[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I think the thing that always gets people is that they had an option available. they had the LS9 sitting there. Just like now they have the LT5 sitting there.( and yes I know I have argued that they have never put the ZR1 engine in anything else...but they could if they wanted to) I think that is what really rubs people the wrong way about it, is they see the competition continually updating and when GM has options available they are just like nah were good.

I can’t recall if they are the same RPO code or not, but the 6.2SC in the CTS-V is the same engine as the C6 ZR1.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Probably the best way to line them up now is probably

GT to LT1
GT PP1 to SS
GT PP2 to SS 1LE

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I can’t recall if they are the same RPO code or not, but the 6.2SC in the CTS-V is the same engine as the C6 ZR1.

Umm, I don't think so. Gen2 V's got the LSA - same as the 5th gen ZL1s. LS9 is a different animal and larger blower.

[ZRacerLE]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I can’t recall if they are the same RPO code or not, but the 6.2SC in the CTS-V is the same engine as the C6 ZR1.

I think the main difference between the ls9 and lsA, was that only the ls9 had forged pistons and crank?

[LS6-M22]

The only other car that got the LS9 was the HSV GTS in Australia

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by ZRacerLE

I think the main difference between the ls9 and lsA, was that only the ls9 had forged pistons and crank?

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/090...ngine-history/

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by ZRacerLE

I think the main difference between the ls9 and lsA, was that only the ls9 had forged pistons and crank?

The LS9 had a 2.3L supercharger. The LSA had a 1.9L

The ZL1 getting small displacement superchargers is my biggest complain with Chevy. 1.9L on gen5 and 1.7L gen6. Heat soak

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Maybe for people who like to lose races and get walked stoplight to stoplight.

I see both sides. To me I agree with Blaq, what fun is power if you can't use it but on the flip side I know plenty of people that love a wild street ride and don't care if someone can beat them or not.

Originally Posted by ZRacerLE

I think the main difference between the ls9 and lsA, was that only the ls9 had forged pistons and crank?

and the LS9 made 639HP and the LSA was 580

Originally Posted by hotlap

The LS9 had a 2.3L supercharger. The LSA had a 1.9L

The ZL1 getting small displacement superchargers is my biggest complain with Chevy. 1.9L on gen5 and 1.7L gen6. Heat soak

That is also one of the reasons I would like to see them update when they could. The small blower on the ZL1 is because of the Z06. IIRC the Z06 has a small blower so it would clear the hood and pass regulations in other parts of the world. The ZR-1 is not sold other countries so it got a bigger blower and bigger hood.

[TheRealJA105]

Originally Posted by hotlap

You misinterpret what I was trying to say.
I wasn’t suggesting a SS will run equal to a PP2 when disadvantaged by its MPSC2 tires. I was poking at the PP2 being a non-track car with MPSC2 tires and no cooling. The base SS, for $37k, on GY Asymmetric 3 tires is equipped to run consistently. It won’t go into limp mode and it’s tires won’t have just one good lap. It would win the race.I didn’t say the GT500’s power was falling off. I was pointing out that it is capable of one hero lap ...if it starts out on new tires. It then falls off significantly.
Recall the conclusion of the Throttle House GT500 vs ZL1 1LE where they site the 500’s worn tires? If only it had new tires... It’s only capable of one lap.
Did you see the part in the Behind the Scenes video where they said Pobst drove the GT3 RS with his foot on the floor and ran three consistent laps with no fade. Pobst hands barely moved while driving the Porsche.

The PP2 is an absolute joke of a car. The runflats have zero good laps in them compared to the MPSC2s and G3s. They aren't even in the same category and will also fall off in times.

No Blaq said that it was heat soaking and falling off in time not you. Then he kept going on saying a robot was driving the cars (see human error not possible) and tires can't only be good for one hero lap when I told him that.

Yes I've already covered that the tire excuse was BS from Throttle House.

It's a $190K track Porsche, it better be capable of that. You guys seriously just shit on things about the GT500 that can't be shit on. I'm all Chevy and like the ZLE so much more, but you guys invent problems for the GT500 and expand them to make it seem like it's garbage. Does it cost too much? Yes Can it beat a ZLE on the track? No, which btw I said it wouldn't way back at the beginning of whatever the first thread it was brought up in.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I'd say 99% of us knew what you meant while 1 failed to comprehend.
Tires, weight, temps, any of the other 20 excuses, the GT500 fell on it's face after 1 lap. While some "genius" might wanna run around telling us what we already know, it is clear that the GT500 is mismatched and not properly engineered like the ZL1 was.

