what wins
07-09-2011, 07:13 PM
#11
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 879
Yep, my old setup was what most new owners have. I had the FRPP 4.10's, Steeda CAI, Steeda UDPs and a 93oct Brenspeed tune and a 2010 SS destroyed me from about a 30mph roll, it wasn't even close by the time I got to 80mph he was a solid car and a half in front of me. I mean it don't happen anymore with the new setup or hasn't but just thought I'd share that. I am a Mustang guy but I think the new SS runs just fine and has probably just as much if not more room for expansion than the new 5.0.
Last edited by REDBOSS1; 07-09-2011 at 10:22 PM.
07-11-2011, 08:38 AM
#12
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Warminster, PA
Posts: 16
Yep, my old setup was what most new owners have. I had the FRPP 4.10's, Steeda CAI, Steeda UDPs and a 93oct Brenspeed tune and a 2010 SS destroyed me from about a 30mph roll, it wasn't even close by the time I got to 80mph he was a solid car and a half in front of me. I mean it don't happen anymore with the new setup or hasn't but just thought I'd share that. I am a Mustang guy but I think the new SS runs just fine and has probably just as much if not more room for expansion than the new 5.0.
Maybe he would have pulled on me up top, who knows but he was NOT pulling on me from 10 - 80.
My mods:
DAVAD Motorsports 93 tune
JLT CAI
Steeda UDP
FRPP 4.10's
FRPP x-pipe
Automatic
Convertible top down
No weight reduction (actually weight adders...18x9/18x10 bullits with 305/45/18 555r's in rear)
And last Tuesday went to track and went 13.3 @ 105 2.038 60' with the same exact setup less 10 psi air in the rear tires
07-11-2011, 07:18 PM
#13
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Utah
Posts: 730
I believe you could have stayed with him BUT that race was completely without a doubt the camaro not being driven correctly.
My supervisor has a bone stock SS with auto.
I have almost the exact same mods you do minus the UDP and I have wieght advatage of coupe....He puts lengths on me every time I even try.
To original topic the 5.0 has stock advantage only due to wieght only IMO. Chevy knows how to build some really good engines even if it is a huge car.
My supervisor has a bone stock SS with auto.
I have almost the exact same mods you do minus the UDP and I have wieght advatage of coupe....He puts lengths on me every time I even try.
To original topic the 5.0 has stock advantage only due to wieght only IMO. Chevy knows how to build some really good engines even if it is a huge car.
07-12-2011, 08:20 AM
#14
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Warminster, PA
Posts: 16
I believe you could have stayed with him BUT that race was completely without a doubt the camaro not being driven correctly.
My supervisor has a bone stock SS with auto.
I have almost the exact same mods you do minus the UDP and I have wieght advatage of coupe....He puts lengths on me every time I even try.
To original topic the 5.0 has stock advantage only due to wieght only IMO. Chevy knows how to build some really good engines even if it is a huge car.
My supervisor has a bone stock SS with auto.
I have almost the exact same mods you do minus the UDP and I have wieght advatage of coupe....He puts lengths on me every time I even try.
To original topic the 5.0 has stock advantage only due to wieght only IMO. Chevy knows how to build some really good engines even if it is a huge car.
To be honest in the three encounters I had on the street, all of them had 425+ hp and pinned me as the underdog. I didn't loose one.
M6, SRT8 Challenger, Camaro SS
Example. At the track last week, one of the runs I had was with a G8 with 370 rwhp (full exhaust, bolt ons, tuned, dr's). He showed me the dyno sheet so no BS. So whats that, 425~ish crank?? He claims he should be running .5 faster and I agree. We were talking the entire night in the pits and decided to line our cars up against one another since there wasn't alot of modern muscle there.
I dont know what his best was that night, but he ran a 13.344@106.32 and I ran a 13.413@103.46 and we were right next to one another down the entire track. I actually think I could have beat him if I had a decent converter in the car or and got my 60' down to 1.8's
I'm pretty happy with the way my car runs. I'd like to get it consistently running deeper 12's with street tires and no weight reduction. The key to my car is the Davad Motorsports tuning. I think they're a little more aggressive than the Bama tunes 90% of 3v's run.
07-12-2011, 11:27 PM
#15
The Paranoid One
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,320
Yeah maybe. Maybe not. In the 20+ years I've been into cars and racing, the #1 excuse I've heard for a faster car (on paper) that either loses or almost gets beat is 'the driver didn't know how to drive'. I can tell you that this guy was shifting pretty damn good. I think I can flat out beat an automatic SS.
