Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 141

WS6 horsepower numbers

This is a discussion on WS6 horsepower numbers within the Firebird / WS6 forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; 400hpbird, Are you telling me I could gain almost 10 rwhp by changing my stock lid with a slp? 1998 ...

  1. #41
    Member slikws6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    southeast
    Posts
    136

    Black
    1998 WS6 Convert

    400hpbird,

    Are you telling me I could gain almost 10 rwhp by changing my stock lid with a slp?

    1998 ws6 vert

  2. #42
    Dcdrummer LS1buckey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Delaware, Ohio
    Age
    33
    Posts
    311

    pewter
    1999 Pontiac Trans Am

    Quote Originally Posted by Mecinoid View Post
    "if you take tq times rpm divided by .5252 you get your hp at the wheels" mine came out to like 30000HP to the wheels.
    you sure it wasn't 300.00? Ya I just did the math going off the 315 tq gm says my car has times that by the rpm it's maxed at which is 4200 and divided it by 5252 and it came out to 251. you only read the numbers to the right of the "."

  3. #43
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    torque is actually 350+

  4. #44
    Dcdrummer LS1buckey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Delaware, Ohio
    Age
    33
    Posts
    311

    pewter
    1999 Pontiac Trans Am

    ya I know thats what I've read but I'm just saying for argument sake I was going off the factory tq rating that I have found for my 99 trans am you can use whatever suits your car.

  5. #45
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    42
    Posts
    262

    Navy Blue Metallic
    2002 Trans Am WS6

    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    i wouldnt say gm cheated, i would just say ford sucks. they had every opporitunity to build a bigger engine, they chose not to. historically ford doesnt know how to make big hp without forced induction.
    Hmmm, really? I used to have a 91 Z28 with a 350. Sure, stangs couldn't hang, but back then they had a 5.0 302. Anyone remember that? However, the camaros and birds with a comparable 305 were outperformed by the mustang. Don't get me wrong, I hate the fact that ford uses a s/c, but I respect their smaller engines. CI for CI, ford has the upper hand. Now, mustangs are lighter, so that probably accounts for a lot also. I think if ford went back to the 351 CI ya'll would see a lot of things change.

  6. #46
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by NvyBluMtlc02WS6 View Post
    Hmmm, really? I used to have a 91 Z28 with a 350. Sure, stangs couldn't hang, but back then they had a 5.0 302. Anyone remember that? However, the camaros and birds with a comparable 305 were outperformed by the mustang. Don't get me wrong, I hate the fact that ford uses a s/c, but I respect their smaller engines. CI for CI, ford has the upper hand. Now, mustangs are lighter, so that probably accounts for a lot also. I think if ford went back to the 351 CI ya'll would see a lot of things change.
    mustangs are not lighter..and f-bods still destroy GTs..i'm confused

  7. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    42
    Posts
    262

    Navy Blue Metallic
    2002 Trans Am WS6

    I meant back then, not now. I know i used the word "now" but not meaning the literal sense.

  8. #48
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by NvyBluMtlc02WS6 View Post
    I meant back then, not now. I know i used the word "now" but not meaning the literal sense.
    ahhh ok i was confused

  9. #49
    Orig Regist: 9/98
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NE Indiana
    Posts
    533

    Black
    1998 Trans Am WS6 'Vert

    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    i wouldnt say gm cheated, i would just say ford sucks. they had every opporitunity to build a bigger engine, they chose not to. historically ford doesnt know how to make big hp without forced induction.


    Yep, the OHC mod-motor has been the Mustang's Archillies' heel since it replaced the 5.0L pushrod motor. And to state the LS1 is "bigger" than the 4.6L DOHC is misleading. It's "bigger" only in displacement. Physically the mod-motor is larger and harder to package under the hood than the relatively compact, volumetrically efficient pushrod LS1. With the mod-motor, Ford set out to prove they could build ~1HP/ci and decided to rely on what was then "fashonable" by the imports: DOHC & 4V/cyl. Meanwhile the good-ol boys at GM set out to prove they could build ~1HP/ci the old fashoned way: Pushrods and killer head design. The result is a simplier, lower production cost LSx series of engines that prove you don't need fancy DOHC & 4V/cyl to obtain all the same benefits, and in the bargain got excellent MPG and low emissions performance to boot.

