View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll
2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
#91
02-06-2008, 12:14 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
Cmon guy, that means nothing. GM specs. Whatever the best years for the LS1 were rated at 325. Theyve put close to that to the wheels.
Now the only thing I will compromise on is people's version of stock are different. No spare, tire pressure, synthetic oil, yadda yadda. I have read and heard about many camaros that run high 12s in the quarter. This is common knowledge. You cant make more hp no matter how you drive. That alone states that the engines make around 380-400hp.
If the engine is only making 325hp then it doesnt lose any power to the ground? Or gaining power? Explain that fella. Is there a midget juggling watermelons and pedalling a bicycle in the rear diff?
Another thing I will compromise on is I have read many articles where they dyno a stock LS1 with some miles on it and get the same numbers. Now sometimes they have headers on them, sometimes not. But there isnt a huge increase in power from the factory headers. Also many engine dyno runs are done without accessories ran. Nevertheless, still engine hp, no matter how much is lost from the time it leaves the crank to the ground. These are the highest numbers and fastest times, not an average. Im sure there have been much lower numbers produced from tired engines.
Why are we arguing over 25hp? This is ridiculous. The cars are quick for stock. The LS1 is sweet. Nuff said.
Oh and that thread you sent me to said they came up with 350ish numbers. You stated 340 at the most. So you must not have been paying attention well.
Now the only thing I will compromise on is people's version of stock are different. No spare, tire pressure, synthetic oil, yadda yadda. I have read and heard about many camaros that run high 12s in the quarter. This is common knowledge. You cant make more hp no matter how you drive. That alone states that the engines make around 380-400hp.
If the engine is only making 325hp then it doesnt lose any power to the ground? Or gaining power? Explain that fella. Is there a midget juggling watermelons and pedalling a bicycle in the rear diff?
Another thing I will compromise on is I have read many articles where they dyno a stock LS1 with some miles on it and get the same numbers. Now sometimes they have headers on them, sometimes not. But there isnt a huge increase in power from the factory headers. Also many engine dyno runs are done without accessories ran. Nevertheless, still engine hp, no matter how much is lost from the time it leaves the crank to the ground. These are the highest numbers and fastest times, not an average. Im sure there have been much lower numbers produced from tired engines.
Why are we arguing over 25hp? This is ridiculous. The cars are quick for stock. The LS1 is sweet. Nuff said.
Oh and that thread you sent me to said they came up with 350ish numbers. You stated 340 at the most. So you must not have been paying attention well.
#92
02-06-2008, 12:35 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
ORIGINAL: TheBat
Cmon guy, that means nothing. GM specs. Whatever the best years for the LS1 were rated at 325. Theyve put close to that to the wheels.
Now the only thing I will compromise on is people's version of stock are different. No spare, tire pressure, synthetic oil, yadda yadda. I have read and heard about many camaros that run high 12s in the quarter. This is common knowledge. You cant make more hp no matter how you drive. That alone states that the engines make around 380-400hp.
If the engine is only making 325hp then it doesnt lose any power to the ground? Or gaining power? Explain that fella. Is there a midget juggling watermelons and pedalling a bicycle in the rear diff?
Another thing I will compromise on is I have read many articles where they dyno a stock LS1 with some miles on it and get the same numbers. Now sometimes they have headers on them, sometimes not. But there isnt a huge increase in power from the factory headers. Also many engine dyno runs are done without accessories ran. Nevertheless, still engine hp, no matter how much is lost from the time it leaves the crank to the ground. These are the highest numbers and fastest times, not an average. Im sure there have been much lower numbers produced from tired engines.
Why are we arguing over 25hp? This is ridiculous. The cars are quick for stock. The LS1 is sweet. Nuff said.
Oh and that thread you sent me to said they came up with 350ish numbers. You stated 340 at the most. So you must not have been paying attention well.
Cmon guy, that means nothing. GM specs. Whatever the best years for the LS1 were rated at 325. Theyve put close to that to the wheels.
