Why so heavy....?

[TheLion]

What is a PP Loaded Hood? I hadn't heard the PP had a different hood.

I believe a PP loaded hood is the vented hoods with turn signals (2016) which mine is. Base model hoods have no vents, signals and possibly less sound dampening material. It's not much, but I'm trying to account for every meaningful different to see where the weight is actually coming from and so far I've come up with 3780 lbs. A 75 lb total gain over base model. Very similar to 1LE weight gain over base.

Sponsored

 

[TheLion]

There isn't that much difference. The LS has all the material in the cam area where there's nothing in the Ford OHC engines.

The improved performance is worth it. LS motors are perfect for pickups and station wagons, not as good for performance vehicles.

LT1 6.2 weighs 465 lbs. The Gen 2 5.0 weighs 445 lbs. Gen 3 5.0 weighs about 440 lbs (due to the plastic oil pan). Sure the 5.0 has a little more of it's weight up top, but it's also lighter by 20 lbs so as stated above it's not going to be meaningful.

 

[TheLion]

I think you're kinda over analyzing here for the sake of not losing sleep however I get it. But simply put, stuff just adds up. Sheet metal, fasteners, glass thickness, interior materials...everything. The Coyote engine is also very heavy. The LT1 weighs around 430lbs without accessories. The Coyote weighs about 450+ without accessories (more valvetrain, more head, more springs...again, EVERYTHING adds up). That is a 20lb+ advantage right there. Then there's the steel unibody. The Alpha chassis unibody is primarily steel with the exception of the dash support which is aluminum that saved like 12lbs or something. But most of the suspension is also aluminum. The Camaro also uses less sheet metal on the body and less glass. Most of the suspension components are also aluminum and cross drilled. That is not the case with the Mustang. This also brings up durability concerns though in certain areas such as the Camaro SS's diff housing. Then there's the wonderful exhaust suitcase on the GT's.

Now here's an interesting comparison. The GT350 Track Pack is 3790lbs. The SS 1LE is 3747 as you put which is true. That's a 43lbs difference. The Voodoo engine weighs about 15lbs heavier than the 1LT. The front wheels and tires are also a few lbs heavier each than the SS 1LE (about 6 lbs). Do some simple math and then you realize if Ford used an aluminum dash support (minus another 10lbs) and didn't use as much sheet metal, they're so neck and neck it's not even funny. But again, this is splitting hairs SO thinly that how much does it really matter? And this is a case of coulda shoulda woulda. Just be a better driver.

Consider this too, the $200K+ Mercedes AMG GTR which is a TWO seater weighs mid 3600lbs. The Corvette ZR1 weighs mid 3500's. The Grand Sport weighs low 3400lbs. Welcome to the new "lightweight."

GT350R is 3713 lbs according to MT. Not sure what the regular GT350 weighs, but it's probably a good 50~75 lbs heavier due to standard low pressure cast alloy wheels and more creature comforts etc.

The LT1 does NOT weight 430 lbs. Your thinking of an LS in the previous generation. The LT1 has more technology on it, so it got heavier, but also makes quite a bit more average power (much broader mid-range). The 5th Gen LT1 6.2L weighs 465 lbs. The standard 2nd Gen 5.0 weighs 445 lbs. It's actually lighter, but makes a hair less average power unless you throw in a Power Pack 2 or 3.

https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/chevrolet-introduces-the-all-new-lt1-v8-engine-for-the-c7-corvette-ar136830.html

A key to engine building is how many ponies you can pump out per pound, and that is exactly why Chevy went to such great length to minimize the engine’s weight. In fact, this 6.2-liter engine weighs just 465 lbs and is 25.3 inches tall. To put that into perspective, the ultra-powerful BMW 4.4-liter V-8 is mammoth when compared to the LT1, measuring 29.6 inches tall and weighing 503 lbs. To boot, the 4.4-liter powerplant falls 50 horsepower short of GM’s new LT1 engine. This gives the LT1 6.2-liter a 1.033-pound-per-horsepower to 1.257-pound-per-horsepower victory over the fame Bimmer engine.