    Hot Rod ran an article on the LS1 when it came out in the '97 'Vette, and part of the story was that the engineering team was still pissed about the LT5 ('90-'93 ZR1 motor) development being farmed-out and ended up being very expensive to produce and costly to maintain. So their goal was to achieve similar perfomance w/ similar displacement with pushrods. They effectively said to the DOHC / 4V/cyl mentality:

  10. #50
    member since may 2000 nhraformula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    n/w chicago
    Age
    47
    Posts
    6,933

    black
    2000 nhra edition formula

    Quote Originally Posted by colesherman86 View Post
    not saying i'm on either side of this little debate, but gm's motors had always been 5.7L when they came out with the lt1 and the stang at the time had a 5.0 then ford went down to a 4.6 while gm stayed at 5.7 (but really went down to 346ci from 350) so i wouldn't say gm cheated. all that i know is that i realy would like to see a roots type blower on my ls1
    back in 92 you either got a 350 or 305 motor.
    needless to say, the 305 had no chance against a 5.0

  11. #51
    Mustang Slayer BlackPhoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    12

    01 Trans Am WS6
    The real KNIGHT rider

    I personally hate mustang's, but I did own one like 12 yrs ago an 88 GT 5.0. And even though it was a POS I always beat the 3rd gen 350's and 305's. Sad for Ford though, that's not the case now a days.

  12. #52
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by nhraformula View Post
    back in 92 you either got a 350 or 305 motor.
    needless to say, the 305 had no chance against a 5.0
    a 305 has never had a chance against anything. it was a shitty "economy" engine that should have been dumped along with the 267.

  13. #53
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    4

    Black
    '01 WS6

    Quote Originally Posted by slikws6 View Post
    400hpbird,

    Are you telling me I could gain almost 10 rwhp by changing my stock lid with a slp?

    1998 ws6 vert


    Thats what happened with mine, had it on the dyno ran it 2x totally stock, changed it out right there and ran it 2 more times. Only cost me $20 too b/c they had it laying around the shop, probably the cheapest little hp gain I'll ever get lol.

  14. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    191

    Mystic Teal/Chameleon grn
    1998 TA

    Going back to the beginning of the post.....mine is a 1998 TA and it dyno'd 311hp and 330tq with just an slp catback and thats a baseline...no tune. A stock ws6 should dyno over this. You can easily unleash a lot of power in these things. Hopefully I'll be getting my cam, headers, and 4.10's in before too long.
    Good luck with your ws6

  15. #55
    member since may 2000 nhraformula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    n/w chicago
    Age
    47
    Posts
    6,933

    black
    2000 nhra edition formula

    Quote Originally Posted by greenTA View Post
    Going back to the beginning of the post.....mine is a 1998 TA and it dyno'd 311hp and 330tq with just an slp catback and thats a baseline...no tune. A stock ws6 should dyno over this.
    Good luck with your ws6
    A WS6 will dyno just the same. all LS1 cras make the same power

  16. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    191

    Mystic Teal/Chameleon grn
    1998 TA

    They should dyno the same. But most of the ws6's i see dyno closer to 320 and a lot of them are stock.
    Maybe mine is just a runt

  17. #57
    Mustang Slayer BlackPhoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    12

    01 Trans Am WS6
    The real KNIGHT rider

    Quote Originally Posted by nhraformula View Post
    A WS6 will dyno just the same. all LS1 cras make the same power
    I don't see how that can be true. You're telling me that my stock 01 WS6 is going to dyno the same as his 98 T/A, even though my LS1 comes stock with an LS6 intake? Hmmmm....

