Street Racing & Kill Stories - Anyone have a vid of a LS1 vs LT1 (stock to stock)?




CALL911
02-01-2007, 07:48 AM
Looking for a video of a race between a stock LT1 vs a stock LS1 (both F-bodies) from a dead stop, or at least a slow roll.

Trying to show someone the difference between the low end of the LT1 and the top end of the LS1.


BlackHoleSunSS
02-01-2007, 09:10 AM
And.....in be fo da :lock: . This should escalate quickly.

ZFan88
02-01-2007, 09:23 AM
The 'low end' will come down to the driver anyways, it doesn't matter. Once the LS1 gets into the upper rpms you'll just see it walk away


lilbuddy1587
02-01-2007, 10:08 AM
Looking for a video of a race between a stock LT1 vs a stock LS1 (both F-bodies) from a dead stop, or at least a slow roll.

Trying to show someone the difference between the low end of the LT1 and the top end of the LS1.

This is a goddamn myth, get outta here with that.

Formula_X
02-01-2007, 10:27 AM
It's definitely a myth. I've NEVER had a problem beating a LT1 in lower or upper RPMs.

5_02ls1
02-01-2007, 10:30 AM
why would you want to see that.the ls1 was designed to out perform the lt1.the ls1 is gonna win anyway you race them.

89tang
02-01-2007, 10:49 AM
Infact, the L98 is my pick for street use over both the LT1 and LS1 because it has a super strong bottom end.

Keeping stock:
L98>LT1>LS1

Going modded:
LS1>LT1>L98

Here is what some think over on clubgp LMAO!!!!! Yes it says L98 over the LT1 AND LS1 for stock or street use

CALL911
02-01-2007, 10:51 AM
I'm not looking for a discussion here, just looking for a video.

Anyone have a link to one??

5_02ls1
02-01-2007, 10:57 AM
Here is what some think over on clubgp LMAO!!!!! Yes it says L98 over the LT1 AND LS1 for stock or street use
tpi cars are strong on bottom end but the ls1 will easily walk around it.in stock form.me personaly id pick the l98 over an lt1

brejcha
02-01-2007, 11:02 AM
Lets see some vids. Well I know that when I had my friends 98 WS6 with Borla vs my 97 T/A with Magnaflow and no cats, that we were pretty even the whole way.

5_02ls1
02-01-2007, 11:02 AM
I'm not looking for a discussion here, just looking for a video.

Anyone have a link to one??
my friend has a stock 97 z a4 2.73 gear ran almost a second slower than my 98 ta a4 2.73 geared carwhen it was stock either time was to slow to post.if this helps any

bjamick
02-01-2007, 11:03 AM
Well i got destroyed in my 93 trans am by a 00SS from a dig by like 3 cars if that tells you anything.. :(

ZFan88
02-01-2007, 11:17 AM
tpi cars are strong on bottom end but the ls1 will easily walk around it.in stock form.me personaly id pick the l98 over an lt1

The LS1 still produces more torque, just a little later in the RPM. Let's not even talk about horsepower lol

brejcha
02-01-2007, 11:21 AM
Well if it is not stock for stock, you can still have a little modded LT1 still run with the LS1. But stock for stock LS1 will do better 99% of the time.

CALL911
02-01-2007, 11:22 AM
AGAIN! I am not looking for the differences, or a discussion on them. I think we all know the LS1 us superior here. I am just looking for a video of it.

I just came accross this one. The first race the LT1 spins a bit, and its not really a good comparison. But the second run, they both hook up well and is more of what I am looking for. Anyone else have any??

http://thumbs.vidiac.com/9e9689af-f64f-429a-9149-58ca8b1e8cc4.jpg (http://videos.streetfire.net/video/9e9689af-f64f-429a-9149-58ca8b1e8cc4.htm)Click here to see Video (http://videos.streetfire.net/video/9e9689af-f64f-429a-9149-58ca8b1e8cc4.htm)

GXPPOWER
02-01-2007, 01:11 PM
i ran 8.6 @85 in the 1/8 stock. im in a a4 convertible. i doubt any stock LT1 could even run that in the 1/8. and stock does mean normal street tires.

and Ls1 is just as strong as the lt1 on the low end.




their has been videos but it was of like a lt1 beating an ls1 from a roll..... :jest:

so i doubt you will find a legit one unless its one i havent seen. and nowdays i doubt you will find a stock LT1 and a stock ls1 on the same road at the same time let alone taking a vid :P

CALL911
02-01-2007, 02:22 PM
Not interested in opinions, or peoples facts. Just looking for a video, AS STATED BEFORE.

burnzilla
02-01-2007, 04:30 PM
The 0-60 times are very similar.

After that its, ohh NO!

NVR KNO
02-01-2007, 05:53 PM
when i had my 97z28 a4 with an intake, i raced my friends 99ss m6 from a dig and i would put about 1 car on him til 100 everytime and then he would just walk away. now from a low roll i never stood a chance. instant kill. i have a video somewhere around here, i just have to find it.

Mattybz28
02-01-2007, 07:34 PM
when i had my 97z28 a4 with an intake, i raced my friends 99ss m6 from a dig and i would put about 1 car on him til 100 everytime and then he would just walk away. now from a low roll i never stood a chance. instant kill. i have a video somewhere around here, i just have to find it.
That has more to do with the a4 vs m6 gearing than the ls1 vs lt1.

GXPPOWER
02-02-2007, 03:41 AM
well call911 mabe you will realize then why their isnt any videos. the outcome is known.

CALL911
02-02-2007, 06:50 AM
Thanks to someone emialing me a couple vids, I have what I am looking for.

For those that would do nothing but try to argue their case that the LT1 would not run faster than an LS1 at ANY point in a race. I disagree. The LT1 torque peak is at 2400 RPMs, and by the factory is 325 Ft/Lbs. The LS1 torque peak is at 4000 RPM and is rated at 325ish Ft/Lbs dependent on year. There's a HUGE difference in that 1600 RPM. ALL things being equal, the LT1 will grunt harder and jump a little bit on the LS1, but by the 1/8th mile, it's going to be all over for the LT1 as the LS1's phenomenal top end will take over. Been there, done that, seen it too many times.

1600 rpm's may not seem like much, but between the two F-Body's, it's a world of difference off the line. I'm sure their will still be some that will still try to argue otherwise, but you will not convince me on this.

NVR KNO
02-02-2007, 09:50 AM
That has more to do with the a4 vs m6 gearing than the ls1 vs lt1.

i know, i was just stating my experience. :)

ZFan88
02-02-2007, 10:01 AM
Thanks to someone emialing me a couple vids, I have what I am looking for.

