96 3.8 vs 95 3.4
05-24-2002, 05:22 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: S.F. Bay Area, Ca
Posts: 85
So then we all agree the automatic is faster.------------------
white 98 V6 A4 3.8l Camaro, t-tops, Leather, JVC stereo, Pioneer speakers, xeneon headlights, power antenna, dynomax muffler, K&N air filter, custom ram air, and a whisper lid.
05-24-2002, 05:51 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 115
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by muckz:
I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.
Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.
You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.</font>
I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.
Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.
You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.</font>
------------------
'97 Z28 M6
Edelbrock Headers, K&N FIPK, Hooker Cat Back, 3" Flowtech Cutout, Pro-5.0 Shifter, SLP Air Foil, 160* Thermostat, LT4KM, !CAGS, !MAF, !TB, !FANS, 245/50/16 Nitto 555R
Best ET 13.510@102.73
1.974 60Ft
05-24-2002, 08:53 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: windber pa
Posts: 608
No wonder this site lost so many members to the other site, people here are so childish. How did this go from which car is faster 3.8 or 3.4 to my stick is faster than your auto or my stick transfers more power than your auto 
this thread should be locked
this thread should be locked
05-24-2002, 09:33 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 1,042
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bluecmaro96:
No wonder this site lost so many members to the other site, people here are so childish. How did this go from which car is faster 3.8 or 3.4 to my stick is faster than your auto or my stick transfers more power than your auto this thread should be locked</font>
No wonder this site lost so many members to the other site, people here are so childish. How did this go from which car is faster 3.8 or 3.4 to my stick is faster than your auto or my stick transfers more power than your auto
this thread should be locked</font>
I will add my $.02 anyway: I drive the 3.4 in the sig. My brother (Marky82 on here) has a 97 A4 3.8 Camaro convertable w/ a Flowmaster 80. Yes, I know the vert is heavier. After driving his car before the Flow 80, I felt the car was noticable faster. It had a stronger pull around 3000 RPM. I'm sure if he put a CAI on it will really wake up. I know my 3.4 woke up after my Moroso CAI. So yes, the 3.8 is faster.
------------------
--David--
1995 white Firebird 3.4 V6 A4 w/ T-tops
Mods:Kenwood KDC516S stereo, front and rear Alpine speakers, Flowmaster 80 series, Firebat and Autografics decals, Moroso CAI, Rally Foglights, Painted interior (Silver Metallic), BMR STB, Zaino, !speed, !horsepower Help CT get a dragstrip!
05-25-2002, 01:18 AM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 606
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by muckz:
I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.
Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.
You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.</font>
I don't really know what you were trying to accomplish in all your posts. You were arguing one point, you cause quite the commotion, and then say at the end how pointless it is to argue and how everything is subject to one's opinions.
Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. And you were the one who was aruging opinions. When people started bringing up facts, you backed off. As I said before, auto is better for drag racing. Manual is better for transferring power to the wheels. And this is not opinion. This is fact.
You trying to come off at the end as innocent sheep while stirring all these contentions is purely pointless. Then you tell everyone that they have difficulty admitting they're wrong.</font>
And, umm... nowhere did I say that you had difficulty admitting you're wrong.
I'm was simply trying to stop the arguement, as it obviously wasn't going anywhere. I mean hell, we're all supposed to be on the same team anyways, I'm just trying to not get people pissed at each other, as there's no reason.
05-25-2002, 11:24 AM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
Well back to the 3.4L-3.8L matchup, I have only lost to 1 3.8L, he ran a 14.9. I know there are alot out ther that will hand me my ***, but I have beaten a dozen or more, on the street and the strip. and yes I have pulled better stock times then guys in 3.8Ls with stock times. And yes I have driven 4th gen autos, and evne one possible Y87 (97ish RS), but that was before I knew what Y87 was, and didn't feel anythig special about it.