Now the only thing I will compromise on is people's version of stock are different. No spare, tire pressure, synthetic oil, yadda yadda. I have read and heard about many camaros that run high 12s in the quarter. This is common knowledge. You cant make more hp no matter how you drive. That alone states that the engines make around 380-400hp.
If the engine is only making 325hp then it doesnt lose any power to the ground? Or gaining power? Explain that fella. Is there a midget juggling watermelons and pedalling a bicycle in the rear diff?
Another thing I will compromise on is I have read many articles where they dyno a stock LS1 with some miles on it and get the same numbers. Now sometimes they have headers on them, sometimes not. But there isnt a huge increase in power from the factory headers. Also many engine dyno runs are done without accessories ran. Nevertheless, still engine hp, no matter how much is lost from the time it leaves the crank to the ground. These are the highest numbers and fastest times, not an average. Im sure there have been much lower numbers produced from tired engines.
Why are we arguing over 25hp? This is ridiculous. The cars are quick for stock. The LS1 is sweet. Nuff said.
Oh and that thread you sent me to said they came up with 350ish numbers. You stated 340 at the most. So you must not have been paying attention well.
I would also love to see any charts of dynos that show anything of a stock LS1 putting down over 310-320 at the wheels.
Also, where are you getting info that the LT1 Fbod puts out 300 at the fly? You may be looking at corvette numbers?
#93
02-06-2008, 12:48 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
You are hurting my brain. To the wheels I almost agree with you. Lets go with 310 as you stated there. Now lets go with a 15% drivetrain loss. Would you agree with that?
370-15%=314
380-15%=323
Im sure the 400 number that has come up was a brand new one with no accessories. Maybe some dyno headers and dyno mufflers. That would warrant another 15 or so hp. Are we settled here?
Im not talking about the average, Im talking about the best. Who cares about an engine with 130,000 miles on old spark plugs and a worn drivetrain.
370-15%=314
380-15%=323
Im sure the 400 number that has come up was a brand new one with no accessories. Maybe some dyno headers and dyno mufflers. That would warrant another 15 or so hp. Are we settled here?
Im not talking about the average, Im talking about the best. Who cares about an engine with 130,000 miles on old spark plugs and a worn drivetrain.
#94
02-06-2008, 12:58 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
NO, I am talking about what you said before. The newest LS1 Fbod puts down a GM rated 325hp at the fly(underrated...agreed?) Now I agree that they are underrated, but not 400hp at the fly underrated. I will say it again. A bone stock LS1 Fbody will put down at the wheels around 290-310hp.Headers and other mods are not a stock car. An LS1 with longtube headers, maf, LID, and other light mods are very capable of 380-400hp at the fly; thus they are capable of 340-360ish hp at the wheels with those mods. I am talking bone stock just like before.If you show me a dyno with a Bone stock LS1 Fbody putting down anyware near 350rwhp stock(380-400fwhp), than I will give you my Audi.
#95
02-06-2008, 01:18 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
I guess math is not your strong point. Even when I do it for you. 400 is an extreme yes. I havent seen it in person, so lets forget about that number. The popular number is 385 ish. Whatever.
365hp-15%=310
So can we agree on a possible 365 flywheel hp? We must since you stated 310 rwhp. Ok lets put her on an engine dyno. Lets take off the power suckers-accessories, exhaust, hell even airfilter. Welp theres a good chance that is 30hp. Question is, is that stock? The engine itself is running in stock, untamed form. Id qualify that as stock.
This is all worthless and just a numbers game. A possible 400hp stock LS1? I say yes but that depends on your version of stock. RWHP is the true power of the car.
Look up some LS1 builds and see what they baseline the engine at. Usually around 380hp. But that is uncorked. It really depends on your version of "stock". I dont recall ever seeing an engine on an engine dyno in an "in car" form.
Hey the other thing we can argue about is whether or not drivetrain loss is a percent or a fixed number. The answer to that question is the difference in my car doing a 10.3 or a 9.8 in the quarter.
