So you use non verified times to prove a point and then accuse me of not being factual? That's not a fair fight.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: So you use non verified times to prove a point and then accuse me of not being factual? That's not a fair fight.

There was actually a faster pass made with that setup, but it was not "verified"... 12.6 was basically the slowest that setup ever ran.

It then went back with some nitrous and ran 11.9 at 120... same setup.

I was talking to Dobey, Dark. Like I said, I believe that time is accurate but I also have been around long enough to know that you guys down play your modifications and money spent. There is also a non verified time on the list by Revin. He ran a 13.84 with a 3.4 pulley and manual transmission.

The 12.6 @ 108 was my first time taking my car to the track with the 3800 swap bolted to a 4 speed. The 3.4 pulley was truly my only performance mod. It had a 3.5" cold air intake and 3" exhaust. I ended up breaking the 4speed and putting in a 5 speed. I also put in zzp 1.9 modified stock rockers. Took it back to the track and ran 12.5@110. This was at the 25th Fiero shindig track event. I took it back again with a 100 shot of nitrous and race gas to run an 11.9@120. Took the rotors out of the blower and put a turbo on. At 9psi it went 12.4@115. Took the rockers off cause of valve float, bumped the pressure up to 15-16psi(I think) went 11.7 @ 123. Then my current run in my sig is the best so far.

I've never held back any info on my car. I just doesn't take much at all to get a 3800sc engine to really start breathing and pumping out the power. The people running slower than they should might be babying their car, shitty intake, shitty exhaust(most likely), or might just have a bad tune

------------------
Turbo 3800 E85 5spd spec5
11.53@126.7

[This message has been edited by Justinbart (edited 09-20-2011).]

I'll take your word for it but like I said before, the quarter mile list shows different.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: So you use non verified times to prove a point and then accuse me of not being factual? That's not a fair fight.

You said "the 1/4 list shows different" (implying it shows your precious LZ9 somehow being faster than a lightly modded 3800SC. I posted many 3800 runs from that list, all of which were faster than you, and none of which were even in the 13s range where you ran. They were all at least in the 12s. Most were only the mods you mentioned, except for maybe also having an IC, or no mods at all.

Then you go on to say "well, no, look at the 2 *near* my time" which means to say you don't care about the ones that are faster, but only the ones who drove a car approximately the same speed you did in a 1/4 mile run.

I pointed out how wildly different times can be, due to numerous conditions, and stated the highest power rating of a factory installed 3.9 LZ9, compared to the lowest factory installed standard power rating for an older Series II L67 3.8, which is nominally higher than the LZ9 in pretty much all installed trims. The torque curve on a dyno chart is also a little different. It's not like they have the exact same curve, but one is slightly lower than the other.

And now I am somehow using non-verified times to somehow prove a point? The only one fighting in this thread is you. I'm not really a fan of the 3800, but I'm not going to blatently ignore the facts either. The Series II 3800 is a faster engine in a Fiero, than an LZ9, with all other factors being equal, assuming factory programming. You're also suggesting that engine with pulley, cam, and tune is somehow going to still be slower than a factory LZ9? I'm sorry, but a 3800 with those mods should be beating a factory LS4 all day long; and I'm installing an LS4 in my own car.

I never said the 3900 was the fastest or precious. Only that it was the fastest naturally aspirated V6 and comparable to lightly modded 3800sc engines with a cam, tune and pulley. You are adding headers and intercoolers which isn't a fair fight if you are going to keep changing the rules. Also, please take care to specify the 3800 as supercharged, it can be a little misleading the way you talk.

Lets see here, a strongly moded 3.8 with boost/no2 is only 1.655s faster than a na 3.9? really? My boosted is faster than you non boosted! well no duh. That was showen with a srt4 vs 3.9. What are the shipping weights of a lz9 vs series 3?

quote Originally posted by darkhorizon: Manual trans adds 50whp, at least.

and how does that work? A auto has a torque multiplyer and can out shift most drivers. What does a manual have that give more whp?
Matt

quote Originally posted by MaddMatt: and how does that work? A auto has a torque multiplyer and can out shift most drivers. What does a manual have that give more whp? Matt

The low gear on a manual is usually lower than that of an automatic, so no torque converter needed.

