LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

275 stock or more a little rumor i heard

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 11:23 AM
  #31  
jasons93z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,612
From: Oklahoma
Originally posted by BUBBA
Drat! Meant 233 RWHP not 333.
Nope, more like 245 for an m6. Wrong 3 times
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 11:42 AM
  #32  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
245/.85=288
233/.85=274

I don't believe there is a "wrong" or "right" when it comes to this issue.

If the factory advertizes 275, you can take it or leave it. If you dynoed all the lts on the same dyno with the same conditions and came up with 245 to the rear, you still wouldn't know what the parasitic losses were unless you "actually" knew what the true hp/tq was at the crank.JMHO
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 11:53 AM
  #33  
jasons93z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,612
From: Oklahoma
Originally posted by BUBBA
245/.85=288
233/.85=274

I don't believe there is a "wrong" or "right" when it comes to this issue.

If the factory advertizes 275, you can take it or leave it. If you dynoed all the lts on the same dyno with the same conditions and came up with 245 to the rear, you still wouldn't know what the parasitic losses were unless you "actually" knew what the true hp/tq was at the crank.JMHO
When i first got my car i dynoed 250. I have yet to do it after my mods.
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 12:05 PM
  #34  
BUBBA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 3,499
From: PORTLAND, OR, MULTNOMAH
Good numbers. Assuming that .15 loss is the usual acceptable loss, and that the factory advertized 275 at the crank is accurate, that would mean you not only didn't lose any power though the DT, but you actually picked up 19 HP between the crank and the wheels.

Or...maybe the factory lies? No way!
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 07:19 PM
  #35  
TA Dreaming's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 433
From: Athens, GA
i dynoed my car tonight at work just for the hell of it. put down 272hp and 306tq the only mod is the K&N it has a stock tstat. so yes the 305 its rated at is a little less than what it actually makes at the flywheel. and for the record i have 75k miles on the car now. trey
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 10:35 PM
  #36  
CrippleFightin's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 923
From: Plainfield IL
OK I always thought that WS6's were in house GM cars and the FIREHAWKS were SLP. I know GM makes the WS6 themselves. Firehawk is a different story.
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 11:12 PM
  #37  
Gloveperson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 226
Yea, I also thought the WS6 was a GM car. From what I understood, the WS6 was an option for the Formula Firebird and the Firehawk was the SLP option.
Old Oct 16, 2003 | 11:44 PM
  #38  
Johnnynsac's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 589
From: Sacramento CA
You guys may be right but I read this about SLP.

"When a buyer ordered the WS.6 package in 96 and 97, standard Trans am and Formula models were sent to SLP's production Facility not far from the F-body assembly plant in Ste. Therese, Quebec, for conversion".

I got this from http://www.yearone.com/enthusiast/re...slpfeature.pdf

So that does make it a SLP car, right?, right

Please prove me wrong

Last edited by Johnnynsac; Oct 16, 2003 at 11:48 PM.
Old Oct 17, 2003 | 08:31 AM
  #39  
LT4Firehawk's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 707
From: Dallas
If I remember correctly, 96 & 97 WS-6s were indeed SLP cars. Then starting in 98 I believe they moved the WS-6 in house at the GM plant.
Old Oct 17, 2003 | 03:55 PM
  #40  
CamaroGuy22's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,876
From: Maryland
I do not know about the Pontiac stuff. But the camaro was sent to SLP to make it an SS in 96 and 97. GM then took control over the SS in 98.
Old Oct 17, 2003 | 05:50 PM
  #41  
TA Dreaming's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 433
From: Athens, GA
if SLP did make them thats fine, it just doesnt make since why they would make both the WS6 and Firehawk when they are virutally the same. also why would they lable and number the SS cars and the Firehawks but not put any badging on the WS6 cars? just doesnt seem logical unless of course lots of money was involed and then it doesnt need to make since so long as everyone gets their money.

also i wonder if i called SLP on monday if they could tell me the build number of my car? id be interested to know thats for sure. Trey
Old Oct 17, 2003 | 07:44 PM
  #42  
Johnnynsac's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 589
From: Sacramento CA
Originally posted by TA Dreaming
it just doesnt make since why they would make both the WS6 and Firehawk when they are virutally the same.
Thats the whole thing, there not virutally the same. Different hp ratings and the hoods on the firehawks are not the same as the ones on the WS.6. If you look at a firehawk closely and then look at your WS.6, there very different. But from far, they probably do look the same.
Old Oct 18, 2003 | 05:14 PM
  #43  
TA Dreaming's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 433
From: Athens, GA
true but its still not a lot. i just figured it wasnt enough to justify the same company building two different cars that were not that different. and i had always heard that GM built them in house. Im gonna call SLP on monday and see what i can find out. if they did build them id really like to know my build number and maybe i can find out even more info about it, which is always good. Trey
Old Oct 18, 2003 | 05:55 PM
  #44  
80TA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 724
From: Regina,Sask,Canada
Well lot of lls1 were dynoing around 300rwhp stock .Got to remember that cars do make more power with some break in miles and due to production tolerances etc some cars do just seem to have a bit more.My stock 96 seemed like a total animal.my stock 96 ta that I used to have.My stock 97 ram air seemed slower new than my 96 but maybe some of that was tires..the wider better tires on the 97 maybe had more grip than the 96..not sure.
Anyway dont' worry both ls1 and lt1 are great engines.I am proud to say I own examples of each and also proud to have an old 400 engine in my 80 ta..that one has really nice torque!!
Old Oct 19, 2003 | 12:46 PM
  #45  
LT4Firehawk's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 707
From: Dallas
Originally posted by TA Dreaming
if SLP did make them thats fine, it just doesnt make since why they would make both the WS6 and Firehawk when they are virutally the same.
They are nowhere close to the same thing. The WS6 is a GM specification option package that has very specific content (ram air hood w/airbox, 17" wheels, and catback). While the base Firehawk is similar in content, you can order many other options on it than with a WS6. Things like Torsen differential, major suspension upgrades, LT4 motor (in 97 only). The Firehawk and the SS are basically different models of the Firebird and Camaro, and have SLP specific option code stickers on the car. The WS6 was GM taking the Firehawk idea, and making it easy for the buyer with a single option code of all the basic upgrades. The Firehawk was for the person that wanted the rarest Bird, with lots more option choices. Nothing wrong with either way of doing it, just different approaches for a different type of buyer. To support the different model type idea, take a look at NADA for a 97 Firebird (or most likely any year they made the Firehawk), they actually list the Firehawk as a seperate model of the Firebird vs the Formula or TA. The WS6 is an option package on the Formula or TA. You could say that SLP was similar to AMG before it got bought up by Mercedes.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:29 AM.