Killed a C6 and a Mustang GT yesterday....

**ss~zoso~ss** · 10-30-2006, 11:26 AM

**cailey37** · 10-30-2006, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by SOMSS

Not on their best day, I have dyno'd several C6's and not one had more than 330 RWTQ or more than 338 RWHP stock. The LS2 in not overated very much at all. The LS1's in the F-Bodies were seriously underated and the C5's had about 360 hp but so did the F-Bodies.

hey....it's your story......but I assure you....the C-6's are way under rated! Dont know what kind of dyno you're talking about but I can show you some here that get way better numbers....I would bet you any amount of money on that one and I'm not a gambeling man unless I know 100 percent that I'm gonna win.

**ibanez7** · 10-30-2006, 11:29 AM

its not really a measure of being underrated or overrated.

Its a change in marketing, with 4thgen f-bods GM posted RWHP, with new cars they post crank HP. Which is fine because the general masses dont know the difference!

**ibanez7** · 10-30-2006, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by SOMSS

Not on their best day, I have dyno'd several C6's and not one had more than 330 RWTQ or more than 338 RWHP stock. The LS2 in not overated very much at all. The LS1's in the F-Bodies were seriously underated and the C5's had about 360 hp but so did the F-Bodies.

what kind of dyno? and I hope your talking about ls1 having 360 crank HP!

**shady milkman** · 10-30-2006, 12:17 PM

this thread makes my head hurt !

**jbb6811** · 10-30-2006, 12:50 PM

its hard to bs guys that have been here a long time and have raced almost every thing out there. the fact is the story is just that, a story and you have to make your best call. fact or fiction. the best way to prove your story is true................GET IT ON TAPE.
i would say bs....just my two pennys.

**Roastem** · 10-30-2006, 12:59 PM

I can believe it. I put 3 car lengths on an LS2 GTO at the end of the eighth. He trapped 92 mph too! Left his ass, and I only got 404 whp, vs. the 05 GTO's what, like 360 whp stock?

And spun through second...

**shady milkman** · 10-30-2006, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by Roastem

I can believe it. I put 3 car lengths on an LS2 GTO at the end of the eighth. He trapped 92 mph too! Left his ass, and I only got 404 whp, vs. the 05 GTO's what, like 360 whp stock?

And spun through second...

diff is your lighter alot lighter actually, now a c6 is hella light and only going to 80-90..to put 8 lengths seems bs to me..now yea i can easily believe he beat him..but the lengths is were i cry bullshit.

**Roastem** · 10-30-2006, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by shady milkman

diff is your lighter alot lighter actually, now a c6 is hella light and only going to 80-90..to put 8 lengths seems bs to me..now yea i can easily believe he beat him..but the lengths is were i cry bullshit.

Yeah, the GTO's are a little porky.

You guys have to take "car lengths" with a grain of salt. A guesstimate is just that, an estimate. Prolly 3-4.

I wasn't there! Don't take my bullshit for anything other than what it is! haha

You can't bullshit a bullshitter!

**shady milkman** · 10-30-2006, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Roastem

Yeah, the GTO's are a little porky.

You guys have to take "car lengths" with a grain of salt. A guesstimate is just that, an estimate. Prolly 3-4.

I wasn't there! Don't take my bullshit for anything other than what it is! haha

You can't bullshit a bullshitter!

lol very true.

**breakparts** · 11-01-2006, 02:40 PM

My Uncle Has A Bone Stock C6 Automatic---with All Bolt Ons I Would Give Him A Slow Walk In Each Gear...never To End Up At More Than A Car Length Ahead---i Can Believe You Beat Him ....and He Probly Gave Up When He Figured This Out, Thus Giving The Hella Car Length Idea......

**SOMSS** · 11-01-2006, 02:47 PM

That indeed may have been the reason for the extra car lengths.

**breakparts** · 11-01-2006, 02:50 PM

Happens Alot......the More Expensive Car Dudes Will Run Em....but Once They Start To Lose They Cant Bear To Keep Trying And Keep Looking Stupid........so They Drop Back With Tail Between There Legs

**SeVeReDiStOrTiOn** · 11-01-2006, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by cailey37

hey....it's your story......but I assure you....the C-6's are way under rated! Dont know what kind of dyno you're talking about but I can show you some here that get way better numbers....I would bet you any amount of money on that one and I'm not a gambeling man unless I know 100 percent that I'm gonna win.

The LS2 isn't underrated...neither was the C5 vette. The LS1 was only underrated in the f-bods, that's why f-bods dyno the same or higher(due to solid rear) then the C5 vettes. Why would GM underrate thier flagship vette....they wouldn't.

**cailey37** · 11-02-2006, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by SeVeReDiStOrTiOn

The LS2 isn't underrated...neither was the C5 vette. The LS1 was only underrated in the f-bods, that's why f-bods dyno the same or higher(due to solid rear) then the C5 vettes. Why would GM underrate thier flagship vette....they wouldn't.

One reason.....insurance.....and not having to pay a gas guzzler tax....ok that's two....I assure you....go to the dealer drive one to a dyno and watch what happens........

**breakparts** · 11-02-2006, 02:52 PM

Yup Its True ^^^^^^^

**shady milkman** · 11-02-2006, 03:23 PM

almost all high performance engines are underrated..the LSx line is no exception..as stated its insurance reasons..but gas guzzler has nothing to do with hp or tq rating..its mpg...the only reason why ls2s acheive that is the skip shift and i believe the cylinder shutoff..i cant remember if the c6's ls2 has that...but yea its deff an insurance issue...GM and ford have been doing it for YEARS!! also i heard that the ls1 wasnt actually underrated..it was a change of engine messurments ..they moved from rwhp to crank hp...but i've only heard one person say that so i'm not sure if its true.

**breakparts** · 11-02-2006, 03:26 PM

they said my year makes 310 hp---rwhp would be closer

**shady milkman** · 11-02-2006, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by breakparts

they said my year makes 310 hp---rwhp would be closer

not quite following you..if your talking about gm? there is a large engine build tolerance so it could be a marketing thing to take the biggest possible build tolerance to up the rating but thats assuming that the guy was right about the rwhp vs fwhp

**breakparts** · 11-02-2006, 03:35 PM

IM JUST SAYING-when i bought my car i thought it had 310 fwhp and i was like danm that feels like more than that.......i see why they did it but its kidnd a freebie...LIKE WHEN YOU TELL A CHICK YOUR ONLY PACKIN 6 INCHES AND SHE PULLS IT OUT AND ITS BIGGER...there like o-gooodie