That's actually a V6 Turbo Camaro that can run 10 sec. Andrew owns that car. He did dyno over 500rwhp before. I don't think his camaro is running anymore.
I got out of the air force and the job i had could barley pay the bills. Now i have a better job. The car needs the stall rebiult (its to loose) but can still run on it, other then that it should run fine. I just gotta get the new head gaskets in there.
i have a 95 v6 camaro and i want to give it a little more kick, i was thinking about getting a 6 or 7 psi turbo, but i dont know where to get one from. or maybe getting nitro on it, i dont want to do anything to serious though, considering it will still be my daily drive car. would getting a air intake make much of a difference? suggestions any1 PLEASE????!!!!!!
@artfoolman A turbo would be great on a Camaro, if you put NOS on a Camaro you need to be shot, you would burn out that poor engine in no time if at worst blow the headers off from over compression.
@SilvaDreams you clearly have no idea what nitrous actually does. First give-away was the fact you referred to it as "NOS" NOS is a brand of nitrous oxide injection. Calling all nitrous "NOS" is like calling all cars Honda's. Nice way to show your knowledged comes from Fast and Furious though. Anyways, Nitrous is a chemical supercharger. Done properly it has no more risks or detrimental effects than any type of forced induction. Not up for debate, that is a fact.
@chicogotgreen Right just like running high ocatane fuel (Like 120, you know racing fuel?) does nothing to your car engine either... Oh wait it does! It wears out the cylinders and pistons from higher heat caused by the higher temperatures then what it was originally created for.
Yes you can run Nitrous Oxicide in one but it is the stupidest thing you can do on a "muscle" car.
You... are still a moron. Adding ANY power adds heat. Superchargers and turbochargers have no different effects on the engine than running nitrous. It isn't fuel, its an OXIDIZER. Meaning you add Nitrous Oxide for the OXYGEN content, so you can also add more fuel. It makes the intake charge denser, just like any other forced induction. That is ALL it does. Blowing off the headers? Are you high?
@chicogotgreen Quite aware it is one but there is a limit to what I can post at once, and generally you don't physically blow the headers off (Seen it though), you blow the seals out from over compression.
@SilvaDreams Nitrous does not raise compression, nor should exhaust gaskets be a primary concern when increasing horsepower. Fact is for a given boost in horsepower properly set up nitrous is the least stressful form of forced induction. Unlike super and turbochargers, there is a decrease in the temp of intake charge rather than an increase, thus detonation is avoided. And unlike superchargers, there is no parasitic loss. Most of what you hear about nitrous is a myth or due to improper setup.
I have a 1999 mustang v6 and the only mods i have are CAI, True Dual Flowmaster, and SCT Tune for 93 Octane and my best time is a 15.1, now mind you, this is on stock 15'' rims and cheapo tires from Firestone XD. Also i only paid $3900 for this car WITH all these mods, so $3900 for a 1999 Mustang that gets 15.1 on the 1/4 mile and im EXTREMELY happy with what i got. Especially when i beat the "UNBEATABLE" turboed vtec hondas
@2004svtterminator Lol.. the car is about to blow up again like it has several times already. He throws money at it like no tomorrow, acts like it's the fastest thing around... then BOOM! Talk about Karma.
@YngwieGuitarGod never actted like its the fastest thing around. I know there are faster cars. and it only blew up once due to faulty intake vavle and it was in my driveway. I did blow head gaskets but, that is common for these motors over 20 psi boost
come on man v6 mustangs suck balls no im not a mustang hater i drive a 99 GT 35th anniversary edition electric green but come on man my buddy has a v6 mustang and honestly its a fail to ford
Oh yeah, that's that A-Hole Andrew. Kid is a retard. He has a turbo and thinks his car is the fastest around just because he poured a shitload of money into it... car is constantly falling apart and breaking things... lol
@YngwieGuitarGod oh really? never said it was the fastest any where, last time i blew a head gasket witch is common for this motor at high boost, dumb ass
:D Believe what you want. Look at the track times all over the Internet and lets not forget the Camaro has like a whole litre and some change of displacement over the V8 Mustang.
93 - 97 Z28's demolished the 94 - 98 GT's and ran fairly well against the 99 - 03 GT's being they were a driver's race.
The 98 - 02 Camaro Z28's SLAUGHTERED GTs, not even the Cobra's were able to do anything to them until 2003 / 2004 when they were supercharged. The Mach 1 also ran even times with them.
holly crap you are still arguing about this 3 year later!!!!! My car is the yellow car and has since gone 11.23 in the 1/4. check fquick for the video
In those years, comparing class to class, I'm sorry to say that you're very wrong. The 3.8L V6 Camaro vs the 3.8L V6 Mustang stock vs stock, Camaro wins hands down, now against a GT (pre -99)the 3.8 Can keep up with one until the top end. The Z28 absolutely slaughtered the GT in ALL of its years of production and ran nicely if not defeated the Cobra. The ONLY Mustangs that stood a chance against the LS1 was the Mach 1 and the 2003/04 Cobra.
Haha, not only does your grammar show that you don't know whats going on. But you also fail to see that that is a tuned up Camaro going up against a stock Mustang
Enjoy your pathetic delusional lives with the "knowledge" you have. I am sure that will get you an awesome job working in the drive through at Burger King or Mc Donalds. Good luck.
HAHHAHAHAHA YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT! the z06 is rated at 505 now because IT PRODUCED 505 @ 6300 RPM!!! ON A DYNO!!! AS TESTED BY THE SAE!!! so thank you. so yes an engines rating is what the engine produces!!! and who said anything about putting those numbers to the wheels? we're talking about the numbers the motors produce not what makes it to rwhp. rwhp is ALWAYS less than hp the engine produces. god your dumb... but thanks for literally giving my point the perfect example.
You obviously dont really get the idea about cars at all hence examples why you have ppl do your work for you. Enjoy your pathetic life kid. Keep wishing you were right.
i think i know where you came up with those numbers. ok lets see if i'm right. we know that the hp a car puts to the wheels is ALWAYS less than what the engine puts out. so a car with ex 100 hp engine is prob putting 85 to the wheels right? so, you prob said ok, the camaro makes 205, so the engine is prob at 220-230. is that where you got that?
Yes, if the camaro is just an example so for whatever car it is. I guess they would consider those numbers at the crank / flywheel. That is why if you take a stock Z06 and put it on a dyno it doesnt put down 505hp. it is like 475? Give or take?
It is confusing really i see a bunch of stock C6Z06's on dyno on youtube, and they range from 400rwhp to 470rwhp.....i dont really know what is really causing that much of a difference with the same car if it is bone stock.
I thought that's where you got it from. but you went the wrong direction. 205 is not what the camaro dyno's. 205 is what the engine alone dynos. so the camaro is not rated at 205. the 3.8 is. the camaro will only put about 180 to the wheels. and THAT is why your numbers are high. right thinking but wrong direction. jackass! see i wouldn't have added the jackass part if u weren't such a dick ealier.
No, wrong the engine dyno'd 220-230. the 3800 is rated for 220-230....the rwhp is 205....you loose alot when you put it to the wheels. If the engine dyno'd at 205 the rwhp would be around 180...the only jackass here is your dumb ass since the 3800 isnt rated for 205 because RATINGS do not include the RPM gauge numbers u fuck stick..... RATINGS are at the CRANK OR FLYWHEEL...get a fucking clue you idiot.
even topmcat sees where i was getting them from where HE actually understood that the 220-230 is the CRANK/FLYWHEEL numbers which obviously you dont fucking get since those numbers do NOT include RPM #s. So who is the dumb fuck here now firebird? Oh btw if the 3.4 Camaro is rated for 205 and puts out 180 then explain why then everyone else says 160 for the L32? So what does that mean that it is putting less then 160 to the ground? That is basically what your logic says firebird. full cup of STFU
no no. seriously you actualy did go the wrong way. the motor is 205 and the camaro/firebird puts about 180 stock to the wheels. and yes the l32 is rated at 160 so the camaro with that motor actually DOES put out less than that. don't take my word ( i no u wont) look for yourself. look at anyone dynoing a 3.4 stock. you'll see 120 ish wrhp. not 160. look at anyone dyoning a 3.8 stock. you'll see 180ish. go ahead. do your world famous research and get back to me. you'll see u went backwards.
