Ls1 Monaro burnouts. 10 Second 1/4's

[CFster]

That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1

Originally posted by: CFster
Nice. Talk to your mother that way?

And, I've forgotted more about cars than you'll ever know.

WHAT are you trying to say?

the gto turns heads, is blazingly fast, and STRAIGHT from australia.

MIKE

Plain looking.

and, still built by GM - nuff said.

If you want plain, buy a Honda.

And there isn't much unreliable about a GM small block.

Sorry, but an Accord is just as interesting looking as the GTO
As for the "built by GM" statement, GM is building somehting to be proud of, this isn't another cookie cutter chevy here...

 

[CFster]

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1

Originally posted by: CFster
Nice. Talk to your mother that way?

And, I've forgotted more about cars than you'll ever know.

WHAT are you trying to say?

the gto turns heads, is blazingly fast, and STRAIGHT from australia.

MIKE

Plain looking.

and, still built by GM - nuff said.

If you want plain, buy a Honda.

And there isn't much unreliable about a GM small block.

That's my point - it's as plain AS a Honda. In a parking lot you'll have trouble picking it out of a bunch of other midsize GMs - there's nothing distinctive about it. And numerous reviewers agree with me.

Sure the small block is reliable (albiet 50's technology), but parts will be falling off the rest of the car in short order.

WTF does the small block being 50's tech have to do with anything?

Only that a lot of people are treating this as the second coming or something. GM is using an off the shelf chassis with an off the shelf engine. There's really nothing special about it. It's the next Camaro/Firebird - nothing special.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: CFster
That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

If it had the same horsepower to displacement ratio as say the engine in the S2000, we'd be up in the 600+ horsepower. (Just a guesstimate) What point would there be for that?

 

[Rent]

Originally posted by: CFster
That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

Compared to what engines?

 

[iamwiz82]

HP to displacement means jack sh!t. Performance is all the matters. If you make a 15 liter engine but make it light enough to be competitive, who cares? If an engine is still competitive after 50 years, I's consider it more of an accomplishment than the latest and greatest.

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1

Originally posted by: CFster
Nice. Talk to your mother that way?

And, I've forgotted more about cars than you'll ever know.

WHAT are you trying to say?

the gto turns heads, is blazingly fast, and STRAIGHT from australia.

MIKE

Plain looking.

and, still built by GM - nuff said.

If you want plain, buy a Honda.

And there isn't much unreliable about a GM small block.

That's my point - it's as plain AS a Honda. In a parking lot you'll have trouble picking it out of a bunch of other midsize GMs - there's nothing distinctive about it. And numerous reviewers agree with me.

Sure the small block is reliable (albiet 50's technology), but parts will be falling off the rest of the car in short order.

It's pretty obvious that you don't know much about anything. Reliability? The LS1 is a great engine man, read on up it. Also, you can't talk about things falling off or saying they will until it happens. I don't forsee this to be a problem. Every review I've read has praised teh fit/finish of the whoel vehicle, the refinement of the LS1, etc.. I don't know what you have against GM, but maybe you could look past whatever that is and realize the GTO is a great car.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

What the hell was so visually interesting about the older GTOs in the 60s/70s? It was nothing but a plain-jane Tempest with a big motor stuck in there. Oh and they added some hoodscoops.

The new GTO follows the exact same formula, minus the hood scoops. A run of the mill car stuffed with a big motor.

Except this time around, the new GTO is faster, more comfortable, safer, handles better, brakes better, and is just about a better car in every respect.

 

[CFster]

I shouldn't have anything against GM. We sell 100,000 of them a year where I work. And I've been doing it for 16 years. As a result I've come to expect certain things as far as quality control - they don't have it.

A review about a pre-production car with 0 miles on it is just that - a review of a car that hasn't been used.

Put 40K on it and let's see how much it rattles, and how many times it goes back to the dealer for warranty work and recalls.

And I never said the 5.7 was an unreliable motor - just outdated. Bulky, heavy (even the aluminum version) and inefficient.

 

[CFster]

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster
That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

Compared to what engines?

The Honda Civic, with it's 1.7 liter (103.7 cu in) engine makes 127hp. Lowliest car Honda makes.

The Toyota Camy with it's 3.0 liter (183 cu in) engine makes 210hp. Another plain jane vehicle.

The GTO's 5.7 liter (350 cu in) engine makes 350 hp.

As you can see, the GM engine isn't even breaking 1hp per cu in. Nothing special.

These aren't even performance vehicles I'm quoting.

When I was in high school it was real easy to get 350hp out of a small block. The problem is they're heavy pigs, and belong in trucks.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: CFster
The Honda Civic, with it's 1.7 liter (103.7 cu in) engine makes 127hp. Lowliest car Honda makes.

*buzz* Wrong!

1.7L (102 ci) making 115hp @ 6100rpm 😉

Edit - And of course:

Mazda RX-8
1.3L rotary
250hp (6spd)

- M4H

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster
That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

Compared to what engines?

The Honda Civic, with it's 1.7 liter (103.7 cu in) engine makes 127hp. Lowliest car Honda makes.

The Toyota Camy with it's 3. liter (183 cu in) engine makes 210hp.

The GTO's 5.7 liter (350 cu in) engine makes 350 hp.

These aren't even performance vehicles I'm quoting.

Need I go on?

So what? What is your point? I could point out that the lowest civic makes 115hp, not 127hp, or that the civic only makes 110 lb-ft, or that the camry only makes 162 lb-ft of torque, and that the GTO will make 360ft-lb of torque.

