It would be between a 3.90 and a 4.10. The 4.10 will certainly be better at the drag strip if that is important to you, but the 3.90 should do a little better on the street in terms of driveability and get a little better gas mileage as well. I suspect both will be fine on the track.

Something else I just noticed is that both of these gears will make 6th gear much more usable. From what I am seeing, 6th gear is going to be rather useless like it is on the 4th Gen Camaro, if not more so.

Lugging along at 1600rpm in 6th gear would put you at around 69mph with the standard gearing of the Camaro. That is stupid! Useless! However, a 4.10 gear would put you at 58 mph and a 3.90 at 61mph. I like the 3.90 gear in this case as it would allow you to cruise in 6th at a reasonable, yet low, rpm on 55mph roads (assuming you drive about 10mph over the speed limit). It would also still be reasonable on 65mph speed limit roads as 75mph would put you at about 2000rpm.

So from some real quick analysis, my opinion is that a gear around 3.90 will be the best compromise of performance, drivability, and gas mileage. GM needs to offer a gear like this as part of a "track pack" like Dodge and Ford are doing. They BADLY need to do this!


2010 Camaro SS
1st 3.01 (11.739) = 48mph
2nd 2.07 (8.073) = 69.5mph
3rd 1.43 (5.577) = 101mph
4th 1.00 (3.90) = 144mph
5th 0.84 (3.276) = 171mph
6th 0.57

Final Drive 3.90

275/40/20 tires = 28.6" diameter



2010 Camaro SS
1st 3.01 (12.341) = 45.5mph
2nd 2.07 (8.487) = 66mph
3rd 1.43 (5.863) = 96mph
4th 1.00 (4.10) = 137mph
5th 0.84 (3.444) = 163mph
6th 0.57

Final Drive 4.10

275/40/20 tires = 28.6" diameter

 

3:90 it is! i dont really plan on going to the drag strip at all. i think i took my trans am there 3 times in the 5 years i owned it.
does GMPP sell 3:90 gears? or will i have to go aftermarket for them?

 

My bad, just did a search on ls1tech and found that my code GU5 means I have 3.23
I'm running General Exclaim UMP 245 45 17's. ( should be same height as stock tire)
The launch was from idle, no staging at all. (tends to break tranny mounts if I stage)

 

True but factoring in the lag of the speedo, wouldn't that mean I was actually FASTER?

 

Does the speedo lag? Is it cable-operated or digital?

 

cable. Most speedo's lag.

 

Actually, that gearing is really good for helping highway fuel economy. My truck gets its best mileage at about 60-65mph. With my combo (4L60E/3.23/30" tires) that is only 1500-1650RPM. Oh yeah, my 275/60R17 tires are a half inch shorter than the stock 245/70R17, so that would be 1500-1600RPM. The 5.3L feels comfortable there. I would imagine that the Camaro's much smaller frontal area and much larger engine wouldn't have any problem loafing around at even lower RPM.

The steep first gear ratio in the 6L80E means that the rear gears don't need to be steep to get good acceleration off the line. Compared to the 4l60E it is like having 4.10s off the line, but 3.08s on the highway. The best of both worlds

Everything that I'm seeing about the Camaro SS is making me think that GM has done a hell of a job with it. I really look forward to finally getting inside one this weekend

 

Really? Hmm...if it is a cable, then it would have to be mechanical linkage, right? Is the lag caused by the cable twisting prior to moving? How much lag is there?

Seriously curious...would love to see documentation of this.

 

Can't help you with documentation. Just what I've been told. If lag is not the proper word to use, then how about calibration? When you are at WOT and you hit a registered 60mph on the speedo you are most likely doing more like 63 or so.

Anywho, found this
http://www.leftlanenews.com/pontiac-g8-gxp.html
on the GXP G8. they also rate it at 4.7 and 13.0 in the 1/4 mile. So I would expect that if those numbers are legit, then real world numbers for the Camaro should be better, the manual weighs 200 lbs less, and is rated with an extra 11 horses. So one would think the Camaro should be a click faster than the GXP. right?

 

A 4th Gen F-body will lug along in 6th at 1500-1600rpm but I wouldn't say it likes it. When you hit a hill and have to give more throttle, you are really straining the engine. Still, you can do it.

However, if you can't use 6th gear until about 1600rpm, which is 69mph in the new Camaro, then you can't use 6th gear except for on 65mph+ roads and you would be basically breaking the speed limit on all but 70mph roads. Not that we all don't do that, but it is odd for a manufacturer to design a car this way. I believe they probably did it because the new highway fuel mileage tests take the car up to 80mph if I remember correctly which is absolutely insane and should never have been allowed since it is higher than the highest posted speed limit of any road in the country.

So, you can't use 6th in the Camaro unless you are going about 70mph.

Since most roads are 55 to 60mph due to urban sprawl and ever increasing population densities near roads, you are stuck using 5th gear most of the time with the current cars gearing. With the 3.45 gears in the Camaro, you will be turning just under 2100rpm in 5th gear at 60mph. With 3.90 gears you could be lugging along at the same speed, turning 1600rpm in 6th gear, which you claim will give better gas mileage.

Unless you have a long commute on a 65mph+ road I would say 3.90 gears are actually going to yield better gas mileage than the stock gears.

I think the car is going to be great, but the gearing is not very well done in my opinion, especially the large gaps between 2nd-3rd and 3rd-4th, which are not easily fixable unless you consider rebuilding a transmission in a new car an easy fix.

Even the G8 GXP gets a much better 3.70 rear gear. I wonder if this will become a common swap...

 

Sounds like 3.90's is the way to go. But if anyone is planning on taking their 3.90 to the track with a 6speed, good luck launching it.

 

Seems like the 2010 SS gearing is more for acceleration/moving the weight of the car in gears 1-2 and then focus on overall fuel economy. I think GM would have gone at least 3.73 had it not been for trying to meet mpg goal. 20" wheels really have really thrown off the ratios.

Sounds a lot like the N/A 4.6L Cobra's and their 3.27 gears out of the box. 4.10's really worke them up. We now have the luxury of the 6th gear where they never did.

 

Just takes practice and a decent tire.

 

My Impala had 3.08 gears when it left Arlington, but it has 4.10s now

 

Wow, lots of points needing clarification in this thread...

In addition to the gearing differences which have dominated this thread, remember that peak power isn't everything! The L99 has variable valve timing, which should broaden its torque curve, giving it an off-peak advantage over the LS3. I haven't seen actual numbers here, but I suspect that this plays a big part.

Fixed. Please get it right.

Fixed again. Please get this right too.

It's meaningful in that testers try over and over and over again, and report the absolute best result they were able to attain. That eliminates most of the variables. Then they normalize the results for standard weather conditions, which eliminates most of what's left.

The real value in 0-60 times is that it's something the average car owner can try to reproduce, on the street, without getting in trouble.

They have been using GPS systems like the Racelogic VBOX for at least a decade now. Nobody who's anybody uses 5th wheels anymore.

You're lumping three different engine configurations together here.

I can't comment on how much an LT1 likes the above.

A '98-00 LS1 will get along just fine at 1500 in 6th, but will struggle if you go much below that.

An '01-02 LS1 (different cam, intake manifold, and tune) will run in 6th at 1000 rpm with no problem, and it will accelerate from that speed, up a reasonable hill, without difficulty (slowly, but no lugging). I do it all the time in mine. You have to get down to 700-800 for it to lug.