Actually of all the dyno charts i see so far even if it was supposedly rated at 205 they are pulling 195 to 200rwhp.. so i dont see the L36 being rated at 205 but 220-230 is alittle more understandable.
Also i have a site that you can get the estimated rwhp as long as you are given the Weight, the Trap Speed, and the ETA from the drag strip. So far with the ETA ranging from 14.6sec to 14.904 with a trap speed of 90 to 104mph....3800lbs with driver. they are all saying 190 to 200 rwhp
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! OK OK ... your done... you throw a estimated hp from software and your definetly finished. overcooked even. so thank you for entertaining me for this long, but there's not a chance i'm finishing this with software estimation from quartermile times that are too fast for a factory 3.8 maro/bird. we run mid to low 15's average. 14.6? yeah ... ok... HAHAHAHA. man.... this was fun... later
14.6 nhra times for factory camaro? this i gotta see. and your not serious about hp estimates from a website are you? weren't you the one talking earlier about being careful of your source? no one worth their weight in dirt takes those kind of estimates seriously.
lol i'm done debating this. 1st he confused 2 different motors. 2nd he calculated for drivetrain loss backwards. 3rd he threw that laughable hp estimator at me 4th you cant estimate rwhp accurately with 1/4 there are too many variables. that's what dyno's are for. now he's lying about working with Atlanta Dragway. lol I LIVE HERE! don't argue dude. don't waste your words. stupid has no limit.
oh of course you didn't... because then you'd have a founded argument. we wouldn't want that now would we? it seems you would rather go with facts you cant really provide evidence for, and instead of debating like a man, you throw insults around as a replacement for an actual point. you've been provin wrong in every angle you came at. this is over. it's not even fun anymore how sad and misinformed you are. and since it's not fun. i no longer care to watch you squirm.
Havent actually been proved wrong at all and that is what is funny about it. If you actually thought this was a debate then i guess that makes you the ignorant misinformed dumb shit doesnt it? Mmhmm i guess so. Funny how every different angle you contradicted yourselves completely. Oh but wait if you guys actually had facts you would of been proved wrong anyway no you rather just go off of review sites for cars rather then General Motor specs when the car was released.
lol ok... your not wrong. you Confused two different 3.4's but your not wrong. you have an engine putting out 220 factory as stated by gm that never existed and you cant prove it but I STILL HAVE MY handouts/manuals FROM PONTIAC when i bought my 98 firebird but those are obviously wrong, but your not wrong. you calculated rwhp in the opposite direction, but your not wrong. and everything you posted to provide proof was NOT factory. so you obviously know everything right? what's there to argue?
Never existed according to whom besides yourself and your butt buddy? You guys are the only idiots here thinking that a rating for an engine would include the RPM numbers which if it was from the crank or flywheelit would not be with RPM numbers since RPM numbers show up with Dyno runs to find the RWHP not the RATED HP....good job....but this is an idiot that thinks using hear-say statements such as "MY HANDOUTS/MANUAL I HAVE IN MY FACE SAYS DIFFERENT CAUSE I'M A DUMB ASS" is legitimate proof?
Yeah i can see why you always lose debates because your logic is flawed in more then one way.....If only you had the ability to think with that one muscle in your head that matters.....Cant expect much from a complete idiot that thinks a RATE HP includes the RPM numbers.....shows just how little you actually know about cars.
Oh but you guys said you look at forums but never really did look to try to substantiate your false claim you did have in an attempt of having any thing for your unfound asserions
Run along little kid with your exhaust work you have another person do for you. i am sure someday you might grow a set and actually work around cars unlike obviously you and your butt buddy firebird.
oh no, no, lets go back to your claiming to help with eta's! please! tell me you go there and help! tell me your right here in atlanta area! and yes that's software, any computer generated calculation is software that makes estimates. and boy are those estimates inaccurate. plus calculationg hp by 1/4 times is inacurrate anyway because that depend on driver/reaction/humidity/wind/hooking/ etc. if you help out at Atlanta drag you SHOULD know that u cant estimate rwhp that way.
that's briliant of you. i suck at welding so that therefore means i don't konw my way under the hood? lol. that motor in that blazer? replaced by me. got if from jasper after the previous owner blew a head gasket. so me and a handful of guys can swap an engine but i don't know anything? ok. i'm done with you. i dismiss you back to fairy land where ignorance is bliss. that's a shame, you could have learned something.
Learn something from two dumb fucks that dont know jack shit about cars? Yeah i would of learn alot.....maybe i would of learn why dip shits like you are ricers more the muscle heads.....take care kids...enjoy your pathetic lives
1. that's fondle's camaro with intake headers and 3" exhaust. not stock. but you got one thing right. with an intake and full exhuast that's what i would expect. 192. That the only one? try again!
Would of made sense if it was the right person lol. Sorry and no there are plenty more and "dragtimes" is the website name....and if you want to see the rest i can record them on the Atlanta Dragway in Commerce,Ga where i help out with ETA's and such. I can give you plenty of V6 stock camaro's ETA , Trap speed, and weight...you do the math and tell me those are less then 190rwhp stock. Tell those owners too their car isnt running what they are lol feel free to come by
a car is limited by how much you can change before it isnt even considered that car anymore.....prime example.....Just because a pro drag car has the fiberglass body shape of a camaro doesnt make it a camaro with whatever massive 2000+RWHP engine they put on it whether it be Blown,Turbo'd,or Juiced engine.
if you completely take out the factory engine and drop a different one into it technically it isnt really that car anymore unless they made camaros in mass production with a engine for example like the 572BBC other then the ZL1. And clearly you were talking about its potential even if he got the car year wrong, even if you put a 2010 in place of that older model you'd get the same outcome. He was talking about the 2010 since he mentioned the 300hp.
no read it again. that kid was saying that THIS camaro isn't modded and that it came stock with 300 hp. then topcat corrected him saying this is the 3.4 camaro with 160 hp. then YOU corrected top cat saying the 3.4 put out 200 something hp. but you were thinking (i guess) of the lq1. however, the camaro never came with the lq1. only the 160 hp version. lol i read it. i was bored. but anyway... that's prob where the mix up occured.
Enjoy your pathetic life kid i am done wasting my time on some dumb ass that doesnt know jackshit about cars that thinks he does...someday i wonder if you might get slapped up by a real grease monkey that you try to impress with your ignorance lol i would laugh.
hahahahaha.........you think the camaro is modded......the v6 camaro had 300hp you tard. mustang only had 210.face it you lost.boo hoo.Camaro is King!
you shouldn't run your mouth when you don't know what ur talking about. the only time the camaro had a 300 v6 is 2010. this is NOT a 2010 camaro. it's a pre-98. so it's v6 starts at 160 for the 3.4 and 205 for the 3.8. u fail... but u did get one thing right. Camaro IS king. well prince, Corvette is king.
