@claymillican25; Clay Millican, as similar with my comments on the video You recorded, compiled, edited and posted on Your channel about this CRC GTO with the dynometer measurement results: These are actually calculable, precisely, accurately, exactly through the gear ratio, power transfer of the drive train through the clutch, transmission, drive shaft, differential, axles, wheel cylinders, wheels, tires [the most variable aspect - due to sidewall stiffness (especially with these old tires - weaker - though extremely little use). Your 'Guestimate' along with Jeff Lutz [originally] with 325 is precisely 75 HP loss, 325/400=0.8125, 81.25 % power transfer, 18.75% loss -> What is the basis You have with Your 'Guestimate" of 325 wHP, 81.25 % power transfere, 18.75% loss ? ->That power transfer seemed a little high, with the power loss number seemingly to be a little low -> personally was expecting >=20% loss, thus -80 HP => however, the stated measurement of 328 wHP and shown [25:53] 335.24 wHP, 339.52 lbs-ft torque -> as in Your video posted You stated the speed measured [seemingly for the maximum HP] was 137, and the view of the power/torque curves appear to show the maximum wHP @ ~ 6500 RPM [may not have reached the dropping, 'turn over' point and excellent upper power sustained] , maximum torque @ ~ 5000+ RPM =>Thus, the power transfer is simply 328/400=0.82 = 82% => 18% loss =Thus, accordingly to the 335 or 335.24 [more precisely] the power transfer = 335/400=0.8375, 83.75%, 16.25% loss, more accurately 335.24/400=0.8381, 83.81% power transfer, 16.19% loss. Perhaps You can reply, respond with the two different wHP measurements - stated 328 [previous to S/W adjustments, setting by Jeffrey (as he mentioned)] and the clearly recorded, shown 335.24 wHP ? Is this higher measurement also another adjustment, setting or measurement standard [STD, SAE, etc.] ? Also am very surprised with the amount of power transfer through the drive train and with these older, softer tires too. Also, noted the high torque compared with the wHP measured along with the very good-excellent power curve too. It appears there is certainly much more power available in the 'Stock Form' which GM, Pontiac, Holden seem to intentionally, purposely suppressed, reduced within the production ECU-PCM settings, perhaps for emissions, fuel millage, and other considerations including 'insurance'. Apparently the GTO has a LS-2, 6.0 L/364 c.i. V8 is reported by GM with SAE 400 bHP power @5200 RPM, SAE 400 ft-lbs torque @400 RPM, with a T56 6 speed transmission with OD. As per stated in the posted video, the dynometer measurement was performed, completed with the transmission in 4th gear. So, does this 6th speed manual transmission have 2 OD gears ? Is this T56 transmission the T56 Magnium in this post on this site -> gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/ls2/ shows: PRODUCT DETAILS Able to withstand 700 ft/lbs torque while providing unbelievably crisp shifts, the Super Magnum T56 Transmission is the kingpin of Tremec's high-performance lineup. No other manual transmission offers as much combined strength, ease of use, and versatility as the T56 Magnum. This high-torque capacity TREMEC six-speed manual is specially designed for custom, retro-fit installations with Chevrolet Performance crate engines. The exterior case similar to fourth-generation F-body transmission with the stronger, high-capacity gear sets, input shaft and output shaft used in the TREMEC TR6060. It also features a 40-tooth reluctor ring that's necessary for use with electronic vehicle speed sensors used with Chevrolet Performance controllers. Features: 700 lb.-ft. Maximum Torque Capacity 26-Spline Input Shaft 31-Spline Output Shaft Gear Ratios: 2.66 (1), 1.78 (2), 1.30 (3), 1.00 (4), 0.80 (5), 0.63 (6) Slip-Yoke Design Two-Position Shifter Plate Included, With Third Position Built Into The Transmission Am also a bit surprised that You would not know properly about fuel, octane, more power and cleaner burning with higher ethanol or methanol content. According to the information which have located about the LS2, 6.0 L/364 c.i. engine the compression ratio with the stock heads is 10.9:1. The recommended "premium' fuel, meaning some higher than minimum 87 octane is useful to slow the combustion, perhaps 89 octane is sufficient, may improved or need 90-91 octane and actually will certainly perform better with ethanol combined, certainly with common E-85, typical 40-55%, and better with cleaner burning, far less carbon deposits, lower temperature ignition greater ignition/burning energy/power with higher ethanol above 40-55% increasingly as with actual E-85-85% ethanol, 88, 90, 95, 100 % ethanol -well known, by chemists, engineers, racing teams for over six decades and more. Similarly with methanol as was used in