See above, but yeah Mustang's engineering team has been way behind Camaro's.

Originally Posted by hotlap

Yeah. I felt that he was carrying on with the debate he had earlier with you.

Absolutely

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

I didn't forget the elsd, that's an obvious 1le exclusive advantage that I think most are aware of and dont have to mention.
I didnt mention the brakes because if im not mistaken, a regualr ss can get optioned with 6 piston fronts and 4 piston rears. Don't know if it comea with the same pads and rotors though.
I was just getting at the fact that a regular ss is pretty capable as well.

Yeah my SS came with the 6 piston fronts and all SS's have the same rear 4 pistons. Same pads and better slotted rotors, tho I replaced with 1LE standard rotors. I still wish i had the ELSD and Recaros.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Assuming it'll shave 2 seconds is just an assumption, I bet it'll shave off time but 2 seconds on streets or willow is a lot. They only shaved 1 second off a car with lower and handling kit on a 2 minute course.
The gt500 absolute lost time because of the tires deteriorating quickly, but they deteriorated so quickly compared to the Porsche because of its own fat ass lol.
Agreed on many chevy guys and Ford guys not knowing that an ss is already more set up for heavy duty track use than a pp2 and early gt350s.

I wish I would have tracked my car just once on the runflats so I had hard data to give to you guys that don't track, but I knew the stock wheels and tires weren't worth it so I changed them before.
Yes GT500 is too fat.

Originally Posted by shaffe

That's the thing I think alot of people on all forums forget. So many of these cars are never driven close to their potential or pushed harder than accelerating hard onto the expressway or maybe a WOT pull from a stop light. the people that come onto forums and actually do push them hard and discuss how pushing them to the limits and what not is a small percentage of the people that own the cars.

Probably the best way to line them up now is probably

GT to LT1
GT PP1 to SS
GT PP2 to SS 1LE

If the car isn't taken to the track it's not being pushed to it's limits that's for sure.
It's hard to compare any GT to any SS on a track because the GT's aren't equipped for track duty.

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

Umm, I don't think so. Gen2 V's got the LSA - same as the 5th gen ZL1s. LS9 is a different animal and larger blower.

We're going to have to give Martin a pass on this one. He provides so much good info I'm going to pretend i didn't read that.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

We're going to have to give Martin a pass on this one. He provides so much good info I'm going to pretend i didn't read that.

Of course, Jim certainly provides more insight into how GM and Ford make decisions that we otherwise would have never known.

I only posted to clarify the difference in LSA vs LS9.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I think the thing that always gets people is that they had an option available. they had the LS9 sitting there. Just like now they have the LT5 sitting there.( and yes I know I have argued that they have never put the ZR1 engine in anything else...but they could if they wanted to) I think that is what really rubs people the wrong way about it, is they see the competition continually updating and when GM has options available they are just like nah were good.

The more likely case is that GMs engineering resources were allocated to the next project. 14 Z/28, 14 C7 launch, 15 Z06, Alpha Camaro and ZL1

Why go back to put a 638 HP engine in a 4,120 lb gen5 ZL1 when you're already working on a 3,900 lbs gen6 ZL1 with 650 HP?

Originally Posted by shaffe

GT500 from 09-13 went from 500, to 540, to 550 to 662.

That gen5 GT500 progression was actually 07-14. Eight model years.

GT500
500HP 07-09
540HP 10
550HP 11-12
662HP 13-14
Void 15-16-17-18-19
760HP 20-_

The gen5 ZL1 was four model years

ZL1
580HP 12-15
Void 16
650HP 17-_

Chevy allocated its resource MUCH better

Originally Posted by shaffe

Hellcat has gone from 707, to 717, and now in RE trim to 797.

Dodge has nowhere to go but to offer more power

• The 707 and 717 HP engines are basically identical. In its sixth year
• The Redeye is the last card left to play

Originally Posted by shaffe

It's not like Ford or Dodge had a engine sitting there (well the RE did I guess, detuned Demon engine) where as GM does. That's what bugs me about it.