Actually if you are going to quote stats get them right because even if it isnt the 2010 V6 with 300hp....the 3.4 has 200-210hp......3.8 has 220-230hp.....the 3.4/3.8 is the same in the chevy lumina's and the early impala's when they brought them back. as well the 3.8 is in the Firebird,Monte Carlo,and grand prix....So technically you failed worse on top of his fail......Corvette is the chevy king but technically the camaro/trans am are under-rated vettes when they got the LS engines
your talking about the supercharged 3.8's. that's the ONLY time the 3.8 even came close to to 220-230 is when it was supercharged in the 04 monte carloSS/ impala SS/ and grand prix gtp. the 3.4 made 160. so i have NO IDEA where u got that from but it's WAY off...
you WOULD be right for the 3.8 IF the camaros/firebirds had the eaton supercharger option the way the monte carlo and grand prix did. but they didn't ... so u kinda fail now...
right, 240 with the eaton, so how are you getting 220-230 naturally aspirated? you tellin me that the eaton only added 10-20 hp? seriously, where are you getting these numbers from?? no really. WHERE?
the 3.4 in the lumina IS NOT the same one that came in the camaro/firebirds. the difference between the L32 and the LQ1 is one is a DOHC. they are two COMPLETELY different animals. so you do fail. worse and worse it seems. and about the 3.8 L36... you show me where ANYONE has recorded over 205 in ANY application and i'll admit that i'm the biggest failure ever. stock cars of course. put up or fail.
If you actually knew anything about cars period you'd see how much of a idiot you truly are right now with the statement you just made. You already admitted being the biggest fail by running your mouth like you pointed out someone else doing when YOU dont know anything at all.
still waiting for you to prove me wrong. lets see a dyno sheet of your so called stock L36 putting 218 to the wheels since you OBVIOUSLY cant provide anything to back up the facts you pulled out of your ass.
if you knew the difference between a plug and a piston you would see that you just stuck your foot in your mouth. trying to correct me with incorrect facts. the 3.4 in the camaro and birds were rated at 160 FACT. the 3.4 in your lumina is not the same as the maro/birds 3.4 FACT. the 3.8 series II in the birds/maros never saw ratings higher than 205 even in Fwd applications FACT. u have different number than me and the rest of the planet? PROVE IT! 2ND TIME... WHERE U GETTING THIS FROM??
I have to prove anything to a complete and total dumb ass that doesnt know anything about cars except what you THINK you know which is absolutely nothing?.....pure sense of irony there having to educate the one that thinks he is right.....you wouldnt know what a fact was unless you looked it up in a dictionary and then added it to whatever "knowledge" you think you have about cars which frankly is nothing.
that's EXACTLY what i would say if i couldn't prove anything. face it... you fucked up. just admit it. it's ok... you were wrong it happens... why don't you come to FBN and tell me and every other member that our 3.8's are rated at 220-230 and our 3.4's are 210. come tell usall we're wrong and you, with you undocumented numbers are right. your a joke with no punch line.
The only dumb ass here that is behind is you with your head up your ass. Enjoy your pathetic life kid. You are a waste of breathe, and effort when all you do is make yourself even more of a dumb fuck then when you did when you opened your mouth......like i said take care kid....maybe someday a complete and total idiot like yourself might go somewhere in life.
bye! hope you get your facts right before you try to correct someone else. so lets see.. do we listen to goodwrench/ wards auto world/ edmunds or to you... a guy who couldn't provide even the SMALLEST shread of evidence and can't admit when he's wrong? yeah... choice is obvious.
THAT IMPALA IS TURBOCHARGED YOU RETARD! IT'S NOT A STOCK 3800!!!! you wanna preach to me about what i don't know when you can't tell the difference between a turboed 3.8 putting 600+ hp and a stock one?? you said the 3.8 was 220-230 but you STILL cant prove shit. just quit while your behind
HELL NO it doesn't count. but don't argue... egale will bring up retarded numbers from faiy land and claim they're directly from gm. (he's got a telepathic connection with the engineers so he doesnt need to present an actual sorce.)
There not off at all. If anyone numbers are off it is this mentally inept idiot topmcat that thinks modding a blazer/s10 is even worth the effort that is all knowing.
ok. so for the sake of debate, are you sure your talking about the same 3.4? you know there's like three different 3.4's out there right? the one for the camaro is DEF. 160 hp. and where are you getting 230 plus for the 3.8 series II? not callin you a liar but i've never seen those numbers. so help me out.
the 230+ is for the 3.8 Series || thats supercharged with the M90 Eaton blower. The numbers they have is 240 to 260 for the M90 depending on boost obviously everything stock including pulley. Yeah i know there are 3 different ones. The one i am talking about is the LQ1 from 94'-97 they produce 215hp,225 lb tq.
the regular stock 3.8 serious || i get about 215 to 220 on dyno stock with just a tune. You can get alot more out of them then just 205hp if you tune them correctly.
agreed... but so why did you comment on the camaro's 3.4? i'm pretty sure topmcat was talking about stock numbers for the 3.4 and 3.8 motors. stock meaning no tune.
i was talking about the car's potential and i am pretty sure the guy he was running his mouth off at was as well. A tune does not make it not stock numbers. Stock means that all internals and even bolt-ons are factory parts not after-market. I am pretty sure anyone who drag races would say even if you tuned the car if there are no modifications to it; it is stock.
nope. i was talking to someone else about what the numbers for those motors where and YOU said i was wrong. and clearly i wasn't. we weren't talkin about potential. cuz a cars potential is only limited by your wallet.
Not to mention if you do internal work and bolt-ons you arent stock anymore. Also you'd get far greater increases in hp with interals redone as well as bolt-ons.
that'd be one hell of a tune! maybe i coul see that on a larger displacement v8. ls1 for example. and even that is an agressive tune. but that kinda power jump from V6? no bolt on either? i'll believe it when i see it.
never said that. dont put words in my mouth. i'm saying that 20-30 hp from a v6 is HIGHLY unlikely. now... if you combined it with a good exhuast set up or a bolt on to work with the tune then yeah. maybe. AND ALSO zweb was talking about what he THOUGHT this camaro came with stock. because he thought it was the 2010. he even pm me appologizing. AND MY comment said the 3.4 starts at 160. which is true. and the 3.8 at 205 for the 3.8. which is true. WE WERE NOT TALKIN ABOUT POTENTIAL.
shows EXACLTY how much you know. i'd say a few more ponies/ better fuel economy/ and a nicer sound is worth the few bucks i spent. 15.54 for a 3500 pound suv isn't bad ... not bad at all.
see, you just asumed that for yourself. i don't just copy and paste facts. i don't act untill i'm sure i know what i'm doing and exaclty what i'm fucking with. 1 site saying something doesn't mean shit. but when you've got lots of reputable knoledgable companies and goodwrench not to mention vets in the forums, it's a pretty safe bet that it's correct. i did my research before i picked out my exhaust, intake, pullies, e-fan, throttle body, and got tuned. i'm not stupid
there you go assuming again. look man...your not better than me because you know how to change your bicycle chain. the only thing i didn't do was the exhaust because i cant weld for shit and the tune which w4m did. just go fix your crooked handle bars.
Right i am assuming because it is plainly clear you dont know jackshit so you think trying to prove anything online will make your unfound assertions any more true then when you thought of them. Truly pathetic you are.
well... from a non-biased perspective... you called him on the numbers right? thinking they were talkin about potential, not what the motor come with. but u were wrong. then u confused the two different 3.4's. then you misqouted the 3.8's numbers (factory). sooo... u kinda did loose.
Actually wrong, i didnt misquote any numbers so good job on completely contradicting the "non-biased perspective" Ironically enough the fact you guys think changing the A:F ratio wont give you the needed HP to give a 3.8 N/A 220hp is irelevant to the facts that it can. The fact that the 3800 is rated for 220 from GM is FACT. What is sad is resting on review sites that arent always fact as "fact".the fact the kid NEVER checked any forums or did research is FACT. If he did he'd be eating his words
ok, ignoring the first two points (misunderstanding the factory/potential thing AND the 3.4 being different) lets focus on the third. how do you get that gm rated the 2nd series 3.8 at 220? gm rated it at 205 it's posted right on gm performance parts under 3800 series II dyno chart. so how you get 220?
gm did not rate it at 205....ratings are not marked by RPM #s good job. 205 @ #### RPMs is a Dyno number on stock internals/bolt-on's/tuning.....good job kiddo.
ok woah... first don't call me kiddo. second what are u talking about? how else do you "rate" a motor besides the numbers they produce? how do you rate a motor as putting out more hp than it produces across the entire power curve?? that make absolutely no sense. and lastly you don't know what biased means. no offence but your using the word wrong if u think it means siding with one side. that's not biased. biased means being partial. topmcats numbers aren't wrong so what isthere to point out?
