When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
As a matter of fact I do. What exactly would that have to do with information I posted? Surely you are not believing that my post would have somehow been different if I had an LS3 are you?
I find that amusing since you don't even know me. I also feel sorry for you and your superiority complex. That must be a sad, sad little world that you live in. I sure thank you for letting me share this forum space with you. I have a smiley with a different finger for you but I can't post it so just use your imagination.
when i had my lt1 z28 it was rated at 275 hp which was actually 245or so rwhp spot on or close, to advertised hp.. when the ls1's came out they where dynoing over their hp claim, it was a hard pill to swallow....but it was a fact. the ls1's were indeed underrated, now move forward to 2008 the ls2 guys have a great car but chevy changed the entire engine in 2008 while the looks of the car are virtually identical, the more powerful engine is dynoing higher than it should, that is just a fact, and once again it is a hard pill to swallow. the ls1's would destroy the lt1 but they only had a 30hp difference....nope the ls1's were underrated same as the ls3's
I find that amusing since you don't even know me. I also feel sorry for you and your superiority complex. That must be a sad, sad little world that you live in. I sure thank you for letting me share this forum space with you. I have a smiley with a different finger for you but I can't post it so just use your imagination.
Sorry to ruin your fantasy with facts.
so your saying because i don't agree with your hp claim i have a superiority complex?.....no. but what i do have is a underrated 2008 corvette. so i'll go back to my sad sad ls3 driving world and you go back to your world where the ls3 is not underrated. sorry to burst your bubble. the quicker you accept this the better
when i had my lt1 z28 it was rated at 275 hp which was actually 245or so rwhp spot on or close, to advertised hp.. when the ls1's came out they where dynoing over their hp claim, it was a hard pill to swallow....but it was a fact. the ls1's were indeed underrated, now move forward to 2008 the ls2 guys have a great car but chevy changed the entire engine in 2008 while the looks of the car are virtually identical, the more powerful engine is dynoing higher than it should, that is just a fact, and once again it is a hard pill to swallow. the ls1's would destroy the lt1 but they only had a 30hp difference....nope the ls1's were underrated same as the ls3's
The LS3's are certified to SAE standards. In order to carry that certification they can't be. The horsepower number as presented was witnessed and can't be represented any more than +/- 1% of tested power.
The LS3 is a phenominal powerplant. I'm glad that the Corvette made the jump in 2008 as the car deserves the best that GM has to offer. The new transmission and drivetrain is simply more efficient than the T56 was. It is doing a better job of putting that power to the ground with less loss through the driveline. Having worked on powertrain products in my past, this much I'm certain of. I can't change your mind, that's fine. All I can do is provide the facts. If folks want to believe that they have a super sleeper making 450, 475 or more at the crank and GM is simply lying, so be it.
The facts are the facts. Whether Talon has an LS2 or an LS9.
Originally Posted by talon90
The LS3's are certified to SAE standards. In order to carry that certification they can't be. The horsepower number as presented was witnessed and can't be represented any more than +/- 1% of tested power.
The LS3 is a phenominal powerplant. I'm glad that the Corvette made the jump in 2008 as the car deserves the best that GM has to offer. The new transmission and drivetrain is simply more efficient than the T56 was. It is doing a better job of putting that power to the ground with less loss through the driveline. Having worked on powertrain products in my past, this much I'm certain of. I can't change your mind, that's fine. All I can do is provide the facts. If folks want to believe that they have a super sleeper making 450, 475 or more at the crank and GM is simply lying, so be it.
What you are seeing above is the reason why many feel that chassis dyno numbers are for the most part horse $#***.
And no, I don't mean the fact that different brand dynos read out differently, I mean it's very easy to manipulate the input data.
I was talking causally with my shop about my project car's expected HP on their dyno asking them what they thought it would be.
They asked me, "What do you want it to be? We can make it read anything."
Forum member Short-Throw.
People are very quick to post up their chassis dyno numbers in an attempt to prove that their car is a super sleeper or a "ringer". Never mind what the engine dyno numbers under controlled conditions have shown. Never mind what the folks from SAE, Katech, and elsewhere have observed.
Chassis dynos are used primarily to sell parts and modifications.
"Chassis dynos are marketing devices used to justify and sell products. Numbers are easily skewed to get the number you want. That is why I hate them and it's ruining the business. Internet forums are only compounding the problem and giving people a false sense of what is possible. I can't tell you how many times I have told somebody how much power we are making on the engine dyno using our strict testing procedures only get get a reply like "thats all?" "So and so is making 700hp!" You really think that person/business knows something that Katech doesn't? That the person has some secret for making 10% more power? Katech has been building racing engines for GM Racing, NASCAR, IRL, Trans Am, IROC and many others for almost 30 years. We've run A LOT of engines. Back when we were building NASCAR engines somebody was claiming to make more power out of the same engine. We challenged anybody to run those engines on our dyno and if it made the power they said it would we would run it for free. Nobody took us up on the challenge."
Under the controlled repeatable conditions as outlined in SAE J2723, production engines intended for installation into vehicles for sale to the public produce the SAE J1349 Certified Horsepower figure plus or minus 2%.
You need not worry that your LS3 is making appreciably less power than your buddy's LS3.
OK then, my butt dyno says my LS3 is putting out 444.71 HP.
OK then, my butt dyno says my LS3 is putting out 444.71 HP.
Exactly.
436*.02= 8.72+436=444.72
Production engines rated at 436 hp can make anywhere between 427.28 to 444.72 and still be within the 2% of variation.
So 427.28......431.64.....436......440.36.....444.72
The most your buddy is going to have on you is 17.44 hp under that scenario. Thats if he got the weakest one and you got the strongest one.
Truth is, at least for the 505hp LS7, all of the actual engines tested by Katech on engine dynos, and they have tested hundreds, and at random came in 505-508hp. All the ones which the gentleman from SAE, Gary Pollak, saw were in the same range.
" For the certification tests we did run a few engines but none produced more than 507 or 508 hp."
Good points Phil. The LS3 is part of the evolution of the C6 along with the other improvements that began on the 08.
Right John. And at this level it really just boils down to a slight difference on the street. And get a set of '08 OEM wheels and at a glance you can't tell the difference. A year and a half ago, if I had not bought my '07 (at 0%, mind you), I too would have an '08, no doubt. But like so many others have said, not enough of a difference to cry over. Again, I'll save my crying for something a little more Z ubstantial.
07-26-2008, 02:46 PM
I have a smiley with a different finger for you but I can't post it so just use your imagination.