Indy, F1, LeMans, drag racing, endurance, road and other racing. As is well known, established, this higher compression ratio will result in a smaller range 'window' within tuning, timing when coupled with the forced air compression via the super charger [or any turbocharger], but not extremely difficult, as these LS2 engines are commonly boosted by both superchargers and turbochargers including on the Corvette, Camaro, SS, etc., as the next LS6, 6.2 L/372 c.i. engine. Perhaps if the build includes modification, swapping the heads, then certainly the choice [per Jeff, Jeffrey, Clay, etc.] involved may be with a slightly reduced compression, closer to 10.5 or 10.0 ;1 for easier tuning, timing and flexibility. Am certain [All] Y'All know what is best for the desired results with the proper combination of the components. These vehicles would certainly perform best with a 'Flex-Fuel' sensor, and setting in the ECU-PCM which the GM stock version also has automated programming to handle with the simple addition, connection and setting modification,as with Gen 5&6 Camaro, SS, C6&C7 [C8?] Corvette and other vehicles including Your Chrysler/Dodge, and others as Fords too. All The Best 😊, Sincerely ☺
Thats one car that needs to honour its heritage.Its a monaro ,needs a hsv front end and bonnet( hood) and rebadged as a monaro , even get hsv wheels, they look so much better than the ones on it now.get rid of all the gto badging
Got the 4 door version of this car,well next model up....a 2003 VY commodore ss with 47xxx km's on the clock,all stock & still smells like new car inside. Can relate how excited these guys are. But great to see what LRC CRC & Clay is doing for the future of racing.
Big old sign a small block cylinder heads and that 1300 my motor that Cam that supercharger send a Jeff Lutz headers and exhaust . Maybe I set of coil overs or whatever suspension you all use. Makes me wish I was a Make-a-Wish I hit the lottery before the auction cuz it's going to be a bad dude
What a great project CRC what a great company to bankroll the project and smart because more car people = selling more products. Spend money now make money tomorrow
Why can't you call it the real name. Holden MONARO. MONARO is the Aboriginal word, meaning "High Plain". Put the Maloo front from Holden special vehicle. Maybe the Monaro GTS front.
To bad you guys didn't know about the car while you were in Australia because you would have been able to get a of performance parts that are available here Hi from Australia .🇦🇺
Try doing 15% parasitic loss. 3 time 15 = 45. Then 15% of 28 which is roughly 4.5 horse power. So the loss should be 48 horse power. So what the loss should be at wheel hp is 352hp. So you are under that?? Now this is all a guess
@ltsgarage; It seems You have a strange way of calculating the loss, which is also not 'parasitic', rather calculable, precisely, accurately, exactly through the gear ratio, power transfer of the drive train through the clutch, transmission, drive shaft, differential, axles, wheel cylinders, wheels, tires [the most variable aspect - due to sidewall stiffness (especially with these old tires - weaker - though extremely little use). If we use Your initial idea with 15% loss through the drive train from 400 bHP measured at the engine crankshaft, => Thus 15% of 400 bHP = 60 bHP [not 48 bHP = 12 % of 400 bHP] => Thus, expected measurement would be 400 * 0.85 = 400-60 = 340 wHP [not 352 wHP] -> What is the basis You have with Your 'Guestimate" of 15% loss ? ->This power loss number seemed to me to be quite low - was expecting >=20% loss, thus -80 HP => however, the stated measurement of 328 wHP and shown [25:53] 335.24 wHP, 339.52 lbs-ft torque -> in the video posted by Clay Millican, he stated the speed measured [seemingly for the maximum HP] was 137, and the view of the power/torque curves appear to show the maximum wHP @ ~ 6500 RPM [may not have reached the dropping, 'turn over' point and excellent upper power sustained] , maximum torque @ ~ 5000+ RPM =>Thus, the power transfer is simply 328/400=0.82 = 82% => 18% loss =Thus, accordingly to the 335 or 335.24 [more precisely] the power transfer = 335/400=0.8375, 83.75%, 16.25% loss, more accurately 335.24/400=0.8381, 83.81% power transfer, 16.19% loss. Also am very surprised with the amount of power transfer through the drive train and with these older, softer tires too. All The Best 😊, Sincerely ☺
@@newtonfirefly3584 why are you asking me if you have all the answers ??? Every time someone tells us about power loss 15% is usually the number they use. It’s power loss through the transmission drag of the drive shaft, rear end gears. Oh. I used a simple math. Most people that look at your calculations haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. And yes it is Parasitic loss. It’s the drag of all systems !!!