No obviously you have very bad reading comprehension since i said a NON-BIASED VIEW means pointing out the wrongs of both sides or the two people....what you did in the comment before was offer a BIASED VIEW. The power rating for an engine does not include the RPMs where you get those numbers good job buddy
once again.... thats NOT what biased means!! this is the 3rd time someone's explained this to you but biased means being partial to one side vs another. partial means showing favoritism. he didn't show favoritsm to me. he just pointed out that you were wrong in three ways. what is there on my behalf to point out? nothing. nothing i said was wrong. not one word. so how can u expect someone to find fault? did you find something incorrect? if u can,PROVE IT otherwise stop bitching.
ignorance... you wanna explain how an engine making at MAXIMUM "X" amount can be rated 15 hp more overall? you know what? don't... you just confirmed what i already knew. your retarded.
you are really that retarded that you think a offical rating would include the RPMs for those numbers? Is that why the Z06 is rated for 505HP but we all know it doesnt put all 505 to the rear wheels.....You are a stupid ass. Feel free to tell someone that the rating of HP for the engine is the numbers with the @ #### RPM and watch them laugh at you because that is DYNO NUMBERS meaning not even the RATED HP FOR THE ENGINE....good job dumb ass.
that doesn't make sense. non-biased means not caring or having any steak in who wins. how does saying that one side won me biased? if a judge rules in one sides favor in a boxing match, does that make the judge now biased?
The fact you were completely sided in one side of the argument is being biased a non-biased perspective means pointing out the wrongs from both sides or two different peoeple.....Nice try again.
LMAO!!! that's not what biased means! so by ur def., if i said that corvette beat that civic's ass. that would make me biased. because i completly sided with one side right? lol. biased means you lean to one side because you FAVOR a side more. not that you just made a decision on who you thought won. and you call ME pathetic? quit using words you don't understand
The only difference between them is the price/weight....they made it more affordable for ppl to own the same performance without paying an arm and a leg which is a solid 70,000+$ depending on year 85,000$+ for 2009 model base msrp....so yeah i think 38,000$ to 48,000$ for a 2010 camaro is better then 85,000+$
i hate v6 mustang v8 all the way
cubanpimp727 1 month ago
Damn, that Camaro hauls ass for a 6. Why are you racing a stock v6 stang anyway?? lol
BigKleib34 5 months ago
Why in the hell would you put a stock V6 Mustang on a track anyway... that's like racing a Pruis. And this is coming from a Mustang owner...
AdamXtreme1 6 months ago 2
yea if some of yall dumbass ford fans would watch these videos the majority of fords lose. all the fuckin time
SuperSurfnazi 8 months ago
That's actually a V6 Turbo Camaro that can run 10 sec. Andrew owns that car. He did dyno over 500rwhp before. I don't think his camaro is running anymore.
Naturalhit 9 months ago
@Naturalhit
oh it might come out to play next spring ;)
turbov6camaro 4 months ago
@turbov6camaro Hey Andrew. Glad to know you still got that hot rod v6. So all the bugs worked out now? Looking forward to your vids on your runs.
Naturalhit 4 months ago
@Naturalhit
I got out of the air force and the job i had could barley pay the bills. Now i have a better job. The car needs the stall rebiult (its to loose) but can still run on it, other then that it should run fine. I just gotta get the new head gaskets in there.
turbov6camaro 4 months ago
Respond to this video... car has ran 11.2 since this video
turbov6camaro 4 months ago
haha again i say this is why i bought a camaro!!!!
jacbstelzer 10 months ago
ûhm_Ï_fÉel_s0_loÑêlÿ_tÔÐÀY
BabeayAlphaaa104 11 months ago
@slackass123 why all these gay ass stupid people posting comments bragging about there slow ass cars?
gaarafan19 11 months ago
More like get raped by a slightly modded v6 camaro haha
chiefhinton 1 year ago
hahaha GET RAPED
Theos92vr4 1 year ago
Yes!!!! Camaros do rock!!! Woot!! Woot!!! Camaro driver here!!! 95 Lt1
CupcakeLuver26 1 year ago
camaros rock ladys and jntlemens yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
geardosanchezmiluso 1 year ago
You want more kick....buy a v8 and p.s. Buy a mustang
brookst1221 1 year ago
i have a 95 v6 camaro and i want to give it a little more kick, i was thinking about getting a 6 or 7 psi turbo, but i dont know where to get one from. or maybe getting nitro on it, i dont want to do anything to serious though, considering it will still be my daily drive car. would getting a air intake make much of a difference? suggestions any1 PLEASE????!!!!!!
artfoolman 1 year ago
@artfoolman A turbo would be great on a Camaro, if you put NOS on a Camaro you need to be shot, you would burn out that poor engine in no time if at worst blow the headers off from over compression.
SilvaDreams 1 year ago
@SilvaDreams you clearly have no idea what nitrous actually does. First give-away was the fact you referred to it as "NOS" NOS is a brand of nitrous oxide injection. Calling all nitrous "NOS" is like calling all cars Honda's. Nice way to show your knowledged comes from Fast and Furious though. Anyways, Nitrous is a chemical supercharger. Done properly it has no more risks or detrimental effects than any type of forced induction. Not up for debate, that is a fact.
chicogotgreen 10 months ago
@chicogotgreen Right just like running high ocatane fuel (Like 120, you know racing fuel?) does nothing to your car engine either... Oh wait it does! It wears out the cylinders and pistons from higher heat caused by the higher temperatures then what it was originally created for.
Yes you can run Nitrous Oxicide in one but it is the stupidest thing you can do on a "muscle" car.
SilvaDreams 10 months ago
@SilvaDreams
You... are still a moron. Adding ANY power adds heat. Superchargers and turbochargers have no different effects on the engine than running nitrous. It isn't fuel, its an OXIDIZER. Meaning you add Nitrous Oxide for the OXYGEN content, so you can also add more fuel. It makes the intake charge denser, just like any other forced induction. That is ALL it does. Blowing off the headers? Are you high?
chicogotgreen 10 months ago
@chicogotgreen Quite aware it is one but there is a limit to what I can post at once, and generally you don't physically blow the headers off (Seen it though), you blow the seals out from over compression.
SilvaDreams 10 months ago
@SilvaDreams Nitrous does not raise compression, nor should exhaust gaskets be a primary concern when increasing horsepower. Fact is for a given boost in horsepower properly set up nitrous is the least stressful form of forced induction. Unlike super and turbochargers, there is a decrease in the temp of intake charge rather than an increase, thus detonation is avoided. And unlike superchargers, there is no parasitic loss. Most of what you hear about nitrous is a myth or due to improper setup.
chicogotgreen 10 months ago
well ass u can see camaro has stock rims weighs less then wat the mustang has
cubanpimp727 1 year ago
the camaro's body is too heavy... and in about 10yrs the suspension needs to be changed out.
rwilson0097able1 1 year ago
A stock mustang goes 0-60 in 9.9 seconds and 1/4 in 17.3
the same year (95) same sized engine camaro goes 0-60 in 7.4 and 1/4 in 15.7
Camaro v6's were just built better.. Simple..
getignited114 1 year ago
i used to be a mustang guy then i got my z28 with ss package and i run 13 flat stock and thats spinning tires in first
coryratcliffe53 1 year ago
I know the owner of that camaro. That's Andrew's turbo Camaro V6. It has 563rwhp now.
