


my raceweight is 3960 with me in it. what did you and your car weigh in at? I was running street tires BTW. (your time isn't all that good either for you mph, so im guessing street tires for you). Whats your gearing like? What's your full slip look like?

and in the end, btw, comparing track numbers is like comparing dyno numbers. unless you were there driving alongside against me, no matter how hard you may try, it's pretty much impossible to compare.

I've seen tons of people cutting 1.9s on stock tires.

around here, on an unprepped track (wed night fun drags), your LUCKY if you can get anything under 2.2. The best i've seen is a 2.1xx on street tires.

that just shows how all tracks are different.

I'm betting 9 to 11% , not because of some super killer lube, but the static 15% or so absorbtion most people site just starts to break down on high HP engines.

from what i've seen (i keep tack of rwhp dyno numbers and such in a database) most manual transmission cars lose between 11-13% while most MODERN autos lose 13-15%. Older OD auto's are usually 16-18% and the large oldschool 3spd autos are in the 19-22% range.

around here, on an unprepped track (wed night fun drags), your LUCKY if you can get anything under 2.2. The best i've seen is a 2.1xx on street tires.

that just shows how all tracks are different.

Wednesday night fun drags are definitely not the place to be if you're looking for a new personal best. :lol: I've been to a couple around here but usually cars are .5 to .7 slower than their normal ETs from not being able to hook.

Wednesday night fun drags are definitely not the place to be if you're looking for a new personal best. :lol: I've been to a couple around here but usually cars are .5 to .7 slower than their normal ETs from not being able to hook.

ya i know. but those are the only nights (days) when they don't do ANY sort of inspection on the cars for NHRA safety equiptment.

ya i know. but those are the only nights (days) when they don't do ANY sort of inspection on the cars for NHRA safety equiptment.

Thought you said you were kicked off the track. Did you get squirly on launch and draw attention to yourself?
Your car violates the 13.49 roll bar rule in stock trim as many newer converts do these days. But many tracks I've been to allow the convert drivers to have some fun during T&T as long as they don't do anything to make the track mangers think they are in over their heads and heading for danger.

Thought you said you were kicked off the track. Did you get squirly on launch and draw attention to yourself?
Your car violates the 13.49 roll bar rule in stock trim as many newer converts do these days. But many tracks I've been to allow the convert drivers to have some fun during T&T as long as they don't do anything to make the track mangers think they are in over their heads and heading for danger.

nah, this car hardly kicks out at all when it spins. it stays straight, unlike my old solid axle 5.0. that thing would get stupid sometimes. it was actually the lady that hands out the slips told me that i was in violation and that i had to keep it under 13.49. i gone back but in less favorable conditions. that, and the track is seems to spit out slower numbers now lol. i'll probably go back in a couple weeks. i try going once, maybe twice a year. it's two hours away.

12.5's all day long ;)

I did a little speculative bench racing based on some real world info that I had verified with my own eyes and came up with this.


For reference I used this google gem to get started.
http://www.race-cars.net/calculators/et_calculator.html
Assuming a 3860 Curb weight of an SS with the T6060 Rated at 422hp and then a very uncharacteristic 15% drive loss I come up with 359whp

Stock 359whp:
12.64 @ 107mph

Lightly modded(BPU) 392whp:
12.28@110.92mph

Full BPU with Cam and Tune 451whp:
11.72@116.23mph

In my opinion for a Camaro to be running mid 11's with mods that almost every single one of us will do just for the sound alone is not bad. I for one am impressed. You also have to realize that I was being conservative with the numbers figuring a 15% drive line loss. If I used the numbers straight from my friends Vette it works out like this.


Stock 385whp:
12.36@110.26mph

Lightly modded(BPU) 418whp:
12.02@113.32mph

Full BPU with Cam and Tune 477whp:
11.52@118.23mph

Worry all you want about how it is certified, but you can color me impressed when all I have spend is about 2 grand in mods and some wrench time to be running in the 11's on street tires.

I did a little speculative bench racing based on some real world info that I had verified with my own eyes and came up with this.

385 rwhp is a little high. That's about average for the 430 hp vette, while the 436 vette's are usually 390 rwhp. the camaro will probably make ~370-375rwhp.