@@ltsgarage7898 As per my posted comment, clearly You did NOT use simple, correct math, mathematics, calculations !! Your calculations, estimates, claims fail to use basic 5th grade level. Also, again Your claim these power losses are "parasitic" are certainly, absolutely incorrect, false improper use of the term, meaning of 'parasitic'. Also certainly NOT 'drag' on the drive train, system either. -> these are determinate by the gear ratios, precisely. The only variable is the flexibility of the tires. Good Luck
@@newtonfirefly3584 so? You don’t think that the drive train has anything to with power loss??? Wow. Many I’ve been having more horse power to my wheels that the Dyno has been telling me for the last 55 years. That’s back when I did my first Dyno pull. How old were you when you did your first Dyno pull???
@johnmilner; @johnmilner5485; So, John Milner which of these ideas, concepts, philosophies are You and accept: "Socialist/ISM", "Communist/ISM", "Fascist/ISM", "Authoritarian/ist/ISM", "Corporate/ist/ISM", "Union/ist/ISM", "Collective/ist/ISM", "Capitalist/ISM", "Globalist/ISM", "Elite/ist/ISM", Governance ?? 🤨 or "Free Enterprise", "Free Markets", "Open Markets" ?? 🧐 All The Best 😊, Sincerely ☺
This car is so nice can’t wait for everyone to see what it’s going to be in the end !!!
@claymillican25; Clay Millican, as similar with my comments on the video You recorded, compiled, edited and posted on Your channel about this CRC GTO with the dynometer measurement results:
These are actually calculable, precisely, accurately, exactly through the gear ratio, power transfer of the drive train through the clutch, transmission, drive shaft, differential, axles, wheel cylinders, wheels, tires [the most variable aspect - due to sidewall stiffness (especially with these old tires - weaker - though extremely little use).
Your 'Guestimate' along with Jeff Lutz [originally] with 325 is precisely 75 HP loss, 325/400=0.8125, 81.25 % power transfer, 18.75% loss
-> What is the basis You have with Your 'Guestimate" of 325 wHP, 81.25 % power transfere, 18.75% loss ?
->That power transfer seemed a little high, with the power loss number seemingly to be a little low -> personally was expecting >=20% loss, thus -80 HP => however, the stated measurement of 328 wHP and shown [25:53] 335.24 wHP, 339.52 lbs-ft torque
-> as in Your video posted You stated the speed measured [seemingly for the maximum HP] was 137, and the view of the power/torque curves appear to show the maximum wHP @ ~ 6500 RPM [may not have reached the dropping, 'turn over' point and excellent upper power sustained] , maximum torque @ ~ 5000+ RPM
=>Thus, the power transfer is simply 328/400=0.82 = 82% => 18% loss =Thus, accordingly to the 335 or 335.24 [more precisely] the power transfer = 335/400=0.8375, 83.75%, 16.25% loss, more accurately 335.24/400=0.8381, 83.81% power transfer, 16.19% loss.
Perhaps You can reply, respond with the two different wHP measurements - stated 328 [previous to S/W adjustments, setting by Jeffrey (as he mentioned)] and the clearly recorded, shown 335.24 wHP ? Is this higher measurement also another adjustment, setting or measurement standard [STD, SAE, etc.] ?
Also am very surprised with the amount of power transfer through the drive train and with these older, softer tires too.
Also, noted the high torque compared with the wHP measured along with the very good-excellent power curve too. It appears there is certainly much more power available in the 'Stock Form' which GM, Pontiac, Holden seem to intentionally, purposely suppressed, reduced within the production ECU-PCM settings, perhaps for emissions, fuel millage, and other considerations including 'insurance'.