Naturalhit 1 year ago
I have a 1999 mustang v6 and the only mods i have are CAI, True Dual Flowmaster, and SCT Tune for 93 Octane and my best time is a 15.1, now mind you, this is on stock 15'' rims and cheapo tires from Firestone XD. Also i only paid $3900 for this car WITH all these mods, so $3900 for a 1999 Mustang that gets 15.1 on the 1/4 mile and im EXTREMELY happy with what i got. Especially when i beat the "UNBEATABLE" turboed vtec hondas
frozendrake 1 year ago
@frozendrake man. or auto trans?
david053092 1 year ago
@david053092 its a manual :)
frozendrake 1 year ago
@david053092
Auto for tha camaro
turbov6camaro 4 months ago
camaro beating a mustang?? haha good for them 1 out of ten!! sorry ass camaros
flachho 1 year ago
Comment removed
666vic555 1 year ago
haha i still get a crack outa this 2 years later
chevymudder86 1 year ago
@2004svtterminator Lol.. the car is about to blow up again like it has several times already. He throws money at it like no tomorrow, acts like it's the fastest thing around... then BOOM! Talk about Karma.
YngwieGuitarGod 1 year ago
@YngwieGuitarGod never actted like its the fastest thing around. I know there are faster cars. and it only blew up once due to faulty intake vavle and it was in my driveway. I did blow head gaskets but, that is common for these motors over 20 psi boost
turbov6camaro 4 months ago
come on man v6 mustangs suck balls no im not a mustang hater i drive a 99 GT 35th anniversary edition electric green but come on man my buddy has a v6 mustang and honestly its a fail to ford
lavaheads69 1 year ago 3
@lavaheads69 not the 07s :D mines a beast
wonderbreadkw 1 year ago
Oh yeah, that's that A-Hole Andrew. Kid is a retard. He has a turbo and thinks his car is the fastest around just because he poured a shitload of money into it... car is constantly falling apart and breaking things... lol
YngwieGuitarGod 1 year ago
@YngwieGuitarGod oh really? never said it was the fastest any where, last time i blew a head gasket witch is common for this motor at high boost, dumb ass
turbov6camaro 4 months ago
@turbov6camaro Dumb ass.. wow.. how can I top those words when they come from the idiot who blows his car up constantly... LOL
YngwieGuitarGod 4 months ago
Comment removed
FranciscoSRO2 1 year ago
Camaro wasn't supercharged or tubroed...
xxxSTAxxx 1 year ago
@xxxSTAxxx
I own the Car it was turboed. slow lanch due to exhaust leaks. the headers melted :( at the flanges
viper04af 1 year ago
@viper04af
Oh god I am so sorry. Probably why I couldn't hear it =[.
xxxSTAxxx 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It takes a V8 Camaro to out run a V6 Mustang. V8 vs V8 and the Stang will win 90 % of the time.
Godzukidan 1 year ago
@Godzukidan no, i have a v8 camaro and a mustang has never stood a chance. v8 camaro's are fast as hell if you know how to drive them
dkangell09 1 year ago
@Godzukidan
:D Believe what you want. Look at the track times all over the Internet and lets not forget the Camaro has like a whole litre and some change of displacement over the V8 Mustang.
93 - 97 Z28's demolished the 94 - 98 GT's and ran fairly well against the 99 - 03 GT's being they were a driver's race.
The 98 - 02 Camaro Z28's SLAUGHTERED GTs, not even the Cobra's were able to do anything to them until 2003 / 2004 when they were supercharged. The Mach 1 also ran even times with them.
Need4Camaro 1 year ago
why do these fords even try?
PLUMPER101 1 year ago 6
mustang's does the sound great feeling about it when u ride it gives u goosebumps but camaro are asskickers damn
rebelelite11 1 year ago
ford sucks
brandontheawesome 1 year ago
holly crap you are still arguing about this 3 year later!!!!! My car is the yellow car and has since gone 11.23 in the 1/4. check fquick for the video
viper04af 1 year ago
Stock camaro vs Stock mustang (year 1967), i have proven that the camaro is superior to the mustang in my senior paper...
lizardman2150 1 year ago
@lizardman2150 badass
Sk8FalIen 1 year ago
well i freaking love mustangs with all of my heart but from what ive been seeing these camaros are kicking their asses =( no good
niecey0923 2 years ago 18
to bad THERES LIKE 5000000 OF THEM IN VIRGINIA
Metal4Life117 1 year ago
@niecey0923 Did you read desc? "Me in my Very Stock V6 mustang loses to a highly modded v6 Camaro (its either turboed or SC...)"
Little unfair race.
Conclusion: Tuned* Mustang ( *TT, T , or SC) VS Stock Camaro = Mustang Win Stock Mustang VS Stock Camaro = Mustang Win Tuned Mustang VS Tuned Camaro = Mustang Win Stock Mustang VS Tuned Camaro = Camaro Win
Mustang Win Probability = 3/4 = 75%
Camaro Win Probability = 1/4 = 25%
FranciscoSRO2 1 year ago
@FranciscoSRO2
In those years, comparing class to class, I'm sorry to say that you're very wrong. The 3.8L V6 Camaro vs the 3.8L V6 Mustang stock vs stock, Camaro wins hands down, now against a GT (pre -99)the 3.8 Can keep up with one until the top end. The Z28 absolutely slaughtered the GT in ALL of its years of production and ran nicely if not defeated the Cobra. The ONLY Mustangs that stood a chance against the LS1 was the Mach 1 and the 2003/04 Cobra.
Need4Camaro 1 year ago
Comment removed
666vic555 2 years ago
Haha, not only does your grammar show that you don't know whats going on. But you also fail to see that that is a tuned up Camaro going up against a stock Mustang
xp77254 2 years ago
well sory mr clean but i have a stock camaro and no stock mustang has ever beat me. so dont cr
666vic555 2 years ago 15
Haha, why would I cry over a car.... Keep trying to insult me though :P
xp77254 2 years ago
@666vic555 and how many stock mustangs have u raced?
supermanXindisguise 1 year ago
@666vic555 thats because where your probably from no one knows how to drive
seansskyline 1 year ago
@666vic555 have you ever taken it to the track? you should be around 15.8, my stock mustang did 16.1, so yea no stock stang should beat you.
kryptonek88 1 year ago
@666vic555 i guess you have never raced it then
jaemustang89 8 months ago
sweet race,
St0pTrashTyping 2 years ago
bumblebee win?
wolf123L 2 years ago
Yeah.
like73ninjas 2 years ago
That Camro looks so badass. I would easily trade my red conv. for a yellow one
haikutoru 2 years ago
Enjoy your pathetic delusional lives with the "knowledge" you have. I am sure that will get you an awesome job working in the drive through at Burger King or Mc Donalds. Good luck.
egale180 2 years ago
HAHHAHAHAHA YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT! the z06 is rated at 505 now because IT PRODUCED 505 @ 6300 RPM!!! ON A DYNO!!! AS TESTED BY THE SAE!!! so thank you. so yes an engines rating is what the engine produces!!! and who said anything about putting those numbers to the wheels? we're talking about the numbers the motors produce not what makes it to rwhp. rwhp is ALWAYS less than hp the engine produces. god your dumb... but thanks for literally giving my point the perfect example.
topmcat 2 years ago
You obviously dont really get the idea about cars at all hence examples why you have ppl do your work for you. Enjoy your pathetic life kid. Keep wishing you were right.
egale180 2 years ago
i think i know where you came up with those numbers. ok lets see if i'm right. we know that the hp a car puts to the wheels is ALWAYS less than what the engine puts out. so a car with ex 100 hp engine is prob putting 85 to the wheels right? so, you prob said ok, the camaro makes 205, so the engine is prob at 220-230. is that where you got that?
topmcat 2 years ago
Yes, if the camaro is just an example so for whatever car it is. I guess they would consider those numbers at the crank / flywheel. That is why if you take a stock Z06 and put it on a dyno it doesnt put down 505hp. it is like 475? Give or take?
