2010 camaro and 2010 stang. Lets talk V6s.

#4
DBMSTNG said:
low end torque V6 vs. high rpm V6. that's how it works.
Click to expand...

The camaro V6 = 273#s of torque

Mustang = 240#s of torque

they dont say what RPM....but that doesnt matter much. I doubt its an 8000RPM V6 in the camaro. And in any case....once you get off the line it makes zero difference.

I would say....extremely poor design vs good design :shrug:

You have to be retarded to have another companys V6...thats .4L smaller, outperform your V6 on TORQUE by 33#s :rlaugh: Ford is starting to get me POd...lets step it up already!
 
#6
hotmustang331 said:
The camaro V6 = 273#s of torque

Mustang = 240#s of torque

they dont say what RPM....but that doesnt matter much. I doubt its an 8000RPM V6 in the camaro. And in any case....once you get off the line it makes zero difference.

I would say....extremely poor design vs good design :shrug:

You have to be retarded to have another companys V6...thats .4L smaller, outperform your V6 on TORQUE by 33#s :rlaugh: Ford is starting to get me POd...lets step it up already!
Click to expand...

the 4.0L is a truck engine. it's designed for low end torque on 87 octane. it may not make more PEAK torque, but does pull harder at lower rpm. the Chevy engine is a higher compression V6 that revs to 7000rpm if i am not mistaken. that engine will make more of it's torque around 3500+ rpm.

the 300hp V6 only pulls a mid 14 in the 1/4 in the new Camaro. good for a V6 no doubt, but "300hp" in that car is kinda misleading due to torque delivery and weight.


just checked out GM's specs. max HP @ 6400rpm, max TQ @ a lofty 5200rpm and redline is indeed 7000rpm.


also, the base price of a Mustang V6 is $3500 less than the Camaro V6 will be. that will probably change when Ford drops a 3.7L 300hp V6 in the 2011 Mustangs.
 
#7
DBMSTNG said:
the 4.0L is a truck engine. it's designed for low end torque on 87 octane. it may not make more PEAK torque, but does pull harder at lower rpm. the Chevy engine is a higher compression V6 that revs to 7000rpm if i am not mistaken. that engine will make more of it's torque around 3500+ rpm.

the 300hp V6 only pulls a mid 14 in the 1/4 in the new Camaro. good for a V6 no doubt, but "300hp" in that car is kinda misleading due to torque delivery and weight.


just checked out GM's specs. max HP @ 6400rpm, max TQ @ a lofty 5200rpm and redline is indeed 7000rpm.


also, the base price of a Mustang V6 is $3500 less than the Camaro V6 will be. that will probably change when Ford drops a 3.7L 300hp V6 in the 2011 Mustangs.
Click to expand...

That is if Ford and Chevy are around in a few yrs. It's kind of scary with what's going on with the auto industry. Pearl02.
 
#11
martyd said:
the 3.6 is direct injection.
Click to expand...

Bingo....direct injection is the key to the camaro's high numbers. it allows for higher compression and no spark knock with lower octane fuels. more and more new motors are direct injected. it is a great technology and i cant wait to see the power potential from this design. Ford will no doubt put a stronger v6 in soon but are still in the developing stages of their own direct injection engines.
 
#13
The new Piggy Camaro is said to be tipping the scale at around 3700+lbs , and this is the lighter V6 , nothing like a 4000 pound V8 Pony car , good job GM :notnice:

The V6 stang is is about 3 1/2 to 4 hundred pound less , so the HP advantage is not as bad as it looks ! its still bad:(
 
#14
You cant look at it like that, both have outdone each other from time to time. Look back at the DZ302's in the old Z28's, they are said to have 375 to 380hp stock(rated 275 at the crank) and you could attain nearly 500 flywheel hp with over the counter GM parts.

I am just happy GM and Ford are getting good in the V6 game, should have done it 10 years ago if not more because both had very good DOHC designs and programs(GM's Northstar and LT5 programs and Fords 4.6 programs)
 
#17
SaleenGT2001 said:
:lol:now lets see 2 stock cars like the above ones race and see who wins......
Click to expand...