Apparently the GTO has a LS-2, 6.0 L/364 c.i. V8 is reported by GM with SAE 400 bHP power @5200 RPM, SAE 400 ft-lbs torque @400 RPM, with a T56 6 speed transmission with OD. As per stated in the posted video, the dynometer measurement was performed, completed with the transmission in 4th gear. So, does this 6th speed manual transmission have 2 OD gears ?
Is this T56 transmission the T56 Magnium in this post on this site -> gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/ls2/
shows: PRODUCT DETAILS
Able to withstand 700 ft/lbs torque while providing unbelievably crisp shifts, the Super Magnum T56 Transmission is the kingpin of Tremec's high-performance lineup. No other manual transmission offers as much combined strength, ease of use, and versatility as the T56 Magnum. This high-torque capacity TREMEC six-speed manual is specially designed for custom, retro-fit installations with Chevrolet Performance crate engines. The exterior case similar to fourth-generation F-body transmission with the stronger, high-capacity gear sets, input shaft and output shaft used in the TREMEC TR6060. It also features a 40-tooth reluctor ring that's necessary for use with electronic vehicle speed sensors used with Chevrolet Performance controllers.
Features:
700 lb.-ft. Maximum Torque Capacity
26-Spline Input Shaft
31-Spline Output Shaft
Gear Ratios: 2.66 (1), 1.78 (2), 1.30 (3), 1.00 (4), 0.80 (5), 0.63 (6)
Slip-Yoke Design
Two-Position Shifter Plate Included, With Third Position Built Into The Transmission
Am also a bit surprised that You would not know properly about fuel, octane, more power and cleaner burning with higher ethanol or methanol content.
According to the information which have located about the LS2, 6.0 L/364 c.i. engine the compression ratio with the stock heads is 10.9:1. The recommended "premium' fuel, meaning some higher than minimum 87 octane is useful to slow the combustion, perhaps 89 octane is sufficient, may improved or need 90-91 octane and actually will certainly perform better with ethanol combined, certainly with common E-85, typical 40-55%, and better with cleaner burning, far less carbon deposits, lower temperature ignition greater ignition/burning energy/power with higher ethanol above 40-55% increasingly as with actual E-85-85% ethanol, 88, 90, 95, 100 % ethanol -well known, by chemists, engineers, racing teams for over six decades and more. Similarly with methanol as was used in Indy, F1, LeMans, drag racing, endurance, road and other racing.
As is well known, established, this higher compression ratio will result in a smaller range 'window' within tuning, timing when coupled with the forced air compression via the super charger [or any turbocharger], but not extremely difficult, as these LS2 engines are commonly boosted by both superchargers and turbochargers including on the Corvette, Camaro, SS, etc., as the next LS6, 6.2 L/372 c.i. engine. Perhaps if the build includes modification, swapping the heads, then certainly the choice [per Jeff, Jeffrey, Clay, etc.] involved may be with a slightly reduced compression, closer to 10.5 or 10.0 ;1 for easier tuning, timing and flexibility. Am certain [All] Y'All know what is best for the desired results with the proper combination of the components.
These vehicles would certainly perform best with a 'Flex-Fuel' sensor, and setting in the ECU-PCM which the GM stock version also has automated programming to handle with the simple addition, connection and setting modification,as with Gen 5&6 Camaro, SS, C6&C7 [C8?] Corvette and other vehicles including Your Chrysler/Dodge, and others as Fords too.
All The Best 😊, Sincerely ☺
Thats one car that needs to honour its heritage.Its a monaro ,needs a hsv front end and bonnet( hood) and rebadged as a monaro , even get hsv wheels, they look so much better than the ones on it now.get rid of all the gto badging
Sweet car all around!
I worked at a Pontiac dealership when these were coming out brand new. That thing is showroom fresh.
I am truly in awe, my two favorite drag racers supin up a low mileage GTO, what a dream car this would be.
When do you get time to sleep Jeff!? Love everything you guys do, I’m a welder/fabricator//body & paint guy, and you guys are killin it!
That is a very mint car
Beautiful car! I love the idea, I don't see a downside. Thanks for sharing with us.
You should make a template of that car body and place it over Jeff yellow GTO. Rumor is Jeff yellow GTO has laid back windshield.