egale180 2 years ago
It is confusing really i see a bunch of stock C6Z06's on dyno on youtube, and they range from 400rwhp to 470rwhp.....i dont really know what is really causing that much of a difference with the same car if it is bone stock.
egale180 2 years ago
I thought that's where you got it from. but you went the wrong direction. 205 is not what the camaro dyno's. 205 is what the engine alone dynos. so the camaro is not rated at 205. the 3.8 is. the camaro will only put about 180 to the wheels. and THAT is why your numbers are high. right thinking but wrong direction. jackass! see i wouldn't have added the jackass part if u weren't such a dick ealier.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
No, wrong the engine dyno'd 220-230. the 3800 is rated for 220-230....the rwhp is 205....you loose alot when you put it to the wheels. If the engine dyno'd at 205 the rwhp would be around 180...the only jackass here is your dumb ass since the 3800 isnt rated for 205 because RATINGS do not include the RPM gauge numbers u fuck stick..... RATINGS are at the CRANK OR FLYWHEEL...get a fucking clue you idiot.
egale180 2 years ago
even topmcat sees where i was getting them from where HE actually understood that the 220-230 is the CRANK/FLYWHEEL numbers which obviously you dont fucking get since those numbers do NOT include RPM #s. So who is the dumb fuck here now firebird? Oh btw if the 3.4 Camaro is rated for 205 and puts out 180 then explain why then everyone else says 160 for the L32? So what does that mean that it is putting less then 160 to the ground? That is basically what your logic says firebird. full cup of STFU
egale180 2 years ago
no no. seriously you actualy did go the wrong way. the motor is 205 and the camaro/firebird puts about 180 stock to the wheels. and yes the l32 is rated at 160 so the camaro with that motor actually DOES put out less than that. don't take my word ( i no u wont) look for yourself. look at anyone dynoing a 3.4 stock. you'll see 120 ish wrhp. not 160. look at anyone dyoning a 3.8 stock. you'll see 180ish. go ahead. do your world famous research and get back to me. you'll see u went backwards.
topmcat 2 years ago
Actually of all the dyno charts i see so far even if it was supposedly rated at 205 they are pulling 195 to 200rwhp.. so i dont see the L36 being rated at 205 but 220-230 is alittle more understandable.
egale180 2 years ago
where are the ones you see. post up.
topmcat 2 years ago
Also i have a site that you can get the estimated rwhp as long as you are given the Weight, the Trap Speed, and the ETA from the drag strip. So far with the ETA ranging from 14.6sec to 14.904 with a trap speed of 90 to 104mph....3800lbs with driver. they are all saying 190 to 200 rwhp
egale180 2 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! OK OK ... your done... you throw a estimated hp from software and your definetly finished. overcooked even. so thank you for entertaining me for this long, but there's not a chance i'm finishing this with software estimation from quartermile times that are too fast for a factory 3.8 maro/bird. we run mid to low 15's average. 14.6? yeah ... ok... HAHAHAHA. man.... this was fun... later
topmcat 2 years ago
Software? I didnt know that NHRA material wasnt good enough for you? Oh ok yeah i forgot it takes a man to be able to handle a man sport.
egale180 2 years ago
14.6 nhra times for factory camaro? this i gotta see. and your not serious about hp estimates from a website are you? weren't you the one talking earlier about being careful of your source? no one worth their weight in dirt takes those kind of estimates seriously.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
lol i'm done debating this. 1st he confused 2 different motors. 2nd he calculated for drivetrain loss backwards. 3rd he threw that laughable hp estimator at me 4th you cant estimate rwhp accurately with 1/4 there are too many variables. that's what dyno's are for. now he's lying about working with Atlanta Dragway. lol I LIVE HERE! don't argue dude. don't waste your words. stupid has no limit.
topmcat 2 years ago
nhra times? did i say that no i didnt u fucking idiot....glad to see your reading comp is still horrid.
egale180 2 years ago
oh of course you didn't... because then you'd have a founded argument. we wouldn't want that now would we? it seems you would rather go with facts you cant really provide evidence for, and instead of debating like a man, you throw insults around as a replacement for an actual point. you've been provin wrong in every angle you came at. this is over. it's not even fun anymore how sad and misinformed you are. and since it's not fun. i no longer care to watch you squirm.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
Havent actually been proved wrong at all and that is what is funny about it. If you actually thought this was a debate then i guess that makes you the ignorant misinformed dumb shit doesnt it? Mmhmm i guess so. Funny how every different angle you contradicted yourselves completely. Oh but wait if you guys actually had facts you would of been proved wrong anyway no you rather just go off of review sites for cars rather then General Motor specs when the car was released.
egale180 2 years ago
lol ok... your not wrong. you Confused two different 3.4's but your not wrong. you have an engine putting out 220 factory as stated by gm that never existed and you cant prove it but I STILL HAVE MY handouts/manuals FROM PONTIAC when i bought my 98 firebird but those are obviously wrong, but your not wrong. you calculated rwhp in the opposite direction, but your not wrong. and everything you posted to provide proof was NOT factory. so you obviously know everything right? what's there to argue?
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
Never existed according to whom besides yourself and your butt buddy? You guys are the only idiots here thinking that a rating for an engine would include the RPM numbers which if it was from the crank or flywheelit would not be with RPM numbers since RPM numbers show up with Dyno runs to find the RWHP not the RATED HP....good job....but this is an idiot that thinks using hear-say statements such as "MY HANDOUTS/MANUAL I HAVE IN MY FACE SAYS DIFFERENT CAUSE I'M A DUMB ASS" is legitimate proof?
egale180 2 years ago
Yeah i can see why you always lose debates because your logic is flawed in more then one way.....If only you had the ability to think with that one muscle in your head that matters.....Cant expect much from a complete idiot that thinks a RATE HP includes the RPM numbers.....shows just how little you actually know about cars.
egale180 2 years ago
Oh but you guys said you look at forums but never really did look to try to substantiate your false claim you did have in an attempt of having any thing for your unfound asserions
egale180 2 years ago
Run along little kid with your exhaust work you have another person do for you. i am sure someday you might grow a set and actually work around cars unlike obviously you and your butt buddy firebird.
egale180 2 years ago
oh no, no, lets go back to your claiming to help with eta's! please! tell me you go there and help! tell me your right here in atlanta area! and yes that's software, any computer generated calculation is software that makes estimates. and boy are those estimates inaccurate. plus calculationg hp by 1/4 times is inacurrate anyway because that depend on driver/reaction/humidity/wind/hooking/ etc. if you help out at Atlanta drag you SHOULD know that u cant estimate rwhp that way.
topmcat 2 years ago
that's briliant of you. i suck at welding so that therefore means i don't konw my way under the hood? lol. that motor in that blazer? replaced by me. got if from jasper after the previous owner blew a head gasket. so me and a handful of guys can swap an engine but i don't know anything? ok. i'm done with you. i dismiss you back to fairy land where ignorance is bliss. that's a shame, you could have learned something.
topmcat 2 years ago
Learn something from two dumb fucks that dont know jack shit about cars? Yeah i would of learn alot.....maybe i would of learn why dip shits like you are ricers more the muscle heads.....take care kids...enjoy your pathetic lives
egale180 2 years ago
... waiting...
topmcat 2 years ago
watch?v=fdY8_xf4ax0
egale180 2 years ago
1. that's fondle's camaro with intake headers and 3" exhaust. not stock. but you got one thing right. with an intake and full exhuast that's what i would expect. 192. That the only one? try again!