For those that would do nothing but try to argue their case that the LT1 would not run faster than an LS1 at ANY point in a race. I disagree. The LT1 torque peak is at 2400 RPMs, and by the factory is 325 Ft/Lbs. The LS1 torque peak is at 4000 RPM and is rated at 325ish Ft/Lbs dependent on year. There's a HUGE difference in that 1600 RPM. ALL things being equal, the LT1 will grunt harder and jump a little bit on the LS1, but by the 1/8th mile, it's going to be all over for the LT1 as the LS1's phenomenal top end will take over. Been there, done that, seen it too many times.

1600 rpm's may not seem like much, but between the two F-Body's, it's a world of difference off the line. I'm sure their will still be some that will still try to argue otherwise, but you will not convince me on this.

Go look at dyno numbers. The LS1 is well underrated, I don't even know why you said this lol

wickedwarlock
02-02-2007, 10:31 AM
Thanks to someone emialing me a couple vids, I have what I am looking for.

For those that would do nothing but try to argue their case that the LT1 would not run faster than an LS1 at ANY point in a race. I disagree. The LT1 torque peak is at 2400 RPMs, and by the factory is 325 Ft/Lbs. The LS1 torque peak is at 4000 RPM and is rated at 325ish Ft/Lbs dependent on year. There's a HUGE difference in that 1600 RPM. ALL things being equal, the LT1 will grunt harder and jump a little bit on the LS1, but by the 1/8th mile, it's going to be all over for the LT1 as the LS1's phenomenal top end will take over. Been there, done that, seen it too many times.

1600 rpm's may not seem like much, but between the two F-Body's, it's a world of difference off the line. I'm sure their will still be some that will still try to argue otherwise, but you will not convince me on this.

Just as zfan88 has posted. Look at dyno numbers. Someone posted a comparison on the same day from two stock ones, same gears, etc.

It's nothing but a myth. I own both too, they are totally different animals, even from a dig.

You either seen a good running lt1 and a bad running ls1.

ZFan88
02-02-2007, 10:43 AM
I also have both an LT1 and LS1 in my garage. With my mods I run about equal in the 1/4 as the 'stock' LS1. Of course he'll walk me from a higher roll

brejcha
02-02-2007, 11:25 AM
I am just happy that my pretty stock LT1 will still be even with the new 05-06 Mustang GT's. :-) I dont care to much about racing against our own. I understand the LT1 puts out less than the LS1, but being only 19 I am happy with my 1997 LT1 T/A.

5_02ls1
02-02-2007, 12:31 PM
Go look at dyno numbers. The LS1 is well underrated, I don't even know why you said this lolwell said as far as that video goes you posted neither driver could launc worth a shit.

CALL911
02-02-2007, 03:06 PM
Go look at dyno numbers. The LS1 is well underrated, I don't even know why you said this lol

The argument from the beggining was that the LT1 would do better 0-60 or 1/8 mile time, NOT that the LT1 had more HP or would yeild a faster 1/4 mile time.

Here's a vid. Stock vs. Stock, LS1 vs. LT1. The results yeild what happens (and what I have been stating). The LT1 gets the lead at first, only to be walked down by the more powerfull LS1.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d97/dafuzzsux/th_121_2182.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/albums/d97/dafuzzsux/?action=view&current=121_2182.flv)

lastcall190
02-02-2007, 03:10 PM
I know part of the reason for this thread :lol:

-J (jbsupra89t)

ZFan88
02-02-2007, 03:31 PM
that video sucks and so do the drivers. the ls1 is faster stock for stock anywhere, and this coming from an LT1 owner lol

gtman316
02-02-2007, 04:30 PM
http://thumbs.vidiac.com/d05ce585-292c-4130-aea1-f533d27b1f2d.jpg (http://video.ls1tech.com/video/d05ce585-292c-4130-aea1-f533d27b1f2d.htm)Click here to see Video (http://video.ls1tech.com/video/d05ce585-292c-4130-aea1-f533d27b1f2d.htm)

I think this vid pretty much sums it up.

JKDZ28
02-02-2007, 04:50 PM
http://thumbs.vidiac.com/d05ce585-292c-4130-aea1-f533d27b1f2d.jpg (http://video.ls1tech.com/video/d05ce585-292c-4130-aea1-f533d27b1f2d.htm)Click here to see Video (http://video.ls1tech.com/video/d05ce585-292c-4130-aea1-f533d27b1f2d.htm)

I think this vid pretty much sums it up.

Looks about right.

E_V_O
02-02-2007, 04:54 PM
Who cares because a stock 4 banger 4 door evo will destroy them both

KEE AUDIO
02-02-2007, 04:59 PM
I had a 91 GTA with the L98 in it for 4 years. Car was perfect and it made 233rwhp but it also made 328.6rwt on the dyno stock except for catback. My 98 LS1 made 318rwt stock catback and lid. As far as fun on the low end...doughnuts, spinning the tires, showing off...my GTA was way more fun than my current car. It could incinerate the tires as far as you wanted to go. However, the ride was over at about 4800-5000rpm. My LS1 T/A is way more powerful and is way faster than the GTA. L98's are alot of fun though...if you can find a decent one...too many dudes sportin mullets got a hold of alot of them early on and trashed most of them. I remember racing an LT1 SS on Bankhead Hwy in my GTA and getting my ass handed to me after 2nd gear. Off the line it was close. Still a very fun car!!

I8ASaleen
02-02-2007, 05:00 PM
:lol: That's funny i beat E_V_O's all the time.

CALL911
02-02-2007, 05:16 PM
This thread was started because I wanted a video to show stock vs stock. I got what I wanted and posted it up. As said before, the LS1 is more powerful and faster in the quarter mile. This is not the argument as I feel some are thinking it is. What I am saying and have been saying is that the LT1 has a different power curve than the LS1 and will initially have more torque than the LS1 thus running slightly quicker 1/8 mile or 0-60 time, until the LS1 hits its curve and has use of its greater HP. If you don't believe me, look at the video I posted up again. It is of poor quality, however it demonstrates my point perfectly.

sdm1234
02-02-2007, 05:52 PM
I am just happy that my pretty stock LT1 will still be even with the new 05-06 Mustang GT's. :-) I dont care to much about racing against our own. I understand the LT1 puts out less than the LS1, but being only 19 I am happy with my 1997 LT1 T/A.

as am I... i'm only 20 and i have my whole life to get an LS1, but by the time i get old i'll probably just get an LS7 or whatever is next on the list of LSXs.