To be honest in the three encounters I had on the street, all of them had 425+ hp and pinned me as the underdog. I didn't loose one.
M6, SRT8 Challenger, Camaro SS
Example. At the track last week, one of the runs I had was with a G8 with 370 rwhp (full exhaust, bolt ons, tuned, dr's). He showed me the dyno sheet so no BS. So whats that, 425~ish crank?? He claims he should be running .5 faster and I agree. We were talking the entire night in the pits and decided to line our cars up against one another since there wasn't alot of modern muscle there.
I dont know what his best was that night, but he ran a 13.344@106.32 and I ran a 13.413@103.46 and we were right next to one another down the entire track. I actually think I could have beat him if I had a decent converter in the car or and got my 60' down to 1.8's
I'm pretty happy with the way my car runs. I'd like to get it consistently running deeper 12's with street tires and no weight reduction. The key to my car is the Davad Motorsports tuning. I think they're a little more aggressive than the Bama tunes 90% of 3v's run.
To be honest in the three encounters I had on the street, all of them had 425+ hp and pinned me as the underdog. I didn't loose one.
M6, SRT8 Challenger, Camaro SS
Example. At the track last week, one of the runs I had was with a G8 with 370 rwhp (full exhaust, bolt ons, tuned, dr's). He showed me the dyno sheet so no BS. So whats that, 425~ish crank?? He claims he should be running .5 faster and I agree. We were talking the entire night in the pits and decided to line our cars up against one another since there wasn't alot of modern muscle there.
I dont know what his best was that night, but he ran a 13.344@106.32 and I ran a 13.413@103.46 and we were right next to one another down the entire track. I actually think I could have beat him if I had a decent converter in the car or and got my 60' down to 1.8's
I'm pretty happy with the way my car runs. I'd like to get it consistently running deeper 12's with street tires and no weight reduction. The key to my car is the Davad Motorsports tuning. I think they're a little more aggressive than the Bama tunes 90% of 3v's run.
Sorry but that's just the way it is. Without some pretty stout mods you flat out beating a new SS is just not in the books my friend.
Comparing a generously modded 06 to a new SS is not really fair if you are comparing the two cars either.
The new SS' engine is a good engine. The automatic is kinda yuck compared to the manual but it's a good engine.
Remember these cars came out a few years ago before the 5.0 too.
They did have a one up on the 4.6 stock for stock for sure.
The 5.0 I would say is more impressive of course but I'm not knocking the new SS. I'm not saying you sound like fanboy but I don't think your comparison is either fair or correct.
07-13-2011, 09:25 AM
#16
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Warminster, PA
Posts: 16
With an 06GT you must have some pretty good mods to beat a new SS.
Sorry but that's just the way it is. Without some pretty stout mods you flat out beating a new SS is just not in the books my friend.
Comparing a generously modded 06 to a new SS is not really fair if you are comparing the two cars either.
The new SS' engine is a good engine. The automatic is kinda yuck compared to the manual but it's a good engine.
Remember these cars came out a few years ago before the 5.0 too.
They did have a one up on the 4.6 stock for stock for sure.
The 5.0 I would say is more impressive of course but I'm not knocking the new SS. I'm not saying you sound like fanboy but I don't think your comparison is either fair or correct.
Sorry but that's just the way it is. Without some pretty stout mods you flat out beating a new SS is just not in the books my friend.
Comparing a generously modded 06 to a new SS is not really fair if you are comparing the two cars either.
The new SS' engine is a good engine. The automatic is kinda yuck compared to the manual but it's a good engine.
Remember these cars came out a few years ago before the 5.0 too.
They did have a one up on the 4.6 stock for stock for sure.
The 5.0 I would say is more impressive of course but I'm not knocking the new SS. I'm not saying you sound like fanboy but I don't think your comparison is either fair or correct.
My mods at the time when I ran the 6 speed on the street
DAVAD Motorsports 87 tune loaded (remembered I didn't even have the 93 tune in)
JLT CAI
Steeda UDP
FRPP 4.10's
FRPP x-pipe
Automatic
Convertible top down
No weight reduction (actually weight adders...18x9/18x10 bullits with 305/45/18 555r's in rear)
I hear what you're saying about the LS3 and I'm in complete agreement with you. It's a great engine and a wonderful car. (I was shopping SS and Hemi Chargers before I bought my 06. I decided I wanted a convertible and didn't want to wait until 2011 when the SS verts came out.)
I'm just telling you my real world experience from a seasoned adult racer.
From what I've read, the stock 6 speed SS are capable of 13.0@111 and the autos slightly slower. Take into account that is the magazines best run with a professional driver in a controlled environment. On the street, different story.