385 rwhp is a little high. That's about average for the 430 hp vette, while the 436 vette's are usually 390 rwhp. the camaro will probably make ~370-375rwhp.

why? an LS3 is an LS3. are they going to grind a new cam?

why? an LS3 is an LS3. are they going to grind a new cam?

because the LS3 in the Camaro will have 422 hp versus 430-436 for the Corvette. The Camaro will be SAE certified (as is the corvette) meaning what it's rated at is what it will make, within 1%. The differences will probably be very minor, such as exhaust and intake tracking, but the power difference will be there.

because the LS3 in the Camaro will have 422 hp versus 430-436 for the Corvette. The Camaro will be SAE certified (as is the corvette) meaning what it's rated at is what it will make, within 1%. The differences will probably be very minor, such as exhaust and intake tracking, but the power difference will be there.

they dont SAE certify all the motors (just a couple for testing), thats why vettes put down 380-390rwhp in M6 trim and is rated at 43Xhp which doesn't equate if you do the math. which brings me to whole point in this discussion with you, why would the camaro be 370-375? Unless they really mess with the tune and the exhaust, it should be on par with the vette.

they dont SAE certify all the motors (just a couple for testing), thats why vettes put down 380-390rwhp in M6 trim and is rated at 43Xhp which doesn't equate if you do the math. which brings me to whole point in this discussion with you, why would the camaro be 370-375? Unless they really mess with the tune and the exhaust, it should be on par with the vette.


The vette has a more efficient transaxle. On the order of 10% loss. 395/.9 = 438 almost dead on with the SAE rating.

The Camaro with a conventional transmission axle will have losses on the order of 12%.

422(.88) = 371rwhp

The Camaro SS will dyno about 20-25 less rwhp than a vette. Bet on it.

Where are you getting your data from with regards to efficiency losses?

The vette has a more efficient transaxle. On the order of 10% loss. 395/.9 = 438 almost dead on with the SAE rating.

The Camaro with a conventional transmission axle will have losses on the order of 12%.

422(.88) = 371rwhp

The Camaro SS will dyno about 20-25 less rwhp than a vette. Bet on it.

The vette has a more efficient transaxle. On the order of 10% loss. 395/.9 = 438 almost dead on with the SAE rating.

The Camaro with a conventional transmission axle will have losses on the order of 12%.

422(.88) = 371rwhp

The Camaro SS will dyno about 20-25 less rwhp than a vette. Bet on it.

10% is hugely efficient and not realistic

14-16% for the manual, 18-20% for the auto.

the math is wrong that is posted above......^^^^

370rwhp/.88=421

380rwhp/.88=431

390rwhp/.88=433

100-12% loss=88 (if you are wondering where I got .88 from).

M6 LS3's see 390rwhp as the median @ 14% loss is...

390/.86=453 crank hp, which makes sense because its underrated.

10% is hugely efficient and not realistic

14-16% for the manual, 18-20% for the auto.


Nope.

The GT500 an SAE certified 500hp car dynos ~440rwhp.

500(.88) = 440

The C6 is SAE certified at 436 with Z06 exhaust option. They dyno ~390rwhp.

436(.9) = 392

12% is the number most people agree on for loss on a TR6060 with an 8.8 rear axle. And the vettes transaxle looks to be even better.

the math is wrong that is posted above......^^^^

370rwhp/.88=421

380rwhp/.88=431

390rwhp/.88=433

100-12% loss=88 (if you are wondering where I got .88 from).

M6 LS3's see 390rwhp as the median @ 14% loss is...

390/.86=453 crank hp, which makes sense because its underrated.


Except they're not underrated.:)

The 422hp Camaro SS will dyno out at 370rwhp.

the math is wrong that is posted above......^^^^

370rwhp/.88=421

380rwhp/.88=431

390rwhp/.88=433

100-12% loss=88 (if you are wondering where I got .88 from).

M6 LS3's see 390rwhp as the median @ 14% loss is...

390/.86=453 crank hp, which makes sense because its underrated.

underrated doesn't exist, so long as the engine is SAE certified. with the certification process, ALL engines must be +-1% of the rated power to have the privilage of being "SAE Certified". It's not that complicatated, go to SAE's main website. go check out the Corvette forums, they have written so much more about this discussion.

rest assured, "underrated" doesn't exist anymore*. (*Except for non-SAE certified engines. but then again, they can be overrated as well, such as the much speculated LS2 in the vette forums.)

btw, i believe most manual's are at about 10-12% while most MODERN auto's are at 13-16%.

is anybody else ridiculously dissapointed in the "estimated performance" of the new camaro... I mean, these 0-60 and 1/4 times being said for the new camaro could easily have been done by a 10 year old ls1.. I shure as hell hope its underrated or this is a huge waste.

