h22 are 200hp at the crank or pulley or whatever for manual and 195 for auto. an dthey weigh more then a j-body. most of thses cars have more hp then us b/c they weigh soo much more less weight is the same thing as more hp

i said it was it was 195 to the ground...not the crank and it is a manual

195hp and more tourqe then a jay bodys horse power TO THE GROUND it wouldnt matter if the prelude weighed 3500lbs it would stil pull the @!#$ out of any j-body unless like i said before using NOS or Turbo

i guess i hit my secret nitrious button that i didnt know i had.

the hp/tq rating that is given by the maker is not wheel hp/tq. an ecotec says 140hp and 150tq but u dyno them and they have 12-15 less then that. and i did beat an auto h22. (with just an intake) never found a stick to race. but theres a yellow one with a c/f hood i'm gonna find and race him and WIN. (i know i'llwin b/c he only beat my boys '05 gli by a car and i took his gli by like 2-3 cars.) now i have my new cams and mounts done also so i tend to put a couple cars in between us. and to let you know its not just all about how my hp and tq the car has. u need to consider the driver skill, temp, gear ratio, transmission...etc.o yea BTW that GLI has 180HP and TQ. thats 40 more HP and 30 more TQ...............................................................................................................

yea lets see some vids??

when i find that @!#$ty h22, i will make sure we get a video of it....you're such a hater. just leave the forum no one wants to hear what u have to say b/c i'm not the only one beating h22s.

It's not all about peak HP and peak TQ numbers either... with my old 2002 Hyundai Elantra 5-speed I paced a Prelude 5-speed for a bit, I lost but it was close, closer than it's numbers would have one believe.

Whomever puts more TQ to the ground first has a BIG adadvantage in a race. The Ecotec engine puts out more torque sooner than an H22, giving it a chance to peak again before the H22 peaks again in the next gear. Understand? Probbably not, either way, I believe ohh3sunfire, last night with my AUTOMATIC 04 sedan I took down a 5-speed 1.8T Jetta wagon with not much problem.

yea all the other people with MODS are...i'm not hating...i'm just calling you out as a liar about your stories...either that or they really weren't trying...let me put it simple and clear so you completely understand...for example...your stock eco...140hp/150ft/lbs, weighing 2770 lbs....compared to a vr-6 175 hp and torque that weighs about the same...or 98 prelude sh 190hp/160 ft/lbs that weighs 3000 lbs .....or basically any of the cars you listed...it just isn't going to happen buddy...i do have faith in the ecotec...but your not gonna go beat corvettes (or for this purpose 325i's and fox body 5.0's and vr6's) and shiat stock buddy, its just out of your sunfires league in the first place...so do you still want to argue that you beat them? (or could have if they were trying?)

1.8t jetta's are weak...for a turbo vehicle, even though it is stock, they are slow...they have nearly the same ratings as your j-body with about 300 more lbs added onto that beast of a car

i was stock when i raced that auto h22.(intake doesnt really count as much). he was at my rear bumper by the time I shut down (shut down at shifting into 4th gear) but i also got new cams,15 to the wheels, and engine mounts, releases torque that i lose through the transfer of power from engine to wheels, so i would have put a couple cars between us now. i never said i could beat a corvette. that would take a lot of PSI (althought 8PSI can put a base model sunfire into low 13s) and for a stock fox body 5.0 they arent that fast my buddy had one i had 4-5 mods done to it and only ran 14.4 and 14.5. they feel quick b/c they had a whole lot of torque stock and thats what gets them down the track.

Eric Doyle wrote:1.8t jetta's are weak...for a turbo vehicle, even though it is stock, they are slow...they have nearly the same ratings as your j-body with about 300 more lbs added onto that beast of a car

Not really. It was new. Considering it has 180HP/174Ft.Lbs and a 5-speed manual and mine is stock with "140HP and 150Ft.Lbs of TQ" and an automatic, it should have killed me. It didn't.

My 1990 Ford Probe V6 140/160 5-speed is also slower than my AUTOAMTIC Cavalier. MUCH slower!! It still runs strong and chirps in 2nd and 3rd.

I also have taken down a 99-04 Mustang V6 5-speed. 193HP.

All I know, is my 04 auto cavy will destroy my friends 01 auto civic with an exhaust and intake. I only have minor mods too and its like outrageous how badly I can beat him in any race!

I'm pretty sure that most of the Ecotecs are underrated, so are the numbers for the Dodge SRT-4. It's the american thing to do, Vette's and Camaro's came with under-rated horsepower numbers as well. I have an Ion Redline, and I've seen owners posting dyno charts, as well as Sport Compact Car and Car and Driver, that shows almost 200hp at the wheels STOCK. The SCC dyno showed 197 at the wheels. I drove an Ion3 with your same 2.2 Ecotec, and that thing was pretty fast on the interstate. I don't mean Corvette fast, but pulled strong all the way up to 80ish. I saw some of the 03-04 Cavis at the Super Chevy Show in Joliet, IL take a Z28 SS all the way down a quarter mile. I don't know what all was done to it, but we were talking to the 4 kids with these Cavis that were there, and these were FAST. I dunno about the specific race wins, NEVER under-estimate the power of a terrible driver! The third day I had my Redline I got beat to the highway on-ramp by a girl in an ECHO, because I had no idea how to take off in the new car. Sat at the light spinning tires on a damp road cause I was too stupid to launch right. Sure don't mean that her Echo was faster, she just drove it better than my simple ass in the rain, well in that situation driving better just meant that she didn't have to worry about spinning tires in that POS.

Mike M wrote:All I know, is my 04 auto cavy will destroy my friends 01 auto civic with an exhaust and intake. I only have minor mods too and its like outrageous how badly I can beat him in any race!

dont forget those 01 and up Civics are heavier then before... <br>

-------------------------------------

My Car Specs
Club J-Body Montreal Forums

I can see how a Cav can beat these cars, but I don't think GM under rates the performance... I think it's more when the power comes on, and how long its there. Looking at just numbers is not a good measurement of performance, you really should be comparing their torque curves. Hondas and turbocharged cars have real lousy low ends, but great top end, whereas the Cav's power comes on earlier and stays on for longer period of time. So even if it has less peak power, the total power delivered to the ground (mmmm integrals) could very well be greater.

Also remember cars lose quite a bit of power over time, so rated at 190bhp new less than 10 years ago, may only have 175bhp now, where your 2004 Cav probably is still running around 140bhp.

Oh, and don't you be talking trash about the 1.8T engine now

The other thing I noticed is, GM Performance rates the 2.0/SC in my car at 205hp @ 5600 RPMs. The dyno charts that are getting posted show the power increasing right up to the limiter, on every graph. What about on your N/A Ecotecs, are they increasing all the way to the limit or is there a definite round-off at the top? I see what you're saying about the time spent in the power band, gotta love torque. I really do think some/most of these engines are under-rated. We have SRT-4 owners in our forum, and in some magazines that are bone stock and pushing their rated horsepower at the wheels, not the crank. I know it's supposed to be at the crank, but there is no such thing as a 2 hp drivetrain loss. The only real answer is consistant lying by multiple unrelated people, or some form of under-rating. Believe me, I can't see Sport Compact Car giving any more credit to the Redline they tested than it earns. I mean, they give it a 7.1 0-60 and even slower for the Cobalt. Funny how C&D could do it in 6.3 seconds.

I don't disagree my boy has a 03 grand prix gt and i can run with that and alot of honda's. The ecotec is very underrated if you ask me

I was running dead even with a 2002 Grand Prix GT 4 door tonight, all the way to 140km/h, had 4 smallish guys in it. I've got cams and aem intake as the only mods right now, and heavyish rims.

04firetec wrote:I was running dead even with a 2002 Grand Prix GT 4 door tonight, all the way to 140km/h, had 4 smallish guys in it. I've got cams and aem intake as the only mods right now, and heavyish rims.

run with them? those cams obviously messed your car up to. with just an intake i could bogg or short shift first and still beat them. with POS cams i can hardly beat a prelude with exhaust.....having no low end any more sucks a big one. thank god i'm getting these horrible cams out.



MY 2003 SUNFIRE

They are rated at 200hp, nothing to sneeze at. A little heavier, but w/e.. I doubt whoever it was could drive. This was from about 70km/h-140km/h. I should have started in 2nd, but I started in 3rd.. I didn't lose any low end power from the cams, I gained low end power. My wife's 2003 4 door 5 speed ecotec is a good comparison anytime I want. It's just plain faster at any rpm you tromp it at. You probably advanced your cams by a cog or something..

04firetec wrote:I doubt whoever it was could drive.

^^ i'm soo tired of everyones excuse. since they only come in auto. i dont see them missing a gear or anything so how can't tthey drive? and i didnt do my cams i had them installed and it was done by the book.



MY 2003 SUNFIRE

They can also not put the pedal all the way to the floor in an auto, get scared etc..

Anyways, obviously whoever put in your cams screwed up. They made a big difference in my engine, and from what you're describing, your cams are probably 1 cog advanced. In order to "by the book" install these cams, you have to take the whole front of the motor apart, until you get to the crank sprocket for the timing chain, then line up the 3 colored links to the marks. You can't do it otherwise, unless you take all that stuff apart, which is a big job to do by the book. I should know, I have the GM Service Manual. I didn't do it that way, I just zip tied the cam cogs, and bungeed them to keep the chain tight while I swapped in the cams. Easy, and defintely noticeable gains through the whole power band. If yours is weaker at bottom, and really rough at low rpm, and only goes at over 5500, then you're definitely advanced on your cams by a cog, I would guess. My guess is that whoever you paid to do it, screwed up..

the engine was pulled apart b/c i had a new head installed and it was done by the book. these cams are just one big POS. and i guess everyone messed up on theirs? i doubt it the guy that help build karo's engine did arnjolts and arnjolts car feels like mine.



MY 2003 SUNFIRE