topmcat 2 years ago
Would of made sense if it was the right person lol. Sorry and no there are plenty more and "dragtimes" is the website name....and if you want to see the rest i can record them on the Atlanta Dragway in Commerce,Ga where i help out with ETA's and such. I can give you plenty of V6 stock camaro's ETA , Trap speed, and weight...you do the math and tell me those are less then 190rwhp stock. Tell those owners too their car isnt running what they are lol feel free to come by
egale180 2 years ago
a car is limited by how much you can change before it isnt even considered that car anymore.....prime example.....Just because a pro drag car has the fiberglass body shape of a camaro doesnt make it a camaro with whatever massive 2000+RWHP engine they put on it whether it be Blown,Turbo'd,or Juiced engine.
egale180 2 years ago
if you completely take out the factory engine and drop a different one into it technically it isnt really that car anymore unless they made camaros in mass production with a engine for example like the 572BBC other then the ZL1. And clearly you were talking about its potential even if he got the car year wrong, even if you put a 2010 in place of that older model you'd get the same outcome. He was talking about the 2010 since he mentioned the 300hp.
egale180 2 years ago
no read it again. that kid was saying that THIS camaro isn't modded and that it came stock with 300 hp. then topcat corrected him saying this is the 3.4 camaro with 160 hp. then YOU corrected top cat saying the 3.4 put out 200 something hp. but you were thinking (i guess) of the lq1. however, the camaro never came with the lq1. only the 160 hp version. lol i read it. i was bored. but anyway... that's prob where the mix up occured.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
Enjoy your pathetic life kid i am done wasting my time on some dumb ass that doesnt know jackshit about cars that thinks he does...someday i wonder if you might get slapped up by a real grease monkey that you try to impress with your ignorance lol i would laugh.
egale180 2 years ago
hahahahaha.........you think the camaro is modded......the v6 camaro had 300hp you tard. mustang only had 210.face it you lost.boo hoo.Camaro is King!
zweb620 2 years ago
you shouldn't run your mouth when you don't know what ur talking about. the only time the camaro had a 300 v6 is 2010. this is NOT a 2010 camaro. it's a pre-98. so it's v6 starts at 160 for the 3.4 and 205 for the 3.8. u fail... but u did get one thing right. Camaro IS king. well prince, Corvette is king.
topmcat 2 years ago
Actually if you are going to quote stats get them right because even if it isnt the 2010 V6 with 300hp....the 3.4 has 200-210hp......3.8 has 220-230hp.....the 3.4/3.8 is the same in the chevy lumina's and the early impala's when they brought them back. as well the 3.8 is in the Firebird,Monte Carlo,and grand prix....So technically you failed worse on top of his fail......Corvette is the chevy king but technically the camaro/trans am are under-rated vettes when they got the LS engines
egale180 2 years ago
your talking about the supercharged 3.8's. that's the ONLY time the 3.8 even came close to to 220-230 is when it was supercharged in the 04 monte carloSS/ impala SS/ and grand prix gtp. the 3.4 made 160. so i have NO IDEA where u got that from but it's WAY off...
topmcat 2 years ago
you WOULD be right for the 3.8 IF the camaros/firebirds had the eaton supercharger option the way the monte carlo and grand prix did. but they didn't ... so u kinda fail now...
topmcat 2 years ago
Wrong with the eaton S/C it is 240 to 260 but good job failing twice now.
egale180 2 years ago
right, 240 with the eaton, so how are you getting 220-230 naturally aspirated? you tellin me that the eaton only added 10-20 hp? seriously, where are you getting these numbers from?? no really. WHERE?
topmcat 2 years ago
the 3.4 in the lumina IS NOT the same one that came in the camaro/firebirds. the difference between the L32 and the LQ1 is one is a DOHC. they are two COMPLETELY different animals. so you do fail. worse and worse it seems. and about the 3.8 L36... you show me where ANYONE has recorded over 205 in ANY application and i'll admit that i'm the biggest failure ever. stock cars of course. put up or fail.
topmcat 2 years ago
If you actually knew anything about cars period you'd see how much of a idiot you truly are right now with the statement you just made. You already admitted being the biggest fail by running your mouth like you pointed out someone else doing when YOU dont know anything at all.
egale180 2 years ago
still waiting for you to prove me wrong. lets see a dyno sheet of your so called stock L36 putting 218 to the wheels since you OBVIOUSLY cant provide anything to back up the facts you pulled out of your ass.
topmcat 2 years ago
if you knew the difference between a plug and a piston you would see that you just stuck your foot in your mouth. trying to correct me with incorrect facts. the 3.4 in the camaro and birds were rated at 160 FACT. the 3.4 in your lumina is not the same as the maro/birds 3.4 FACT. the 3.8 series II in the birds/maros never saw ratings higher than 205 even in Fwd applications FACT. u have different number than me and the rest of the planet? PROVE IT! 2ND TIME... WHERE U GETTING THIS FROM??
topmcat 2 years ago
I have to prove anything to a complete and total dumb ass that doesnt know anything about cars except what you THINK you know which is absolutely nothing?.....pure sense of irony there having to educate the one that thinks he is right.....you wouldnt know what a fact was unless you looked it up in a dictionary and then added it to whatever "knowledge" you think you have about cars which frankly is nothing.
egale180 2 years ago
that's EXACTLY what i would say if i couldn't prove anything. face it... you fucked up. just admit it. it's ok... you were wrong it happens... why don't you come to FBN and tell me and every other member that our 3.8's are rated at 220-230 and our 3.4's are 210. come tell usall we're wrong and you, with you undocumented numbers are right. your a joke with no punch line.
topmcat 2 years ago
The only dumb ass here that is behind is you with your head up your ass. Enjoy your pathetic life kid. You are a waste of breathe, and effort when all you do is make yourself even more of a dumb fuck then when you did when you opened your mouth......like i said take care kid....maybe someday a complete and total idiot like yourself might go somewhere in life.
egale180 2 years ago
bye! hope you get your facts right before you try to correct someone else. so lets see.. do we listen to goodwrench/ wards auto world/ edmunds or to you... a guy who couldn't provide even the SMALLEST shread of evidence and can't admit when he's wrong? yeah... choice is obvious.
topmcat 2 years ago
If only you werent so mentally inept and actually did your research you'd see how much of a real dumb ass you are.
egale180 2 years ago
By the way dumb ass because you said any application here is a 3800 impala that runs high 9s low 10s with exactly what you asked for OVER 205
watch?v=hBVH1bWZuRU
egale180 2 years ago
THAT IMPALA IS TURBOCHARGED YOU RETARD! IT'S NOT A STOCK 3800!!!! you wanna preach to me about what i don't know when you can't tell the difference between a turboed 3.8 putting 600+ hp and a stock one?? you said the 3.8 was 220-230 but you STILL cant prove shit. just quit while your behind
topmcat 2 years ago
but that's not stock. does that count? the 3.4 in the chevrolet camaros are different the same ones in the chevrolet lumina.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
HELL NO it doesn't count. but don't argue... egale will bring up retarded numbers from faiy land and claim they're directly from gm. (he's got a telepathic connection with the engineers so he doesnt need to present an actual sorce.)
topmcat 2 years ago
lol well maybe he's got some source don't be rude and we'll see.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
um, not to but in but those figures are a bit off my friend :)
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
There not off at all. If anyone numbers are off it is this mentally inept idiot topmcat that thinks modding a blazer/s10 is even worth the effort that is all knowing.
egale180 2 years ago
ok. so for the sake of debate, are you sure your talking about the same 3.4? you know there's like three different 3.4's out there right? the one for the camaro is DEF. 160 hp. and where are you getting 230 plus for the 3.8 series II? not callin you a liar but i've never seen those numbers. so help me out.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
the 230+ is for the 3.8 Series || thats supercharged with the M90 Eaton blower. The numbers they have is 240 to 260 for the M90 depending on boost obviously everything stock including pulley. Yeah i know there are 3 different ones. The one i am talking about is the LQ1 from 94'-97 they produce 215hp,225 lb tq.
