Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 11:05 AM
  #61  
falchulk's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,881
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by RussStang
I can't say anything for the Hemi, but the LS1 does not do this. Running anything more than 91 is a waste of time. People pick up power by advancing their timing and running 93 over on the East coast, where we can get 93 everywhere.

The LS1 already runs on premium!! We are talking about engines that are slightly detuned to run on less octane.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 11:08 AM
  #62  
RussStang's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by falchulk
The LS1 already runs on premium!! We are talking about engines that are slightly detuned to run on less octane.
I thought we were talking about engines gaining more power due to 96 octane. You put 96 octane in an engine tuned for 87, and you won't see any difference. There have been far too many idiots that have pumped expensive 100+ octane in their cars thinking it would "wake it up", only to realize nothing has changed.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 11:19 AM
  #63  
falchulk's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,881
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by RussStang
I thought we were talking about engines gaining more power due to 96 octane. You put 96 octane in an engine tuned for 87, and you won't see any difference. There have been far too many idiots that have pumped expensive 100+ octane in their cars thinking it would "wake it up", only to realize nothing has changed.
Wrong again. I can point out many current exceptions to that rule. I have one sitting in my driveway. Titan engine rated at 305 on 87 octane. Dynoed at 315 on premium. Armada engine rated the same on 87, the infinity version which has the exact same powertrain and exhaust is rated at 315 on premium. There are more examples. But as I said, its due to the stock tune of the engine.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 02:52 PM
  #64  
mgreen's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 171
From: New Lenox, IL
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

LS1 Fbodies (and probably all LSX variants) have high octane and low octane tables.

Car starts off running in high octane (basically ~91-93), if the computer senese knock, it just reverts to the low octane table.

The primary difference in tables was timing advance. So, even running 93 octane, your car could run in the low octane tables if it was hot out and a big load on the engine causing KR.

Or, running 89 octane in colder weather could run fine in the high octane table.

There was NOT a third table where the computer said " OHHHH, you're running 100 octane, let me crank up the timing. "

Although there are some cars in the past with so much timing built in that they were always running with retard, and using 100+ octane on a 100% stock vehicle would net you more power. One example is the 2nd Gen DSMs.

Finally, anyone who thinks that the SRT8 can't hit 12.X stock, is just a brand loyal idiot. Brent (w/ the SRT8 in the 12s) has been around the LS1tech & GTO messageboards for a few years now, and from his postings I think it's evident that he isn't the type of guy to just BS about his numbers.

And east coast baro.s in the high 30.9X and low temps are easily worth a few tenths and 2-3mph over average conditions at other tracks.

MIke
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 04:43 PM
  #65  
SSbaby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by falchulk
Wrong again. I can point out many current exceptions to that rule. I have one sitting in my driveway. Titan engine rated at 305 on 87 octane. Dynoed at 315 on premium. Armada engine rated the same on 87, the infinity version which has the exact same powertrain and exhaust is rated at 315 on premium. There are more examples. But as I said, its due to the stock tune of the engine.
If the engine is designed to run on premium, it produces its power on premium. Giving it aviation fuel won't give it any more grunt. However, if you run it on unleaded it will pull timing.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 05:29 PM
  #66  
turbo96z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,255
From: new jersey
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

sorry i'm late, but i gotta chime in:

1. ATCO is a not so normal track, i've seen guys drop 1/2 a second from their times at E-town in the same kind of weather.

2. if this is the same guy that runs the blue turbo'd GTO in the 10s i've heard so much about around E-town(haven't seen him run yet), his driving skills are a little above average.

3. the 100+ octane thing is hit or miss. i've seen engines dyno'd on it and some have "woken up", some haven't. it all depends on the engine tune.

4. i have seen a GTO and SRT8 Charger run side by side for 3 passes. the GTO got the jump the first time, the Charger got the win light the 2nd time, and the GTO got the Charger the 3rd time due to some wicked tire spin on the line. they ran blacked out(no times posted)all 3 times so i don't know who was running what(and didn't ask out of curtousey because i do it all the time) but they both said they were stock and it sure sounded like it.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 09:37 PM
  #67  
RussStang's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by falchulk
Wrong again. I can point out many current exceptions to that rule. I have one sitting in my driveway. Titan engine rated at 305 on 87 octane. Dynoed at 315 on premium. Armada engine rated the same on 87, the infinity version which has the exact same powertrain and exhaust is rated at 315 on premium. There are more examples. But as I said, its due to the stock tune of the engine.
Then you definetly have the exception to the rule, and the stock pcm is designed to run more aggressive timing on a better octane. Try this in a new LS4 Impala though, and it is unlikely you will see any difference. Or just about any car for that matter. Try running 96 in that Nissan, and see if it makes any difference. I bet it doesn't do an damn thing. As you said, the engine is already designed for premium, although for whatever reason they rate it for 87 in the Armada. I would like to see some more examples of engines running better with better octane than the manufacturer suggests. I would bet easily for the vast majority of the engines this is not the case.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 09:37 PM
  #68  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by DrewSG


Wrong
Just saw GTO's part of the red tag sale.

