Terminator VS 2010 SS Camaro
- Thread starter saleen523
- Start date
Look into the recent camaro build (hot rod i believe) big cam, ported heads, tune, cai, bigger maf, catback no cats and they only got 462rwhp.
Last weekend i saw 6 camaros', the fastest one doing 12.05, he had a blower at 8psi (525rwhp) with dr's. Most of the other ones were in the mid to high 13's. Most of the terminators with a decent driver are in the high 11's.
Ok, so a terminator with decent driver is in the high 11's so that would mean one with a non decent driver would be low 12's which is the same as the supercharged camaro you mentioned. 8psi and it's making 525 rwhp, I wonder it's rwhp if it was running 14-16 psi like most termies.
BOOM?? The Cobra is a low compression 4.6L modular motor with forged internals, not a high compression pushrod 6.2L with cast pistons. 14-16psi is nothing for a Cobra, where as 14-16psi on a LSX motor is a considerable amount of boost even with a built motor, forget about a stock one.
Don't be a ricer crybaby, that's like me losing to a Supra and being like, "well what if I was running 25psi and had two turbos", or a Viper owner losing and saying lets see you make 800rwhp+ on 10psi and pump.
Boost is only a measure of restriction.
Last edited:
I got a short vacation with a warning :burn:
I am NOT about to get into the middle of the whole Ford vs GM debate but I do want to speak from a strictly technical point when it comes to a few comments people made.
For those mods 462rwhp is a bit low especially if it was in an M6 car. Those LS3's are capable of putting down 500+rwhp with those mods. Hell even the 6.0's in the Pontiac G8 GT's are putting down 460 to 475rwhp+ and that is through an auto no less. Once the AFM is deleted from the G8 GT it's engine is is pretty much an LS3 with .2 liters less displacement. Same heads, same intake too which is why I include those car's into this LSx engine talk for comparison purposes. That Camaro putting down 525rwhp should be well into the middle 11's with a good driver and proper setup. The Pontiac G8's are pretty similar in allot of ways to the 2010 Camaro's in terms of engine and chassis and with 500rwhp on boost most G8's are hitting middle 11's with sticky tires and good driver with a properly tuned car. I can assure you that running low 12's with a combo like that shows that either the setup was not dialed in correctly, driver sucked or track wasn't prepped right. I am not making ANY excuses for the blown Camaro driver running such shitty times. He run what he brung but it sure as hell wasn't enough. lol.
Stock LSx's have ran that amount of boost and held together with the right mods. While they don't have forged stock bottom ends they can hold some boost in stock form, even considering their higher compression. A built LSx engine can easily handle 14-16 psi boost ALL DAY. I don't know where you gathered your information from but you are sorely mistaken if you think an LSx cannot handle boost well, whether it be in stock form or especially built form. There is a guy running 750+rwhp with his TT,cammed G8 GT and it still has the stock bottom end while pushing 14psi boost. I don't expect it will hold much longer but with a connecting rod bolt upgrade they can handle more than people assume. Assuming that the LSx engines couldn't take boost well was the biggest inaccuracy I bought into before I got a GM car and had to really learn about the LSx engines too. Also remember that these GenIV LSx engines are a different breed compared to the earlier generationIII LSx engines like the LS1, LS6, and so on.
I also didn't quote it, but there was one GM fella in here thinking that the OP's Cobra with it's 3.1 pulley and other mods would be 460ish rwhp which is not the case. That is 2.76 pulley + supporting mods territory right there. I think the original race video seemed fairly accurate. Stock for stock with equal drivers the Cobra would have pulled on the Camaro too so it would definitely pull on it harder while modded.
EVERYONE here should educate themselves better when it comes to their "competition" because there were comments made about both Ford modular and GM LSx engines that are just inaccurate from a technical standpoint.
For those mods 462rwhp is a bit low especially if it was in an M6 car. Those LS3's are capable of putting down 500+rwhp with those mods. Hell even the 6.0's in the Pontiac G8 GT's are putting down 460 to 475rwhp+ and that is through an auto no less. Once the AFM is deleted from the G8 GT it's engine is is pretty much an LS3 with .2 liters less displacement. Same heads, same intake too which is why I include those car's into this LSx engine talk for comparison purposes. That Camaro putting down 525rwhp should be well into the middle 11's with a good driver and proper setup. The Pontiac G8's are pretty similar in allot of ways to the 2010 Camaro's in terms of engine and chassis and with 500rwhp on boost most G8's are hitting middle 11's with sticky tires and good driver with a properly tuned car. I can assure you that running low 12's with a combo like that shows that either the setup was not dialed in correctly, driver sucked or track wasn't prepped right. I am not making ANY excuses for the blown Camaro driver running such shitty times. He run what he brung but it sure as hell wasn't enough. lol.