Can’t wait to see what u guys do w it and prop u guys nothing wrong w giving back to the younger generation. Have to keep it going
This would be a great small tire street car
Imagine the look on those Pontiac guys faces!
This is gonna be awesome. Hopefully, Lutz ends up with it and has 2 GTO race cars
Got the 4 door version of this car,well next model up....a 2003 VY commodore ss with 47xxx km's on the clock,all stock & still smells like new car inside. Can relate how excited these guys are. But great to see what LRC CRC & Clay is doing for the future of racing.
Some of the HSV front ends look way cooler than the got might be an option for u guys
Never liked the Pontiac front they put on these
Agreed that front end is ugly You guys should covert to HSV front end
I thought for sure Clay was having a "streetcar" built to play with SO. Lol Super cool car and project guys!
Have an 04 same color looking forward to your build. Also running Stainless Works LT and Cats. Also look at MaverickMan for some carbon fiber stuff
Big old sign a small block cylinder heads and that 1300 my motor that Cam that supercharger send a Jeff Lutz headers and exhaust . Maybe I set of coil overs or whatever suspension you all use. Makes me wish I was a Make-a-Wish I hit the lottery before the auction cuz it's going to be a bad dude
👍🏼
I can’t wait to meet my favorite street outlaw one day
Top video
Clay, where did you find such a pristine car?
It's a Great Day 👍 when you find a low mileage GTO And pull 328 on a Dyno
Have a Great Day 👍
God Bless America 🇺🇸🙏🇺🇸
Very clean car what kind of music do you listen to while cutting grass jeff
What a great project CRC what a great company to bankroll the project and smart because more car people = selling more products. Spend money now make money tomorrow
At blackout tinting getting some tint done!!!! I see your car is still here such a badass car!!!!
i was close i guessed 327 hp gonna be a cool build
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍♥️
interested in another low mile gto? have a yellow 2004 with just over 1000 miles in PA too lol
You guys are too cool 😎 can't wait till the project starts
Put your comments below,lol
Why can't you call it the real name. Holden MONARO.
MONARO is the Aboriginal word, meaning "High Plain".
Put the Maloo front from Holden special vehicle.
Maybe the Monaro GTS front.
What’s the back story on this car? 1300 miles!! Wow!
When yall ask the horsepower I guess 328...and I was right on the nose...unreal!
I'd seriously consider finding another one to auction off and put that one away....
I would do a satin finish wheel with decent meats all around so it handles good
Gto 2.0 💪🏼💪🏼
well Letts se what's going on I want 2 se what u plan on doing 2 this newest car ore GTO right 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍 Letts go
you should have did a couple of pulls
Guys dont forget to drop in a twin plate 3.7 gears and a Harrop Diff Cover...
Excited for this I've wanted a 6.0 gto since the day it was released to the public
Harrop supercharger.
Made in Australia!!!
You guys should try to find a rim that resembles an old school G.T.O rim. 🤙🤪🤙
Do some chrome rally wheels
To bad you guys didn't know about the car while you were in Australia because you would have been able to get a of performance parts that are available here
Hi from Australia .🇦🇺
Put an Aussie HSV body kit on it and make it what it should be
18%
SD cards are cheap, why you not recording in HD?
Do a auto cross type build
that's because he Dino it before he brother to Jeff
unlock the ECU and you get more power out of it
Are you guys not videoing any of the testing for season 6 NPK
Guess whos gonna pay for the lunch next？🤔
Sounds like the bearings are shot in the dyno rollers. 18% loss
Long tube headers?
Off the top of my head 18 to about 22 percent loss of hp
350
just under 18% lower than Flywheel HP
369
How's it going Jeff Lutz
You should have bought Manaro panels back home to the US with you from Oz.
don't you think that's kind of a stupid place to have a Dino and shouldn't you have a fan blowing on the front of a car
Bogarts or 2 piece ARE s
Bogart's or a 2 piece ARE Look great on this car 😢 IT'LL BRING A TEAR TO YOUR
18% loss from the crank to tires
Try doing 15% parasitic loss. 3 time 15 = 45. Then 15% of 28 which is roughly 4.5 horse power.
So the loss should be 48 horse power.
So what the loss should be at wheel hp is 352hp.
So you are under that??