365hp-15%=310
So can we agree on a possible 365 flywheel hp? We must since you stated 310 rwhp. Ok lets put her on an engine dyno. Lets take off the power suckers-accessories, exhaust, hell even airfilter. Welp theres a good chance that is 30hp. Question is, is that stock? The engine itself is running in stock, untamed form. Id qualify that as stock.
This is all worthless and just a numbers game. A possible 400hp stock LS1? I say yes but that depends on your version of stock. RWHP is the true power of the car.
Look up some LS1 builds and see what they baseline the engine at. Usually around 380hp. But that is uncorked. It really depends on your version of "stock". I dont recall ever seeing an engine on an engine dyno in an "in car" form.
Hey the other thing we can argue about is whether or not drivetrain loss is a percent or a fixed number. The answer to that question is the difference in my car doing a 10.3 or a 9.8 in the quarter.
#96
02-06-2008, 01:30 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
LOL, look man, Unless you can provide some bone stock Fbody LS1 dynos, Then you're numbers are full of s hit. Bone stock means Bone stock( no work whatsoever to the vehicle). I have heard of some freak Fbodys that have dynoed around 310RWHP. Most Dyno from 290-300ish at the wheels. That by no means equates to 380-400hp at the fly. I am done with this arguing. I am enjoying a fine captain and coke, thus I am done going back and fourth unless you can find a Stock(stock means no Modification whatsoever) dyno that would show RWHP over 310, then don't even bother to respond. I will use my old account tomorrow at Camaroz28.com, and post a thread about what the norm dyno for stock LS1 members had, and I will ask for their input on what they think a Stock LS1 Fbody will produce at the fly....good night.
#98
02-06-2008, 01:33 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
ORIGINAL: omidsaudi
i thought this forum was going to be of an s4 killingan ss
not an argument and 20 hp difference
cmon
i thought this forum was going to be of an s4 killingan ss
not an argument and 20 hp difference
cmon
#99
02-06-2008, 01:37 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
i am not a lover of american cars either.
i see where you are coming from.
i cant wait till my a4 is heated so i can walk around an ss
i ran with an 02 ss supercharged
it was horrible haaha
it was like 3 days ago
but then yesterday i was rollin with my friend in his c32 n we got of on him at the light but then he pulled on us in 3rd
i see where you are coming from.
i cant wait till my a4 is heated so i can walk around an ss
i ran with an 02 ss supercharged
it was horrible haaha
it was like 3 days ago
but then yesterday i was rollin with my friend in his c32 n we got of on him at the light but then he pulled on us in 3rd
#100
02-06-2008, 11:46 AM
RE: 2000 Camaro SS vs. 2000 Audi S4
Nothing pisses off a v8 man like a four cylinder keeping up. Turbo or not. Especially AWD. Im constantly in discussions with DSM guys about whos going to be faster on the street, me or them. Well see but Im going to have to buy special tires that are 190 bucks apeice and will only last 2-3 months. Woof.
Well as far as rwhp goes there 01a4t, you are correct. The 310 rwhp is not common and even higher numbers have been seen. At least we are agreeing on that.
But here is something to think about. When you buy a crate motor from GM, how is the power rated? Surely not with accessories and and restrictive exhaust.
So let it be heard, if you were to buy a 350hp crate engine and replaced your LS1, youd be sorely disappointed. I'll see what you bring up at that forum, if it contradicts me, then I will search for pure engine dynos and we'll get this figured out.
Here is an article anyway.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com.../photo_05.html
Well as far as rwhp goes there 01a4t, you are correct. The 310 rwhp is not common and even higher numbers have been seen. At least we are agreeing on that.
But here is something to think about. When you buy a crate motor from GM, how is the power rated? Surely not with accessories and and restrictive exhaust.
So let it be heard, if you were to buy a 350hp crate engine and replaced your LS1, youd be sorely disappointed. I'll see what you bring up at that forum, if it contradicts me, then I will search for pure engine dynos and we'll get this figured out.
Here is an article anyway.
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com.../photo_05.html