I'm wrong.

Originally Posted by Slappy3243
It was no act of god that I got my 05 GTO a few weeks ago for $29,000. Sticker and real world price are very different. You would be very hard pressed to get an SRT-8 below sticker right now so it has to be taken into consideration unless you have money to blow. And by the way, the current red tag price on a brand new GTO is $30,773.73
Yep, saw it myself.

It wasn't an act of God.... just an act of just 600 GTOs sold in October.

Pass the crow and the hot sauce.

Originally Posted by BigDarknFast
Yep, it's pretty obvious you wrote this in a hurry. WAY wrong. You can get a new 05 GTO below $30k without even really trying. Take a look at the deals folks are posting over at ls1gto.com. As for the SRT8's... methinks you've got the regular Hemi-equipped cars confused with the SRT8's. You sir are way off base with this.
Yummmm. Crow.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 10:06 PM
  #69  
turbo96z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,255
From: new jersey
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by guionM
Just saw GTO's part of the red tag sale.

I'm wrong.



Yep, saw it myself.

It wasn't an act of God.... just an act of just 600 GTOs sold in October.

Pass the crow and the hot sauce.



Yummmm. Crow.

at least you fessed up......



BTW, how'd all the crow taste?
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 10:07 PM
  #70  
Big Als Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Atco is 10 feet short, 15 feet on the right side, is downhill, and always gives you a tail wind. The staging area of the track is made up of 50% epoxy, so you get sub 2.0 60's as well.
At Atco, everything is faster. Some say God made the track...right after she made the LS1.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 10:10 PM
  #71  
turbo96z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,255
From: new jersey
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by Big Als Z
Some say God made the track...right after she made the LS1.

that would explain alot.
Old Nov 21, 2005 | 11:46 PM
  #72  
SSbaby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by Big Als Z
Atco is 10 feet short, 15 feet on the right side, is downhill, and always gives you a tail wind. The staging area of the track is made up of 50% epoxy, so you get sub 2.0 60's as well.
At Atco, everything is faster. Some say God made the track...right after she made the LS1.
So they left out a few minor details...

RE: the HEMI PCM... I won't believe it will run better on premium or 96 octane gas unless somebody can confirm to me it runs a few tables that the LS1 PCM doesn't have in addition to the Hi-Lo Spark tables.

I have not seen any tables on an LS1 PCM that would factor in more aggressive spark levels than what's already on the Hi-Spark table. I doubt the HEMI would run something more advanced... mainly because the PCM would have no way of knowing how much spark is too much until it senses knock... which would be counter-productive as it would then pull timing if knock was encountered... but please enlighten me if I'm wrong.

In other words, the HEMI will not make more power if you run higher-octane (than normal) fuel.
Old Nov 22, 2005 | 01:33 AM
  #73  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by RussStang
Then you definetly have the exception to the rule, and the stock pcm is designed to run more aggressive timing on a better octane. Try this in a new LS4 Impala though, and it is unlikely you will see any difference. Or just about any car for that matter. Try running 96 in that Nissan, and see if it makes any difference. I bet it doesn't do an damn thing. As you said, the engine is already designed for premium, although for whatever reason they rate it for 87 in the Armada. I would like to see some more examples of engines running better with better octane than the manufacturer suggests. I would bet easily for the vast majority of the engines this is not the case.
My '98 Camaro would ping quite a bit in the summer, especially on those really hot, dry days, when the A/C was on. I noticed it on throttle tip in. The pinging would go away after less than a second. This happened with 92 octane and later with the even more miserable 91 that we get now (though I didn't notice much difference actually).

If I could have bought 93 or higher, I would have, but I don't know how much difference it would have made.

On the cooler summer days or at night, and the rest of the year, there was very little of that behavior even with the 91 octane.

Come to think of it, I should have tried adding a little octane boost -- too cheap and lazy to think of it before I guess
Old Nov 22, 2005 | 09:27 AM
  #74  
MarineReconZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 509
From: Modesto, CA
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by SSbaby
In other words, the HEMI will not make more power if you run higher-octane (than normal) fuel.
Unless the guy had a PCM tuned for 96... Hmmm...
Old Nov 22, 2005 | 09:42 AM
  #75  
BigBlueCruiser's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
Re: GTO vs Charger SRT-8

Originally Posted by GN1270
I just traded in my CTS-V for a 300 SRT-8 yesterday and all I can say is the car was no freak. In the summer guys were touching the 12's with 2.1 60ft times and this guy was in the 1.8 range..you do the math. The HP is deffinately underrated in the 300.

Well looks like you'll have to go run your new 300 SRT and put and to all this.

Seeing as it's brand new, we'll even give you a .5sec handicap. If you can rip off 13.0 or faster, then the SRT is a mid 12 car bone stock after break in.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:36 AM.