I have ownded 2 autmatics both TH700R4s, one in a 4.3L, one in a 2.8L, Basis of the 4l60E, and I prefer my T5, and if possible I may never get another automatic car again.
problem is only cars left that are manual, is the Cavalier, Extreme and the vette. So it looks like I will be dealing with more used cars for awhile. I think and prefer Stick is much better that I would even consider getting a Mustang in the future.
BTW us 3.4L guys love being told that we are wasting our times with our 3.4L we should get a 3.8L, just because there are a few really fast guys that are not you out there with 3.8L, doesn't mean you have the greatest car in the world. Its very similar to the average V8 guy coming around asking why are you wasting your time on a v6, you should have bought a v8.
------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight W/out driver: 3160
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
AIM: MustangEater82
I have ownded 2 autmatics both TH700R4s, one in a 4.3L, one in a 2.8L, Basis of the 4l60E, and I prefer my T5, and if possible I may never get another automatic car again.
problem is only cars left that are manual, is the Cavalier, Extreme and the vette. So it looks like I will be dealing with more used cars for awhile. I think and prefer Stick is much better that I would even consider getting a Mustang in the future.
BTW us 3.4L guys love being told that we are wasting our times with our 3.4L we should get a 3.8L, just because there are a few really fast guys that are not you out there with 3.8L, doesn't mean you have the greatest car in the world. Its very similar to the average V8 guy coming around asking why are you wasting your time on a v6, you should have bought a v8.
------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight W/out driver: 3160
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
AIM: MustangEater82
05-25-2002, 01:59 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Syracuse, NY GO 'CUSE
Posts: 246
grdlockv6...i would love to know where you get your info from? if this is from personal knowledge, then you need to get out more.
all things being equal the 3.8 will eat up the 3.4.
as for the manual/auto tranny arguement, you are out of touch with reality on that. the auto tranny robs the car of some power. just like a 12 bolt/9" rearend will do.
although the difference is minimal to you on a stock car putting out less than 200 hp, it makes a difference when you start driving something with a little more power.
it seems you start one arguement and when that is proven to you, you being to argue something else. noone is picking a fight here, but we are trying to help give better info.
in general, you will get similar results with the same car expect for tranny's. you might squeeze out a tenth or 2 and an extra couple mph.(again...ALL conditions being equal)!
im sure my post will do nothing to your overall opinion to this arguement, but i am still trying to grasp your points in this conversation. all the cars in your club that are auto may be the fastest...but dont you think that is prolly the end result of the modifications and money into the car?
------------------
97 SILVER SS #1402 M6
MY Site
Strange 12 bolt w/ 3.73's.
heads, cam, Hooker LT's
6pt wolfe cage and...
100 shot of Love Juice
AIM dcdroopy
all things being equal the 3.8 will eat up the 3.4.
as for the manual/auto tranny arguement, you are out of touch with reality on that. the auto tranny robs the car of some power. just like a 12 bolt/9" rearend will do.
although the difference is minimal to you on a stock car putting out less than 200 hp, it makes a difference when you start driving something with a little more power.
it seems you start one arguement and when that is proven to you, you being to argue something else. noone is picking a fight here, but we are trying to help give better info.
in general, you will get similar results with the same car expect for tranny's. you might squeeze out a tenth or 2 and an extra couple mph.(again...ALL conditions being equal)!
im sure my post will do nothing to your overall opinion to this arguement, but i am still trying to grasp your points in this conversation. all the cars in your club that are auto may be the fastest...but dont you think that is prolly the end result of the modifications and money into the car?
------------------
97 SILVER SS #1402 M6
MY Site
Strange 12 bolt w/ 3.73's.
heads, cam, Hooker LT's
6pt wolfe cage and...
100 shot of Love Juice
AIM dcdroopy
05-26-2002, 12:20 AM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,738
not intended for anyone specific, ehll I rarely even read the name of who talks, just every thread I get involved in, with a 3.4L vs. a 3.8L thread, they I hear people say blah blah, magnus, hit a 14.00 flat, no 3.4L ever did that, hell I see peopel say it and they have posted times slower then mine in there sig, and still have the ***** to say thats why the 3.8L is better then the 3.4L. I know my car is modded but I doubt my home made intake, pepboys exhaust, and crank pulley made up 40 HP. not even by import magazine standards.
