Automotive Trivia Time!!!!

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
ZL-1 is /was an awesome engine.

It could rev to 7200RPM (that was the redline I believe) and made power all the way up there to! To all those honda fan boys saying domestic v8s cant rev really need to look into that engine.

I have dreams of stuffing one of those in: a) 1993 RX-7 b) Miata c) Datsun 510 c) some sort of go-kart.

I have only one thing to say:

HEMI

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: kevman
what was the first FWD american car?

A Tucker.

It also had headlights which turn in the direction of the steering wheel (a manual version of hte system BMW is touting in the new 5).

 

[Demon-Xanth]

As far as more than 500HP, I believe the LS6 was also dyno'ed at over 500. Though a ZL1 Camero, in an unrestored all original state dynoed at 347HP (rear wheel). Open headers and a richer air-fuel mixture made it pull 524 RWHP. Not a bad gain for very little work is it?

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
As far as more than 500HP, I believe the LS6 was also dyno'ed at over 500. Though a ZL1 Camero, in an unrestored all original state dynoed at 347HP (rear wheel). Open headers and a richer air-fuel mixture made it pull 524 RWHP. Not a bad gain for very little work is it?

Ah, nope.

LS6 was rated at 450hp but that was very optimistic. Stock they were maybe good for 400hp.

It was similar to what they did with the 409. The hiperf version was rated at 409 hp. Then all of a sudden it was rated at 427 hp, yet nothing in the specs of this engine changed and the performance stayed the same.

 

[JC]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN

Originally posted by: kevman
what was the first FWD american car?

A Tucker.

It also had headlights which turn in the direction of the steering wheel (a manual version of hte system BMW is touting in the new 5).

Nope! The Tucker was a rear-engine car....and definitely not front-wheel drive! True about the lights, but it was just the center 'cyclops' headlight that turned, IIRC.

First american FWD was the Olds Toronado, 1966.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: JC

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN

Originally posted by: kevman
what was the first FWD american car?

A Tucker.

It also had headlights which turn in the direction of the steering wheel (a manual version of hte system BMW is touting in the new 5).

Nope! The Tucker was a rear-engine car....and definitely not front-wheel drive! True about the lights, but it was just the center 'cyclops' headlight that turned, IIRC.

First american FWD was the Olds Toronado, 1966.

Nope. Cord 810 was FWD in 1936.

ZV

 

[JC]

D'oh! Got me!

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: JC
D'oh! Got me!

"Even a blind pig finds an acorn every so often."

And to whomever it was who cited the Tucker as the first car to have headlights follow the direction in which the wheels are turned, you're wrong. There was at least one 1932 Duesenberg SJ Boattail Speedster built with that feature.

ZV <--would trade everything he owns and everything he will ever own for a matched set of the following: Cord 812 Convertible Phaeton, Auburn Boattail Speedster, and Duesenberg SJ.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
As far as more than 500HP, I believe the LS6 was also dyno'ed at over 500. Though a ZL1 Camero, in an unrestored all original state dynoed at 347HP (rear wheel). Open headers and a richer air-fuel mixture made it pull 524 RWHP. Not a bad gain for very little work is it?

Ah, nope.

LS6 was rated at 450hp but that was very optimistic. Stock they were maybe good for 400hp.

It was similar to what they did with the 409. The hiperf version was rated at 409 hp. Then all of a sudden it was rated at 427 hp, yet nothing in the specs of this engine changed and the performance stayed the same.

Nah, I disagree about the LS6 completely. It EASILY had the 450hp. I'll bet my pay for the rest of the year on that. Think about it, it's a 454, with open chamber rectangle HUGE port heads, 11-1 compression, about a .540 lift solid cam, aluminum intake and an 850 carb.
That is easily 450 hp. You could pull a plug wire off and still have more than 400 hp with that setup.
Example: My old engine for my race truck had basically a warmed over LS6....454, 11.9-1, older, not as good closed chamber rectangle ports heads, unported, a .637 solid cam and the same intake with an 850. Between 550-600 hp it had.
Consider the LS6 had slightly better heads, a touch less compression, slightly smaller cam, same otherwise, and no way you fall all the way to 400hp.
Now the crate LS7 had 12-1 compression, ZL1 cam and it was close to 600 hp. But was never installed in a car, but you don't gain that much HP from 1 point of compression and a slightly bigger cam.
I personally know of someone who bought a crate LS6, had the compression lowered and a hydraulic cam installed and it still dynoed at well over 400hp. He put it in, believe it or not, a Jaguar XJ6. Talk about a sleeper.

