Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
I'm suprised the automags didn't get better times with the C6 since the LS2 is underrated.
LS2 GTO vs. S/C Cobra should be a good drag race, now they are both on par with HP and weight.
LS2 GTO vs. S/C Cobra should be a good drag race, now they are both on par with HP and weight.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 163
From: Dallas, TX
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
They need to stop letting the journalists complete the tests that will be the basis for the numbers that will go in print. Sure they need to drive and experience the car, but they need to find a decent driver to put the numbers up.
I dont read mags anymore, they are useless.
I dont read mags anymore, they are useless.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,472
From: South Bend, Indiana
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by BigBlueCruiser
Sorry, but the '05 GTO isn't coming in in the low-mid '30s. They'll be comparable in price.
Originally Posted by routesixtysixer
Curb weight: 4160 pounds
I would bet somewhere between $5,000 and $10,000 more than a GTO (MSRP probably around $40,000).
In addition:
"The fuel economy of the 6.1 liter version of the Hemi is far from great, and the 300C SRT-8 will only get about 14 miles per gallon in city driving and 19 on the highway. Because of that it will also be subject to the U.S. gas guzzler tax."
I would bet somewhere between $5,000 and $10,000 more than a GTO (MSRP probably around $40,000).
In addition:
"The fuel economy of the 6.1 liter version of the Hemi is far from great, and the 300C SRT-8 will only get about 14 miles per gallon in city driving and 19 on the highway. Because of that it will also be subject to the U.S. gas guzzler tax."
Pathetic! 
Originally Posted by Z28x
Assuming the auto still has 18% drivetrain loss. 351 RWHP = 428HP 
even at 15% loss that is still 413HP
even at 15% loss that is still 413HP
I'm in tears! Too bad the Camaro couldn't stick around for that 
Those Cobra guys would have to crawl back under their rocks.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by BigBlueCruiser
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
I wanna see this brick do 170 mph....at sustained speed....
It looks like both cars will be about equal on the performance front. It'll come down to styling and price as to whether there's an SRT-8 or a GTO in your driveay.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 917
From: Lexington, KY
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by BigBlueCruiser
It looks like both cars will be about equal on the performance front. It'll come down to styling and price as to whether there's an SRT-8 or a GTO in your driveay.
..and the fact that one has 4 doors and one has 2
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by BigBlueCruiser
It looks like both cars will be about equal on the performance front. It'll come down to styling and price as to whether there's an SRT-8 or a GTO in your driveay.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,472
From: South Bend, Indiana
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
My point was simply top speed capability. Straight line performance equality I can buy. I don't have specific cd numbers on the 300 but I have to believe it would take a rediculous amount of horsepower combined with outrageous gearing to push that brick wall of a front end to 170 mph. Reminds me of when Dodge claimed their Tomahawk bike would reach 350 mph...me thinks they tend to exaggerate.
I think Dodge claimed 300 mph on the Tomahawk bike, which I don't think is too far fetched for 500HP to tug just an engine, wheels, and a gas tank.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
Originally Posted by Meccadeth
I think Dodge claimed 300 mph on the Tomahawk bike, which I don't think is too far fetched for 500HP to tug just an engine, wheels, and a gas tank.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
Re: Dyno pull of LS2 GTO
The following data is pulled from C&D (please don't accuse me of magazine racing, its all I have in this particular case).
The 300C 's Drag area, Cd (0.35) x frontal area (25.4 sq ft): 8.89 sq ft
The 04 GTO's Drag area, Cd (0.31) x frontal area (23.3 sq ft, est): 7.22 sq ft
Can't qualify that, but certainly the GTO slips thru the air better.
The 350 HP 346 cid 04 GTO and the 340 HP 345 cid 05 300C ran nearly identical times. C&D got 13.9 @ 102 out of the Hemi, and 13.9 @ 102 out of the GTO. Both were autos (no doubt the M6 GTO could do better).
The 300C weighs almost 300 lbs more than the GTO (4140 vs 3821).
Assuming the HP ratings are accurate, the LS2 GTO and 6.1L 300C should be very close in performance (excepting gas mileage, as has been stated).
Source:
GTO Test Specs
300C Test Specs
The 300C 's Drag area, Cd (0.35) x frontal area (25.4 sq ft): 8.89 sq ft
The 04 GTO's Drag area, Cd (0.31) x frontal area (23.3 sq ft, est): 7.22 sq ft
Can't qualify that, but certainly the GTO slips thru the air better.
The 350 HP 346 cid 04 GTO and the 340 HP 345 cid 05 300C ran nearly identical times. C&D got 13.9 @ 102 out of the Hemi, and 13.9 @ 102 out of the GTO. Both were autos (no doubt the M6 GTO could do better).
The 300C weighs almost 300 lbs more than the GTO (4140 vs 3821).
Assuming the HP ratings are accurate, the LS2 GTO and 6.1L 300C should be very close in performance (excepting gas mileage, as has been stated).
Source:
GTO Test Specs
300C Test Specs
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Darth Xed
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
13
Jul 22, 2002 12:45 PM