Joezee
02-02-2007, 05:53 PM
call911.....YOU ARE WRONG......100000 times proven......get over it.

Walking dead...I totally agree with your post....I had a 92 tpi 350 AND my ls1 at the same time.....on the street the 92 feels faster at anything under 60mph....

I know two corvette owners who were SORRY they traded their tpi cars in on new lt1s back in 92.....because of the loss in torque below 4000rpms.....

TPI= torque
LTI= horsepower
LS1= BOTH

I8ASaleen
02-02-2007, 05:57 PM
WHAT!? :lol: Gotta be kidding me. If I had a scanner I'd show you my dyno, torque comes on at completely at 2100 rpm and flatlines there until 5500 rpms.

sdm1234
02-02-2007, 05:57 PM
What I am saying and have been saying is that the LT1 has a different power curve than the LS1 and will initially have more torque than the LS1 thus running slightly quicker 1/8 mile or 0-60 time, until the LS1 hits its curve and has use of its greater HP. If you don't believe me, look at the video I posted up again. It is of poor quality, however it demonstrates my point perfectly.

as i recall from MANY posts and dyno sheets, the LS1 ultimately makes more TQ at any RPM, over the LT1.

CALL911, can u send my all those videos that people sent u to my email please? i would like love to see races stock for stock! i've never seen 2 stockers run together. thanks! email is: sdm1234@lycos.com

CALL911
02-02-2007, 09:09 PM
call911.....YOU ARE WRONG......100000 times proven......get over it.

Walking dead...I totally agree with your post....I had a 92 tpi 350 AND my ls1 at the same time.....on the street the 92 feels faster at anything under 60mph....

I know two corvette owners who were SORRY they traded their tpi cars in on new lt1s back in 92.....because of the loss in torque below 4000rpms.....

TPI= torque
LTI= horsepower
LS1= BOTH


I have never stated that the LT1's were faster in anything other than the get go, (0-60, 1/8 mile). I even put the video up to prove it. Decide what you want. I have.

CrabhartLS1
02-02-2007, 09:12 PM
why are LT1 and LS1 guys getting mad at each other in the first place? It's like walking into a trekkie convention and yelling "kirk is a bitch!"

CALL911
02-02-2007, 09:24 PM
sdm1234, vid links sent to your email.

JKDZ28
02-02-2007, 09:38 PM
I have never stated that the LT1's were faster in anything other than the get go, (0-60, 1/8 mile). I even put the video up to prove it. Decide what you want. I have.

There not faster from the get go, look at the video on page 2.

This is the experience I've had as with others - time and time again.

CALL911
02-03-2007, 05:31 AM
There not faster from the get go, look at the video on page 2.

This is the experience I've had as with others - time and time again.

The video on page two (that wasn't posted by me) was a modded car to a modded car. This is not the disagreement. The arguement was between at completly stock LT1 and a stock LS1 like the video I posted.

ZFan88
02-03-2007, 09:17 AM
It was a lid and catback on both, hardly modded. You're obviously too close-minded to understand that the LS1 is better anywhere in the race..

brejcha
02-03-2007, 09:27 AM
Also the second video posted was a 2002 LS1 T/A Ws6 pushing like what 325 hp at least and the 97 T/A WS6 pushing 305-310 HP. I know its not much. Also lets stop fighting. We are on the same team.

Lets talk about how both LT1 & LS1 beasts pwn 4.6 liter stockers :-)

skifast87
02-03-2007, 02:28 PM
Honestly we talk about this every 3 monthes or so. We all know what happens. LS1 end of story

burnzilla
02-03-2007, 02:53 PM
I don't know why these threads spin out of control. The LS1 is faster. Period.

If you want to see a good stock for stock race, line up a M6 Ram Air LT1 against an A4 2.73 LS1.

sdm1234
02-03-2007, 03:42 PM
I don't know why these threads spin out of control. The LS1 is faster. Period.

If you want to see a good stock for stock race, line up a M6 Ram Air LT1 against an A4 2.73 LS1.

HEY MY LT1 CAN KICK BUTT AGAINST AN A4 LS1 haha. just kidding. actually, my cousin just got a '00 M6 LS1 and we're really looking forward to racing eachother soon. i'll try to get a video of it (in car). i think it'll be a great race, because i'm slightly modded and he's stock. he's driven my car before and he says my car breaks 'em loose easier down low than his car. he doesn't know too much about LT1s compared directly with LS1s, nor does he think the LT1 is known as a TQ monster compared to the LS1. he just said that from what he felt, with no other influence from what anyone has said. i'll try to get a vid, and hopefully we'll race when it gets warmer!

CALL911
02-03-2007, 07:39 PM
Funny how the LS1 guys get all defensive when they even hear that someone believes an older LT1 might actually be faster at one small part of a race.

Whats even more interesting is the fact I opened this thread on both this forum, and the "other" big f-body forum that has more LT1 guys than LS1 guys, and how the results from both threads go with the majority of specific engine owners.

5_02ls1
02-03-2007, 08:29 PM
Also the second video posted was a 2002 LS1 T/A Ws6 pushing like what 325 hp at least and the 97 T/A WS6 pushing 305-310 HP. I know its not much. Also lets stop fighting. We are on the same team.

Lets talk about how both LT1 & LS1 beasts pwn 4.6 liter stockers :-)
gm undrates the ls1 most ls1s put those #s at the wheels your video sucked the vid on page 2 tells the truth

slick1851
02-03-2007, 08:36 PM
tpi cars are strong on bottom end but the ls1 will easily walk around it.in stock form.me personaly id pick the l98 over an lt1



Hahhahahahahaha pick a L98 over a LT1



L98 is a boat anchor in my book.....Unless you have a Mini ram on it, and really good good heads

5_02ls1
02-03-2007, 08:47 PM
Hahhahahahahaha pick a L98 over a LT1



L98 is a boat anchor in my book.....Unless you have a Mini ram on it, and really good good heads
first person ive ever seen bash the almighty 350.hope that was sarcasm.the l98 runs almost as good and is way easier to work on and no opti spark

Joezee
02-03-2007, 11:43 PM
No disrespect , but call911, nobody is being defensive.....EVERYONE has responded rather civil.....and yet you continue to believe the myth.....this board is about learning something and sharing knowledge about all of our cars.
So when someone makes, and continues to make false statements, even after this subject has been covered about 10,000 times in the past ,...what do you expect ???
L98s run low 14s with great low end torque.
Lt1s run high 13s to low 14s with good torque and good hp.
Ls1s run mid to low 13s with great torque and great hp.
this is not a secret......at no point in the rpm spectrum does an Lt1 make more torque than an Ls1......why does that offend people ? Lt1s were awsome in their day, and with some mods still are.....there are plenty of cars faster than an Ls1...just not an Lt1.....not bashing at all.