I have 315rwhp & 327rwtq in my Mach 1, & my buddy has 342rwhp & 359rwtq in his LS1 GTO & we are neck & neck all the way up to 140mph???:shrug:

LS1 GTO & 03-04 Mach 1 is a drivers race with the GTO having a HP advantage, but the Mach having a weight advantage.... Drivers race IMO. I have also pulled on a few lightly modded 98-02 Camaro's as well....


Pretty sad that damn near a whole liter more in cubes, but not much faster... & since when was an LS1 only rated @ 305hp????
 
#18
EPIK said:
I have 315rwhp & 327rwtq in my Mach 1, & my buddy has 342rwhp & 359rwtq in his LS1 GTO & we are neck & neck all the way up to 140mph???:shrug:

LS1 GTO & 03-04 Mach 1 is a drivers race with the GTO having a HP advantage, but the Mach having a weight advantage.... Drivers race IMO. I have also pulled on a few lightly modded 98-02 Camaro's as well....


Pretty sad that damn near a whole liter more in cubes, but not much faster... & since when was an LS1 only rated @ 305hp????
Click to expand...

the gto is a turd compared to your car. More power, but just not a performance oriented car, and heavier. A big disappointment by gm.

4.6 4v V8 305 hp Mach 1

vs

5.7 V8 305 hp LS1

How does that work?
Click to expand...

the ls1 was never a 305hp car, even with the crappy 97-00 camshaft and intake(revised in 01 with the ls6 and a better cam).


I don't know if we want to go down the road of comparing the ls1 to a 4.6 4v, the thread was originally about v6's. I have yet to see a 4v car make 410-420hp(350-365rhp) with the stock intake, camshaft, and untouched heads.
 
#19
Winters98GT said:
I don't know if we want to go down the road of comparing the ls1 to a 4.6 4v, the thread was originally about v6's. I have yet to see a 4v car make 410-420hp(350-365rhp) with the stock intake, camshaft, and untouched heads.
Click to expand...

I know, Im not trying to turn this into an LS1 vs 4V thread, but i had to throw that out there when I saw the comment about seeing who would win in a race. Im not debating that the LS1 is a superior motor, but Mach's can hang with LS1 GTO's & Camaro's all day stock for stock...Modded LS1 camaro's are a different story...& C5 Z06's, now thats a whole different league that you are talking about. The 410hp u are referring to is in the Z06 right, not the camaro?


As far as V6's go, i will take an import V6 over an america one any day of the week unless you are talking about a grand national....
 
#20
EPIK said:
I know, Im not trying to turn this into an LS1 vs 4V thread, but i had to throw that out there when I saw the comment about seeing who would win in a race. Im not debating that the LS1 is a superior motor, but Mach's can hang with LS1 GTO's & Camaro's all day stock for stock...Modded LS1 camaro's are a different story...& C5 Z06's, now thats a whole different league that you are talking about. The 410hp u are referring to is in the Z06 right, not the camaro?


As far as V6's go, i will take an import V6 over an america one any day of the week unless you are talking about a grand national....
Click to expand...


:flag:

no, I was just referring to the power output of a bolt on ls1 compared to bolt on 4v's. . I don't think the ls1 is really a superior motor to the 4v, just has more cubes to it. BTW, always love the clean rides you have.


mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
3.8 T5 & Bellhousing to 1987 Lincoln 5.0
Replies
3
Views
294
Other Auto Tech
Noobz347
Noobz347
J
Fox 1986 V6 Fuel/Electrical Issues, crank, no start, turns over with starting fluid
Replies
6
Views
498
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
gkomo
gkomo
from6to8
Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 1994 Cobra Supercharger install
Replies
420
Views
9K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
from6to8
from6to8
1
Engine Motor swap from a 2003 Explorer
Replies
7
Views
567
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
squeak93
squeak93
J
'96 Cobra: A/C gets weak and engine misfires under load when warm
Replies
2
Views
305
SVT Tech Forum
nickyb
nickyb
Top Bottom
Back
Forums
Menu