Sure, there's no power interruption, but when you're in gear with a manual, you're putting down more instantaneous power than with the automatic, so overall, even with the power interruption, the manual is faster. This is applicable for "low-powered" cars. Your 3900 probably fits in that category. Eventually, with increasing power levels, there's no shortage of power, and the power interruption becomes more of an issue.

The torque converter you like wastes power in an automatic. There's slippage.

Automatics also weigh more.

quote Originally posted by MaddMatt: and how does that work? A auto has a torque multiplyer and can out shift most drivers. What does a manual have that give more whp? Matt

*pokes head in*

A direct drive system between the engine and trans, not a fluid drive system. Autos are only as efficient as manuals when the converter locks up, which isnt going to happen under WOT anyway, but then again they are much heavier than manuals.

I think internet bickering between two powertrains is funny because its all opinion based. It would be awesome if someone could build two cars, one with a 400 horsepower 3800sc, and one with a 400 horsepower 3900 (turbo or non) and see which one costs less to build, which puts out better 1/4 mile numbers, which ultimately lasts longer and which looks better (okay thats opinion based).

My guess would be 3800sc for each of those questions. I would imagine with the much larger aftermarket you will find mods much cheaper for the 3800, 1/4 mile times would most likely go to the 3800 due to it having more torque, and even though we dont have the years and years of longevity research for the 3900 that we do for the 3800, it would be hard to beat that motor for strength and longevity especially with increased power levels.

*pokes head back out*

-Joe

quote Originally posted by MaddMatt: Lets see here, a strongly moded 3.8 with boost/no2 is only 1.655s faster than a na 3.9? really? My boosted is faster than you non boosted! well no duh. That was showen with a srt4 vs 3.9. What are the shipping weights of a lz9 vs series 3? and how does that work? A auto has a torque multiplyer and can out shift most drivers. What does a manual have that give more whp? Matt

1.655 is a lot of difference. It means all you get to see are tail lights.

3.8sc with only a northstar TB, decent exhaust a 3.5 pulley being run with a 365 4 spd tranny and i am in the 13.5 13.4 range with no tune...with a tune i bet i could beat you down the line in your 3900...sorry your engine isnt that great.. nor is mine...put some money into it or suck it up and deal with the fact its not as fast as u think...tim

quote Originally posted by MaddMatt: Lets see here, a strongly moded 3.8 with boost/no2 is only 1.655s faster than a na 3.9? really? Matt

...... No.... These are lightly modded engines (cam, pulley, tune) making 350+ whp. If you'd have been on "hwy 49" three years ago, you'd have seen a strongly modified 3800, and you wouldn't have had a chance in hell of keeping in viewing distance. Modifying the 3800 to make insane amounts of power is cheap, easy, and reliable, therefore it's an upgrade. I'm talking about 500 wheel horse power at the same cost of boosting the 3900 @ 10 lbs. Base power and torque ratings are what people use for engines that have no aftermarket.

Matt, if I demod my engine so that its a fair race, you've got to take your steering wheel off. Fair is fair.

quote Originally posted by weaselbeak: 1.655 is a lot of difference. It means all you get to see are tail lights.

1.655 is the difference between a 2002 Camaro and a 2007 Toyota Camry.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by thismanyfieros:

3.8sc with only a northstar TB, decent exhaust a 3.5 pulley being run with a 365 4 spd tranny and i am in the 13.5 13.4 range with no tune...with a tune i bet i could beat you down the line in your 3900...sorry your engine isnt that great.. nor is mine...put some money into it or suck it up and deal with the fact its not as fast as u think...tim[/QUOTE

Quarter Mile List shows different!

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: You aren't on the List either!

I'm sorry, but all your comments only make me think of this:

http://www.southparkstudios...odes/s11e14-the-list

I don't know why you keep ignoring the blatently obvious facts, but whatever sparkles with you.