GXPPOWER
02-04-2007, 04:14 AM
call911. the fact is the LS1 makes more power at any point in the rpms. its been shown on these boards numerous times in dyno graphs. second stock for stock both equally driven an ls1 will be an lt1 in the 1/8 mile. your bragging about 1 video lol. with noone know what the circumstances are. then argue with us who have ran vs lt1s numerous times. and come with the same results. when i have traction an lt1 is never infront of me. and even when i spin off the line im pulling back on the lt1 before im out of first gear. and im an a4 freaking convertible. and these experiences was when i just had a cutout.

like i said earlier i doubt even one lt1 100% stock ran 8.6 in the 1/8 mile. that was my time stock in my heavy slow a4 vert.

JKDZ28
02-04-2007, 04:50 AM
Funny how the LS1 guys get all defensive when they even hear that someone believes an older LT1 might actually be faster at one small part of a race.

Whats even more interesting is the fact I opened this thread on both this forum, and the "other" big f-body forum that has more LT1 guys than LS1 guys, and how the results from both threads go with the majority of specific engine owners.

I owned my LT1 for 6 years. Went from stock, full boltons, 3000 stall to full-bolt-ons with a 6 speed.

I'll assure you, the LT1 is not faster from any RPM.

I had full boltons and I NEVER could beat a stock LS1 - never...

CALL911
02-04-2007, 08:11 AM
If anyone can find ACTUAL dyno charts of a bone stock LT1 and a BONE stock LS1, you will find that the LT1's torque peaks at 2400 RPM at 325 (factory stats). The LS1 peaks around exactly the same torque (325 ish from the same factory stats), however at 4,000 RPM. During this difference in 1600 RPM, is the difference in question here. I will try to dig up factory/bone stock dyno graphs. If anyone else can post them up feel free as well.

LS1's also react better to mods than LT1's. This is most likely the big difference between my stock to stock video showing what I am saying that everyone says sucks compared with the modded LT1 with the modded LS1 video. The video is not of as good of quality, however it accuratly shows a STOCK LT1 vs a STOCK LS1. If you just say the video that shows a stock to stock LS1 vs LT1 sucks and then keep saying that a modded LS1 to a modded LT1 is accurate of both stock cars, you are not presenting a good or accurate case here. Show me another video of a factory stock LT1 vs factory stock LS1? Show me actual factory dyno graphs??

For those that keep screaming that LS1's make more power (total) and that they run faster in the quarter mile, you are not listening to what is in question. I have never disputed these facts of total power or quarter mile time.

CALL911
02-04-2007, 08:13 AM
Here's another video of a bone stock LS1, and a bone stock LT1 from a roll, (same sucky quality, but you can see how the LS1 has total advantage up top)


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d97/dafuzzsux/th_121_2185.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/albums/d97/dafuzzsux/?action=view&current=121_2185.flv)

Joezee
02-04-2007, 10:20 AM
your pushing your luck call911.......this thread could get ugly......
I do however admire your devotion to the Lt1....

CALL911
02-04-2007, 11:22 AM
This discussion is not meant to slander anyone, or their year F-body. It is meant to discuss (hopefully with little to no disrespect to anyone) this dispute.

If anyone feels they can continue this debate without slander to anyone, in search of facts, then I ask that you continue to make inputs. If you feel you are more interested in badmouthing or looking to not take this discussion in a proffessional mannor, then please don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Now, I'm still digging for some stock to stock dyno sheets (no luck yet, however it's only a matter of time). Anyone else find any?

slick1851
02-04-2007, 11:29 AM
first person ive ever seen bash the almighty 350.hope that was sarcasm.the l98 runs almost as good and is way easier to work on and no opti spark



TPI? Nothing great about it, Shitty intake manifold design slow a shit with boltons....


Read the GM HIGH TECH......



TPIs need to be BUILT with a MINI RAM to do anything special in my book..




NOW A 350 SBC Carb motor, there is nothing wrong with....Im a TPI hater

brejcha
02-04-2007, 11:59 AM
OK guys we are all on the same side. Being an LT1 owner myself I know that if it were stock to stock off the line depends on the driver, but higher up there LS1 FTW. Now with mods on both cars it can go either way. I have seen a modded LT1 walk an LS1 so yea.

But besides the point. We are all owners of some of the greatest cars ever made. Lets not have a big fight over this. Anyways enjoy driving what you have.

CALL911
02-04-2007, 01:17 PM
Thanks for the positive input brejcha.

I tend to believe that the LS1's gain more with similar mods than the LT1. Take putting a whisper lid on an LS1 in comparison with CAI on an LT1. The LS1 will make more of a gain (usually a couple tenths in the 1/4 mile compared to 1 tenth the LT1's usually get).

slick1851
02-04-2007, 02:37 PM
LS1s are going to be faster than LT1 period.....They have put down faster times Stock Vs Stock etc


Now when it comes to modded a LT1 needs a bit more, but its not a slow" car

The LT1s main down fall is the opti spark thats the real problem with them...

brejcha
02-04-2007, 02:50 PM
I am a wanna be gear head. What is the main purpose to the opti and how does it work. Also i have seen like performance optis..what are those.

TonyGXP
02-04-2007, 03:12 PM
I don't know what all the arguing is about, obviously the LS2 is the superior engine.. at almost 5000lbs I ran 13.49 @102 bone stock.. :devil:

L98 over an Lt1? L98? run of the mill ran high 14's at best, I used to beat my friend's GTA 5.7's with my 84Z28 5.0HO A4 ALL THE TIME.. I ran a Stock LT1 Z28 and he beat me by a pole length... I can't believe the nonsense some of these guys are spreading here...

