Auto or Manual???
Well, I responded to the off topic thread, but, 99.9% of the time, a built automatic is gonna go faster than a manual tranny.
As I said in the other post, if you want to consistantly go fast at the drag strip, get an auto with a stall. If you want to have more fun, get a manual. If you want the best of both worlds, get an auto with a reverse manual valve body, transbrake, and a huge stall.
It really depends on how fast you wanna go. In the end, an auto is greater than a manual.
As I said in the other post, if you want to consistantly go fast at the drag strip, get an auto with a stall. If you want to have more fun, get a manual. If you want the best of both worlds, get an auto with a reverse manual valve body, transbrake, and a huge stall.
It really depends on how fast you wanna go. In the end, an auto is greater than a manual.
lets say an 02 auto GT put down 215 HP, stock it's rated at 260 at the crank. A little math and trial and error and I have to show that car with a just over 17% drivetrain loss to equal the numbers given. If I use the 230 for the manual I get just under a 12% loss. Thats a HELL of a big difference. Can someone please confirm for me an actual stock RWHP dyno run for a 99-04 GT so I can confirm this?
ORIGINAL: 96SilverLT1
lets say an 02 auto GT put down 215 HP, stock it's rated at 260 at the crank. A little math and trial and error and I have to show that car with a just over 17% drivetrain loss to equal the numbers given. If I use the 230 for the manual I get just under a 12% loss. Thats a HELL of a big difference. Can someone please confirm for me an actual stock RWHP dyno run for a 99-04 GT so I can confirm this?
lets say an 02 auto GT put down 215 HP, stock it's rated at 260 at the crank. A little math and trial and error and I have to show that car with a just over 17% drivetrain loss to equal the numbers given. If I use the 230 for the manual I get just under a 12% loss. Thats a HELL of a big difference. Can someone please confirm for me an actual stock RWHP dyno run for a 99-04 GT so I can confirm this?
If you go by the factory engine ratings, then the SRT4 has the best transmission in the world: -5% drivetrain loss, 225hp dyno versus 215hp crank.
your right, mine dosn't make 275 at the crank, it makes 285 
LT1 motors are not as heavily underated as LS1 motors seem to be. Probably because they were not as close to the LT1 vette numbers as the LS1 numbers were to the LS1 vettes. I know that 285 is "close" because I know someone that actualy dynoed the diff between crank HP and wheel HP through a Mcleod street twin and 12 bolt and got just under 12% loss at 500 HP. so the stock clutch and 10 bolt has to be right around 10 % like I figured.

LT1 motors are not as heavily underated as LS1 motors seem to be. Probably because they were not as close to the LT1 vette numbers as the LS1 numbers were to the LS1 vettes. I know that 285 is "close" because I know someone that actualy dynoed the diff between crank HP and wheel HP through a Mcleod street twin and 12 bolt and got just under 12% loss at 500 HP. so the stock clutch and 10 bolt has to be right around 10 % like I figured.
An Auto will whoop up on a Manual any day of the week when the manual has a horrible to mediocre driver. Get the auto and throw in a 4.10 and a nice 3200+ stall. You'll eat any manual all day long.
**** a manual.
**** a manual.
ORIGINAL: T1H5ON
autos suck period
autos suck period
This is coming from a guy who just swapped out an automatic for a built 4 speed....
Auto > manual in a dragrace.
and automatic is far superier for several reasons,
bumper to bumper trafic doesnt drive me INSANE
perfect shifts every time
with gears and a shift kit, will out run any manual stock for stock
the list goes on......
bumper to bumper trafic doesnt drive me INSANE
perfect shifts every time
with gears and a shift kit, will out run any manual stock for stock
the list goes on......