 

[CFster]

EX version makes 127hp.

Ok I lied, the EX isn't the lowliest Honda I guess.

 

[CFster]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: Rent

Originally posted by: CFster
That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

Compared to what engines?

The Honda Civic, with it's 1.7 liter (103.7 cu in) engine makes 127hp. Lowliest car Honda makes.

The Toyota Camy with it's 3. liter (183 cu in) engine makes 210hp.

The GTO's 5.7 liter (350 cu in) engine makes 350 hp.

These aren't even performance vehicles I'm quoting.

Need I go on?

So what? What is your point? I could point out that the lowest civic makes 115hp, not 127hp, or that the civic only makes 110 lb-ft, or that the camry only makes 162 lb-ft of torque, and that the GTO will make 360ft-lb of torque.

My point is that Pontiac's top of the line performance car only beats the Camry in the torque dept (displacement - torque ratio). This wouldn't be an issue, but the thing is - those aren't performance cars!

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: CFster
That's precisely why. The block design and bore x stroke measurements have gone virtually unchanged since it's inception. It's inefficient, bulky, and has a low displacement to horsepower ratio compared to most performance engines today.

No the LS1 (346) is not the same as the LT1 (350) for starters the block itself is almost 2 inches shorter. I can go on but now there is no point.

 

[LAUST]

The GTO's 5.7 liter (350 cu in) engine makes 350 hp

it's not a 350.. see this is why you think it's from the 50's, you do not even have a clue what is under the hood, it's a 346 now, totally different block, if you take ANY part off a 1996 Corvette (LT1 AKA 350) it will NOT fit on a 97 vette's LS1 AKA 346.

the middle vehicle in my sig has a LM7, it's a iron block version of the LS1 with a smaller bore. Not even the fuel injectors off a LT1 will fit on my truck without changing the plugs on the harness. There is nothing shared with the old 350 at all that I can think of. I have owned many 350's and this is my first LS1 based motor.

 

[Rent]

I would stay and argue, but I prefer not to be retarded.

If you want to believe that the LS1 is bulky and inefficient, go ahead. There mere fact that you're trying to push this HP/L bullsh!t shows how much you really know about cars.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: LAUST
The GTO's 5.7 liter (350 cu in) engine makes 350 hp

it's not a 350.. see this is why you think it's from the 50's, you do not even have a clue what is under the hood, it's a 346 now, totally different block, if you take ANY part off a 1996 Corvette (LT1 AKA 350) it will NOT fit on a 97 vette's LS1 AKA 346.

hmm i didn't know that. I know this wasn't replied towards me..

i always thought that Chevy 350 small block implied all the 5.7L V8s made by Chevy/GM. I assume they all shared common block dimensions..just made with different materials and in different flavors.

 

[fyleow]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: CFster
The Honda Civic, with it's 1.7 liter (103.7 cu in) engine makes 127hp. Lowliest car Honda makes.

*buzz* Wrong!

1.7L (102 ci) making 115hp @ 6100rpm 😉

Edit - And of course:

Mazda RX-8
1.3L rotary
250hp (6spd)

- M4H

*buzz* Wrong!
The 1.7L Honda Civic EX engine produces 127 HP and has V-TEC. Try again 😉

 

[CFster]

They do come in different flavors.

The 4.8L, 5.3L, 6.0L and 5.7L are all based on the same motor - small block Chevy. Minor differences in displacement is all.

These people are just trying to split hairs now because they don't know what they're talking about. It's still the same engine. The only changes they've made over the years is they've basically reversed the coolant flow, gone to roller lifters and fooled around with head designs. THAT'S IT.

Even if it was a COMPLETELY different design, logic dictates that 1 hp/cu in is inefficient by todays standards.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Woa, I am impressed by all you living-room car experts.

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN

Originally posted by: LAUST
The GTO's 5.7 liter (350 cu in) engine makes 350 hp

it's not a 350.. see this is why you think it's from the 50's, you do not even have a clue what is under the hood, it's a 346 now, totally different block, if you take ANY part off a 1996 Corvette (LT1 AKA 350) it will NOT fit on a 97 vette's LS1 AKA 346.

hmm i didn't know that. I know this wasn't replied towards me..

i always thought that Chevy 350 small block implied all the 5.7L V8s made by Chevy/GM. I assume they all shared common block dimensions..just made with different materials and in different flavors.

Nope, from the time it was a 283 it became a 327, 305, 350 and 400. That ended in 1998 in the trucks, 96 in the vette and 97 in the F-body.

After that point the LS1/LS6/LM7/LQ4/LQ9 (5.7/5.7/5.3/6.0/6.0) took over with a completly new block. One way to see them from a mile and 1/4 away 😉 is look at the exhaust ports, the old gen 350 AKA LT1 has siamese exhaust ports. I'll look for some picks for everyone

 

[CFster]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
Woa, I am impressed by all you living-room car experts.

Well, I can't speak for the 11 grader and the one who's father drives an SSR, but I'm ASE certified and have been fixing these things for 16 years.

 

[gogeeta13]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: CFster
The Honda Civic, with it's 1.7 liter (103.7 cu in) engine makes 127hp. Lowliest car Honda makes.

*buzz* Wrong!

1.7L (102 ci) making 115hp @ 6100rpm 😉

Edit - And of course:

Mazda RX-8
1.3L rotary
250hp (6spd)

- M4H

I dont wanna drag this into OT, but technically, the rotary is 3.9L. In a full cycle, 1.3L is displaced 3 times.

 

[LAUST]

Vroooom