ChocoTaco369
02-04-2007, 03:25 PM
If anyone can find ACTUAL dyno charts of a bone stock LT1 and a BONE stock LS1, you will find that the LT1's torque peaks at 2400 RPM at 325 (factory stats). The LS1 peaks around exactly the same torque (325 ish from the same factory stats), however at 4,000 RPM. During this difference in 1600 RPM, is the difference in question here. I will try to dig up factory/bone stock dyno graphs. If anyone else can post them up feel free as well.
why do you keep saying this? you're racing dyno graphs. on top of that, the LS1 DOES NOT have 325 ft-lbs from the factory, it has 350 ft-lbs. if you want the numbers of the LS1, get it off the corvette, NOT the f-body as they were underrated to make the corvette look superior in power when, in fact, they were not. you should know this.

the LT1 is not faster than the LS1 anywhere in the powerband. you're thinking of what the "butt dyno" tells you. the torque in the LT1 is lower in the powerband so it simply FEELS more powerful. the low rpm torque makes a powerful feel but it translates into MUCH LESS horsepower. remember, horsepower is a multiplication of TORQUE X RPM's, so the fact that the LT1 makes its torque lower shows is huge disadvantage in horsepower, the actual rating that determines how fast your car is. horsepower is POWER, races are won by a power-to-weight ratio paired with gearing and aerodynamics. the LS1 has a better power-to-weight ratio than an LT1 in ANY RPM along with relatively the same weight and gearing. the LT1 simply cannot hang with an LS1 anywhere. if it does, it's driver error, plain and simple.

torque is a SOTP feel, horsepower is the propellant. the LT1 is NOT faster anywhere, it just feels like it is.

burnzilla
02-04-2007, 07:07 PM
the LT1 simply cannot hang with an LS1 anywhere. if it does, it's driver error, plain and simple.
.

The Tq curve in the LT1 goes well up until 4800Rpms, and the HP curve is strong and climbs good all the way up till 6000 rpm.
The 0-60/80 mph can be very close.

The LT1 was choked out by GM.

Now lets not get this out on control, the LS1 is faster, and revs better up top, but the LT1 is a potent motor and not anything to be taken lightly, especially if modded right.

:lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock:

JKDZ28
02-04-2007, 08:15 PM
why do you keep saying this? you're racing dyno graphs. on top of that, the LS1 DOES NOT have 325 ft-lbs from the factory, it has 350 ft-lbs. if you want the numbers of the LS1, get it off the corvette, NOT the f-body as they were underrated to make the corvette look superior in power when, in fact, they were not. you should know this.

the LT1 is not faster than the LS1 anywhere in the powerband. you're thinking of what the "butt dyno" tells you. the torque in the LT1 is lower in the powerband so it simply FEELS more powerful. the low rpm torque makes a powerful feel but it translates into MUCH LESS horsepower. remember, horsepower is a multiplication of TORQUE X RPM's, so the fact that the LT1 makes its torque lower shows is huge disadvantage in horsepower, the actual rating that determines how fast your car is. horsepower is POWER, races are won by a power-to-weight ratio paired with gearing and aerodynamics. the LS1 has a better power-to-weight ratio than an LT1 in ANY RPM along with relatively the same weight and gearing. the LT1 simply cannot hang with an LS1 anywhere. if it does, it's driver error, plain and simple.

torque is a SOTP feel, horsepower is the propellant. the LT1 is NOT faster anywhere, it just feels like it is.

Bingo! Well put, you fellas need to listen to Choco :)

JKDZ28
02-04-2007, 08:18 PM
The Tq curve in the LT1 goes well up until 4800Rpms, and the HP curve is strong and climbs good all the way up till 6000 rpm.
The 0-60/80 mph can be very close.

The LT1 was choked out by GM.

Now lets not get this out on control, the LS1 is faster, and revs better up top, but the LT1 is a potent motor and not anything to be taken lightly, especially if modded right.

:lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock:

Your right, the LT1 should not be taken lightly. They are very potent powerplants.

However, a well maintained/driven LS1 "should" take a well maintained/driven LT1 everytime.

sdm1234
02-04-2007, 09:15 PM
why do you keep saying this? you're racing dyno graphs. on top of that, the LS1 DOES NOT have 325 ft-lbs from the factory, it has 350 ft-lbs. if you want the numbers of the LS1, get it off the corvette, NOT the f-body as they were underrated to make the corvette look superior in power when, in fact, they were not. you should know this.

the LT1 is not faster than the LS1 anywhere in the powerband. you're thinking of what the "butt dyno" tells you. the torque in the LT1 is lower in the powerband so it simply FEELS more powerful. the low rpm torque makes a powerful feel but it translates into MUCH LESS horsepower. remember, horsepower is a multiplication of TORQUE X RPM's, so the fact that the LT1 makes its torque lower shows is huge disadvantage in horsepower, the actual rating that determines how fast your car is. horsepower is POWER, races are won by a power-to-weight ratio paired with gearing and aerodynamics. the LS1 has a better power-to-weight ratio than an LT1 in ANY RPM along with relatively the same weight and gearing. the LT1 simply cannot hang with an LS1 anywhere. if it does, it's driver error, plain and simple.

torque is a SOTP feel, horsepower is the propellant. the LT1 is NOT faster anywhere, it just feels like it is.

actually, torque is force. force is power. horsepower is just calculated forced used to sustain that power over a period of time, because momentum is power. the higher the momentum, the more kenetic energy, therefore, the horsepower is higher, even though the engine is not pulling as hard as it was at it's peak rating. it's all kinda hard to comprehend, but here's a good link to help understand everything. http://vettenet.org/torquehp.html

i'm not saying Choco is wrong, i'm just saying that i don't agree with this:
horsepower is POWER

horsepower is calculation used to measure sustainable torque and remember... torque is applied force, and applied force is exerted energy, which is power.

ChocoTaco369
02-04-2007, 09:22 PM
The Tq curve in the LT1 goes well up until 4800Rpms, and the HP curve is strong and climbs good all the way up till 6000 rpm.
The 0-60/80 mph can be very close.

The LT1 was choked out by GM.

Now lets not get this out on control, the LS1 is faster, and revs better up top, but the LT1 is a potent motor and not anything to be taken lightly, especially if modded right.

:lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock: :lock:
oh, i'm not saying the LT1 is a bad motor. the LT1 is a very good motor, has proven to hold up well past the 100,000 mile marker and can be deadly built up. i'm simply saying stock for stock, it's not match for an LS1 anywhere in the powerband. yes, the LS1 is a superior motor, but what do you expect? it's newer and was DESIGNED to outperform the LT1. you can't hold it against the LT1.

burnzilla
02-04-2007, 09:25 PM
it's not match for an LS1 anywhere in the powerband. .
Choco... STOP posting.

The 0-60 times are very close. The LS1 is faster.
A stock LT1 SS M6 could take an early 90-00 LS1 A4 GU2.
Thats an exception to the rule. No need to reply Choco.

