Why is it that a lot of LS1 F-bodies are seeing approximately the flywheel rated HP at the rear wheels when they dyno them?

Unless GM did to the Z06 and regular Vette's what they did to the Vette's and F-bodies Underrate their "base model" Vette's to make the Z06s look good on paper?

 

It has long been known that the camaro and firebird were well underrated inorder for the vette's to look better, and ultimately give people a better reason to spend the extra $25,000 on the Vet. If they said the Vet and camaro had the same power outputs that would have made the vet a harder sell. I pretty sure that the Vette and Z06 ratings are pretty accurate though.

 

I've known that for quite some time

Just wondering if the '03 and '04 Vettes are pushing closer HP in relation to the Z06s now than what's said on paper? Even if it's just a few more HP I mean... Seems like they may have tweaked or improved on the motors in some way or another to make them more efficient. I've never looked up dynographs of the C5's really, especially the '03 and '04s.

 

LS1 power jumped from 345-350 from 2001-2004, due to the LS6 intake.

Fbodies dyno higher than, or right at the advertised flywheel ratings because it's essentially the same engine from the Corvette, the 350hp LS1, which is why many dyno ~300 at the wheels. True enough the LS1 has been known to make more than 350 at the flywheel, but nowhere close to the LS6's 405 or 385. It would be more like 360.

The Z06 however, has a completely different engine, with better flowing heads, a more aggressive cam, and a better flowing exhaust sytem, hence the different power numbers.

No way a stock 'vette dynoing around 300 at the wheels is going to come close to z06's dynoing between 340-360 in stock trim.

 

I may have completely changed the topic of the post... sorry for hijacking But I'm not sure if I'm wording my question properly lol. The LS6 Intake is a given... I'm just curious as to if the '03 and '04 Vettes were improved upon in any way?

 

Nope, all improvements after 2001 were suspension, or interior. Maybe they worked out a bug or two but nothing major.

 

Look at the new C6 with the LS2.....with a rating of 400 HP (up 50 HP from 2004) they're only running mid-high 12's at best. A really well driven C5 can hit high 12's. And yet, with only "5 HP" more (405 vs. 400) the C5 Z06 can run low 12's, even high 11's!? Huh...I think there's a problem there.

IMO, the 350 HP rating of the LS1 (whether it's in an F-body or a C5) is probably dead-nuts-even. Dyno tests confirm this, with #'s in the ~295 - 305 range on average, with a ~15% drivetrain loss. The Z06's must be over-rated though, 'cause most of them dyno in the ~360+ RWHP range, which is at least ~410 HP, using only a 12% drivetrain loss. Calculate with 15% loss, and you're looking at ~420 - 425 flywheel HP!!!

I'm still unsure of the LS2 though. However, I think their 1/4 mile trap speeds have been coming in around ~110 - 113 or something, which is sorta between the ~105 - 108 of LS1's, and ~115 - 118 of LS6's.....I say they're probably around ~390 HP in reality.

 

My bone stock 03 Z06 dyno'ed 351 rwhp with 6,500 miles.

 

ive got an 93 LT1, pulleys, full exaust long tubes, 700r, built tranny 2200 stall,pcm for less tuning, full msd ignition, guted cat, throttle body air foil, wonder what ill get in the rwhp department :] sorry totally off topic i know :]

 

255 HEART POUNDING HORSIES 270TQ!

 

i have a 96 ws6 6 spd with pacesetter lts and k&n intake with lt4 knock module it dynoed 299.3 hp and 318.8 tq on a dynojet those are corrected too