Stock LSx's have ran that amount of boost and held together with the right mods. While they don't have forged stock bottom ends they can hold some boost in stock form, even considering their higher compression. A built LSx engine can easily handle 14-16 psi boost ALL DAY. I don't know where you gathered your information from but you are sorely mistaken if you think an LSx cannot handle boost well, whether it be in stock form or especially built form. There is a guy running 750+rwhp with his TT,cammed G8 GT and it still has the stock bottom end while pushing 14psi boost. I don't expect it will hold much longer but with a connecting rod bolt upgrade they can handle more than people assume. Assuming that the LSx engines couldn't take boost well was the biggest inaccuracy I bought into before I got a GM car and had to really learn about the LSx engines too. Also remember that these GenIV LSx engines are a different breed compared to the earlier generationIII LSx engines like the LS1, LS6, and so on.
I also didn't quote it, but there was one GM fella in here thinking that the OP's Cobra with it's 3.1 pulley and other mods would be 460ish rwhp which is not the case. That is 2.76 pulley + supporting mods territory right there. I think the original race video seemed fairly accurate. Stock for stock with equal drivers the Cobra would have pulled on the Camaro too so it would definitely pull on it harder while modded.
EVERYONE here should educate themselves better when it comes to their "competition" because there were comments made about both Ford modular and GM LSx engines that are just inaccurate from a technical standpoint.
Last edited:
Wow. U lost me after the nineteenth paragraph we should have a special place on the forum for guys who wanna publish whole articles about the subject. Thanks for educating all us retards.
:rollseyes
Holy shit one of us actually used full sentences and proper English to get a point across on a forum. In the future I will try to dumb it down for "retarded" noobs like you next time.
oke:
Last edited:
Except it can't because it's a high compression cast N/A bottom end, that's the whole point. :bored:
A Terminator would get 500 RWHP too if it was 11.5 compression with 8 psi, but then you couldn't run 18 psi on a Terminator built like that either and you'd be stuck at a brick wall with only 500 RWHP even with a blower.
Apples vs. Eggplants.
In the end you are always better off with lower compression and more boost, as a blower of some sorts is vastly more efficient at performing 80% of the compression work over the pistons.
Last edited:
Maybe you should thank rocket5979 for presenting some VERIFIABLE information, as opposed to the "i saw this/i saw that" conjecture that has been so abundant throughout this thread. His insight was valuable. Yours was not.
By the way, nice kill OP.
He over reved the gear he started in an then got wheel spin when he shifted to the next gear. Its all very clear for seasoned Terminator guys.
That sound after the first gear shift is tire spin and some mild hop.
Coulda, shoulda, woulda but had he not over reved it and got traction on the shift it wouldve been a lot worse for the SS.
A stock SS of any year is no match for a Terminator with that setup. With his new setup dont even try.
Which LSx engine do you think comes stock with 11.5:1 cr??? Try more like 10.5:1 on average. Some LSx engines are slightly higher cr and others are slightly lower but they all pretty much range in the 10's. So we all know that the Terminators come with 8.5 cr and usually dyno in the 375-380rwhp range on stock 8 psi boost....So are you really trying to say that bumping 2 points worth of compression will gain you 145rwhp??? Good luck with that.
I am pushing 8.5psi on my TT's with a REALLLLL conservative tune on my G8 and my engine has 10.4:1 cr and this engine is just starting out on boost. Even with that real mellow tune running only 13 degrees total timing and low 11 WOT AFR, leaving at least 50rwhp on the table, the car still put down 500rwhp/570rwtq through an auto. You guys who don't think GM LSx engines can take boost are going to eventually learn that is not true the hard way. Same as all the GM (and even other Ford guys) assuming that the Modular 2v's cannot make crap worth of power. Those of us who have built them personally know different though. :beer:
Bolt on supercharger kits for N/A 3V 300 HP GTs are making 500-600 HP with ~10-12 psi. Static compression is a huge factor to making big numbers on low boost. It's not just 2 points of compression, it's 2 pts compression X PSI boost; it's essentially a "compound boost" setup.