ChocoTaco369
02-04-2007, 09:26 PM
actually, torque is force. force is power. horsepower is just calculated forced used to sustain that power over a period of time, because momentum is power. the higher the momentum, the more kenetic energy, therefore, the horsepower is higher, even though the engine is not pulling as hard as it was at it's peak rating. it's all kinda hard to comprehend, but here's a good link to help understand everything. http://vettenet.org/torquehp.html

i'm not saying Choco is wrong, i'm just saying that i don't agree with this:


horsepower is calculation used to measure sustainable torque and remember... torque is applied force, and applied force is exerted energy, which is power.
yes, torque is force. however, torque is NOT power.

power is measured in Watts. 1 horsepower = 745.7 watts. horsepower is nothing but a larger scale to measure power. horsepower is like an Astronomical Unit. because it would be ridiculous to measure distances in our solar system by feet, they use astronomical units, which is 93 million miles - the distance from the Earth to the sun. it would be ridiculous to rate our engine power by watts. it wouldn't make sense to say our engine has 260995 watts of power. too hard to keep track of.

again, torque is NOT power. watts is power, and horsepower is simply a different scale of measuring watts.

ChocoTaco369
02-04-2007, 09:29 PM
Choco... STOP posting.

The 0-60 times are very close. The LS1 is faster.
A stock LT1 SS M6 could take an early 90-00 LS1 A4 GU2.
Thats an exception to the rule. No need to reply Choco.
burnzilla, STOP posting. accept the fact that the LS1 is faster than the LT1 at ANY rpm. you have an LT1. that's the only reason why you're arguing this. if an LT1 jumps an LS1 in the 60 foot, it's because of driver error. the LT1 is not faster anywhere in the powerband. say it with me: "the LT1 is not faster than the LS1 anywhere in the powerband". the sooner you accept it, the sooner you can put it behind you.

and a 3.42 geared M6 against an A4 w/2.73's is comparing apples to oranges. if the LS1 f-body is towing a boat, would the race still count? you're comparing two totally different setups. that being said, i still cut a 2.0 60ft with my stock A4 w/2.73's in the dead of summer on street tires. not many LT1's do that.

i'm not saying that an LT1 and LS1 aren't close in the 60 ft or 1/8 mile. yes, they are close right out of the hole, but the LS1 is still faster. whether it's by inches or miles, a win is a win.

CALL911
02-04-2007, 09:44 PM
Put simply, torque is what is going to get you out of the hole, HP is what the car will do in the upper RPM bands. Your MPH in the 1/4 is a good measure of HP car to car.

All this argument is irrelievant until some facts can be shown (instead of opinions). Best I could do so far was find a couple of poor quality stock LS1 to stock LT1 (down to the paper air filters) videos. If anyone has a stock dyno of either or prefferably both cars, this would help support this dispute.

TonyGXP
02-04-2007, 09:57 PM
a well driven 4.6 5spd GT will hang with an LS1 for the first 30 or so MPH, they can hang with me, so does that mean that a 4.6 "shouldn't be taken lightly, especially a lightly modded one"? most vehicles that are "NEAR" each other in a 1/4 mi race are going to be close out of the hole given they both have traction, but like they say, it aint how you start...... this argument is strange in that why would one take pride in winning a 1/3 of a race anyway?? WTF are we talking about? if it makes you fell better I ran an IS350 the other night from a light and he jumped out a car and half until about 40 when I hit second and caught traction, does that mean he's faster? or that he "felt good"?? I highly doubt it when I flew past him like he was in reverse..

ChocoTaco369
02-04-2007, 09:57 PM
Put simply, torque is what is going to get you out of the hole, HP is what the car will do in the upper RPM bands. Your MPH in the 1/4 is a good measure of HP car to car.
let's clarify a few things.

torque is what an engine makes. horsepower, or power in general, is just a calculation of torque. if you want to look at it in terms of what an engine DOES, all it does is create torque.

basically, what you mean to say is the LS1 is far better at creating torque at a high RPM.

now, no one looks at the scenario this way. it's much easier to think in terms of horsepower because you're taking just one variable into effect where when you're looking at torque, you have to look at it along with RPM's. now, that being said, torque is NOT what gets you out of the hole. horsepower still does. it's just very low RPM horsepower. people think low RPM horsepower is torque. it's not. torque is just a measurement of how hard the engine twists. horsepower is taking that twisting at a certain RPM and turning it into wattage.

i'm starting to ramble. the point i'm trying to make is, torque is what an engine makes. horsepower is a calculation of torque at a given RPM. the engine is making torque no matter what, but it's how much torque at an RPM, or how much horsepower, the engine makes that both gets it out of the hole AND gets you going up top. the LS1 is better at torquing down low and MUCH better at torquing up high than the LT1. horsepower isn't what's created up high. the EXACT SAME THING that is created up high is created down low. horsepower numbers are simply higher in the high RPM's for engines because it's torque multiplied by the RPM. don't confuse these terms.

boostedbuford
02-04-2007, 09:58 PM
When I was stock I raced a 1996 LT1 Ws6 M6 with 9 thousand miles on it( so it was pretty much a perfect new car) From a dig he was right beside me the whole time, and by 110 or I pulled a half a car.

Of course this was a pristine example of a LT1.

burnzilla
02-04-2007, 10:40 PM
i'm starting to ramble. .

Everything youve said has been rambling.


the point i'm trying to make is, torque is what an engine makes. horsepower is a calculation of torque at a given RPM. the engine is making torque no matter what, but it's how much torque at an RPM, or how much horsepower, the engine makes that both gets it out of the hole AND gets you going up top. the LS1 is better at torquing down low and MUCH better at torquing up high than the LT1. horsepower isn't what's created up high. the EXACT SAME THING that is created up high is created down low. horsepower numbers are simply higher in the high RPM's for engines because it's torque multiplied by the RPM. don't confuse these terms.
Blah blah blah STFU Choco!
You said I didnt accept the fact the LS1 is faster. Have you read my posts?
Im not getting in a ridiculous argument like you seem to do every week with someone else, youre are youre ow biggest fan.
You just lied about what I stated, and mumble the facts everyone knows.

Ive raced LS1's and held them with just a few bolt ons to 100mph.
The 0-60 in close, that all I said.
STOP POSTING CHOCO.


When I was stock I raced a 1996 LT1 Ws6 M6 with 9 thousand miles on it( so it was pretty much a perfect new car) From a dig he was right beside me the whole time, and by 110 or I pulled a half a car.

Of course this was a pristine example of a LT1.
No surprise for a taken care of LT1...