------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight W/out driver: 3160
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
AIM: MustangEater82
------------------
1994 Medium Quaser Blue Camaro 3.4L V6 w/ 5-speed
Homeade CAI with a huge K&N cylinder filter, Single outlet Flowmaster with resonator, Accel 8mm ignition wires, Splitfire plugs, 3.42 gears and posi off a 97 WS6, 1 piece steel driveshaft, Converted to 4-wheel disc brakes, 1LE transmision mount, 1LE sway bars, Prothane bushings and endlinks, BMR Strut tower brace, ASP underdrive pulleys
Lightest Weight W/out driver: 3160
15.696@86.22 with a 2.214 60'!
Best R/T .507
Best 60' 2.106
Father's Stock 2000 Navy Blue Camaro 3.8L V6 w/ 5-speed
15.875@88.25 With wheel spin in 1st
AIM: MustangEater82
08-27-2002, 03:27 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Charleston,SC
Posts: 747
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by MustangEater82:
not intended for anyone specific, ehll I rarely even read the name of who talks, just every thread I get involved in, with a 3.4L vs. a 3.8L thread, they I hear people say blah blah, magnus, hit a 14.00 flat, no 3.4L ever did that, hell I see peopel say it and they have posted times slower then mine in there sig, and still have the ***** to say thats why the 3.8L is better then the 3.4L. I know my car is modded but I doubt my home made intake, pepboys exhaust, and crank pulley made up 40 HP. not even by import magazine standards.
</font>
not intended for anyone specific, ehll I rarely even read the name of who talks, just every thread I get involved in, with a 3.4L vs. a 3.8L thread, they I hear people say blah blah, magnus, hit a 14.00 flat, no 3.4L ever did that, hell I see peopel say it and they have posted times slower then mine in there sig, and still have the ***** to say thats why the 3.8L is better then the 3.4L. I know my car is modded but I doubt my home made intake, pepboys exhaust, and crank pulley made up 40 HP. not even by import magazine standards.
</font>
Anyway,the auto's usually are faster at the track and between 2 equally hp'd cars,the auto will have the lower ET.Why?If you look at hp numbers you always want to look at trap speed and not ET.That's because ET can be affected by a lot of little things.So an auto (mine for example) may run a 8.5 @ 83 mph while a friend's M6 with almost the same dyno numbers (My 275 to his 273) runs an 8.8 @ 84mph.I have yet to see a perfect shift out of anyone and I spent that past 7 months at the track every Friday night.You might get more HP to the ground on a manual but the auto uses it better 
Kevin
Edit: I forgot,look at the stock dyno numbers on the 3.4/3.8 and you'll see that the 3.4 puts down a whopping 125-135 to the wheels on average while the 3.8 puts down around 150-155.That's just based on bone stock numbers that I have seen in person.
------------------
1998 Black Z28 A4
-------1/8-------
8.548 @ 83.64 MPH
Pics
Camaro/Firebird Birthday Bash
[This message has been edited by nikkev (edited August 27, 2002).]
08-27-2002, 06:41 AM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: bay area
Posts: 41
First off, in my opinion the reason it seems most autos are faster, is because a LOT more people have auto trannys than manuals. It seems everywhere I look theres an auto.
I like my manual because I have more control over the engine. I can really wind my engine out, and get the best from its performance instead of just shifting at a stock shift point with an auto.
Powershifting has been tested, and doesn't put any extra wear and tear on the engine, according to ls1info.com.
grdlock, you're saying that a stock 3.8auto will beat a stock 3.8 manual EVERY time? put a good driver in there, I'm sure the case will be different. A huge factor that autos seem faster than manuals, is because the drivers suck. It takes no skill to drive an auto, just step on the gas. Shifting involves driving skills.