Chevy did so much more with its engineering resources

12 ZL1
13 1LE
14 Z/28
14 C7
15 C7 Z06 - LT4
16 SS Alpha
17 SS 1LE
17 ZL1
17 C7 Grand Sport
18 ZL1 1LE
19 C7 ZR1
20 C8


12 Boss 302
13 GT500
15 GT S550
15 GT350
17 Ford GT.
18 GT refresh
18 GT PP2 (non track car. For when a PP or PP1 isn’t enough “street performance”)
20 GT500

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by GuywithL86

Which is why the SS is the most boring 450hp car ever and the mustang is a riot.

For a race track I’ll take an underpowered car
For the street, give me an overpowered car

Nothing more fun than a car that makes more power than it should.

Put shitty tires on it.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

If the car isn't taken to the track it's not being pushed to it's limits that's for sure.
It's hard to compare any GT to any SS on a track because the GT's aren't equipped for track duty.

With the benefit of hindsight it appears no Mustang GT (PP1 or 2) is equipped for track (road course) duty lol.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

The more likely case is that GMs engineering resources were allocated to the next project. 14 Z/28, 14 C7 launch, 15 Z06, Alpha Camaro and ZL1

Why go back to put a 638 HP engine in a 4,120 lb gen5 ZL1 when you're already working on a 3,900 lbs gen6 ZL1 with 650 HP?

Why let it sit for 4 model years unchanged when the competition was upping the ante especially when you had something sitting on the shelf that could be used? If they had nothing I would totally get it but they had a viable option. That's what gets me the most is that they have had the ability to and just chose not too.

Originally Posted by hotlap

That gen5 GT500 progression was actually 07-14. Eight model years.

GT500
500HP 07-09
540HP 10
550HP 11-12
662HP 13-14
Void 15-16-17-18-19
760HP 20-_

Yes the GT500 was 8 model years. The reason I started with 09 was that was last year of "just" 500 HP. After that it jumped up almost every year.

Originally Posted by hotlap

Dodge has nowhere to go but to offer more power

• The 707 and 717 HP engines are basically identical. In its sixth year
• The Redeye is the last card left to play

Chevy did so much more with its engineering resources

12 ZL1
13 1LE
14 Z/28
14 C7
15 Z06 - LT4
16 SS Alpha
17 1LE
17 ZL1
18 ZL1 1LE
19 ZR1
20 C8


12 Boss 302
13 GT500
15 GT S550
15 GT350
17 Ford GT.
18 GT refresh
18 GT PP2 (non track car. For when a PP or PP1 isn’t enough “street performance”)
20 GT500

Agree that Dodge had no where to go but more power but they did it anyways.

This second part you and me have debated about before and I will say Ford did more with their resources than Chevy did. In the comparable classes did Chevy execute better, yep 100% but I would say Ford used their resources better to offer performance to a wider base. But since you don't view the ST vehicles or Raptor as performance vehicles it's a moot argument.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Why let it sit for 4 model years unchanged when the competition was upping the ante especially when you had something sitting on the shelf that could be used? If they had nothing I would totally get it but they had a viable option.

I've already answered

Originally Posted by hotlap

Why go back to put a 638 HP engine in a 4,120 lb gen5 ZL1 when you're already working on a 3,900 lbs gen6 ZL1 with 650 HP?

and this.

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

GM knew. My team told them. They didn’t care. Felt they had a couple sharper knives in the drawer. Also pointed out that they were beyond single focus on straight line performance and wanted to focus on a truly balanced sports car.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yes the GT500 was 8 model years. The reason I started with 09 was that was last year of "just" 500 HP. After that it jumped up almost every year.

Still. Eight model years. I'll concede that the trinity engine was and awesome play by Ford.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Agree that Dodge had no where to go but more power but they did it anyways.

It's a 90k car that is marginally better. Chevy developed a C8

Originally Posted by shaffe

This second part you and me have debated about before and I will say Ford did more with their resources than Chevy did. In the comparable classes did Chevy execute better, yep 100% but I would say Ford used their resources better to offer performance to a wider base. But since you don't view the ST vehicles or Raptor as performance vehicles it's a moot argument.

You are correct. Not the same. Also consider that the 18 refresh was just to catch up *.