  18. #58
    Dcdrummer LS1buckey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Delaware, Ohio
    Age
    33
    Posts
    311

    pewter
    1999 Pontiac Trans Am

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackPhoenix View Post
    I don't see how that can be true. You're telling me that my stock 01 WS6 is going to dyno the same as his 98 T/A, even though my LS1 comes stock with an LS6 intake? Hmmmm....
    That's a real good point and an answer I would like to have to. and to add to it, it was said "all LS1 cars" is that to say that a 2000 vette with an LS1 will dyno the same as my 99 Trans am? not trying to be a smartass.

  19. #59
    LS1 chosen son lemons12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    tennessee
    Posts
    2,010

    TA-White, Camaro-Black
    Track-TA98A4 DD-98z28M6

    Quote Originally Posted by shady milkman View Post
    mustangs are not lighter..and f-bods still destroy GTs..i'm confused
    99-04 gts are lighter arent they...

    Quote Originally Posted by nhraformula View Post
    A WS6 will dyno just the same. all LS1 cras make the same power
    true true.. the "ram air" doesnt do jack for any vehicle.. unless it is at unreasonable speeds...

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackPhoenix View Post
    I don't see how that can be true. You're telling me that my stock 01 WS6 is going to dyno the same as his 98 T/A, even though my LS1 comes stock with an LS6 intake? Hmmmm....
    you cant say they all dyno the same... but they all dyno close.. a 98 stock trans am could dyno higher than an 02 ws6... vicaversa for the camaros..

    Quote Originally Posted by LS1buckey View Post
    That's a real good point and an answer I would like to have to. and to add to it, it was said "all LS1 cars" is that to say that a 2000 vette with an LS1 will dyno the same as my 99 Trans am? not trying to be a smartass.

    ls6 intake is only good for maybe 10 hp.. BUT you have to look at more things.. in 98 they had the biggest cams.. that could make up for a few hp right there.. each year had their own ups and downs.. also a 3.23 geared 98 is going to outrun a new year with 2.73s in the 1/8 or it should..

    yes a vette is equal.. people think just because it is a vette it has like 50 more hp.... false.. you have the same engine.. period.. why would it dyno 50 hp more???? or any for that matter.. vettes are light and have good gears.. although i believe are equipped with IRS.. which slows them down in say the 1/8 and thats why a lot of times stock for stock (same years) you will see a TA or camaro take a vette in the 1/8... granted equal drivers.. or A4s..

    JUST alking dyno numbers.. they should all be around 295-315 to the wheels.. regardless of year.. vette.. camaro.. TA.. GTO.. whatever.. an ls1 is an ls1 is an ls1....

  20. #60
    LS1 chosen son lemons12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    tennessee
    Posts
    2,010

    TA-White, Camaro-Black
    Track-TA98A4 DD-98z28M6

    as for the track... stock my 98 was outrunning PLENTY of 99 and up TAs and camaros.. ram air models also.. sticks and autos.. even some mild bolt on cars.. and 3 of them with very small cams... again ANYTHING can happen in racing.. and there are many factors.. but this goes for dyno numbers also.. just because its a 98 doesnt mean its a POS.. and just because its an 02 ws6 doesnt mean its going to outrun a 98 ta.....

    have only got 1 chance to run a vette.. it was a 1999 FRC.. 2.73s.. i had a lid and exhaust.. we were about dead even till about 50 cause my ass end was slinging all over.. and once i hooked i started to pull.. i got him by about a car and a half to 125...

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Understanding Dyno Numbers - Real Wheel Horsepower
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Dyno Information
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-17-2012, 05:22 AM
  2. Horsepower numbers
    By tg580 in forum General Help
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-27-2010, 05:22 AM
  3. Tr230 dyno numbers 98 heads=bad numbers?
    By phoenix1987 in forum Dyno Information
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-11-2007, 08:33 AM
  4. Horsepower Combos - Horsepower Rules
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2007, 08:20 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •