2nd Race with LS1 tonight

  • Sponsors (?)


300bhp/ton said:
I asked this on a fbody site (so as to be completly unbiased), click here to see what they thought of that statement

Wow....that's a great argument. "My car is prettier" :rlaugh:

I normally don't agree with magazine racing but I suppose that is the most reasonable response here. The WS-6 and the SS drivetrains are identical, so it is true that it really is a driver's race. But given the same drivers I understand the SS usually wins. I think I remember reading a comparison in Hot Rod but , to be honest I don't know which magazine it was.
I'm sure the Camaro got the edge because of the difference in weight. Or as your counterparts on the F-body site said "It ways less." :lol:
Sorry, but I don't believe the Ram-air does much except slow down the Firebird via aerodynamics.
 
300bhp/ton said:
Maybe this will help:


WS6 or Ram Air will have no real bearing on its potentail as the engines produce the same BHP, as long as you don't beleive the GM quoted figures.
Sorry missed that first part.

that may be true but if you actually watch them race i've seen WS6 T/A run high 12's low 13's stock but never seen a slowmaro run faster than 13.5 stock there are little diff. (according to a few f-body friends) trans, rear and such, not exactly sure tho
 
Good job getting the GM guys to yell at eachother lol. Nuh uh! Mine is faster 'cause it's purdy!

I think that a plain black 05 GT is JUST fine. Don't need flames or stickers or anything. But like they say about the ricers, each sticker adds 10hp.
 
crazykid2056 said:
Ok, if the Ram-Air is fruitless as so many have said, why do the Ram-Air models make 15 HP over those without?
This not a flame just an honest question. Who actually claims more for Ram Air? If you are reffering to GM with the Fbody's then - No as all of them produced about 345bhp, it was cheaper for GM to advertise a lower output to help prevent lost Corvette sales than actually detune the LS1. I beleive the Mach 1 with 305bhp also had a functioning hood scoop aka Ram Air, yet its increase in power over the GT is more attributed to the rest of the engine such as DOHC and TB size, also bear in mind that the 'non-ram air' variant of the same engine used in the earlier Cobra's produced 320bhp.

As for Ram Air, well that is a big topic. Basically its really cool but not really a great performance mod. Hence companies like Ferrari, Lambo, Aston Martin, McLaren don't use it. Logical isn't it, however the answer lies with physics.

Basically and engine will only ever draw X amount of air thru the intake, to visulise image an engine draws 1 pint of water every second. Now unless you perform other mods such as exhaust and heads/cam the engine will not draw a greater amount of air.

You can not force greater quantities into the engine either, such as 2 pints per second if the engine does not want it. This is what ram air will try and do. The only way you can get more air into the engine is thru forced induction such as a turbo or supercharger.

These will compress 2 pints of water into a one pint class. So the engine is still drawing at the same rate, but the intake air is much densers.

So at low speeds a ram air setup will only act as a regular CAI. As the speed builds it will sort of work though bases on the science above. As the air hits the inside of the scoop it actually becomes compressed thus increaseing the charge densisty of the air. So technically any ram air car becomes slightly FI at speed (although very low psi levels). The down side is the extra drag produced by the scoops. In many cases this is likely to cancel out any benefit from the increased power. In fact in the 80's Aston Martin did exactly this, the V8 coupe used to have a big scoop on the bonnet, yet by using a regular air intake they managed to get more power at lower speeds and due to the better aerodynamics it also had a higher top speed.

The other (and much more effective) alternative is still called ram air but it envolves the RAM pipes and bellmouths inside the air intake manifold. Any tube containing air can be made to resonate at certain critical frequencies in the manner of an organ pipe. Such is the case with the inlet tracts of an engine and if the natural resonance frequencies can be matched to the engine speed then a mild supercharging effect can be induced.

Ram Air is no myth. It just doesn't always work, a subtle but important differance!

An extreme example is Concord, the engineers had a problem with too much air flow entering the Rolls Royce engines at high speed (Mach 1+), so to redude the air intake speed they added a giant baffle scoop which only move into position at high speed, this not only slowed the air down but also compressed it, thus aiding powerout from the engines.



To further the argumanet, the Bristol Fighter uses a form of ram air, or rather very well designed air intake system to acheive more power at high speed.

Here is a direst quote from Bristol:

"Power output of 525 bhp increases further at very high speed due to aerodynamically induced supercharging effect. Maximum speed approximately 210 mph."

BristolFighter2.jpg
BristolFighter4.jpg



Not the lack of actually hood scoops as these would ultimatley cause more drag and reduce top speed.

