Did the GN really crank out 245 hp?

[TRBON8R]

Originally posted by Rogue Leader
245 came from the fact that the 87 Vette was rated at 255 HP. Just as the 89 TTA's 255 HP rating because the 89 Vette was factory rated at 265 HP.

Rogue this isn't correct. The '87 Vette was factory rated at 240 hp. The turbo LC2 topped it by 5 hp. Of course we all know the real difference was greater than that.

 

[pat83t]

Originally posted by TT/A1233
The TTA and GNx esentially have the same improvements over the GN engine.

WOW! I didn't know the TTA had the heads re-worked by McLaren, or the ceramic impeller, ball bearing turbo.

 

[BuickPower3800]

Correct me if im wrong but isnt a GNX faster than a TTA?

 

[JDSfastGN]

I think the TTAs and GNs were close in power but the reason the TTA is faster is due to the little things. 3.23 gears vs 3.42, slightly better intercooler,better fuel pump, more boost and more aggressive chip from what I understand. All those plus the aerodynamics seem to give the TTA about .3-.4 second edge with 3-4 more mph. The heads from what I have read are no better than GN heads, they were not on there for better performance, but to be able to fit the motor and AC inbetween the 3rd gens wheel wells. Hell they came off of a fwd lesabre, The GN made roughly 285 at the flywheel, basically the same as a well running LT1 but with more torque. The TTA made roughly 315 or so if we go by GMs new standard of underrating motors such as the LS1. The TTA that dynoed 301 i heard also had a more aggressive chip in it that was being tested before the car went into production but that is just a rumor i heard and not fact. And the TTA and GNX are very close and it really depends on a lot of factors. AS we've seen GNs and GM in general have a large variation on performance in stock cars, Some GNs can't break 14.5 stock, and others in the same conditions can run a 13.8. Some LS1s run high 13s while others are capable of running high 12s thats just how it is. In my opinion the GNX and TTA are so close that differnet cars and different drivers make or brake who wins or loses.

 

[BuickPower3800]

Wouldnt a GN still get the jump off the line vs. a TTA?

 

[gtokid1]

Any GNX owners have there factory dyno sheets handy.

John

 

[gnturboray]

The TTA wouldn't be squat without the Buick motor just like the modern GTP and the WS6 with the Chevy LS1. Pontiac is just a design team for car bodies!!!! So if that little Buick 6 moved that TA faster than the GN so what! The key words here are Buick V6

 

[sr71gn]

the heads on the production heads of the gnx were not reworked by maclaren- they originally planned to clean up the heads because of the ceramic wheel on the turbo but when the stock castings came out they were good enough that the reworking was canceled. i remember reading a report in 1987, just before i bought my gn, that to test the durability of the motor they ran the engine for two or three days straight at 19 lbs of boost- they said they were getting 415 lbs of torque but i dont recall the horsepower figure--i think the boost being run made the big difference- stock is 13.5 to 14 vs the 19 during the test

as far as the tta vs the gn 13.5 vs 16.5 is quite a difference plus the tta had a gnx intercooler- at the 1987 nationals at bg i watched don kiger switch from the stock intercooler to a gnx intercooler after running a 13.2 with his t-type -he was hoping to get into the 12's but he ran 13.0 with the x intercooler

 

[whitehot84]

The TTA was noted to be the fastest Firebird built until the new Ls1's came out.

 

[GNSCOTT]

Does anyone know the price difference between an 87GN and a 89TTA? Also was the 89TTA called the fastest production car for that year?,I know the 87GN was!

The TTA was alot closer to GNX money than GN money. A TTA was about $27k in 1987 dollars.

 

[TTA89]

The TTA was 31K in 89.

 

[TTA89]

Originally posted by BuickPower3800
Wouldnt a GN still get the jump off the line vs. a TTA?

Why do you think that? They 60ft the same, why people think the Buicks 60ft better is beyond me.

 

[86brick]

Originally posted by TTA89


Why do you think that? They 60ft the same, why people think the Buicks 60ft better is beyond me.

They might 60' the same, but we look better doing it!

Show me a TTA that launches like this>>> http://www.gnregistry.org/movies/GS_NATS_2003_Part3_076.mpg

 

[Lee_Burough]

Facts Vs asserted conclusions and innuendo

SOME of These posts remind me of the ignorance and half truths I see at LS1.com or cameroz28.com when they talk about "those black Monte's".

It reminds me of watching a football game when I like one team and my neighor likes the other team. We can watch the same game but come out with completely different outlooks about the game....All because of his bias for his team and my bias for my team.

Having owned a fairly light 87 LTD with a fresh, built engine, and now a low mile TTA with everything still stock, There is no question the TTA is/was much, much faster.