It's obvious you aren't on the quarter mile list. It's obvious I am on the list and I'm in between two modified 3800sc cars. I'm not sure why it hurts you so bad. I'm not forcing anyone to do a 3900 swap. I'm not going in non 3900 threads hyping up the 3900. I'm just sticking up for my car in a relevant thread. I also stated my modifications so I'm not implying a stock 3900 can run my time.

I do not expect a 3.9 to out run a boosted 3.8. All I'm saying is that it holds it up well for a NA v6. It has the same hp as a series 2 sc3.8, not too bad for only having .1L on it and no sc. When looking for a replacement for my 2.8 I was looking for a NA v6 (4 was too small and 8 is more than I want to play with for now, also didn’t want to deal with boost). That left me with 5 v6 to look at: LZ9 (or lz8 for fule savings), gm high feature (could not find one for a good deal), 3.4 pushrod, L26, and the truck 4.3 (low hp and heavy). sorry no short star, grandma had a N* and its been nothing but trouble. That left the L26, 3.4 pushrod and LZ. The LZ and 3.4 are the same external size as the 2.8 so they would be a bit easier to work on. The L26 is not much better for power/ fuel than the 3.4. Down to 2. The lz8 should get better fuel and has more power than the 3.4. Also its more future proof and its was easier to find one with lower miles (and the price difference was not that bad). So it was the lz8; currently in production and good fuel savings. Not only that but it has 240/240! not bad for a v6, and I am willing to go up with any other na v6 or boosted 4 (or small boosted 6), as I have found out some of those boosted 4s can really move.

I give you the 3.8 is easy/ cheep to make go fast but I need a daily driver. Not a track car, I'm in college. I drove at least 250 mi a week, do you do that in you >12s sc fieros? What would you do for a DD? Do you see why I think the 3.9 is great? 25/35 driving how ever I want (Like a bat out of h-e-double hockey sticks) and having some good power too.

Matt

Honestly, I would bet if I took my turbo off I could hang fairly close to a 3900 fiero.

There is a NA 3800 on the list that ran a 14.56. When I first got my car running I wouldn't even take it to the track, without vvt it would have been a waste. I installed a custom 3400 cam and ran a 13.88. I had Darth go over the tune, redid the exhaust and ran a 13.35. So yes Darkhorizon, I believe you would hang close. And again, I know there are faster 3800sc cars, but some of you guys are trying to ignore or discredit the fact that I am between 2 modified 3800sc cars on the quarter mile list.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: It's obvious you aren't on the quarter mile list. It's obvious I am on the list and I'm in between two modified 3800sc cars. I'm not sure why it hurts you so bad. I'm not forcing anyone to do a 3900 swap. I'm not going in non 3900 threads hyping up the 3900. I'm just sticking up for my car in a relevant thread. I also stated my modifications so I'm not implying a stock 3900 can run my time.

Nobody is "hyping" up the 3800. You took the thread into the 3900 v 3800 debate, and then proceeded to be hurt about who have 3800s suggesting that a mild 3800 build is faster than your 3900. Quit crying.

I don't really care how fast the 3800s are or aren't. A milde 3800 might even still beat my mild LS4 in the 1/4. And I still don't care. I'm not going to jump in a random thread and act like the 1/4 mile list is everything in the world. If you don't want people pointing out examples in the List you hold so precious, which go against your argument of pointing at that list, then don't bring it up.

I have three other slips in the 13.3's. It's safe to say nobody spent the money and time and only raced once. They all went to the track and posted their best times. What about the times behind mine? What about the 14.5? L67 was the first one to post in this thread about the 3800sc. The quarter mile list is the only facts we have to go by. Sorry but someone making a hit and run post about running a 13.5 or 13.6 doesn't even register to me. As far as your crying comment goes. Me saying my feelings were hurt was me kidding, trying to keep the conversation light. Don't ever worry about me being the one crying. Now go take your car to the track and stop bragging up everyone elses times. It's weak and embarrassing.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: I have three other slips in the 13.3's. It's safe to say nobody spent the money and time and only raced once. They all went to the track and posted their best times. What about the times behind mine? What about the 14.5? L67 was the first one to post in this thread about the 3800sc. The quarter mile list is the only facts we have to go by. Sorry but someone making a hit and run post about running a 13.5 or 13.6 doesn't even register to me. As far as your crying comment goes. Me saying my feelings were hurt was me kidding, trying to keep the conversation light. Don't ever worry about me being the one crying. Now go take your car to the track and stop bragging up everyone elses times. It's weak and embarrassing.