egale180 2 years ago
the regular stock 3.8 serious || i get about 215 to 220 on dyno stock with just a tune. You can get alot more out of them then just 205hp if you tune them correctly.
egale180 2 years ago
agreed... but so why did you comment on the camaro's 3.4? i'm pretty sure topmcat was talking about stock numbers for the 3.4 and 3.8 motors. stock meaning no tune.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
i was talking about the car's potential and i am pretty sure the guy he was running his mouth off at was as well. A tune does not make it not stock numbers. Stock means that all internals and even bolt-ons are factory parts not after-market. I am pretty sure anyone who drag races would say even if you tuned the car if there are no modifications to it; it is stock.
egale180 2 years ago
nope. i was talking to someone else about what the numbers for those motors where and YOU said i was wrong. and clearly i wasn't. we weren't talkin about potential. cuz a cars potential is only limited by your wallet.
topmcat 2 years ago
I don't think 25 -30 hp is reasonable outcome with a tune with no bolt ons or intenal work. but thnks forclearnthat up
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
If you are changing the A:F ratio yes.
egale180 2 years ago
Not to mention if you do internal work and bolt-ons you arent stock anymore. Also you'd get far greater increases in hp with interals redone as well as bolt-ons.
egale180 2 years ago
that'd be one hell of a tune! maybe i coul see that on a larger displacement v8. ls1 for example. and even that is an agressive tune. but that kinda power jump from V6? no bolt on either? i'll believe it when i see it.
topmcat 2 years ago
agreed.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
Then i guess you'd be as much of a dumb ass to say that it is impossible to get 15hp added from just a CAI?
egale180 2 years ago
never said that. dont put words in my mouth. i'm saying that 20-30 hp from a v6 is HIGHLY unlikely. now... if you combined it with a good exhuast set up or a bolt on to work with the tune then yeah. maybe. AND ALSO zweb was talking about what he THOUGHT this camaro came with stock. because he thought it was the 2010. he even pm me appologizing. AND MY comment said the 3.4 starts at 160. which is true. and the 3.8 at 205 for the 3.8. which is true. WE WERE NOT TALKIN ABOUT POTENTIAL.
topmcat 2 years ago
that's the way i understood it too. this was fun! you guys should argue about something else too. like.... glitter vs googly-eyes.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
googly-eyes all the way!
topmcat 2 years ago
highly unlikely and you wasted your money on a blazer and a s10 exhaust and you think you know that? Lmfao yeah you are a joke.
egale180 2 years ago
shows EXACLTY how much you know. i'd say a few more ponies/ better fuel economy/ and a nicer sound is worth the few bucks i spent. 15.54 for a 3500 pound suv isn't bad ... not bad at all.
topmcat 2 years ago
lol i hope someday you actually learn something about cars and not what some car review site tells you.
egale180 2 years ago
see, you just asumed that for yourself. i don't just copy and paste facts. i don't act untill i'm sure i know what i'm doing and exaclty what i'm fucking with. 1 site saying something doesn't mean shit. but when you've got lots of reputable knoledgable companies and goodwrench not to mention vets in the forums, it's a pretty safe bet that it's correct. i did my research before i picked out my exhaust, intake, pullies, e-fan, throttle body, and got tuned. i'm not stupid
topmcat 2 years ago
good for you , you can list the things other people did for you i am sure you feel very accomplished. Congrats. Dont care.
egale180 2 years ago
there you go assuming again. look man...your not better than me because you know how to change your bicycle chain. the only thing i didn't do was the exhaust because i cant weld for shit and the tune which w4m did. just go fix your crooked handle bars.
topmcat 2 years ago
Right i am assuming because it is plainly clear you dont know jackshit so you think trying to prove anything online will make your unfound assertions any more true then when you thought of them. Truly pathetic you are.
egale180 2 years ago
careful... as pathetic as he may be he did just beat you in a debate. lol
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
He didnt beat me in nothing. Sorry to disappoint.
egale180 2 years ago
well... from a non-biased perspective... you called him on the numbers right? thinking they were talkin about potential, not what the motor come with. but u were wrong. then u confused the two different 3.4's. then you misqouted the 3.8's numbers (factory). sooo... u kinda did loose.
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
Actually wrong, i didnt misquote any numbers so good job on completely contradicting the "non-biased perspective" Ironically enough the fact you guys think changing the A:F ratio wont give you the needed HP to give a 3.8 N/A 220hp is irelevant to the facts that it can. The fact that the 3800 is rated for 220 from GM is FACT. What is sad is resting on review sites that arent always fact as "fact".the fact the kid NEVER checked any forums or did research is FACT. If he did he'd be eating his words
egale180 2 years ago
ok, ignoring the first two points (misunderstanding the factory/potential thing AND the 3.4 being different) lets focus on the third. how do you get that gm rated the 2nd series 3.8 at 220? gm rated it at 205 it's posted right on gm performance parts under 3800 series II dyno chart. so how you get 220?
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
gm did not rate it at 205....ratings are not marked by RPM #s good job. 205 @ #### RPMs is a Dyno number on stock internals/bolt-on's/tuning.....good job kiddo.
egale180 2 years ago
ok woah... first don't call me kiddo. second what are u talking about? how else do you "rate" a motor besides the numbers they produce? how do you rate a motor as putting out more hp than it produces across the entire power curve?? that make absolutely no sense. and lastly you don't know what biased means. no offence but your using the word wrong if u think it means siding with one side. that's not biased. biased means being partial. topmcats numbers aren't wrong so what isthere to point out?
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
No obviously you have very bad reading comprehension since i said a NON-BIASED VIEW means pointing out the wrongs of both sides or the two people....what you did in the comment before was offer a BIASED VIEW. The power rating for an engine does not include the RPMs where you get those numbers good job buddy
egale180 2 years ago
once again.... thats NOT what biased means!! this is the 3rd time someone's explained this to you but biased means being partial to one side vs another. partial means showing favoritism. he didn't show favoritsm to me. he just pointed out that you were wrong in three ways. what is there on my behalf to point out? nothing. nothing i said was wrong. not one word. so how can u expect someone to find fault? did you find something incorrect? if u can,PROVE IT otherwise stop bitching.
topmcat 2 years ago
ignorance... you wanna explain how an engine making at MAXIMUM "X" amount can be rated 15 hp more overall? you know what? don't... you just confirmed what i already knew. your retarded.
topmcat 2 years ago
you are really that retarded that you think a offical rating would include the RPMs for those numbers? Is that why the Z06 is rated for 505HP but we all know it doesnt put all 505 to the rear wheels.....You are a stupid ass. Feel free to tell someone that the rating of HP for the engine is the numbers with the @ #### RPM and watch them laugh at you because that is DYNO NUMBERS meaning not even the RATED HP FOR THE ENGINE....good job dumb ass.
egale180 2 years ago
So please try the non-biased perspective again only not contradicting it this time.
egale180 2 years ago
that doesn't make sense. non-biased means not caring or having any steak in who wins. how does saying that one side won me biased? if a judge rules in one sides favor in a boxing match, does that make the judge now biased?
firebirdlegend 2 years ago
The fact you were completely sided in one side of the argument is being biased a non-biased perspective means pointing out the wrongs from both sides or two different peoeple.....Nice try again.
egale180 2 years ago
LMAO!!! that's not what biased means! so by ur def., if i said that corvette beat that civic's ass. that would make me biased. because i completly sided with one side right? lol. biased means you lean to one side because you FAVOR a side more. not that you just made a decision on who you thought won. and you call ME pathetic? quit using words you don't understand
topmcat 2 years ago
The only difference between them is the price/weight....they made it more affordable for ppl to own the same performance without paying an arm and a leg which is a solid 70,000+$ depending on year 85,000$+ for 2009 model base msrp....so yeah i think 38,000$ to 48,000$ for a 2010 camaro is better then 85,000+$
egale180 2 years ago