For more info on the fighter check out thier webpage: http://www.bristolcars.co.uk/BristolFighter.htm

Hope this helps.
 
crazykid2056 said:
Ok, if the Ram-Air is fruitless as so many have said, why do the Ram-Air models make 15 HP over those without?

For the same reason identical LS1 engines were rated at 310hp in the Z28/
Formula and 345 in the Vette, marketing. Rated hp numbers aren't nearly as scientific as you'd think.

LS1 engines will make anywhere from 290-310rwhp on a chassis dyno. This is due to the manufacturing tolerances, not the trim level of any particular car. The only exception would be the 345hp option package for the SS's in the '02 model year. This got you a high-flow airlid & catback exhaust from the factory. These cars will make 320-330rwhp stock, just like any other lid/catback LS1.
 
3 posts up you're asking why the ram-air versions were rated at 15hp more now you're saying they're all rated at 345hp.

The point is that the factory ratings don't mean squat. The same identical LS1 engine was rated at 310hp in the Z28/Formula; 325hp in the SS/WS6; and 345hp in the Vette. The ratings are about marketing, nothing more, nothing less. They are all the same engine. The only difference is that the Corvette LS1 has electronic throttle-by-wire while the f-body LS1 has a garden-variety cable-operated throttle.
 
I was lucky - pulled over for 90+ 41 hours after I picked her up. Temp plates, no proof of insurance (picked up Friday night, pulled over Sunday afternoon). Gave me a warning! It would have really sucked to have had to call Allstate Monday morning and go ahead and activate the policy WITH a ticket already!
 
I got a ticket the day I bought mine. Had the car about 2 hours, got caught on the interstate in the middle of nowhere..I was going about 98 when he hit me, but wrote me up for 91 in a 70, so he did cut me a bit of a break. (appearantly, in GA at least, if you get written up for 22+ mph over the limit, the fines go up drastically). I thought he might let me go when he started asking me questions about the car, but didn't..cost me $200. oh well.
 
Wsmatau said:
In theory, but in reality a SS Camaro will beat a WS-6 firebird every time and they have identical engines.
300bhp/ton said:
well I own neither, but I am a member of a few fbody boards.

Post that there and it'd probably crash the server. The only real difference between the Z and the TA is the aero package, but it is unlikely to have any real affect the low side 120mph, and from what I've read not a great deal at higher speeds either.

RAM air is a pretty pointless mod and always has been (although still rather cool, but that won't alter the physics behind it).
300bhp/ton said:
I asked this on a fbody site (so as to be completly unbiased), click here to see what they thought of that statement
Further to my post on the Fbody site and the prediction it would cause trouble, the thread was locked yesterday!
 
300bhp/ton said:
Further to my post on the Fbody site and the prediction it would cause trouble, the thread was locked yesterday!

Those F-body guys really know how to put together an intelligent argument! So, have you proven your statement? Or did you just stir the pot on yet another website? Or did you just want to post the same two articles you regularly post about Ram-air? Did you want to hijack this thread to discuss ram-air? Or are you just trying to get this locked? :spot:
 
Wsmatau said:
Those F-body guys really know how to put together an intelligent argument! So, have you proven your statement? Or did you just stir the pot on yet another website? Or did you just want to post the same two articles you regularly post about Ram-air? Did you want to hijack this thread to discuss ram-air? Or are you just trying to get this locked? :spot:
looks like your doing fine on your own.


All I did was answer the question and provide backup evidance to verify my claim, if you don't like you don't have to beleive it. However claiming otherwise without any form of evidance is pretty lame.

My word means nowt (same as for everyone) so I try and explain and add an explanation to my findings. I assume you read my post concering Ram Air? If you disagree, which areas and why. I would be intreaged and happy to know, because if I have made a mistake and you can verify yours or any other claim then I would like to know - this is how we learn.
 
I still do not see how people arguing and calling each other names on another board answers the question about whether or not a WS-6 is faster than a SS Camaro. I never mentioned whether I though Ram-air helped or hindered the two. You seem to enjoy debating that issue with anyone that will listen. I discussed it with you once previously before the server crash. Duner closed the thread because we had trailed off to jet engines and you didn't believe that some use centrifugal blowers for compression.
You seem to be stuck on the whole ram-air thing and use my quote out of context to fuel your fire. If you have evidence that a WS6 is indeed faster or identical in performance to a SS then post what you have found refuting my claim. I don't want to hear anything more about Ram-Air. I'll see if I can find the article that supports what I wrote about the SS having an advantage because of weight.