In this paper, we test the hypothesis that although OpenAI's GPT-4 performs well generally, we can fine-tune open-source models to outperform GPT-4 in smart contract vulnerability detection. We fine-tune two models from Meta's Code Llama and a dataset of 17k prompts, Detect Llama - Foundation and Detect Llama - Instruct, and we also fine-tune OpenAI's GPT-3.5 Turbo model (GPT-3.5FT). We then evaluate these models, plus a random baseline, on a testset we develop against GPT-4, and GPT-4 Turbo's, detection of eight vulnerabilities from the dataset and the two top identified vulnerabilities - and their weighted F1 scores. We find that for binary classification (i.e., is this smart contract vulnerable?), our two best-performing models, GPT-3.5FT and Detect Llama - Foundation, achieve F1 scores of $0.776$ and $0.68$, outperforming both GPT-4 and GPT-4 Turbo, $0.66$ and $0.675$. For the evaluation against individual vulnerability identification, our top two models, GPT-3.5FT and Detect Llama - Foundation, both significantly outperformed GPT-4 and GPT-4 Turbo in both weighted F1 for all vulnerabilities ($0.61$ and $0.56$ respectively against GPT-4's $0.218$ and GPT-4 Turbo's $0.243$) and weighted F1 for the top two identified vulnerabilities ($0.719$ for GPT-3.5FT, $0.674$ for Detect Llama - Foundation against GPT-4's $0.363$ and GPT-4 Turbo's $0.429$).