SLP involvement
#121
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by graham
Take that number and figure out 20% for drivetrain losses and compare that with the usual RWHP claims by 98+ owners.
#122
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by Bearcat Steve
I've heard it said that GM's official numbers for driveline loss are 12% for the M6 and 15% for the A4.
#124
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by Red Planet
actually, according to John Heinricy (chief engineer) it was 18% on both 6-speed and auto..........
#125
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by demonspeed
Then why would an identical optioned car that is a 6 speed trap higher than an auto? Sure, they might e/t practically the same, but time and time again, 6 speeds trap higher - because they are getting more power to the ground, no?
#126
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by JasonD
I want to say that if a decent aftermarket converter was used, that auto car would smoke the 6-speed in most cases. Someone chime in.
My 2000 SS only had a catback and lid (before the 4.10's). At the time, it had only gone a best of 13.2 @ 108. I raced my buddies 2000 WS6 A4 who had a small cam, long tubes, catback, and 'verter - and went low 12's @ around 110. We were dead even on the highway. Sure, it was quicker, but the trap proved that it simply wasn't putting power to the ground, IMO anyway.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if the M6 and A4 were both losing the same % through the driveline, then they should e/t and trap appx the same stock for stock and car for car.
#127
Re: SLP involvement
Both 6M and A4 cars may ET the same but trap differently because of gearing.
A4's are easier to get out of the hole and have tall 1st and 2nd gears. They will usually do better than an M6 in the 1/8. Down the 2nd 1/8, however, the 4L60E shifts into 3rd and falls bellow its powerband. The M6s has a taller 3rd gear that keeps the engine in the higher RPMs and 4th is hit before the end of the 1/4.
The additional gear is why the M6 traps higher. That and it puts down roughly 10rwhp more to the ground.
A4's are easier to get out of the hole and have tall 1st and 2nd gears. They will usually do better than an M6 in the 1/8. Down the 2nd 1/8, however, the 4L60E shifts into 3rd and falls bellow its powerband. The M6s has a taller 3rd gear that keeps the engine in the higher RPMs and 4th is hit before the end of the 1/4.
The additional gear is why the M6 traps higher. That and it puts down roughly 10rwhp more to the ground.
#129
Re: SLP involvement
They might have used 18% for each, but that is almost certainly just a fudge factor, as the A4 will have more parasitic loss than an M6. That is the main reason you see lower traps with the A4. However, a good auto can and often does produce better ETs. One reason is due to the ability of a correctly-matched converter to keep the engine much closer to its powerband. Also, the average A4 can easily out-shift the average M6 driver....and a properly modified A4 will outshift even the best M6 driver.
#130
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by danno02SS
A4's are easier to get out of the hole and have tall 1st and 2nd gears. They will usually do better than an M6 in the 1/8. Down the 2nd 1/8, however, the 4L60E shifts into 3rd and falls bellow its powerband. The M6s has a taller 3rd gear that keeps the engine in the higher RPMs and 4th is hit before the end of the 1/4.
![Wink](https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif)
That is, unless I was building a dedicated drag car.
And no matter what is said, there must simply be more parasitic loss with an auto than there is a manaul.
#132
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by Bob Cosby
They might have used 18% for each, but that is almost certainly just a fudge factor, as the A4 will have more parasitic loss than an M6. That is the main reason you see lower traps with the A4.
Originally Posted by 97z28/m6
not on a road course.
#134
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by 90 Z28SS
Scott - So did the LS1 F-bodies selectively get the truck cam and some get the vette cam ? Why were so many 4th gen LS1 cars putting down in some cases up to 320 hp at the rear wheels , the majority were at least 300 to the wheels , and then there were a few that actually only put down rear wheel figures that would better corrolate with a 305 hp crank rating ? IT would be interesting to here about
Cuz , you guys obviously knew from SS's to a reg. Formula ....they were making more and in some cases ALOT more than their 305-320( a few 345 hp cars ) advertised hp figures .
![Smilie](https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Some of the fastest recorded stock F-Body times have been down with factory stripper z28 cars.
Red, I have never actually seen a supposedly F-Body LS6 block apart, but I have read from several reputable machinists that the blocks are indeed LS6 blocks, as they have the better breathing areas around the cylinders. Something like 10% of 01s and 25% of 02s got the LS6 block if I recall correctly. There has been alot of debate over whether the LS6 block itself actually increase engine horsepower, but the consensus seems to be that if it does, it is very, very minimal.
#135
Re: SLP involvement
Originally Posted by number77
Scott, those are some cool details! Now I want a 99 Camaro with the 1LE package. I also didn't know about the block color. So they technically weren't "ls6" blocks? ![Smilie](https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
![Smilie](https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)