Have been trying to find actual real world data for dyno results for a stock GNX. I know they were all dynoed at ASC but the records are non-existant as far as I know and that all the publications rated them at 276 HP and 360 lb/ft, but what did they really produce? Does anyone know where I could find this information or have any specifics on this?
Stock GNX Dyno Numbers
- Thread starter kna4977
- Start date
BuckeyeTroop
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2007
I once read where the GNX dyno'd 40 more hp than the GN but 20 less than the TTA. Sounds good to me.
every dyno will read a little different, mileage, maintenance on a car with miles, parts tolerance, temp when dynoed, all play in. my #'s were with a 73,000 mile car still stock plugs wires clean ac air filter. about 2003 ish
on the same note stock 87 T did 204 Hp on the same dyno same day and it was a something teen mile car.
on the same note stock 87 T did 204 Hp on the same dyno same day and it was a something teen mile car.
I dynoed a stock 87 GN one time and it was 210/304 RWHP/RWTQ so that seems about right at 204.
Also makes sense the GNX would be 40 more HP than the GN based on the margin between GN rated HP of 235-245 HP and the GNX at 276.
I don't know anything about the Turbo TA, but I came across an article in a July 1989 Muscle Car Review where they tested the GNX vs TTA for 2 rounds down the quarter mile. Results were as follows:
GNX TTA
Round 1: 13.34/104.11 13.64/102.72
Round 2: 13.61/98.10 13.60/101.18
They also listed the Horsepower and Torque for the GNX was 300/400 and for the TTA it was 250/340.
They declared the winner "the big, bad Buick by a whisker but with numbers this close, either car could win on a given day with the right driver and vehicle condition." so I don't see why the TTA would have more power than the GNX.
The 290 and 315 numbers, are those crank numbers or numbers at the rear wheel?
Also makes sense the GNX would be 40 more HP than the GN based on the margin between GN rated HP of 235-245 HP and the GNX at 276.
I don't know anything about the Turbo TA, but I came across an article in a July 1989 Muscle Car Review where they tested the GNX vs TTA for 2 rounds down the quarter mile. Results were as follows:
GNX TTA
Round 1: 13.34/104.11 13.64/102.72
Round 2: 13.61/98.10 13.60/101.18
They also listed the Horsepower and Torque for the GNX was 300/400 and for the TTA it was 250/340.
They declared the winner "the big, bad Buick by a whisker but with numbers this close, either car could win on a given day with the right driver and vehicle condition." so I don't see why the TTA would have more power than the GNX.
The 290 and 315 numbers, are those crank numbers or numbers at the rear wheel?
BuckeyeTroop
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2007
The TTA was even more underrated from the factory than the GN/X's. The 250 hp number is a joke. The accepted number seems to be 301 hp at the wheels, which was backed up by PHS from what I understand. Several original owners from the TTA board have run mid 13's bone stock @ 101-103 MPH, so if it has less HP than the GNX, it isn't by much.
IIRC...the 'club' magazine ran an article about GNX hp/tq figures and seemed to recall the average was 350-360 range. I do remember the article stating each owner received a dyno sheet of their GNX. I'll have to look in the archives and see where that article is.
Would love to see some actual dyno data sheets if anyone has any they could post. They did dyno each one at ASC but I don't think every owner got a copy of it. If anyone has one of the sheets from ASC they could post that would be great.
I took the results from the MCR July 89 article and plugged them into the dragtimes horsepower calculator and came up with the following flywheel HP ratings:
GNX Weight = 3545
TTA Weight = 3464
GNX TTA
Round 1 = 303.68 276.11
Round 2 = 269.17 281.41
Also found results from April 86 Car and Driver for a GN that ran 13.9 at 98 MPH with a weight of 3520 = 258.81 HP and where they tested the GNX in May 87 which ran 13.5 at 102 with a weight of 3545 = 289.2 HP. Also found an entry of 13.26 at 104 for the GNX in another magazine = 305.87 HP. All flywheel numbers.
I took the results from the MCR July 89 article and plugged them into the dragtimes horsepower calculator and came up with the following flywheel HP ratings:
GNX Weight = 3545
TTA Weight = 3464
GNX TTA
Round 1 = 303.68 276.11
Round 2 = 269.17 281.41
Also found results from April 86 Car and Driver for a GN that ran 13.9 at 98 MPH with a weight of 3520 = 258.81 HP and where they tested the GNX in May 87 which ran 13.5 at 102 with a weight of 3545 = 289.2 HP. Also found an entry of 13.26 at 104 for the GNX in another magazine = 305.87 HP. All flywheel numbers.
Round up a couple stock low mile GNX's in the northeast and bring them to Ottos Performance and we will get the true numbers.
Thanks for that info. I assume those are rear wheel numbers? However, if you take the average and plug it into one of the 1/4 mile calculators, it would equate to a 1/4 mile time of 12.6 sec which doesn't sound right. I don't think any of the reports from back in the day reported those kinds of times. Most were between 13.2 sec and 13.6 sec for the 1/4. If on the other hand they are at the flywheel it would be 13.3 sec which is right on the money and comprable to the results of most period magazine tests.
Also those results I posted from the dragtimes calculator above, even though the calculator said flywheel horsepower, must be rear wheel horsepower. Believe 290 to 315 RWHP or ~365 to 390 HP at the flywheel is probably the most correct guestimate for GNX HP.
wonder what type of dyno they used ?? Mustang ? dynojet? dynodynamics? corrected ?? Uncorrected ?? I have seen huge difference between units. Hell my Gtos baseline was 21hp different from a dynojet to a dynapack and every shop claims they have the best one. Yet I never see them re calibrated as they are suppose to be after so many unit hours. What I have learned in the end is the dyno is really just a money maker for shops, You can get a good base tune but not the real deal. #'s are just something the Supra guys dwell on. Best tunes come from track time. Real power is measured in the et's/mph. I can't tell you how may vette, supra, viper guys I have seen brag on the power they are putting down And I have out and out destroyed them on the street with no where near there claimed #'s.
In the end the GNX as well as TTA are legends and still are very strong by today's standards if they put down 200hp or 400hp is no matter to me. I still remember in 02 a close friend got a New WS6 ta and we ran for the heck of it against my 89 TTA that was stock other than k&n filter on a chrome maf pipe and a fuel pump/ hotwire kit. It was so close you would of thought is was a horse race "AND DOWN THE STRETCH THEY COME NECK AND NECK !!" In the end I was about 1 car length ahead, his front bumper on my rear that was me gaining about 2-3 feet every time he shifted (6 speed) from a 10 mph or so roll up to 135-140 ish
In the end the GNX as well as TTA are legends and still are very strong by today's standards if they put down 200hp or 400hp is no matter to me. I still remember in 02 a close friend got a New WS6 ta and we ran for the heck of it against my 89 TTA that was stock other than k&n filter on a chrome maf pipe and a fuel pump/ hotwire kit. It was so close you would of thought is was a horse race "AND DOWN THE STRETCH THEY COME NECK AND NECK !!" In the end I was about 1 car length ahead, his front bumper on my rear that was me gaining about 2-3 feet every time he shifted (6 speed) from a 10 mph or so roll up to 135-140 ish
march/april 06 of what magazine?
Similar threads
