01-17-2013, 04:01 PM | #15 |
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1
|
490 / 470 I'm going with.
|
01-17-2013, 05:28 PM | #16 |
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
|
490-515 HP/475-500 TQ.
__________________
Got boost
|
01-17-2013, 05:32 PM | #17 |
Drives: 2010 SS/RS M6/2500HD Lmm LTZ Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Georgia
Posts: 2,543
|
|
01-17-2013, 05:49 PM | #18 | |
|
Quote:
My honest guess, for the big dog vettes when they do come out, is going to be 600+hp, plus much bigger tires than what they offer on the base car (255/285). |
|
01-17-2013, 07:09 PM | #19 |
Too Many Great Choices
Drives: Grand Sport/Z07 Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: A Mountain Road
Posts: 7,454
|
475/475
|
01-17-2013, 07:54 PM | #20 |
|
|
01-17-2013, 08:10 PM | #21 |
Drives: 2010 SS/RS M6/2500HD Lmm LTZ Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Georgia
Posts: 2,543
|
|
01-17-2013, 08:49 PM | #22 |
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
|
__________________
Got boost
|
01-17-2013, 08:50 PM | #23 |
Drives: 2010 SS/RS M6/2500HD Lmm LTZ Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Georgia
Posts: 2,543
|
|
01-17-2013, 09:03 PM | #24 |
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
|
There is some logic to my madness. First, you don't add DI, higher CR and VVT to an engine and only see 20 HP. On top of that the C5 Z06 was 405 HP and the C6 LT was 430 HP. So, doesn't seem like GM has a problem with the base model making more than the prior generation performance/track model. Would be nice, wouldn't it?
__________________
Got boost
|
01-17-2013, 09:05 PM | #25 | |
Drives: 2010 SS/RS M6/2500HD Lmm LTZ Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Georgia
Posts: 2,543
|
Quote:
|
|
01-17-2013, 09:10 PM | #26 |
Camaro Disciple
|
It's tough to guess.
DI, high CR, and VVT are good for power. However AFM is bad for power. But I have a hunch that we will be pleasantly surprised.
__________________
2013 Camaro 2SS/RS
|
01-17-2013, 09:15 PM | #27 | |
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 10
|
Quote:
__________________
Got boost
|
|
01-21-2013, 12:38 PM | #28 |
36.58625, -121.7568
|
475/470
Two years later. 485/480 |
|
|
|
|