I'm not bragging up everyone else's times. I'm pretty sure my blown 2.8 isn't going to make any times worth posting; not to mention I let the inspection sticker lapse because it has a blown head gasket, and probably an exhaust leak. No point paying for an inspection that will likely fail anyway, when I've got an engine swap to finish. Believe it or not, some people do take their car to the track once, just to see what it will do.

Anyway, dyno chart time; Here's stock 3900 power at the crank:



Which you even linked to, here: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...ML/114122-2.html#p61

And here's WHP on a bone stock L67 with only WCF headers and 3" exhaust.



Which I found here: http://www.realfierotech.co...=6158&start=0#p82078

The L67 peak torque is at about 4300 RPM there, where the LZ9's peak torque is at 2800. Makes it easier for the 3800 to get a great launch out of the lights. With a pulley, cam, and tune, as you alotted the 3800 in your argumentative post, the stock LZ9 doesn't stand a chance. The torque curve will smooth out, and make more torque.

Think you got those numbers backward but we get the gist. Plus, horsepower being equal between two different motors, the one with more torque down low is going to win a race every time.

Oops poked my head in again.

quote Originally posted by L67: It makes 40 more torque at those ratings, that alone is a big deal. Pulley, cam, tune, and the 3900 doesn't stand a chance. Turbo a 3800, make 400+ hp. Turbo a 3900, break a rod. Right Joseph? Do whatever you want, I've already been there and beaten a stage 2 Turbo Neon. What the hell do I know right?

Here is the post I keep talking about. The statement was pulley, cam and tune. It makes no mention of headers or intercooler. It also does not mention a stock 3900. You keep getting more and more rediculous. Now a stock 3900 is supposed to keep up with a modified 3800sc? I never made such a wacked out claim. edit to add "stock" to 3900

[This message has been edited by joshua riedl (edited 09-21-2011).]

quote Originally posted by dobey: The L67 peak torque is at about 4300 RPM there, where the LZ9's peak torque is at 2800. Makes it easier for the 3800 to get a great launch out of the lights. With a pulley, cam, and tune, as you alotted the 3800 in your argumentative post, the stock LZ9 doesn't stand a chance. The torque curve will smooth out, and make more torque.

....I look at these curves and see that the two are a close match. From what I understand: aera under the curve is a good thing. Also, the 3.8 needs to rev to get its torque where the 3.9 just has it. I know the lz9 torque at 2800 is great for a launch, I CANT get it to burn out (sadly, but I have some fairly good tires). @ 4000 rpm 3.9~180; 3.8~165. @ 5000rpm 3.9~220; 3.8~215; @ 6000 3.9~230; 3.8~226. I'm lost, a stock L67 and lz9 seem to be close, with the lz9 making power sooner? Am I seeing this right?

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: I argue because when someone claims that with a pulley, cam and tune on a 3800sc the naturally aspirated 3900 doesn't stand a chance it hurts my feelings. The quarter mile list shows different.

This is where the 3900 came from. You said the quarter mile list shows that the 3900 is basically equal to a 3800SC with pulley, cam and tune. And you keep going on and on about "the quarter mile list shows different."

And headers are pretty much a given if you're installing any engine into a Fiero that didn't come in a Fiero. The FWD setups aren't really set up to be put in the back. Not like they are adding 200hp to the thing. FFS.

It's spelled "ridiculous," and yes you are being so.

