LS3 for final Commodore

[shaness8]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

By destroyed do you mean what the 335 does to the ls3 or do you mean it was 1/10th quicker? I recall the 315 and ls3 being pretty well on par.

Yeah,

about 1/2 sec or more quicker over the 1/4, and same with 0-100k.

[SensationFG8]

Originally Posted by shaness8

Yeah,

about 1/2 sec or more quicker over the 1/4, and same with 0-100k.

Not my recollection

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/ca...pv_gt_315.html
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/ca...bsport_r8.html

[arronm]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

Did you goto the fpv site? It has one on the page...

Numbers in the second one are mostly irrelevant it shows you how flat the torque is. To help with your inability to read the numbers here they are.

600nm throughout the rev range, Max power 328.5 rwkw.

These numbers were read off a tiny little phone screen...

Thank you for also finally admitting you don't know much of these glorious motors, now please stop posting like you do.

Everyone has a opinion. Its just you dont like mine. Tuff.

I drove the "brutal" car and found it lacking. Get over it.

Hey, my VF for a 6L is soft as well. All those cubes for SFA power.

Just remember we are posting in a commodore thread..

[SensationFG8]

Opinions are fine, you are arguing fact with opinion though, even when presented with the data to back the fact up.

I still say you've never even sat in a 335 let alone driven one. That's just my opinion.

[arronm]

No problem, I will get the member to post. Only to shut you up.

[SensationFG8]

Please do, although the only thing that proves is you don't know what an accelerator is

[shaness8]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

Not my recollection

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/ca...pv_gt_315.html
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/ca...bsport_r8.html

This may help you.

Wheels June 2008

FPV GT 5.4L man 315kw 0-100k 6.4 sec 1/4 mile 14.4

HSV GTS 6.2L man 317kw 0-100 5.5 sec 1/4 mile 13.7

[SensationFG8]

I don't acknowledge wheels as a reliable test sorry.

6.4 is slower than my xr8

[Bossxr8]

Hilarious posting up times from Wheels as a credible source. The same mag that ran the FGX XR8 with 46 psi in the rear tyres and wondered why it would keep wheelspinning off the line



I had to laugh though when they said the SS couldn't even do a burnout, all they could get was a chirp

[stazza]

Originally Posted by Blue Roo

Really?
For all the hype that's surrounds the HSV LS3 saying how Big and Powerful it is. And it still gets beaten in race off the lights by an F6 or a 335.
I to would be embarrassed if I own the car, let alone being in one.
Like the slogan says, " HSV! I Just Ate One."

I gotta agree here. For years I heard about the VE SS's being "weapons". But then I shifted in with a dude who had one and it was slow. Also had a mate who got one and it was slow and boring and lifeless. Sounded good but that's about it. All show no go.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by tempted

Just about every car maker has switched to front wheel drive too.... Does that mean front wheel drive is great, or superior to rear wheel drive?

Not very relevant is it......is the fwd change for performance? No! Is the dismissal of pushrods an efficiency in making power thing? Yes!
Both are progressive and modern....for diff reasons!

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by shaness8

This may help you.

Wheels June 2008

FPV GT 5.4L man 315kw 0-100k 6.4 sec 1/4 mile 14.4

HSV GTS 6.2L man 317kw 0-100 5.5 sec 1/4 mile 13.7

Lol that's the funniest post I've seen since 2008. (Also the slowest GT)

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Bent8

If pushrod's are so great, then why has nearly every other car maker in the world switched to DOHC ?

Because they are a more efficient (but complex) design which means better fuel economy and more power from less cubes compared to pushrods.

5.0L Coyote vs 6.2L LS3 is the perfect example of this... just looking at the huge difference in volumetric efficiency between these 2 motors is enough for anyone to feel embarrassed to be driving an LS3 powered car in 2014/15.

And before you say those Corvette's have great mileage with the LS3's, just remember their top gear ratio is moon shot long.

Don't do yourself any favours being anti pushrod yet own such an underwhelming quad cam 'performance' model that is the Boss 260, which, got its **** handed to it many a time by the old LS1. You want to jump on the high horse of efficient engines then put your money where you mouth is and ditch the old 5000rpm boat anchor and jump into a twin turbo direct injected German marque.
Fact is GM have evolved the sbc into what it is today and that is one of the greatest series of engines eve that still holds its own.
Quote on paper figures til you're blue in the face but realise things play out differently in the real world.