Motor Trend says same thing: http://www.motortrend.com/news/next-gen-lt1-62-liter-v8-for-2014-corvette-revealed-with-450-hp-new-tech-280365/

The result of all this, according to Chevy, is a naturally aspirated
engine comparable to some of the top turbo engines on the market.
Pulling no punches, Chevy takes aim at BMW. The Bavarians’ 4.4-
liter twin-turbo V-8 produces 400 horsepower and 450 lb-ft of torque
while weighing 503 pounds and standing 29.6 inches high. The new
LT1, by contrast, puts down its estimated 450 horsepower and 450
lb-ft of torque while weighing only 465 pounds and standing just
25.3 inches tall. Advantage Corvette, lighter nose more power to
the rear. The extremely compact size, says Lee, allows a low hood
line and better visibility.

Although I do have to laugh at their errernous conclusions. Because the LT1 puts out 50 HP more doesn't mean it makes more usable power. It just has a higher peak power. We would need to look at the power graphs of the engines. A highly strung 2.3L Ecoboost can make 275 crank HP at just 2500 RPM when a stock 2nd gen 5.0 is only making around 160~170 hp...yet the high strung (Cobb Stage 3) Ecoboost 2.3L only peaks at about 340~350 HP.

It just has a really broad power band that's relatively flat compared to an NA engine that climbs and climbs. So in terms of average power, the super high strung 2.3L is making nearly the same average power, just spread out over the RPM range more. I'll bet that Bimmer 4.4L makes a crap ton of power down low where the LT doesn't, but yes it's still heavier so not sure if it's average would be high enough to compensate for it's 40 lbs of added weight over the LT1 or a Power Pack 2 or Power Pack 3 5.0. The 3rd Gen 5.0 is darn near identical to a Power Pack 3 2nd Gen 5.0 stock.

Weights for the Coyote 5.0 come directly from Ford Performance and I also have found a few other articles to confirm the 5.0 weighs 445 lbs. While it may be DOHC, it's also quite a bit smaller displacement by 1.2L over the LS. So the LS's lack of 3 less cams and 1/2 the valve (it has 1 center cam phasor, where the 5.0 has 2 cam phasors per a bank or 4 total) doesn't make up for it's much heftier pistons and rods (which also limit it's RPM range due to piston speed limits / tensile strength of the rods, wrist pins and bearings).

Stated Peak Power to Weight Ratios (LT1 vs. 5.0) in HP / LB (higher is better):

5th Gen LT1 6.2 (stock) = 0.99 HP / lb
2nd Gen 5.0 (stock) = 0.98 HP / lb
2nd Gen 5.0 (Power Pack 2) = 1.02 HP / lb
2nd Gen 5.0 (Power Pack 3) = 1.06 HP / lb
3rd Gen 5.0 (stock) = 1.05 HP / lb

More meaningful is the AVERAGE power to weight ratios based on actual power bands and their measured averages to the wheels (higher is better):

5th Gen LT1 6.2 (stock) = 0.70 Avg. HP / lb
2nd Gen 5.0 (stock) = 0.67 Avg. HP / lb
2nd Gen 5.0 (Power Pack 2) = 0.76 Avg. HP / lb
2nd Gen 5.0 (Power Pack 3) = 0.79 Av.g HP / lb
3rd Gen 5.0 (stock) = NO DATA

As you can see, the average applied power, over a RPM bandwidth of 4,000 RPM for each engine and it's variations. There are NO other factory calibrations for the LT1. It is what it is and that's true for most OE's. Ford's a little unique in that department. They seem to hold back on their factory tuning and make you buy the last 5~10% if you really want it which most people could care less as they are fast enough. But for those that do care, it's available for a fee.