:( new camaro= more expensive old ls1?? haha

Nope.

The GT500 an SAE certified 500hp car dynos ~440rwhp.

500(.88) = 440

The C6 is SAE certified at 436 with Z06 exhaust option. They dyno ~390rwhp.

436(.9) = 392

12% is the number most people agree on for loss on a TR6060 with an 8.8 rear axle. And the vettes transaxle looks to be even better.
if no more cars are underrated, then there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

is anybody else ridiculously dissapointed in the "estimated performance" of the new camaro... I mean, these 0-60 and 1/4 times being said for the new camaro could easily have been done by a 10 year old ls1.. I shure as hell hope its underrated or this is a huge waste.

:( new camaro= more expensive old ls1?? haha

the performance times posted might be "underrated" since SAE has nothing to do with that, but the power will NOT be "underrated".

if no more cars are underrated, then there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

oh, it's possible cars are underrated. Nice point. The Hemi engines and the Ford Modulars come to mind since they are not SAE Certified. Just nothing coming from GM will be underrated because they have made a commitment to SAE Certify EVERY new engine they come out with, starting with the LS7 a while back.


Don't be lazy, look it up for yourself.

My benchracing input....the 2010 SS will be 2-3 tenths quicker than the 05/06 GTO, thus one of the better mags (such as GMHTP) will likely run high 12s with their testing, while the mainstream mags (C&D, R&T, etc) will likely be in the low 13s, perhaps a 12.9 from one of them.

A good "shoe" at Atco, E-town, Cecil, or MIR in cold weather and a well-prepped racing surface will likely get em to run in the mid 12s.

All in all....about on par with an 03/04 Cobra, IMHO.

if my bolt on, +ls6 intake, and hypertech programmed camaro ran a 12.5002 at 110.9 then we will def see 12's for a good driver. the avg driver will se low to mid 13's.

you guys are missing the point.. it weighs THE SAME as a GTO.. it has only 22 more HP...

what times did the GTO pulled with 22 less hp than the ls3? I know the engine has a lot of modding potential... but.. My guess is we will see low 13s @ 110mph at most.

Speed in the 1/4 for me is king.

Speed in the 1/4 for me is king.
speed is not king. ET is king. speed it used to compensate for bad driving. if you can go faster from point A to point B with out increasing speed you're more effiecent.

Although it's still nice to have the speed.

oh btw I've seen a time slip for a stock ls2 GTO that ran a 12.92. . .for what it's worth

So the Vettes only lose 8% through a beefy T56 RWD setup? :lol:

Wow, that's on par with the amazing minimal loss the Ford GT bragged about.

The LS3 SS is rated at 416, I imagine they will dyno 5-10RWHP less if at all then the 08 C6's.

So it's about 150 lbs heavier then the GTO with about 40 more RWHP, there is no doubt in my mind it will outrun the LS2 Goats.

Can't wait to bump this thread to tell you how wrong most of you are.

So the Vettes only lose 8% through a beefy T56 RWD setup? :lol:

Wow, that's on par with the amazing minimal loss the Ford GT bragged about.

The LS3 SS is rated at 416, I imagine they will dyno 5-10RWHP less if at all then the 08 C6's.

So it's about 150 lbs heavier then the GTO with about 40 more RWHP, there is no doubt in my mind it will outrun the LS2 Goats.

Can't wait to bump this thread to tell you how wrong most of you are.

the vette loses ~11%.

LS3 is said to be rated 422 hp, so yes it will dyno less than an LS3 C6. How much, who really knows. I would venture to say ~12% for the manuals. The G8 loses more to the ground (auto vs. auto) than the vette, so if they had similar losses, the auto may lose ~16-17% (361hp stock / ~300rwhp for the G8, 436 hp stock/ ~370rwhp for the C6). We'll have to wait and see. Either way, the camaro will make less.

what they are rated at is what they will make before drivetrain losses, there's no way around that. The LS3 will not be the exactly the same (exhaust + intake) in a vette compared to a camaro.


and the difference will most likely be ~25-30 rwhp compared to a GTO, and MAYBE ~5-10rwhp for the auto.

the vette loses ~11%.