If my best was 12.91@106.89 with a 1.91 60' (March 2011) and on the street I'm probably a low 13 second car, then why is it so unbelievable that I kept up with a car running a magazine best of 13.0
07-13-2011, 10:36 AM
#17
The Paranoid One
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,320
I never said I beat one. If you read again, I said I THINK I COULD beat an automatic. 6 speeds are def pulling too much mph to even dream about it.
My mods at the time when I ran the 6 speed on the street
DAVAD Motorsports 87 tune loaded (remembered I didn't even have the 93 tune in)
JLT CAI
Steeda UDP
FRPP 4.10's
FRPP x-pipe
Automatic
Convertible top down
No weight reduction (actually weight adders...18x9/18x10 bullits with 305/45/18 555r's in rear)
I hear what you're saying about the LS3 and I'm in complete agreement with you. It's a great engine and a wonderful car. (I was shopping SS and Hemi Chargers before I bought my 06. I decided I wanted a convertible and didn't want to wait until 2011 when the SS verts came out.)
I'm just telling you my real world experience from a seasoned adult racer.
From what I've read, the stock 6 speed SS are capable of 13.0@111 and the autos slightly slower. Take into account that is the magazines best run with a professional driver in a controlled environment. On the street, different story.
If my best was 12.91@106.89 with a 1.91 60' (March 2011) and on the street I'm probably a low 13 second car, then why is it so unbelievable that I kept up with a car running a magazine best of 13.0
My mods at the time when I ran the 6 speed on the street
DAVAD Motorsports 87 tune loaded (remembered I didn't even have the 93 tune in)
JLT CAI
Steeda UDP
FRPP 4.10's
FRPP x-pipe
Automatic
Convertible top down
No weight reduction (actually weight adders...18x9/18x10 bullits with 305/45/18 555r's in rear)
I hear what you're saying about the LS3 and I'm in complete agreement with you. It's a great engine and a wonderful car. (I was shopping SS and Hemi Chargers before I bought my 06. I decided I wanted a convertible and didn't want to wait until 2011 when the SS verts came out.)
I'm just telling you my real world experience from a seasoned adult racer.
From what I've read, the stock 6 speed SS are capable of 13.0@111 and the autos slightly slower. Take into account that is the magazines best run with a professional driver in a controlled environment. On the street, different story.
If my best was 12.91@106.89 with a 1.91 60' (March 2011) and on the street I'm probably a low 13 second car, then why is it so unbelievable that I kept up with a car running a magazine best of 13.0
Track conditions also make things variable we all know.
But I say that it would be pretty DAMN impressive to give a new SS a run for it's money with your mods.
BTW the magazine drivers are often CRAP drivers. Most are NOT really professional drivers. Many test the cars with POOR abilities. It's
a known FACT. Magazines are no real testament to what these cars can do. Time slips and videos from the normal track people are your best input where that is
concerned. I NEVER count on the magazine driver's results. I look at videos and time slips from MANY track drivers that do it all the time.
Ask just about anyone on the forums and they will agree. The magazine times can be a JOKE often.
Just look at these results from Edmunds.
They had the 2011 Mustang GT rated at 13.3 in the 1/4 mi.
REALLY? That doesn't say much for their driver.
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...camaro-ss.html
And this is what Car and Driver got with their "professional" drivers when comparing the new SS to the 5.0!!!!
"With its big edge in pounds per horsepower—8.7 versus 9.1—and shorter rear end, we expected the GT to smoke the Camaro in the sprints, but this turned out to be one of the surprises. The Mustang matched the Chevy to 60 at 4.6 seconds, limited slightly by an extra upshift, but it trailed by a half-second to 100 mph, and in the quarter-mile: 13.2 seconds at 109 mph versus 13 flat at 111."
They had the SS beating the 5.0 in the quarter and had the 5.0 at 13.2 !
We all know that is NOT a good run for the new 5.0... And most of the time the 5.0 edges it out
driver for driver being even. But I'd bet that the Camaro driver was not a "pro" either with that 13 flat run.
Enough said about the magazine drivers? Hehehe!
I'm still saying you giving a new SS a run for it's money with your mods would be quite the achievement.
I mean really, compare the HP and trq numbers and the weight too. It just does NOT add up my friend for you to give a new SS a REAL run
for it's money.
I'm not trying to insult you. I'm just stating facts.
Hell.. i've seen tests on the 08 GT500 from magazines "pro" drivers that have the GT500 clocked at 12.9 in the 1/4.
http://mustangs.about.com/od/modelye...vschallngr.htm
Your telling me you are running virtually the same time as a GT500 with your mods?