Greedynessnish
02-05-2007, 12:24 AM
I've been around street racing and drag racing most of life,the L98 when it came out was the best thing since sliced bread. Until that happened I don't think that G.M. hit much over 200 horses in almost 20 years ( I think since the original LT1). Pro drag racing and nascar pushed new technologies for many years like Warren Johnson and Hurst/olds engineering blocks and heads for drag racing.The L98,LT1, and th LSX platforms are evolutions in SBC technology.Having a civil war here is pointless,don't we all have small block chevy's? Before the LSX the previous stock chevy valve angle for 30 something years was 23 degrees on the LSX it's 15 degree (probably based on racing R&D), so yes the LS1 will be a straight beast on the top end. all the power is in the heads and valve train the LS1 is superior and completely different to all other previous chevy and other small block platforms (ford and whoever). I do own an LT1 but it is a small block chevrolet and I think most LT1 owners feel the same way I do. Any LT1/LS1 owner knows he/she has a small block chevy with great potential for torque and horsepower.Advances in cylinder head and valve train technology is great but mustangs owners fear LT1's as well. Oh I much rather bash Fords but it seems we do have some mustang owners here that seem O.K. so I hope I did'nt offend them sorry.

ChocoTaco369
02-05-2007, 01:02 AM
Everything youve said has been rambling.
everything i've said has also been right, too. get the trend? i'm not bashing the LT1. i'm simply pointing out fact. stop getting butthurt. want me to stop posting? give me a reason to stop posting. you being butthurt because your car has a weaker engine is not a reason. when you come up with a real one, post up. until you do, shut the fuck up.


The 0-60 in close, that all I said.

no shit? does your mind function? it's just 0-60. race a civic Si. the 0-60 will be close. it'll be off by a second or so - almost nothing in real life.


Ive raced LS1's and held them with just a few bolt ons to 100mph.

wow, you held off an LS1 when you had bolt-ons. we're all very impressed. give me 5 grand. i'll hold off a ferrari. you had work done which makes your input useless. you've contributed nothing to this discussion. i suggest you move on unless you have something factual to say. i'll give you an example: the LS1 makes more power and is the faster engine at every RPM of the powerband.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 06:26 AM
I'm afraid I also disagree with your logic Choco. I mean no disrespect here, but our motors peak torque is down low and HP is up high in the RPM band. Torque is the raw power that gets you moving (yeah I understand you have HP down low as well, but it is the torque that is doing all the big work down there). This same principle is why the LS1 is such a monster compared to the LT1 up top. And why pretty much everyone agrees on this, that an LS1 vs LT1 at 60-110 will walk the LT1.

Until someone can show me dyno sheets of a BONE stock cars, I still will not believe that all of what I have been arguing of the 0-60 is false.

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 07:44 AM
Thanks for the positive input brejcha.

I tend to believe that the LS1's gain more with similar mods than the LT1. Take putting a whisper lid on an LS1 in comparison with CAI on an LT1. The LS1 will make more of a gain (usually a couple tenths in the 1/4 mile compared to 1 tenth the LT1's usually get).

This is incorrect. The LS1 airlid is dyno proven to gain 5-10 rwhp with 8 being about average. That's maybe one tenth in the quarter mile. The LT1 CAI is dyno proven to gain about 7 RWHP (similair gain as the LS1 lid). The LT1 and LS1 are also dead even in what catbacks and LT headers gain. Both were choked from the factory and both gain 7-12 rwhp for catbacks and 20-25 rwhp for LT headers with ORY. But when comparing the gains of say a torque converter, cam and or heads then I agree the LS1 has a clear cut advantage due to the engine design.

So that video on page two was accurate. It's my experience that the LT1 and LS1 come out dead even 0-60 and then the LS1 walks away. Thus making the LT1 > LS1 in lower RPM's a myth in my book. I have always seen it as LT1 = LS1 in lower RPM's and LS1 > LT1 in upper RPM's.

Until someone can show me dyno sheets of a BONE stock cars, I still will not believe that all of what I have been arguing of the 0-60 is false.

Just because you choose not to accept it doesn't make it any less true. 0-60 is even with equal trannys, gears and drivers. Above that is all LS1 and that's just the way it is.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 08:05 AM
As before, (and before that as well), this is all between a stock LS1 and a stock LT1. You can argue all you want that same mods give same power, but that is not the argument. The argument is stock to stock (which is what the thread was titled). And, as before, anyone can throw their 2 cents in here of their opinion that they swear is fact, but both sides will argue that it is myth.

So far, I have been the only one to show a bone stock run of each car. The results yeild my side of the dispute. The majority opinion of the video was that "it sucked". I know the quality was bad, but it wasn't the quality that I was trying to put out. It may suck quality wise, but the results from the run are undeniable. The race wasn't computer generated. The LT1 stepped away from the LS1 at first until the LS1 got in it's powerband.

If you want to disagree, thats fine (and also makes for a good long thread). But back it up with some dyno sheets, or another BONE stock to BONE stock race video. Just claiming something here will be disputed easily on both sides. We need documented facts (dyno sheets/vids).

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 08:38 AM
As before, (and before that as well), this is all between a stock LS1 and a stock LT1. You can argue all you want that same mods give same power, but that is not the argument.)

I was simply correcting misinformation. A lid is not worth two tenths in the quarter mile and exhaust mods yield the same net results.

The argument is stock to stock (which is what the thread was titled). And, as before, anyone can throw their 2 cents in here of their opinion that they swear is fact, but both sides will argue that it is myth.

I have read several threads over the last several years on this very subject (the LT1 has more down low myth). If it were true that the LT1 was more powerful down low then it wouldn't be called a myth. It would be called a fact. But the fact is that it has been debated and referred to as a myth for years in various threads. There must be a reason for that.

So far, I have been the only one to show a bone stock run of each car. The results yeild my side of the dispute. The majority opinion of the video was that "it sucked". I know the quality was bad, but it wasn't the quality that I was trying to put out. It may suck quality wise, but the results from the run are undeniable. The race wasn't computer generated. The LT1 stepped away from the LS1 at first until the LS1 got in it's powerband.

You have shown nothing but poor quality videos with unknown variables.

If you want to disagree, thats fine (and also makes for a good long thread). But back it up with some dyno sheets, or another BONE stock to BONE stock race video. Just claiming something here will be disputed easily on both sides. We need documented facts (dyno sheets/vids).

Thank you for your permission. You want documented facts that you will probably never find. Do a search on yahoo and google and you'll find out that nobody has stock dynos anymore. The links either don't work or the cars arn't stock by the time they went for a dyno.

Here is my "undocumented information".

