different dyno but 6-speed manual camaro 364rwhp.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN2GGzlX0QE

 

I just thought about what octane was used? We talked before about what 94 octane might add. 375 rwhp is probably 430 fly wheel on a stick. Maybe on 94 octane the 5.0 is making 425-430 HP? I just read it had 91 octane. I'm guessing its under rated by 20 HP/TQ

 

Do we know if the ecu is even designed to read that high of octane, it might have a base timing that is good for 91 or somthing and will retard for less but might not advance for 93 or 94...

 

Still nothing on Camaro 5. I thought this would be front page news.

 

Awesome numbers if they are correct. We need some 1/4 passes to see if it's really putting down that kind of power IMO...

 

They are correct. For that dyno. On that day.

Based on Edmunds other cars they've dyno'ed on that very dyno, you could extrapolate 418 crank HP from their reading on this car.

 

To me, thats a perfect exhaust note. Now I am gona have to get a GT just for the sound...

 

Great find THX. Nice to see some new stuff starting to come out.

 

dynoed in the wrong gear huh?

 

I don't trust these numbers. Their GT500 numbers were way out of wack.

 

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...ang-gt-50.html

 

Fail.

Numbers are useless. Someone email them.

I wonder how many magazines and reviews are going to fail by dynoing it in 4th, assuming that gear is 1:1. It would be safe to subtract 30 - 40 HP from the numbers they obtained in 4th if you ran it 5th as you should.

 

Yeah I just came here to post this...you'd think Edmunds would know better.

 

Somehow I'm not suprised that a auto "journal" like insidetheline managed to publish a review with such an oversight. We need Brenspeed or Doug from Bamachips to get a hold of one of these things and check it out.

 

Are corrections made for the final drive ratio? I don't know anything about dyno testing procedures. Seems you should be able to dyno in pretty much any gear and adjust for the transmission ratios, using higher gears for a more manageable test, but I don't know. I'm hoping they didn't screw up, but I'm guessing they probably did.

 

nevermind

 

They tested with 91.

 

I wasn't expecting all of negative comments here, maybe on Camaro 5, but not here. Regarding some of the reactions, the Edmunds dyno seems to read a little high. I think they had 501 for the 2010 GT500 and 480 is closer to most other dynos. I think 375 rwhp is a good bet and that's closer to 430 HP. About doing the pull in 4th, that's about the same as doing a pull in 3rd for a 2010. MM & FF did this and said there's little effect on HP but TQ reads a little higher (5 percent?). Reading the blog, the numbers sounds legit. Edmunds has run the car in the quarter so they know what it can do. They just cannot release the numbers yet. I'm guessing they got a 12.6 at 112 and that's why they're saying its under rated. We'll see next week!

 

How is discussing differing dynos and incorrect dyno testing procedures negative?

Geez.

The difference between here and Camaro 5 is they are all fanboys. I like to think that here, we talk about reality. The engine isn't making 450HP. What does Ford have to gain by under rating? NOTHING. If the engine made 450, you bet they'd advertise it!

I had a dyno operator run my G8 in 3rd instead of 4th on the first pull by mistake. It measured 335 in 3rd and 301 in 4th.

 

except if they have a boss 302 thats rated at 450 or so, why would you buy it.