Now this is all a guess
@ltsgarage; It seems You have a strange way of calculating the loss, which is also not 'parasitic', rather calculable, precisely, accurately, exactly through the gear ratio, power transfer of the drive train through the clutch, transmission, drive shaft, differential, axles, wheel cylinders, wheels, tires [the most variable aspect - due to sidewall stiffness (especially with these old tires - weaker - though extremely little use).
If we use Your initial idea with 15% loss through the drive train from 400 bHP measured at the engine crankshaft,
=> Thus 15% of 400 bHP = 60 bHP [not 48 bHP = 12 % of 400 bHP] => Thus, expected measurement would be 400 * 0.85 = 400-60 = 340 wHP [not 352 wHP]
-> What is the basis You have with Your 'Guestimate" of 15% loss ?
->This power loss number seemed to me to be quite low - was expecting >=20% loss, thus -80 HP => however, the stated measurement of 328 wHP and shown [25:53] 335.24 wHP, 339.52 lbs-ft torque
-> in the video posted by Clay Millican, he stated the speed measured [seemingly for the maximum HP] was 137, and the view of the power/torque curves appear to show the maximum wHP @ ~ 6500 RPM [may not have reached the dropping, 'turn over' point and excellent upper power sustained] , maximum torque @ ~ 5000+ RPM
=>Thus, the power transfer is simply 328/400=0.82 = 82% => 18% loss =Thus, accordingly to the 335 or 335.24 [more precisely] the power transfer = 335/400=0.8375, 83.75%, 16.25% loss, more accurately 335.24/400=0.8381, 83.81% power transfer, 16.19% loss.
Also am very surprised with the amount of power transfer through the drive train and with these older, softer tires too.
All The Best 😊, Sincerely ☺
@@newtonfirefly3584 why are you asking me if you have all the answers ???
Every time someone tells us about power loss 15% is usually the number they use. It’s power loss through the transmission drag of the drive shaft, rear end gears.
Oh. I used a simple math. Most people that look at your calculations haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.
And yes it is Parasitic loss. It’s the drag of all systems !!!
@@ltsgarage7898 As per my posted comment, clearly You did NOT use simple, correct math, mathematics, calculations !!
Your calculations, estimates, claims fail to use basic 5th grade level.
Also, again Your claim these power losses are "parasitic" are certainly, absolutely incorrect, false improper use of the term, meaning of 'parasitic'. Also certainly NOT 'drag' on the drive train, system either.
-> these are determinate by the gear ratios, precisely.
The only variable is the flexibility of the tires.
Good Luck
@@newtonfirefly3584 so? You don’t think that the drive train has anything to with power loss???
Wow. Many I’ve been having more horse power to my wheels that the Dyno has been telling me for the last 55 years.
That’s back when I did my first Dyno pull.
How old were you when you did your first Dyno pull???
@@newtonfirefly3584 please google Parasitic Loss then scroll down a couple of spots !!!
19 percent loss
List and sell all the original parts your taking to help raise more money for the charity. Exhaust and everything else
Clay stated that all of the original parts, components will be included, so the 'new' owner can swap the modifications if desired.
This will be the first GTO that Jeff has built, can't wait to see how bad it gets butchered.
who's going to bid knowing you're going to pump the price/bids up now?? lol bit stupid sayin that on camera
Without fixing the pay rate & structure in automotive repair there is no way we can retain anyone or create a viable future in this industry .
@johnmilner; @johnmilner5485;
So, John Milner which of these ideas, concepts, philosophies are You and accept:
"Socialist/ISM", "Communist/ISM", "Fascist/ISM", "Authoritarian/ist/ISM", "Corporate/ist/ISM", "Union/ist/ISM", "Collective/ist/ISM", "Capitalist/ISM", "Globalist/ISM", "Elite/ist/ISM", Governance ?? 🤨
or "Free Enterprise", "Free Markets", "Open Markets" ?? 🧐
All The Best 😊, Sincerely ☺
a Holden Monaro.. left hand drive.
A NON-DISCRIPT blob shape is what Jeff Lutz is goo-goo over, damn ………..so disappointing.😕
That’s a Holden Monaro very nice cari had a few I wish I kept mine best wishes folks ❤️❤️❤️🙏🙏👍👍🦘👍🇦🇺🇺🇸