I'm getting tired of your lies. I never said the 3900 was basically equal. I never said a stock 3900 will be faster than a modified 3800sc. Headers and intercoolers are not in the quote I posted. It was said that the 3900 doesn't stand a chance when THE QUARTER MILE LIST SHOWS DIFFERENT! Notice how I never said the 3900 was the best, fastest, or stock in any claim. Feel free to not correct my spelling, it's an internet forum FFS.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: I'm getting tired of your lies. I never said the 3900 was basically equal. I never said a stock 3900 will be faster than a modified 3800sc. Headers and intercoolers are not in the quote I posted. It was said that the 3900 doesn't stand a chance when THE QUARTER MILE LIST SHOWS DIFFERENT! Notice how I never said the 3900 was the best, fastest, or stock in any claim. Feel free to not correct my spelling, it's an internet forum FFS.

I didn't lie about anything. All I did was continually correct your ignorant berating of how "the quarter mile list shows different" in different ways with hard facts. But I guess you don't take well to facts.

It's not like you're at the bottom of the list even. I guess that didn't sparkle with you?

Are we even having the same conversation? I'll make it simple for you. It was said that with a cam, pulley and tune the 3900 doesn't stand a chance. If someone were to check the quarter mile list they would see that I have beaten and come within a couple tenths of cars that meet those requirements. This in my mind means that the 3900 does in fact stand a chance.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: Are we even having the same conversation? I'll make it simple for you. It was said that with a cam, pulley and tune the 3900 doesn't stand a chance. If someone were to check the quarter mile list they would see that I have beaten and come within a couple tenths of cars that meet those requirements. This in my mind means that the 3900 does in fact stand a chance.

And a couple of cars meeting those requirements have gone over a half second faster than you, in that same list. Not sure why you can't understand that. You could beat a C6 Z06 with the 3900 if the Vette driver can't drive worth crap, too. What's your point?

I guess we are having a different conversation. You keep talking about 2 very specific examples in a very non-descript and non-verifiable list. Myself and the 3800 guys who have replied, have been talking about facts. The fact is that everything else being equal, the 3800SC with those mods will be faster than the 3900 without the mods to gain the extra power, and smooth out the torque curve. Every time. The numbers on the dynos say so.

Im confused over this flame war, what is modded on the 3900 to make it not stock? But slso in dobey's defence the way you worded your post made the 39 seem stock

I never said anything about a vette so I could not have making a point. I already said several times that I know there are faster cars. The requirement was a cam, pulley and tune on a 3800sc and a 3900 won't stand a chance. No mention of a stock 3900, just a 3900. Feel free to review the thread and you will see. Then feel free to review the verifiable times on the quarter mile list and you will see that I beat and came within a couple tenths of 3800sc cars that meet those requirements. Then feel free to review your own posts and you will see that you are the one who used non verified examples. For arguements sake I think we should agree that the highlighted times are verified.

quote Originally posted by joshua riedl: I never said anything about a vette so I could not have making a point. I already said several times that I know there are faster cars. The requirement was a cam, pulley and tune on a 3800sc and a 3900 won't stand a chance. No mention of a stock 3900, just a 3900. Feel free to review the thread and you will see. Then feel free to review the verifiable times on the quarter mile list and you will see that I beat and came within a couple tenths of 3800sc cars that meet those requirements. Then feel free to review your own posts and you will see that you are the one who used non verified examples. For arguements sake I think we should agree that the highlighted times are verified.

How can we verify those times? You will bring me your car, and a 3800 car with those mods, and I will drive both of them on the same day at the drag strip? Did they run at the same drag strip, at the same time as you? Is the tune on them actually good? Calling "tuning" or an IC a mod is a bit silly, but whatever. There are too many unknown values that can affect 1/4 mile times on that list, to be able to take them as hard fact, which you keep trying to perpetuate them as. Do you have a dyno chart for your car? I'm going on actual facts, but the only dyno chart I could find for an LZ9 was one you yourself posted a link to in another thread, that is supposedly from GM Powertrain, for the top end stock LZ9 on an engine dyno at GM. It's a nice curve, but lots of things change when you put the engine in an actual car, and drive it down a track. If you've got a dyno chart to prove your point with, let's see it. I'd love to know what numbers your car puts out at the wheels.

With your mods, you should be in the 12s already.

Dyno charts don't mean dick between two cars unless it was done on the same dyno on the same day.

3800sc > 3900 /thread

------------------
Turbo 3800 E85 5spd spec5
11.53@126.7