LS3 is said to be rated 422 hp, so yes it will dyno less than an LS3 C6. How much, who really knows. I would venture to say ~12% for the manuals. The G8 loses more to the ground (auto vs. auto) than the vette, so if they had similar losses, the auto may lose ~16-17% (361hp stock / ~300rwhp for the G8, 436 hp stock/ ~370rwhp for the C6). We'll have to wait and see. Either way, the camaro will make less.

what they are rated at is what they will make before drivetrain losses, there's no way around that. The LS3 will not be the exactly the same (exhaust + intake) in a vette compared to a camaro.


and the difference will most likely be ~25-30 rwhp compared to a GTO, and MAYBE ~5-10rwhp for the auto.


They don't put the LS3 in the G8 GT so what are you talking about?

They don't put the LS3 in the G8 GT so what are you talking about?

they do put the LS3 in the G8 GXP

you guys are missing the point.. it weighs THE SAME as a GTO.. it has only 22 more HP...

It's actually almost 200 lbs heavier than the GTO.

But I'm probably missing the point, too.

They don't put the LS3 in the G8 GT so what are you talking about?

Im talking about drivetrain losses. the drivetrain losses in the camaro will more likely mirror that of the G8 (zeta) more than the corvette.

you know it should really be similar to a GT500. similar weight and power. but more losses and a tiny bit less power.

you know it should really be similar to a GT500. similar weight and power. but more losses and a tiny bit less power.

TINY BIT LESS POWER?! :lol::lol:

near 80 hp is not similar by any stretch of the word.

Im talking about drivetrain losses. the drivetrain losses in the camaro will more likely mirror that of the G8 (zeta) more than the corvette.

....false


also, if your going to run your mouth about the new camaro, why dont you do it on a mustang forum, we all love the car, you obviously dont know what youre talking about and your SUPERR SICK cobra is slower than my gfs type R civic hahaaha

thats what he gets for having a 3800lb+ car.

Anyways... FWIW a 322rwhp camaro ls1 ss 2001 did 13.1 @ 108 with an awful driver (just a borla and lid, no programming) ... I see no point in buying the new camaro.

If the 1/4 mile is your only criteria then yeah, the F5 isn't worth the money, start adding in things like safety, driving dynamics/comfort, build quality, ect and the F5 looks better.

....false


also, if your going to run your mouth about the new camaro, why dont you do it on a mustang forum, we all love the car, you obviously dont know what youre talking about and your SUPERR SICK cobra is slower than my gfs type R civic hahaaha

he never said he had a "SUPERR SICK cobra" or even bragged about it. and with 117+ traps, his car is kinda fast. if your bfs type R civic traps higher than that, its pretty fast too. but you can rest assured that the SUPERR SICK camaro will not come close to matching that either.

thats what he gets for having a 3800lb+ car.

3780 lbs.

and yes, it is a pig.

....false


nice arguement there, very convincing! :lol::lol:

my sister is going to buy one of the first f-5's that are available. she has ragged me about how she is going to kill me over and over and laugh.

so my counter is to lose 350lbs(car3000#even) and turbo a 4.6 3v.

i think her excitement will abate when she realizes just how hard it is to get 4000# rolling no matter how much power she has.

its kinds like the termi's making more power than a '07 Z06 and still losing hands down.

lose weight = faster with less power.

i do think its a great car for collecting. a wise man would buy a:
'08 z06
'08 gt500kr
'09 SRT challenger
'10 Z28


we have a fellow in wildhorsesclub clarksville who has an 08 LS3 vette, an 06 FORD GT, and an 06 GT500.

he drives the vette harder. 7.9 in the 1/8th. he is still babying it.

my sister is going to buy one of the first f-5's that are available. she has ragged me about how she is going to kill me over and over and laugh.

so my counter is to lose 350lbs(car3000#even) and turbo a 4.6 3v.

i think her excitement will abate when she realizes just how hard it is to get 4000# rolling no matter how much power she has.

its kinds like the termi's making more power than a '07 Z06 and still losing hands down.

lose weight = faster with less power.

i do think its a great car for collecting. a wise man would buy a:
'08 z06
'08 gt500kr
'09 SRT challenger
'10 Z28


we have a fellow in wildhorsesclub clarksville who has an 08 LS3 vette, an 06 FORD GT, and an 06 GT500.

he drives the vette harder. 7.9 in the 1/8th. he is still babying it.

Wait...........what? :think:

Unwelcome content removed

dunno if it was posted but keep in mind guys about hte G8 GXP.

it the same platform, has the LS3 but makes a little less power, weighes more then the camaro and run 13.0's @109..the camaro WILL be in the 12's