In other words, all I am saying is that "such and such makes the same power with half the boost" is a retarded argument. If you're not making more power with less boost with high compression N/A pistons, something is very very wrong.
And saying any particular engine can't take boost is also retarded. Any engine can handle 20+ psi boost when it's built for it. 6L of displacement built with 8.0:1 compression and 20+ psi boost =
Last edited:
Bolt on supercharger kits for N/A 3V 300 HP GTs are making 500-600 HP with ~10-12 psi. Static compression is a huge factor to making big numbers on low boost. It's not just 2 points of compression, it's 2 pts compression X PSI boost; it's essentially a "compound boost" setup.
In other words, all I am saying is that "such and such makes the same power with half the boost" is a retarded argument. If you're not making more power with less boost with high compression N/A pistons, something is very very wrong.
And saying any particular engine can't take boost is also retarded. Any engine can handle 20+ psi boost when it's built for it. 6L of displacement built with 8.0:1 compression and 20+ psi boost =
I am talking hp at the rear tires, not the flywheel. You don't see too many S-197 GT's pushing 500-600rwhp on 10-12 psi boost without digging a little into the engine and a more aggressive tune. Let alone that the stock bottom end will not like that kind of power for long AT ALL. The most the average person will see out of their stock S-197 GT bottom end before it blows will be right around 450-500rwhp max. Some die earlier and others get lucky and live longer. And by the way....how the hell did we get on the S-197 GT's when your original comment and comparison was made about the Terminator's?
I am well aware of how static compression affects power on both N/A and FI combo's as well as compounded boost and pressure ratios. Regardless 145rwhp is one hell of allot of power to net from 2 points of compression on an FI combo. Go ahead and try it sometime and see how much more power you make. I can assure you that a gain of 145rwhp is quite ambitious. I can completely understand the reasoning behind that portion of your post but the example given probably wasn't the best. Another common mistake that people make when comparing Ford vs GM is assuming that because GM has engines using "only" 2 valves per cyl that their heads cannot flow well. Take a look at the numbers sometime and I bet that will surprise allot of people too.
I also differ with you on your point you made a post or two back regarding how lower compression plus boost is "always better off". Again, that depends on the type of forced induction, how much boost you are going to be running, what KI the camshaft has, the cylinder head combustion chamber design, fuel used and so on. I usually tend to prefer low cr + high boost for PD blower systems I install and tune. When I do turbo systems I usually like to stick with a cr in the middle range to keep decent power down low to launch off of (streetcar..no transbrake) before the turbo spools but then still not run the engine ragged after full boost has come on either. :beer:
Last edited:
I am talking hp at the rear tires, not the flywheel. You don't see too many S-197 GT's pushing 500-600rwhp on 10-12 psi boost without digging a little into the engine and a more aggressive tune. Let alone that the stock bottom end will not like that kind of power for long AT ALL. The most the average person will see out of their stock S-197 GT bottom end before it blows will be right around 450-500rwhp max. Some die earlier and others get lucky and live longer. And by the way....how the hell did we get on the S-197 GT's when your original comment and comparison was made about the Terminator's?
I am well aware of how static compression affects power on both N/A and FI combo's as well as compounded boost and pressure ratios. Regardless 145rwhp is one hell of allot of power to net from 2 points of compression on an FI combo. Go ahead and try it sometime and see how much more power you make. I can assure you that a gain of 145rwhp is quite ambitious. I can completely understand the reasoning behind that portion of your post but the example given probably wasn't the best. Another common mistake that people make when comparing Ford vs GM is assuming that because GM has engines using "only" 2 valves per cyl that their heads cannot flow well. Take a look at the numbers sometime and I bet that will surprise allot of people too.
I also differ with you on your point you made a post or two back regarding how lower compression plus boost is "always better off". Again, that depends on the type of forced induction, how much boost you are going to be running, what KI the camshaft has, the cylinder head combustion chamber design, fuel used and so on. I usually tend to prefer low cr + high boost for PD blower systems I install and tune. When I do turbo systems I usually like to stick with a cr in the middle range to keep decent power down low to launch off of (streetcar..no transbrake) before the turbo spools but then still not run the engine ragged after full boost has come on either. :beer:
You took all the excitement out this thread. :xpl:
I don't care how conservative your tune is 500rwhp with twin turbos is nothing to brag about and also from what I've seen stock LS motors lift the heads easier than modulars.
G8's make me:xpl:
op:
op:Users who are viewing this thread