[asagaai]

Originally Posted by smoo

Don't do yourself any favours being anti pushrod yet own such an underwhelming quad cam 'performance' model that is the Boss 260, which, got its **** handed to it many a time by the old LS1. You want to jump on the high horse of efficient engines then put your money where you mouth is and ditch the old 5000rpm boat anchor and jump into a twin turbo direct injected German marque.
Fact is GM have evolved the sbc into what it is today and that is one of the greatest series of engines eve that still holds its own.
Quote on paper figures til you're blue in the face but realise things play out differently in the real world.

Mate- I am f+#%#)g tired after a very long year of work- got a major headache anyone care to translate?

[HemiMagic]

Originally Posted by Bent8

Yep, they were very close indeed.. here's a snapshot from 2008.

image

Take the Turtle cover off and it runs cooler

[kypez]

Originally Posted by arronm

Nah dude. Peak is peak. Its a number not a range.

Take a look or post up your dyno graph. It will be written on there.

Peak torque is what you feel when you get shoved back in the seat.

Originally Posted by arronm

The graphs really show the difference between the turbo 6 and V8. The peak torque is so high on the 8 compared to the 6. That's probably why when I drove the GT 335 it felt soft. Even though I did mash the throttle all the way to redline in 2nd and 3rd

It doesn't hit,just builds. My VF is the same. And then the SS guys put in cams and make it worse

Originally Posted by arronm

From the graphs I have seen. 335 coyote 4200-4300 peak torque and that old graph was 4600 so not that much difference.

And seeing the turbo 6 is under 3000. Thats the difference I was feeling

http://www.fpv.com.au/f6_showroom/f6

http://www.fpv.com.au/gt_showroom/gt

Read and learn... Its there, in simple english

Also, go study how an engine works. Clearly you have a lot of half knowledge that is working against you here.

"Peak is peak" Thats the quote of 2014 regarding torque on FI Engines...

[arronm]

I had to laugh though when they said the SS couldn't even do a burnout, all they could get was a chirp

Its true, the stock autos are lame.

[Bent8]

Originally Posted by smoo

Don't do yourself any favours being anti pushrod yet own such an underwhelming quad cam 'performance' model that is the Boss 260, which, got its **** handed to it many a time by the old LS1. You want to jump on the high horse of efficient engines then put your money where you mouth is and ditch the old 5000rpm boat anchor and jump into a twin turbo direct injected German marque.
Fact is GM have evolved the sbc into what it is today and that is one of the greatest series of engines eve that still holds its own.
Quote on paper figures til you're blue in the face but realise things play out differently in the real world.

Ok I'll bite, let's compare my motor to the LS1 fitted to the VZ Commodore SS....

BOSS 260 5.4L (2003 - 2007)
260kW @5200rpm
500Nm @4000rpm

LS1 5.7L (2004 - 2006)
250kW @5600rpm
470Nm @4000rpm

If you wanna talk efficiency, the BOSS 260 makes more power at lower revs and more torque from less cubes !

And just for fun, the outputs for the hand-built M113 AMG V8 used in the C55, SLK55 until 2007 (this motor was SOHC with 3 valves per cylinder)

AMG 5.4L (5439cc)
270kW @5750rpm
510Nm @4000rpm

Again, the BOSS 260 makes nearly the same power at much lower revs.

Reason for this is because the Ford block has a very long stroke which means huge power potential when fitted with the appropriate mods.

Sorry to burst your bubble mate, but my boat anchor BOSS 260 makes between 248 - 255rwkw (depending on dyno) with 218,000km on the dial !!

She starts first time everytime, doesn't suffer from any kind of heat soak or piston slap like the LS1 did and has a nice throaty V8 note to boot.

Anyways, thanks for your kind words and back on topic.....

[smoo]

As I said on paper stats are great but nothing to stand by when it comes to the real world. You fail to take into account the sheer size of the quad cam, and weight of the cast iron block.
A few stock car teams here played around with them, they couldn't handle being knocked around, would jump teeth on the timing chain. So back to the sbc for them.
Off topic but since you mention LS1 piston slap, the Boss 260s were burning valves and doing timing chain tensioners long after GM sorted LS1 issues.
Why compare an aging SOHC 1990s Mercedes engine? Why not the S62 from 1999 out of the M5 ;)
Im sure yours is a decent drive and sounds good but I don't get why a lot of Ford guys jump on the anti push rod band wagon, because up until the Miami, the GM V8s gave the Falcons a run for their money plus more.

[graphicgoose]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

Opinions are fine, you are arguing fact with opinion though, even when presented with the data to back the fact up.

I still say you've never even sat in a 335 let alone driven one. That's just my opinion.

Just to confirm, Arron did actually drive my GT 335, so is at least making an informed decision on his part...whether you agree with it or not is a different matter entirely.

He's also no slouch behind the wheel, could probably teach most of us a thing or two about car control.