The fastest stock 2015 GT PP 6M on the fast list ran a 12.56 by McMark26. The fastest stock 2017 SS 6M ran a 12.099 on the camaro6g's fast list ALSO by McMark26 at the same track he ran his PP GT he ended up trading in due to lemon law issues. To calculate the percent difference: ((12.56 - 12.099) / 12.56)*100 = 3.7% difference in 1/4 mile time. From 2750 RPM to 6750 RPM the 5.0 makes an average power of about 300 whp. From 2500 RPM to 6500 RPM, the LT1 makes an average of about 323 whp.

PP GT is heavier stock by about 100 lbs as well (compared to a base 1/2SS 6M which McMark26 bought). MT also ran a 12.4 on their SS 1LE 6M and a 12.8 on their 6M PP GT. Average power difference: ((323 - 300) / 323)*100 = 7.1 %. MT's 1/4 mile times also differ by a similar ((12.8-12.4)/12.8)*100 = 3.1% to McMark26's.

So the GT runs 3.7% slower with an average deficit in power of 7.1% and weight disadvantage of about 100 lbs. GT is also geared a little more aggressively than the SS for 1/4 mile performance to compensate for slightly higher weight and lower average power. Sounds about right. Power Pack 2 with no other modifications puts them on equal footing. Throw in a cat back exhaust and some lightweight wheels and the GT now has the edge (something most of the GT track guys and auto x guys do anyway). Power Pack 3 is even better, easily besting Power Pack 2's average by about 15 hp or besting the LT1's average power by a whopping 29 HP. Power Pack 3 would rule the tracks, but in drag it won't be any faster than Power Pack 2 because the gearing doesn't make full use of it's RPM range in 4th on the 1/4 mile.

I'm not suggesting a power pack alone, tires and wheels will make a PP GT perform as well as an 1LE because all of the 1LE's boast over the base 1/2SS which is roughly equivalent in handling to a PP GT is due to it's finely tuned suspension. But it will move quite a bit closer to the 1LE's track performance as it's no longer at a power deficit and actually boasts a small advantage. Then it comes down to driver and suspension tuning, which you can also change quite easily in the GT if that's your goal.

These small changes all add up to one over all large change, track times, again if you care. There are lots of people who buy Mustang's because of their more practical chassis. The Trunk is massively larger by comparison (14 cubit ft vs. 9) with a much larger opening. I fit quite a bit more in my GT's trunk on road trips than we can in our Prius C for example, the epitome of practical daily cars. Interior space is better than the SS's, especially storage, it's seats are better suited for touring, visibility is much better giving you confidence in poor weather conditions / heavy traffic etc.

By changing it's performance characteristics, you have a GT SS...the best of both worlds. But you can't make an SS GT because there's nothing you can do about the SS's chassis design and limitations and lack of any semblance of practical usage.

 

[Hack]

Great posts and analysis, [MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION]

 

[scrubber3]

If I had a Pulitzer to dish out, lion would get it. Hands down

 

[Peon]

Id like to imagine that part of my reason for swapping from an ecoboost to my GT was bc i missed [MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION] and his posts over in the ecoboost forums. Im just glad you are still active while i slowly plan out my mods for my 17 gt

 

[ALUSA]

My fully loaded 15 pp gt with the exception of radar cruise scaled at 3815 lbs with full liquids trunk stuff removed! Borla catback dropped it down to 3785 lbs lol! The current loaded gt pp’s manual with magnetic ride is around 3860 lbs. These cars are keep getting heavier.

Now when you compare a base ss camaro with 3680 lbs, you need to know that the car already comes with heavy 20” inch Wheels with Brembo brakes and 3 more gallons of fuel! That’s probably around 80 extra pounds over a base gt! So if camaro ss only came with 18” wheels, no Brembo’s and 16 gallons of fuel tank, you are looking a 3600 lbs or less weight vehicle! Thank god challenger is still as heavy as a Rino!

Sponsored