I think not sir. But really it is known the GT500 runs well under the 12.9 time. (12.5 or lower at some times)
I am trying to make the point about magazine times here.
I'd also like to see a time slip and video from the run you claim though. That is one nice run with your mods.
Not saying you aren't stating truth. I'd just like to see the run because it would be a very nice run.
Lets not forget you were running a Drag Radial tire which can make a HUGE difference vs stock tires when talking times my
friend. These 13.0 times from magazines on the Camaro SS are NOT with drag radials wrapped on the car.
That's just not a fair comparison you speak of either.
Last edited by Blacksmoke; 07-13-2011 at 11:24 AM.
07-13-2011, 11:48 AM
#18
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Warminster, PA
Posts: 16
Never said it was unbelievable. I said it was unbelievable WITHOUT some good mods on there.
Track conditions also make things variable we all know.
But I say that it would be pretty DAMN impressive to give a new SS a run for it's money with your mods.
BTW the magazine drivers are often CRAP drivers. Most are NOT really professional drivers. Many test the cars with POOR abilities. It's
a known FACT. Magazines are no real testament to what these cars can do. Time slips and videos from the normal track people are your best input where that is
concerned. I NEVER count on the magazine driver's results. I look at videos and time slips from MANY track drivers that do it all the time.
Ask just about anyone on the forums and they will agree. The magazine times can be a JOKE often.
Just look at these results from Edmunds.
They had the 2011 Mustang GT rated at 13.3 in the 1/4 mi.
REALLY? That doesn't say much for their driver.
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...camaro-ss.html
And this is what Car and Driver got with their "professional" drivers when comparing the new SS to the 5.0!!!!
"With its big edge in pounds per horsepower—8.7 versus 9.1—and shorter rear end, we expected the GT to smoke the Camaro in the sprints, but this turned out to be one of the surprises. The Mustang matched the Chevy to 60 at 4.6 seconds, limited slightly by an extra upshift, but it trailed by a half-second to 100 mph, and in the quarter-mile: 13.2 seconds at 109 mph versus 13 flat at 111."
They had the SS beating the 5.0 in the quarter and had the 5.0 at 13.2 !
We all know that is NOT a good run for the new 5.0... And most of the time the 5.0 edges it out
driver for driver being even. But I'd bet that the Camaro driver was not a "pro" either with that 13 flat run.
Enough said about the magazine drivers? Hehehe!
I'm still saying you giving a new SS a run for it's money with your mods would be quite the achievement.
I mean really, compare the HP and trq numbers and the weight too. It just does NOT add up my friend for you to give a new SS a REAL run
for it's money.
I'm not trying to insult you. I'm just stating facts.
Hell.. i've seen tests on the 08 GT500 from magazines "pro" drivers that have the GT500 clocked at 12.9 in the 1/4.
http://mustangs.about.com/od/modelye...vschallngr.htm
Your telling me you are running virtually the same time as a GT500 with your mods?
I think not sir. But really it is known the GT500 runs well under the 12.9 time. (12.5 or lower at some times)
I am trying to make the point about magazine times here.
I'd also like to see a time slip and video from the run you claim though. That is one nice run with your mods.
Not saying you aren't stating truth. I'd just like to see the run because it would be a very nice run.
Lets not forget you were running a Drag Radial tire which can make a HUGE difference vs stock tires when talking times my
friend. These 13.0 times from magazines on the Camaro SS are NOT with drag radials wrapped on the car.
That's just not a fair comparison you speak of either.
Track conditions also make things variable we all know.
But I say that it would be pretty DAMN impressive to give a new SS a run for it's money with your mods.
BTW the magazine drivers are often CRAP drivers. Most are NOT really professional drivers. Many test the cars with POOR abilities. It's
a known FACT. Magazines are no real testament to what these cars can do. Time slips and videos from the normal track people are your best input where that is
concerned. I NEVER count on the magazine driver's results. I look at videos and time slips from MANY track drivers that do it all the time.
Ask just about anyone on the forums and they will agree. The magazine times can be a JOKE often.
Just look at these results from Edmunds.
They had the 2011 Mustang GT rated at 13.3 in the 1/4 mi.
REALLY? That doesn't say much for their driver.
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...camaro-ss.html
And this is what Car and Driver got with their "professional" drivers when comparing the new SS to the 5.0!!!!