[SensationFG8]

Yet couldn't spin up the wheels in second, cmon goose you know thats not a truthful opinion about a Miami.

Do you support his statements regarding the power and "peak" torque of the Miami motor?

[graphicgoose]

The wheels on a stock Miami don't spin up just by stomping the loud pedal in a straight line. CAT600 did that with my car coz he wanted to see if it axle tramped or not but it didn't spin and he was like "oh yeah, man they're doughy stock". Mash the pedal in a corner then it's a different story, but then again it's the same with Arron's Commodore.

The Miami FEELS slower than the turbos like his F6, which is no doubt his baseline comparison, because of the power delivery. The Miami doesn't give you the same boot in the guts that the turbos do, but it does keep pulling up top.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by graphicgoose

The wheels on a stock Miami don't spin up just by stomping the loud pedal in a straight line. CAT600 did that with my car coz he wanted to see if it axle tramped or not but it didn't spin and he was like "oh yeah, man they're doughy stock". Mash the pedal in a corner then it's a different story, but then again it's the same with Arron's Commodore.

The Miami FEELS slower than the turbos like his F6, which is no doubt his baseline comparison, because of the power delivery. The Miami doesn't give you the same boot in the guts that the turbos do, but it does keep pulling up top.

because the GT doesnt have as much lag as a Turbo it feels slower? Those turbo diesels must feel really fast to Arron...

[graphicgoose]

No, not because of the lag, but the way the turbo delivers its torque.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by graphicgoose

No, not because of the lag, but the way the turbo delivers its torque.

But thats how it delivers it... nothing then bang! PD Superchargers reduce that as it doesnt need to spool up.

[CAT600]

PD V8 is faster out on the open road because it hooks up (such linear power) and will pull cleanly and smoothly from 1500 to 6500 with less than ~15% variation in peak torque from end to end... to have a turbo 6 with the same top end shove it will have SO MUCH more midrange (like 50% extra) that it will just blow the tyres off as it comes on. For example I took Dan (graphicgoose) in my FG making 530+rwkw and he will tell you that once hooked up in a suitable gear (lets call it 3rd ) it was linear from 50 to lots.

Take a 530rwkw turbo 6, it will have nothing until 3000rpm, thereafter will hose 4th gear in the same situation until it falls over at the limiter as the tyres cant regain traction once turning.

The same applies to a stock or tune only cars, just in lower gears.... in a stock 335 with tyres in good shape it will not turn them in 1st but therein lies the beauty, it will swing to 6500 and you grab 2nd and leave the opposition behind. A ZF turbo will mask this by shortshifting as it comes on but get it wrong and its a smokeshow.

The LS engines are fine in stock form, but you cant compete with boost hence why Walkinshaw/Magnusson/Whipple etc have built blower kits for them, to add linear grunt.

The Miami is the best stock (and tune-only) engine you can buy in a local car bar none, followed closely by the 310 F6 engine

EDIT (read a bit more further up)... the only engine I would define as "brutal" is the turbo 6, everything else is just varing degrees of fast.

Maybe a 600rwkw PD car is brutal, but its brutal from 1500-7000

Daniel

[kypez]

Originally Posted by CAT600

PD V8 is faster out on the open road because it hooks up (such linear power) and will pull cleanly and smoothly from 1500 to 6500 with less than ~15% variation in peak torque from end to end... to have a turbo 6 with the same top end shove it will have SO MUCH more midrange (like 50% extra) that it will just blow the tyres off as it comes on. For example I took Dan (graphicgoose) in my FG making 530+rwkw and he will tell you that once hooked up in a suitable gear (lets call it 3rd ) it was linear from 50 to lots.

More midrange? Both produce around the same torque between almost the same rev range... Are you saying the turbo makes More KW through the rev range?

We are talking two motors that are stock. The F6 and GT 335.

[CAT600]

Originally Posted by kypez

More midrange? Both produce around the same torque between almost the same rev range... Are you saying the turbo makes More KW through the rev range?

We are talking two motors that are stock. The F6 and GT 335.

A stock F6 will show more midrange than a 335... forget the marketing of it. the dyno shows more rwnm.

Then there is the "event".. the transition as the car comes onto full boost, the rear wheel torque changes by a much larger amount and this is what unhooks a tyre, tyres will generally take more grunt the slower andmore progressively you feed the power in, ramping it on hard is fun but unless you are at the track/have killer traction its going to make the car unhook a lot easier.

Daniel

[arronm]

Dan clarified. Enough said

[SensationFG8]

No I believe he just said to get the same peak power it would have an undriveable midrange. You certainly have an interesting definition of brutal power though...