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
As far as more than 500HP, I believe the LS6 was also dyno'ed at over 500. Though a ZL1 Camero, in an unrestored all original state dynoed at 347HP (rear wheel). Open headers and a richer air-fuel mixture made it pull 524 RWHP. Not a bad gain for very little work is it?

Ah, nope.

LS6 was rated at 450hp but that was very optimistic. Stock they were maybe good for 400hp.

It was similar to what they did with the 409. The hiperf version was rated at 409 hp. Then all of a sudden it was rated at 427 hp, yet nothing in the specs of this engine changed and the performance stayed the same.

Nah, I disagree about the LS6 completely. It EASILY had the 450hp. I'll bet my pay for the rest of the year on that. Think about it, it's a 454, with open chamber rectangle HUGE port heads, 11-1 compression, about a .540 lift solid cam, aluminum intake and an 850 carb.
That is easily 450 hp. You could pull a plug wire off and still have more than 400 hp with that setup.
Example: My old engine for my race truck had basically a warmed over LS6....454, 11.9-1, older, not as good closed chamber rectangle ports heads, unported, a .637 solid cam and the same intake with an 850. Between 550-600 hp it had.
Consider the LS6 had slightly better heads, a touch less compression, slightly smaller cam, same otherwise, and no way you fall all the way to 400hp.
Now the crate LS7 had 12-1 compression, ZL1 cam and it was close to 600 hp. But was never installed in a car, but you don't gain that much HP from 1 point of compression and a slightly bigger cam.
I personally know of someone who bought a crate LS6, had the compression lowered and a hydraulic cam installed and it still dynoed at well over 400hp. He put it in, believe it or not, a Jaguar XJ6. Talk about a sleeper.

All those hi po engines were dynoed with headders and optimised for max output because that sold cars. The reality is they were seriously restricted when put into their respective chassis (pollution compliance, noise standards).

An average LS6 chevelle was good for mid 13's. Same with a hemi, Buick GS 455 stage 1, etc. These engines lost over 100 hp just from being fitted into the engine bay. Its just the way things were back then.

Hot Rod found and dynoed a stock crate motor LS6 back in the early 80s. This thing was 100% stock and made less than 400 hp. Don't make me dig out the article because those mags are in storage as I well be moving soon.

 

[Pacfanweb]

From Car Craft Magazine's 101 Things you need to know about muscle cars:
Note that Car Craft and Hot Rod are practically the same thing.

"10 LS6 To many, the '70 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 powered by the LS6 version of the 454ci big-block V-8 was the ultimate musclecar. Rated at 450 hp (probably underrated), the LS6 Chevelle was quick, attractive, and full of charisma."

I'd love to see a link to anything saying an LS6 has only 400hp, because the only thing I can find is that they were under rated.
I would certainly question anyone's dyno figures that say otherwise.

I also knew someone who had an absolutely bone stock, crate motor LS6 in a 68 Camaro, and it ran well into the 11's with ease. And a Camaro wasn't THAT much lighter than a Chevelle. A few hundred pounds doesn't make that much difference.
Also remember that those old road tests were on yesterday's rubber. Look at the MPH if you want to know the horsepower.

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
From Car Craft Magazine's 101 Things you need to know about muscle cars:
Note that Car Craft and Hot Rod are practically the same thing.

"10 LS6 To many, the '70 Chevrolet Chevelle SS 454 powered by the LS6 version of the 454ci big-block V-8 was the ultimate musclecar. Rated at 450 hp (probably underrated), the LS6 Chevelle was quick, attractive, and full of charisma."

I'd love to see a link to anything saying an LS6 has only 400hp, because the only thing I can find is that they were under rated.
I would certainly question anyone's dyno figures that say otherwise.

I also knew someone who had an absolutely bone stock, crate motor LS6 in a 68 Camaro, and it ran well into the 11's with ease. And a Camaro wasn't THAT much lighter than a Chevelle. A few hundred pounds doesn't make that much difference.
Also remember that those old road tests were on yesterday's rubber. Look at the MPH if you want to know the horsepower.

A 68 Camaro is way lighter than a BB chevelle.

An underrated 450 hp would put the chevelle in the mid 12's or so. They say the same thing about the hemi cars being underrated. If that were true then a hemi roadrunner should be doing mid 12's. It doesn't.

It is a pointless arguement because these cars never made that kind of power in their stock as delivered condition.

Heck Car Craft said the fastest 1/4 mile production car of 1970 was the Buick GS 455 Stage 1. I know plenty of Chevy and Dodge fans that dispute that.

Even the fastest production cars evar (1968 SuperStock Hemi A-bodies) were rated at 550hp and would cut low 11's to high 10's after a little tuning.

So its all good. Lets have a :beer:

 

[Pacfanweb]

Just got home from work and am totally ready for the beer. Bottoms up!!