Each car has definite advantages however. Ride being the biggest advantage of the TR and the biggest downside of my TTA (did I mention squeaks and rattles? ). The TTA is an animal, much more aggressive to my seat of the pants dyno

If you want to get some empirical data about the differences found in the TTA's refined LC2 engine and drivetrain, go here: http://www.89tta.com/ttahist.htm

The TTA heads, stainless headers and exhaust do flow significantly more air than the TR could from the factory. It has an adequate radiator. It has great brakes (brake pad change in 30 seconds or less). It had more boost with 45 psi fuel pressure (and, baffles in the gas tank). It had the GNX intercooler. The TTA weighed 200 pounds less than the GN. It had 16X8 wheels and tires. The suspension and drive line were improvements over the TR. Those differences are prolly worth .3-.7 seconds in a quarter mile (that means more RWHP to you doubters).

I believe _Car and Driver_ touted a top speed 156+....

That said, people still turn their heads for the GN/black T-type and swoon over the GNX (myself among them). The TTA can run with the TR's, but, is never going to be a GN or GNX. So, why spend all this time posturing that "mine is bigger than yours"?

I bought my TTA solely for the engine, and because Pontiac solved several of the problems that plagued the TR's (brakes, cooling, cracking headers, oil in the up pipe (all that stuff is refined in the TTA)....LC2 Forever

 

[JOHNDEEREGN]

very well said Lee

Can I drive your TTA

 

[Rogue Leader]

Originally posted by TRBON8R
Rogue this isn't correct. The '87 Vette was factory rated at 240 hp. The turbo LC2 topped it by 5 hp. Of course we all know the real difference was greater than that.

No the whole thing was GM wouldnt allow any literature to say anything had more HP than the Vette, the Vette had 250 or 255 and the GN had 245 for that very reason... Acording to GM "nothing can beat the Vette"

 

[GNSCOTT]

I STILL sticj with my beleifs. I said why the IC isn't much help, I've said why the headers aren't any help (ATR headers don't even help a stock TR), and I know Tom at champion has flowed both heads and said the TTA heads flow a little more but not what people are claiming. I deffinately do not beleive in a butt dyno, because my Iroc's beacause they had such a rough ride always felt faster. When I drive my vette sometimes i look up and i'm doing 100..It doesn't feel that fast because the ride is so much better. The web site you posted is exactly like you described, people sticking up for their own vehicle. 3#'s of boost will feel faster and is problably 2-10ths, 200#'s is another 2-10ths. I failed Physics, but i'm sure the aerodynamics helps at least a 10th, so there's a half second minumum right there..


I think the board and particularly this section is here for these kinds of conversations. I still think that both running 16 or 16.5 #'s of boost, these cars have the same HP. STILL jmho.

 

[Vendor Defendor]

why is everyone getting into a pissing match over this? i mean both are great cars, and both have my respect. i personally would rather have a GN over a TTA because i think they are a nicer ride, i personally dont care if it dosent handle as well...

and anyways the TTA wouldnt be anything with out the Turbo Buick motor, so bow down before the one you serve, or we will take our motors back j/k

-Neil

 

[Hyper]

turbo

Originally posted by GNSCOTT
I STILL sticj with my beleifs. I said why the IC isn't much help, I've said why the headers aren't any help (ATR headers don't even help a stock TR), and I know Tom at champion has flowed both heads and said the TTA heads flow a little more but not what people are claiming. I deffinately do not beleive in a butt dyno, because my Iroc's beacause they had such a rough ride always felt faster. When I drive my vette sometimes i look up and i'm doing 100..It doesn't feel that fast because the ride is so much better. The web site you posted is exactly like you described, people sticking up for their own vehicle. 3#'s of boost will feel faster and is problably 2-10ths, 200#'s is another 2-10ths. I failed Physics, but i'm sure the aerodynamics helps at least a 10th, so there's a half second minumum right there..


I think the board and particularly this section is here for these kinds of conversations. I still think that both running 16 or 16.5 #'s of boost, these cars have the same HP. STILL jmho.

well, I dont think it is as aerodynamic as you think. Ask "WJ" (no not me my friend Warren Johnson). He told me that the olds he was driving was alott more aerodynamic than the Transam. He had to use the pontiac because they where footing the bills. Believe me he knows his stuff. And Kenny dyno a stock GN with stock chip and everything at 301 HP in 1987. So it was a little underrated.

 

[GNSCOTT]

why is everyone getting into a pissing match over this? i mean both are great cars, and both have my respect. i personally would rather have a GN over a TTA because i think they are a nicer ride, i personally dont care if it dosent handle as well...

I didn't consider it a pissong match. I considered it people discussing the differences/non differences between the TTA and GN. I don't think anybody said either one was better than the other, and if they did its obviously just an opinion.