stock rwhp
06-23-2004, 07:24 PM
#21
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cibolo Tx
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MarineBlue03GMC
As I said before I think something is way off here. There is NO way a stock 5.3 is putting out some of the power people are claiming. I think the dyno settings have got to be way off.
A minimum of an 18% driveline loss should be found on just about any rear wheel drive car. With this loss then a truck making 270hp to the wheels would be making 330hp at the flywheel from the factory. There is NO way Chevy is over 35hp off when claiming stock hp numbers. Why would they do that? Especially when competing against the 300hp Ford, 345hp Hemi, and 340+hp Nissan Titan.
A minimum of an 18% driveline loss should be found on just about any rear wheel drive car. With this loss then a truck making 270hp to the wheels would be making 330hp at the flywheel from the factory. There is NO way Chevy is over 35hp off when claiming stock hp numbers. Why would they do that? Especially when competing against the 300hp Ford, 345hp Hemi, and 340+hp Nissan Titan.
06-23-2004, 07:42 PM
#22
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 2,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My buddy works at a Nissan Dealership. I test drove one and they are pretty quick!! I wanted him to drive it and see how I stacked up. He declined saying that he could lose his job 
. They are quick though...
. They are quick though...
06-23-2004, 07:46 PM
#23
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 2,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MarineBlue03GMC
As I said before I think something is way off here. There is NO way a stock 5.3 is putting out some of the power people are claiming. I think the dyno settings have got to be way off.
A minimum of an 18% driveline loss should be found on just about any rear wheel drive car. With this loss then a truck making 270hp to the wheels would be making 330hp at the flywheel from the factory. There is NO way Chevy is over 35hp off when claiming stock hp numbers. Why would they do that? Especially when competing against the 300hp Ford, 345hp Hemi, and 340+hp Nissan Titan.
A minimum of an 18% driveline loss should be found on just about any rear wheel drive car. With this loss then a truck making 270hp to the wheels would be making 330hp at the flywheel from the factory. There is NO way Chevy is over 35hp off when claiming stock hp numbers. Why would they do that? Especially when competing against the 300hp Ford, 345hp Hemi, and 340+hp Nissan Titan.
06-23-2004, 09:06 PM
#25
TECH Veteran
Originally Posted by gearheads78
04 5.3 in a Avalanche
I never dynoed stock but mine was 241HP SAE with Magnaflo catback.
I never dynoed stock but mine was 241HP SAE with Magnaflo catback.
06-23-2004, 10:50 PM
#28
Originally Posted by MarineBlue03GMC
245hp I could see, but no way is a truck making 268+RWHP stock.
261-245= 16 HP. You guys are disputing that? I am simply telling you what I have seen. I know for a fact that GM under rated the 6.0, ask Parish.....Simply put, the 261 is possible on a cool day at sea level with a facotry freak.
Not trying to argue here, but I have seen it with my own eyes guys.
06-23-2004, 11:00 PM
#29
Tech Fanatic
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still even find 240 more somewhat hard to believe. The drive line loss numbers just dont make sense to me. Im not saying anyone is lying or didnt actually see what they saw. I do think that dynos show different numbers as a result of MANY different factors. My point is is that there is no way Chevy is under rating their engines by 35h+hp.
