Well, not really. Quick knows his stuff and is a great debater. With the chassis dyno information out there, his position is easy to understand, but when you are sure of the facts before searching for supporting information the argument takes a different direction.

 

Was that really necessary? Especially after I went out of my way to give you credit. I guess I shouldn't have expected any more than that. People do get nasty when they're on the wrong side of the argument.

 

Yeah, you're right my friend. I went back and edited it out.

 

I have been reading this for a couple of days now, just to get my jollies..It really is better than the daily news.. Now I feel compelled to post up a question.
I just don't get this line of logic..The C5Z06 was at the end of its lifetime when the C6 and the LS2 came out, so what would GM be protecting? So why would a 5 hp, (Heck, lets get generous 10hp) addition to the rating of the LS2 have anything to do with marketing of a car that was no longer going to be made?
Trying to use Gm's published 1/4 mile times to justify the argument is really stretching it. I mean, if they are going to lie about HP to protect an outgoing model from a new one, would think twice about skewing 1/4 mile numbers to sell a car..
I would tend to believe that they shied away from certifying the LS2 because it was a little short on the HP they had been claiming..Now that would be a marketing decision..

 

LS3 also means less gas mileage !!!!!!!!!!

 

That's good. It's time to make peace on this issue and agree to disagree. My very first post was intended to give the OP some extra info, but ended up getting drawn in further than I expected or wanted to.

 

$8,500 straps on a supercharger and then they are ALL IN THE REAR VIEW MIRROR.

My $8,500 on an LS2 will kick your but, anywhere - anytime - and hang with a ZR1.

 

i don't think at this point anyone is taking this to seriously....i think if anything it has brought us a little closer together..I never never come up on another Corvette and challenge them..But I have ran with a few together..and i believe that because of this form..i feel a brotherhood with other Vets.

 

Appreciate your questions, but to tell you the truth, I am getting tired of making replies on this thread. As I posted earlier, take some to time to go through that other thread I mentioned...you'll find an answer there.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that they hid the LS2 from the latest SAE testing methods. There was PLENTY of time and opportunity for them to submit it to the new testing methods had they wanted.

2006 LS7 in the Z06 gets tested under the new guidelines, ......but the LS2 in the base 2006 does not. Same thing happens in '07.

If they had wanted to submit LS2 for testing under the new ratings system, they could have. Why didn't they? They tested at least one other prior engine in their line up and got a "HP increase" under the new test methods using the same engine.

That was the engine in the Cadillac.

They got a free bump in the Cadillac's power rating under the new testing. If they could have gotten a "free" 5-10hp bump or more, for the LS2, just by submitting the LS2 to the new testing methods, and doing nothing else to it one has to ask; why would they not jump at that opportunity? Why "hide" it from the new testing methods? Why duck the new "be all and end all" SAE "test to end all tests"?

Why keep it out of the "newer, stricter, hard core, no fudging the numbers" testing if it could cut the mustard and substantiate it's claimed 400hp number, if not better it, under this new, and more stringent method of testing?.....Testing which had been used for the LS7, and would be used for the LS3.

Worthy of mention here, is that a few other manufacturers had to state a lesser horsepower number than they had stated just the year earlier, for some of their prior engines, which were submitted for the new testing methods.

 

did the same thing,,,,,,but have learned to love the paddle shift, and the 6 speed auto over the 4 speed,,,,but really miss the AW,,,

 

How much HP in my 05 LS2 GTO? It was made in Australia.

 

Not U.S. manufacturers and definitely not GM engines.

Not planning on replying to the rest of the post--been there; done that.

 

You're right. GM had a perfect record as far as having no engines "downgraded" in terms of horsepower once those engines were submitted for the new testing methods.

http://web.camaross.com/forums/showthread.php?t=390916

But then again, the LS2 was not submitted for the testing, now was it?

It was held out of participation in the new testing methods.

Perhaps that had something to do with GM maintaining that perfect record of having no engine downrated in the new testing methods.

Withold it from the testing, and it doesn't get downgraded.

Only submit for the new stricter testing, those which you know can maintain their power rating, if not increase it, under the new testing.

But definitely don't submit one to this test which you know is going to be degraded in power.

http://www.cars.com/go/news/Story.js...er=&aff=sacbee

"GM has submitted results from 11 engine lines — covering popular vehicles such as the Chevrolet Malibu and Impala, Pontiac G6 and Cadillac DTS — to SAE for certification. The tests bumped up the horsepower ratings for the Malibu, Impala and G6 by 1 for 2006."

They tested the above engines according to the new SAE guidelines, but not the LS2, an engine going into one of their flagship products????.

 

LS7 gained 5; Cadillac STS-v gained 29

All the arguments have already been made. It is time to put this to rest.

 

Yep, everyone remembers that 2005 model LS7 rated at 500 hp.

 

hopefully for good, but we both know better than that.

Just like Jason and Freddy, it will be back.

 

Not sure how you mean that. I see you became a member in 2007, so you may not be aware that the LS7 was rated at 500 horsepower under the old SAE J1349 guidelines before being rated at 505 under the revised J1349 protocol with certification.

 

Is it just me or does the following seem like it should be worth more than 30-36 HP:

*Engine displacement increased to 6.2 liters (376 cubic inches)
*Revised a camshaft
*Revised valvetrain (LS7 heads)
*High flow intake
*Use of the Z06's fuel injectors
*NPP Exhaust

I got over 30hp alone with tubes and tune on my LS2.
And so it goes........

 

Oh absolutely. 06QS and I were going at it much worse than you. Only - he was making your arguement. I can remember it like it was yesterday. He went on about the things Marina was saying. He went on about how "the new SAE standard was a more generous STD cuz the LS7 gained 5 HP".

Oh - there was no convincing Q

And then, with pages of LS2 dynos posted here in the 340 - 350 RWHP range - LG Motorsports (hardly a fly by night outfit) posted dyno sheets from at least 2 bone stock LS3's at > 390 RWHP. And within a week - there were several more.

All from reputable tuners.

On about the 3rd or 4th day - 06QS (0r DSOMZ51 as he was known as then) - did a major mia culpa. He took a lot of **** - but he admitted he was wrong.