I was wanting to know what the torque rating is for my 2002 SS with the 345HP package from SLP? I have seen both 345 and 350. Thanks!
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
Don't know if SLP actually rated torque with their 345 HP package, but the stock SS HP was 325, torque spec rating is 350. I think the 345 TQ is from 2000 model year when the base HP was rated at 320.
Dyno the car, then you'll know what useable HP and TQ you really have. My 2002 (with the 20 HP package) was dynoed stock at 321 HP and 338 lbs-ft of torque at the rear wheels. So the factory ratings are kinda low anyway.
Posted by Rhode Island Red (Member # 220) on :
hmm I have a 2002 Firehawk.. they say 345hp and 350 tq .. but with GM severely detuning the engine, it made only 307.3 hp and 325 ft-lbs of torque (SAE corrected) at 4000 miles on her. But dyno #'s vary from dyno to dyno and day to day.. my best at the track is 13.60@104.7 with a 2.110 60' on DR's (I cannot get traction for the live of me) that was at 1700 feet or whatever New lebanon valley Dragway is in elevation... what I am getting to (long winded wise ) is that our cars with the LS1's are really underrated the hp/ and torque should of been really advertised as 360 hp and 370ish in tq.
BTW auto manufacturers are planning to change how hp/tq is determined and advertised, to be more realistic (they want to be more in-line with the drive train losses making what they advertise seem to have even lower #'s)
Posted by BobsSS (Member # 1857) on :
The SLP brochure says 345 but I think it is a carry over from the 345 days. I called SLP a couple of years ago and they said that they did not claim any torque numbers other than what GM claimed, which is 350. Its kind of funny since the same engine in the C5 is rated at 375.
Posted by Rhode Island Red (Member # 220) on :
a lot of difference between the LS1 in the f-bod and the vette is not a hardware difference like you said!
Just that the main difference powerwise is what is in the PCM for A/F, Timing and etc. they are more tweaked for the vette and detuned for the F-bod!!
For example .. I saw a 97 ls1 vette go from 298 RWHP/307 to 328 hp/331TQ with just tuning. Althoug Gm sets the tuning up for longevity and to reduce warranty issues.. they still tweak the tuning on the vette and retard stuff on the F-bods PCM Tuning .. that is why the vette is rated more ... besides the vette has a different, more agressive cam, and the cam is a major role in determing power, but still tuning is a major part
Posted by Glenn S (Member # 1977) on :
Points to Ponder:
(1) Jeffy said a long time ago that SLP did not change the torque rating on the 345hp package.
(2) Rhode Island Red's car which ran dyno numbers of 307.3 hp and 325.0 torque would actually be rated at 361.5 net hp and 382.3 net torque. The number that manufacturers use is at the flywheel. This allows for a 15% drivetrain loss.
(3) Camaros and Firebirds will generally show higher dyno numbers that corvettes because of the solid rear axle (less power train loss).
Posted by Mark IXZD 150 (Member # 235) on :
GM had to pick a number but obviously they will vary car to car. For the fully optioned 2002 it was 345 hp & 350 tq. That's the "official" rating.
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
All that is said above is true in most cases and hardly no 2 cats are the same. There will be a few hp and tq differences on all of them even though they are same package. Some of it is in tuning and some of it is in the engine came a little closer to blue print specs from the factory as Scott would call a ringer. My 2001 SS was rated at 335 hp and 345 tq from the factory and after break-in it dynoed 330 RWHP and 345 RWTQ which was with in 5 hp of its flywheel rating from the factory and was its torque rating. I have seen some 2002's hit 337 RWHP with the 345 package and then I seen some only hit 302 RWHP before break-in.
Posted by Mark IXZD 150 (Member # 235) on :
Wayne,
So now that you know that the official GM ratings are true despite what someone at SLP told you, let Afterthoughts Auto (or me) know that you want the 345/350 dashplate so I can get it in the mail to you. It's sitting right here on my desk. Otherwise, you may have to wait for the next batch which won't close until the 15th and it probably won't ship until the 22nd.
Posted by heldonss (Member # 1676) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by el ess1: [QB] Don't know if SLP actually rated torque with their 345 HP package, but the stock SS HP was 325, torque spec rating is 350. I think the 345 TQ is from 2000 model year when the base HP was rated at 320.
The SLP option sheet states 345 Hp and 345 lbs of torque. Who knows?????? Posted by JeffY (Member # 120) on :
who cares-who can feel less than 1.5% of the total claimed torque?
Posted by poSSum (Member # 119) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rhode Island Red: .. my best at the track is 13.60@104.7 with a 2.110 60' on DR's (I cannot get traction for the live of me)
You can't hook with the drag radials What does it do?
Posted by Avengeance Z4C (Member # 2053) on :
Ive seen 345/350 ratings.
My car dynoed 326whp/338wtq stock. With just tuning it jumped to 344whp/353wtq, and pulled off a 13.1 @ 110mph to back it with nothing else done. Matter of fact some say I lost ET cause I put Eibachs on it. So Im a firm believer that these cars are "detuned" a bit. Tuning will deffinately net some extra power with these cars.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) is that our cars with the LS1's are really underrated the hp/ and torque should of been really advertised as 360 hp and 370ish in tq. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Otherwise, you may have to wait for the next batch which won't close until the 15th and it probably won't ship until the 22nd.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)