"With its big edge in pounds per horsepower—8.7 versus 9.1—and shorter rear end, we expected the GT to smoke the Camaro in the sprints, but this turned out to be one of the surprises. The Mustang matched the Chevy to 60 at 4.6 seconds, limited slightly by an extra upshift, but it trailed by a half-second to 100 mph, and in the quarter-mile: 13.2 seconds at 109 mph versus 13 flat at 111."
They had the SS beating the 5.0 in the quarter and had the 5.0 at 13.2 !
We all know that is NOT a good run for the new 5.0... And most of the time the 5.0 edges it out
driver for driver being even. But I'd bet that the Camaro driver was not a "pro" either with that 13 flat run.
Enough said about the magazine drivers? Hehehe!
I'm still saying you giving a new SS a run for it's money with your mods would be quite the achievement.
I mean really, compare the HP and trq numbers and the weight too. It just does NOT add up my friend for you to give a new SS a REAL run
for it's money.
I'm not trying to insult you. I'm just stating facts.
Hell.. i've seen tests on the 08 GT500 from magazines "pro" drivers that have the GT500 clocked at 12.9 in the 1/4.
http://mustangs.about.com/od/modelye...vschallngr.htm
Your telling me you are running virtually the same time as a GT500 with your mods?
I think not sir. But really it is known the GT500 runs well under the 12.9 time. (12.5 or lower at some times)
I am trying to make the point about magazine times here.
I'd also like to see a time slip and video from the run you claim though. That is one nice run with your mods.
Not saying you aren't stating truth. I'd just like to see the run because it would be a very nice run.
Lets not forget you were running a Drag Radial tire which can make a HUGE difference vs stock tires when talking times my
friend. These 13.0 times from magazines on the Camaro SS are NOT with drag radials wrapped on the car.
That's just not a fair comparison you speak of either.
I always 'run what I brung' and I don't complain about the outcome. If the SS would have put lengths on me, I'd chime in about that instead. In this case, he didn't pull on me as you are all claiming he should have.
Guess what? I beat an LS1 way back in the early days with a modded LT1! I know that's a fact some guys cant accept either
07-13-2011, 11:53 AM
#19
The Paranoid One
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,320
No insult taken. I'll post up a time slips. Not here to tell tall tales either. I'm 38, not 19. Just telling you like it is on the street vs. on paper/magazines/youtube clips.
I always 'run what I brung' and I don't complain about the outcome. If the SS would have put lengths on me, I'd chime in about that instead. In this case, he didn't pull on me as you are all claiming he should have.
Guess what? I beat an LS1 way back in the early days with a modded LT1! I know that's a fact some guys cant accept either
I always 'run what I brung' and I don't complain about the outcome. If the SS would have put lengths on me, I'd chime in about that instead. In this case, he didn't pull on me as you are all claiming he should have.
Guess what? I beat an LS1 way back in the early days with a modded LT1! I know that's a fact some guys cant accept either
In reality odds are with a decent driver you would be fresh meat for a new SS.
When comparing cars you want to compare with equally skilled drivers. Otherwise there IS NO comparison.
And if you take magazine time slips for your basis of comparison (like the one I posted in my reply),
then you could say you could hang and maybe beat my GT500 with your mods.
It's like wondering if a mouse can shat out an elephant.
Sorry but that just ain't happenin' friend.
Last edited by Blacksmoke; 07-13-2011 at 11:59 AM.
07-13-2011, 12:03 PM
#20
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Warminster, PA
Posts: 16
Again that 6 speed really had to have a bad driver man.
In reality odds are with a decent driver you would be fresh meat for a new SS.
When comparing cars you want to compare with equally skilled drivers. Otherwise there IS NO comparison.
And if you take magazine time slips for your basis of comparison (like the one I posted in my reply),
then you could say you could hang and maybe beat my GT500 with your mods.
It's like wondering if a mouse can shat out an elephant.
Sorry but that ain't happenin' friend.
In reality odds are with a decent driver you would be fresh meat for a new SS.
When comparing cars you want to compare with equally skilled drivers. Otherwise there IS NO comparison.
And if you take magazine time slips for your basis of comparison (like the one I posted in my reply),
then you could say you could hang and maybe beat my GT500 with your mods.
It's like wondering if a mouse can shat out an elephant.
Sorry but that ain't happenin' friend.
I still don't know why its so impossible to believe that my car, capable of a high 12 second pass (but more likely 13.0-13.3) cant keep up with a another car running the same times??
I guess the SRT8, M6 and M3 all coincidentally had bad drivers as well?
I know you're doing the math and what your providing makes sense, but on the street from light to light its a different story.
My car is setup to make the most of light to light racing.