The 2nd and 3rd fastest N/A F-bodies on firebirdv6.com are manuals: 14.417, and 14.480 ( http://timeslips.firebirdv6.com/timeslips/mike_huff.jpg )
And plus, even if you are right about the auto vs manual, I'd rather have a manual any day. They're cheaper, more fun to drive, and get better gas mileage.
I like my manual because I have more control over the engine. I can really wind my engine out, and get the best from its performance instead of just shifting at a stock shift point with an auto.
Powershifting has been tested, and doesn't put any extra wear and tear on the engine, according to ls1info.com.
grdlock, you're saying that a stock 3.8auto will beat a stock 3.8 manual EVERY time? put a good driver in there, I'm sure the case will be different. A huge factor that autos seem faster than manuals, is because the drivers suck. It takes no skill to drive an auto, just step on the gas. Shifting involves driving skills.
The 2nd and 3rd fastest N/A F-bodies on firebirdv6.com are manuals: 14.417, and 14.480 ( http://timeslips.firebirdv6.com/timeslips/mike_huff.jpg )
And plus, even if you are right about the auto vs manual, I'd rather have a manual any day. They're cheaper, more fun to drive, and get better gas mileage.
08-27-2002, 10:45 AM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: I'm in the Bay, Trick
Posts: 1,150
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">First off, in my opinion the reason it seems most autos are faster, is because a LOT more people have auto trannys than manuals. It seems everywhere I look theres an auto.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">...more fun to drive...</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">A huge factor that autos seem faster than manuals, is because the drivers suck.</font>
Oh well...gotta get to class. Back to the topic though, 3.8L still wins.
------------------
-Nathan
1996 Camaro
3.8L Series II, SLP CAI, Catco cat, Taylor 8mm wires, LSD, 3.42 gears, Borla catback.
1995 Dodge Stealth R/T
Twin Turbo Intercooled 3.0L AWD M6,A'PEXi AVC-R boost control, HKS Blow-off valve, K&N FIPK, Denso Iridium plugs, 245/40/18 Kumho Supra, Borla Catback, Mobil 1 fluids.
*VVvvTTttFFff* TNC since 1981!
[This message has been edited by ImportKILLER (edited August 27, 2002).]
08-27-2002, 05:00 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,719
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by nikkev:
Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods </font>
Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods
</font>
------------------
99 Black SS A4 t-tops a ton of factory options plus white face gauges which have a disputable hp gain. (formerly V6white98, changed cars)
08-27-2002, 07:20 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado, US
Posts: 74
Just reading through and I seen alot of good points and also some bad points. I have an automatic now but I used to have a stick. It was in a four banger but the stick was more fun. I liked the control of the stick but the auto seems smoother. It seems 3.4s have beat 3.8s, 3.8s have beat 3.4s, autos have beat sticks and sticks have beat autos. I guess racing is more than 3.4s or 3.8s and autos or standards. As for the original post. I think if the same person drives either car, 3.4 or 3.8 he will think the 3.8 is faster. But its just my opinion.
------------------
Black 94' 3.4l Camaro A4
------------------
Black 94' 3.4l Camaro A4
08-27-2002, 08:28 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Charleston,SC
Posts: 747
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 99blackSS:
Ya all you need is 20-25hp more TO THE GROUND I would like to see a mod that puts all its hp to the ground.
Originally posted by nikkev:
Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods </font>
Hehe,rock on!Long live the 3.4!And guys,the difference in these 2 cars isn't 40hp,it's more like about 20-25.That can easily be made up with a few mods
</font>
A 3" cat-back puts down 14 rwhp on a V6.That's dyno proven numbers,not a guestimate.And that's only 1 mod
Kevin
------------------
1998 Black Z28 A4
-------1/8-------
8.548 @ 83.64 MPH
Pics
Camaro/Firebird Birthday Bash
