LS2-vs-LS6:
07-30-2004, 08:05 PM
#21
Intermediate
Member Since: Sep 2000
Location: Diamondhead MS
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-01-2004, 10:33 PM
#23
Race Director
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Redondo Beach USA
Posts: 12,487
Received 1,977 Likes
on
1,190 Posts
About the same peak torque and 5 less peak HP than a decent LS6. The top end rolls off a little beyond 6000 whereas the LS6 is flat to the redline, but the LS2 has a little fatter bottom end and midrange, which will be real useable in normal driving.
Looks like an honest rating, and the RWHP and torque curves are exactly what I expected compared to the LS6. Depending on exhaust system efficiency, C6 LS2 could come in a little more or even a little less.
Duke
Looks like an honest rating, and the RWHP and torque curves are exactly what I expected compared to the LS6. Depending on exhaust system efficiency, C6 LS2 could come in a little more or even a little less.
Duke
Last edited by SWCDuke; 08-01-2004 at 10:37 PM.
08-07-2004, 08:58 PM
#24
Race Director
The 5-6% torque advantage the LS-2 enjoys in the midrange is half offset by the 3% taller wheel/tire combo of the C6. So the net advantage is much narrower: about 3%.
Also, I have never seen such an irregular torque curve as the LS-6 engine depicts. Actual dynos from our members show a much smoother curve, and much fatter in the middle. If I can find my dyno sheet, I will post it...looks nothing like this.
Maybe they used a Monday LS-6.
Also, I find GM's torque graphing a bit silly. Why not use full scale and show it like it is. How ricey of them.
Also, I have never seen such an irregular torque curve as the LS-6 engine depicts. Actual dynos from our members show a much smoother curve, and much fatter in the middle. If I can find my dyno sheet, I will post it...looks nothing like this.
Maybe they used a Monday LS-6.
Also, I find GM's torque graphing a bit silly. Why not use full scale and show it like it is. How ricey of them.
