Is it possible

Is is possible for a V6 3.8L Camaro with a chip to beat a 67' impala SS V8 3.5L!

first of all umm, i dont think they even had a 3.5L V8 in 67. didnt you mean '97 impala? what is that like 200CI. if you did mean a 67 then your talking about a car that ways close to two tons compared to how much ever a new camaro weighs. if a 67 inpala actualy had that engine in it, a 90 year old lady with her walker could probably beat it.

I am sure you meant 5.3L, not 3.5L....so:

5.3L is a 327ci V8 and was available in a 275hp version for the 1967 Impala (Inline 6, 283, 327, 396, and 427 were all available).

Due to the HP being about the same* and the weights of the Vehicles in Question, stock for stock I would probably put money on a 3.8L Camaro. The Camaro should be making over 200hp at a weight of 3400 pounds without driver compared to the 3600 pound Impala (average weight without driver).

[*Remember that before 1972 manufacturers used Gross HP ratings, and now we use Net HP readings. This means to me that the 327 cubic inch 5.3L and the 231 cubic inch 3.8L would probably make close to the same power stock for stock.]

short answer: no
long answer: no

short answer: no
long answer: no

Why do you think that? I am curious?

ok i got the gross vs. net thing, but to me a 327 v8 is a very high output engine. thats despite the fact that i would compare torque, not horsepower. i dont know any stats but on a guess i would say the impala is just more powerful.

well, the L30 (275 horse 327 V8) was gross rated at 355 lbs-ft, the L36 (200 horse 231 V6) is net rated at 225 lbs-ft. Yes, the Torque is more, but we do not really know how much since you cannot accurately compare net vs gross without an engine or chassis Dyno. Torque pushes you down the track, and it takes Torque to overcome drag coefficient. DC of the 4th gen is 0.32-0.34, DC of the Impala will be in the 0.40's (1970 Chevelle has a DC of 0.42). Todays Live axle cars have a 15-18% Driveline loss, compare to 20%+ of the older generation cars, so this means less Driveline loss on the newer cars as well.

so, Here are the things to put into consideration for these cars, both in stock form:
HP was about even...
TQ was higher on the V8, but unsure of how much higher...
Camaro has AT LEAST 200 pounds less weight, not including Driver...
Much better Drag Coefficient on the Camaro over the Impala...
Drivetrain efficiency Is much better on todays car.

So, Basically the Impala is going to need a lot of Extra torque and HP to overcome its disadvantages.

I have actually owned both Body styles in question here, this is why this question Interests me. My 1967 Impala was a 195hp 283, but after it was wrecked I went looking for another one. I drove a 1967 Impala SS that was equipped with the 275hp/355lbs-ft 327 V8 and a TH350. The car had the 12 bolt option, which leads me to believe it had a Decent gear in it. At the time, I also owned a 2000 Monte Carlo SS with the 200hp/225lbs-ft 231 V6 with an Automatic tranny and a Final drive of (i believe, correct me if I am wrong) 3.29:1. The 2000 Monte basically weighs the same as a 4th gen Camaro. I will tell you that judging by SOTP, the Monte would have handed the 327 Impala SS its behind!

We are Bench racing here, but due to all these facts I really feel that Stock for Stock, a 3.8L V6 4th gen Camaro has a good chance of getting ahead of a 1967 Impala 327 car.

well my reasoning would be its the same concept as that 3.8 versus a fourth gen z28. if you look at purely the numbers then its the same matchup and i know for a fact that the z28 would win, so...

well my reasoning would be its the same concept as that 3.8 versus a fourth gen z28. if you look at purely the numbers then its the same matchup and i know for a fact that the z28 would win, so...


please explain? i am lost on this...are you now comparing the 4th gen z28 to the 4th gen 3.8?

if you are, there is no comparison. both 4th gen motors are rated 'net' ratings, so you can get an even better idea:

200hp 225lbs-ft 3.8 vs 275hp 335lbs-ft 5.7 (LT1)

since they are both rated the same and are in the same car (so weight and drag would not make the comparison change), the Only truly effective differences would be Power output and Driver. This is completely unlike comparing the 3.8L 4th gen camaro to the 67 Impala.

If you are talking about the Buick Turbo 3.8L (LC2?), it was rated 'net' as well.

ratings for it were 245hp and 355lbs-ft and Stock for stock it sits pretty even with the LT1. LT1 had 40hp more and 20lbs-ft less than the LC2, and I believe the camaro was only slightly faster stock for stock.

Amungst my searching for GN performance specs, I stumbled across a page of data (http://web.missouri.edu/~apcb20/times.html). Take a look at it! It appears to be a list of data from different publications. I do not think all these numbers are 100% accurate, but they can give you an idea.

on the page, I found a listing for a 1967 Camaro with a 350 running a 15.4 1/4 mile and a 1968 Corvette with the 327 (the BASE corvette 327 was 300hp Gross Rated and weighed 3100lbs) running a 15.6 1/4. I am sure that these are not 100% accurate, but Given that I have seen numorous 3.8L V6 F bodies run in the 15's and better at the track I would say that it is still a good chance of a 4th gen V6 Camaro to take a 1967 Impala 327.