The 2014 Corvette Stingray Forum
News / Blog Register Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Go Back   Chevrolet Corvette Stingray C7 Forum > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-04-2010, 12:10 AM   #29
Sax1031


 
Drives: 2000 Mustang GT
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Elgin,SC
Posts: 2,707
This is what I saw a couple weeks ago. Supposed to be the same car that ran the 12.4x.



420whp/419rwtq
Sax1031 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2010, 08:17 AM   #30
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8cd03gro View Post
A 1.82 with stock IRS and stock tires. . . eh, I don't know about that. Has it been confirmed that it was on stock tires?

remember that car was an automatic, in the CHallenger specifically that makes a big difference. If I am not mistaken some of the better driver's in R/Ts, such as DodgeTony on stock 4 seasons were able to pull 1.8s-1.9s.
Stew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2010, 10:03 AM   #31
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
I'm with Evil Twin here, my money says this car is right on top of 430rwhp given the dynos we've seen and track performance thus far. That said, that still puts this thing right on top of LS7 hp territory and arguably this thing may be doing better than the LS7 in the torque department...and the LS7 is a real piece of work. Yeah, I think this car justifies the price, particularly since it is cheaper than the 2011 GT500 and likewise will almost certainly be cheaper than the 2012 Z28.

Also worth thinking about. If they throw this engine at the Charger we'll have a no apologies, rwd performance sedan priced meaningfully below the CTS-V as well.
syr74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2010, 11:14 AM   #32
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
is the edmunds inside line numbers corrected?? because the other srt8 dynoed 420rwhp corrected and 440uncorrected.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2010, 11:28 AM   #33
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,789
Probably not corrected. I am not a fan of insideline anyways. ANd I agree around 430 RWHP average looks like what we will be seeing.
Stew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 12:25 PM   #34
matt55

 
matt55's Avatar
 
Drives: CTS-V
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Raleigh NC
Posts: 1,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew View Post
WHat makes one real and one not?
One (420 whp sae) was made from a Dynojet
One (453 whp) was made by photoshop or whatever and they say this is what it did , without any other factors that we can see like on the DJ one like SAE cf.
__________________
10.8@130.8 610 whp, CAI, 2.5, E85, id850 on street tires.
matt55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 12:34 PM   #35
ViperTomcat
Banned
 
Drives: 2011 Avenger Heat
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt55 View Post
One (420 whp sae) was made from a Dynojet
One (453 whp) was made by photoshop or whatever and they say this is what it did , without any other factors that we can see like on the DJ one like SAE cf.
So because they dont show every single bit of data from the IL dyno test..its a photoshop?

They are both real, just one is by a "common man" the other is by a well known website.
ViperTomcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 12:41 PM   #36
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViperTomcat View Post
So because they dont show every single bit of data from the IL dyno test..its a photoshop?

They are both real, just one is by a "common man" the other is by a well known website.
no, the insideline one isnt an actual dyno sheet that they print out. It looks like an artists rendering of what the sheet looked like when he saw it. Also, yes, because it has no other info on it it makes it suspicious at the least.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 12:45 PM   #37
2010 2-Tone


 
Drives: 2010 RY 2SS with Custom Stripes
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Jennings, La.
Posts: 2,220
I am not believing the hp or the 60ft time on stock tires with a 4400lb car!!! Just saying.
2010 2-Tone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 12:53 PM   #38
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010 2-Tone View Post
I am not believing the hp or the 60ft time on stock tires with a 4400lb car!!! Just saying.
could be the timing mark was wrong at the first 60' but bottom line they ran a 12.4 on the first day.....
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 01:12 PM   #39
matt55

 
matt55's Avatar
 
Drives: CTS-V
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Raleigh NC
Posts: 1,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViperTomcat View Post
So because they dont show every single bit of data from the IL dyno test..its a photoshop?

They are both real, just one is by a "common man" the other is by a well known website.
Ok after alot of digging and searching , I found what made the diff from the 420 to 453 WHP

The InsideLine guys had a ............RED KEY







































__________________
10.8@130.8 610 whp, CAI, 2.5, E85, id850 on street tires.
matt55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 02:48 PM   #40
Sax1031


 
Drives: 2000 Mustang GT
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Elgin,SC
Posts: 2,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010 2-Tone View Post
I am not believing the hp or the 60ft time on stock tires with a 4400lb car!!! Just saying.
the head in the sand "nananananananana" approach.
Sax1031 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 05:47 PM   #41
assasinator
1 n the head,2 n da chest
 
assasinator's Avatar
 
Drives: 2002 cadillac deville
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: huntsville al.
Posts: 659
me = 400rwhp / 3500lbs = 8.75 lbs/rwhp

`11GT=365rwhp/3650lbs= 10 lbs/rwhp

07gt500= 435rwhp/3920lbs= 9.01lbs/rwhp

gen4= 305rwhp/3250lbs = 10.65lbs/rwhp ----stripper i know.

SS = 370rwhp / 3780lbs = 10.08 lbs/rwhp

392= 430rwhp / 4200lbs = 9.77 lbs/rwhp

392 needs 480rwhp to hang just even with me. im good. SS needs 432 rwhp to be even. 1998-2002 needs 371rwhp.

i have CAI since the dyno so it needs about 490rwhp now. SS needs ~442rwhp. 280lbs and 700 lbs hurts.

im not intimidated by it.
__________________
2011GT E85, Kooks 1-7/8", 3" offroad X, 2-7/8" overaxles, Roush mufflers, CobraJet intake, SCJ monoblade throttle body, drew 4.5" CAI, Boss302S exhaust valve springs, Baby CobraJet exhaust cams. 3.73 gears, lightweight 300A. 455rwhp @7800/410rwtq SAE 5000lb roller dynojet

Last edited by assasinator; 12-06-2010 at 06:01 PM.
assasinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 06:18 PM   #42
SS 376

 
SS 376's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 IBM 1SS (Former)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NoVA
Posts: 2,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N View Post
i think theyll dyno 430rwhp on average.
yea, 410-420 sounds about right. If this 392 actually made what, 530-550 at the crank, Dodge would be trumpeting that from the top of every hill they could find. They would not sandbag or underrate anything...
SS 376 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Personal Test drive review: 11 GT vs. 11 2SS vs 10 Challenger R/T ViperTomcat Chevy Camaro vs... 171 07-27-2010 05:42 PM
Challenger Pricing LSxcellent General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 31 12-03-2007 10:00 PM
Ontario to become home of the all-new 2008 Dodge Challenger Mr. Wyndham General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 3 08-09-2007 03:54 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.