Actual HP

TyHawk · Post by **TyHawk** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:44 am

This has probably been discussed before but I didn't see it. Are the older Hawks that are rated at 315 actually 315? I've heard people say before they were under rated.

Scott Chab · Post by **Scott Chab** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 10:06 am

The LS motors seem to be consistently underated but the only LT motor I've seen underarted was the LT4.

BLACK-HAWK · Post by **BLACK-HAWK** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:06 am

bone stock mine put down about 275rwhp at about 4200' elevation (m6) / 285rwhp with long tube headers. if i remember right my buddies LS1 hawk with slp long tube headers and a cut out put down 310'ishrwhp(?). i believe the 315HP rating is from the flywheel

Scott Chab · Post by **Scott Chab** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:38 am

BLACK-HAWK wrote:bone stock mine put down about 275rwhp at about 4200' elevation (m6) / 285rwhp with long tube headers. if i remember right my buddies LS1 hawk with slp long tube headers and a cut out put down 310'ishrwhp(?). i believe the 315HP rating is from the flywheel

All manufacturer HP ratings are at the flywheel.

It is quite common to see SLP LS1 cars rated at 345hp putting down 320whp+ bone stock.

TyHawk · Post by **TyHawk** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 12:53 pm

Wow. So an LS1 would be like a 1999 up or did they start later?

So far I'm happy with the 95. Breaks lose pretty easy in 1st! Although I don't beat on it just goosed it a couple times.

I will want more HP before long though.

BLACK-HAWK · Post by **BLACK-HAWK** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:12 pm

i have a turbo for you

TyHawk · Post by **TyHawk** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:24 pm

Yeah? How much will that set me back?

VBACHAWK · Post by **VBACHAWK** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:09 pm

Don't even ask.............@@ Just have him forward the photos.........twin turbo nightmare that goes on and on.................If I had the $$$ I'd just drop a Z06 engine into the damn thing.......or an LS9............saw my shop drop a Z06 into a 69 Chevelle...........a mere $30,000 I think it was.

Pam
97 red Hawk #99
Wondering how I can actually drive this thing to Ohio......sigh......

BLACK-HAWK · Post by **BLACK-HAWK** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:13 pm

TyHawk wrote:Yeah? How much will that set me back?

Scott Chab · Post by **Scott Chab** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:22 pm

TyHawk wrote:Wow. So an LS1 would be like a 1999 up or did they start later?

The first LS1 Hawk was '99.

TyHawk · Post by **TyHawk** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:56 am

I'll take that as "stick with stock stupid"!

BLACK-HAWK · Post by **BLACK-HAWK** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:04 am

also one of those things... " if you have to ask, you can't afford it"

... if you do any modifying, go all motor, 383 stroker baby!

Scott Chab · Post by **Scott Chab** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:51 pm

TyHawk wrote:I'll take that as "stick with stock stupid"!

There is no reason to stick with stock unless you're happy with the stock performance or you don't have the money for mods. If you do decide to mod, figure out your goal (handling, power, braking, street, strip, road course, show) and then determine your budget. When you are determining your budget, just remember that when you modify one part of the car it could very easily show the weakness of another part and that will need to be repaired/replaced. For example, if you throw a lot of power mods on the car you might need a better clutch, bigger brakes or a stronger rear.

LT4 Hawk 9 · Post by **LT4 Hawk 9** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:36 pm

Scott Chab wrote:The LS motors seem to be consistently underated but the only LT motor I've seen underarted was the LT4.

Arguable...

My '97 LT4 Hawk, Loudmouth and K&N, 291hp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szzt4CO50tg

Stock '96 Vette, 297hp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuB7WKXeChU

Stock '96 Vette, 281hp:

Stock '96 Vette, 283hp:

Figure in a 13% loss on these figures, and there ain't much underrating goin' on. Back in 2002 at the Firehawk Rally, Zeke Maxwell told me that they extrude honed the manifolds on the LT4 F-Bodies in order to get them up to where they were REALLY 330hp. Leaving the LT1 tune in them really choked them. I have had mine tuned since the dyno run, and will get updated numbers this summer.

Scott Chab · Post by **Scott Chab** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:26 pm

Maybe I should have said that the only LT f-body motors that were underrated were the LT4s. I don't think the LT1 f-body motors were underrated at all.

Actual HP

Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP

Re: Actual HP