When I first bought my LS1 it was stock. At that time the company I worked for had a stock 95 Z28 A4 that they used to use as a company vehicle. The owners son now owned that car and wanted to see what that car could do against mine. The parking lot at this company was huge. Close to a 1/4 mile from one end to another. We raced several times 0-75, 10-75, ect. The dig results varied depending on who launched better. The slow roll results were all the same.

Dead even with me pulling at the end. I can't document this, we never made videos, ect. But this was a real world result because it was two cars in the same location with the same gears, transmissions (autos too so there is no driver error factor), ect.

IMO in order for a dyno chart to be real world accurate it would have to be two stock cars dynoed on the same day and on the same dyno. You'll never find this so I would consider looking for videos more then I would look for dyno charts.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 10:18 AM
Stock dynos maybe hard to find, however I am confident they can be found. You can't tell me just because both cars have been out for a while that no one has ever dyno'd them when they were stock, and that the dyno sheets aren't still available to post up or look at somewhere.

As for the rest, I put it best in my last reply.

"So far, I have been the only one to show a bone stock run of each car. The results yeild my side of the dispute. The majority opinion of the video was that "it sucked". I know the quality was bad, but it wasn't the quality that I was trying to put out. It may suck quality wise, but the results from the run are undeniable. The race wasn't computer generated. The LT1 stepped away from the LS1 at first until the LS1 got in it's powerband.

If you want to disagree, thats fine (and also makes for a good long thread). But back it up with some dyno sheets, or another BONE stock to BONE stock race video. Just claiming something here will be disputed easily on both sides. We need documented facts (dyno sheets/vids)."

Greedynessnish
02-05-2007, 10:59 AM
The LT1 does make more torque down low but if i'm right the LS1 climbs in RPM a bit faster which is why most LS1's recover so quick out of the hole against an LT1 or anything else. The faster it climbs in rpm's the faster the LS1 gets to its peak power which will evem out the 0-60 between the 2.If i'm wrong please point me in the right direction.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 11:26 AM
IMO, you are on about the same lines as what my argument here has been, except I believe that the LS1's don't really come in strong to over take the LT1 until after 60 MPH. Others here might agree with you totally, and then there are others yet who think we are both wrong, and that the LS1's will beat the LT1's (stock to stock on all this BTW) both 0-60, and in the quarter.

I think everyone here can agree that the two are close, which makes it difficult, and why many of us are of different opinions on the rest. I have posted a video of a stock race that shows my theory that the LT1's are quicker in the 1/8 (or 0-60), at which time the LS1 starts making its power and walks away from the LT1.

Really we are still in need of some more video of stock to stock (down to the paper air filter). Stock dyno's would be another good tool here. But as some one mentioned, they will need to be on the same dyno on the same day to be a good comparison (which I agree with).

ZFan88
02-05-2007, 11:42 AM
Unless you have equal drivers with equal-optioned cars, the videos aren't going to mean much in your theory. For a street/strip race for stock cars, the LS1 would be better 0-60 and in the 1/4 obviously. Launching the same, the LT1 would have a harder time hooking up due to the spike in torque so low, where the LS1 can roll into the throttle faster. As you know, the LS1's torque is higher in the rpm, but still more average/peak. I'm pretty sure there was a thread a while back that had stock dyno comparisons...it might have been in the LT1 section. Neither car is slow, so it's going to be close, but of course the newer LS1 will win any scenario.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 11:51 AM
Unless you have equal drivers with equal-optioned cars, the videos aren't going to mean much in your theory. For a street/strip race for stock cars, the LS1 would be better 0-60 and in the 1/4 obviously. Launching the same, the LT1 would have a harder time hooking up due to the spike in torque so low, where the LS1 can roll into the throttle faster. As you know, the LS1's torque is higher in the rpm, but still more average/peak. I'm pretty sure there was a thread a while back that had stock dyno comparisons...it might have been in the LT1 section. Neither car is slow, so it's going to be close, but of course the newer LS1 will win any scenario.

The video I put up had both cars getting out of the hole the same, and both seemed to shift equally (or close enough to it). Ideally, a race would be both automatic cars, from a 3 MPH roll, but so far my vid has been the closest.

As for the LS1 being faster everywhere (0-60 and 1/4 mile), it will still be in dispute until we can find those old dynos, or get more vids. Until then we will just have to agree to disagree on this one :judge:

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 12:56 PM
The video I put up had both cars getting out of the hole the same, and both seemed to shift equally (or close enough to it). Ideally, a race would be both automatic cars, from a 3 MPH roll, but so far my vid has been the closest.

As for the LS1 being faster everywhere (0-60 and 1/4 mile), it will still be in dispute until we can find those old dynos, or get more vids. Until then we will just have to agree to disagree on this one :judge:

Your vids proved nothing other then some people should not be allowed to use video cameras. I found some old threads where people linked a stock dyno but guess what? The links were no longer valid.

Just like your argument. You want to discredit the video on page two because both cars had an intake and catback. Whoopty friggin doo. Like adding 15 rwhp to BOTH cars is really going to skew the results. And it's not like an intake/catback aren't the first two mods most LT1/LS1 owners do anyway :judge:

LS1 and LT1 are going to be primarily equal down low. Here's a link to 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times for various vehicles.

http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html

Here are just the Pontiac Formulas/TA's from that list:

Year__Make___Model________0-60-1/4

1993 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 6.3 14.8
1994 Pontiac Firebird Formula 5.8 14.1
1995 Pontiac SLP Firehawk 5.3 13.9
1995 Pontiac Firebird Formula 6.7 15.1
1995 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.6 14.0
1996 Pontiac Firebird Formula 5.8 14.3
1997 Pontiac Firebird 3.8l 7.2 15.5 (C&D Jun '97)
1998 Pontiac Firebird Formula 5.3 13.9 (C&D Jun '98)
1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.1 13.4
2000 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (WS6) 4.9 13.4

They show the LT1's in the mid to upper 5's for 0-60 while the LS1's are lower 5's. But like I said, I feel they are closer then that. Probably both in the 5.2 second 0-60 range. But after that :drive:

CALL911
02-05-2007, 02:11 PM
darrensls1; first off, thanks for putting up some actual posted times. Although they are posted by the "experts" at C&D, I think we can mostly all agree that these are probably not the average times (15.1 1/4 mile from a 95 Formula, 14.8 1/4 mile from a 93 Trans Am, 13.9 1/4 mile from a 98 Formula ect.) They may call themselves pros, but if they are getting those times out of those cars (even stock), I would say they are far from pros. It would almost be better getting vids of stock cars with F-body owners who know how to drive them to their potential at the track.

As for another bash on my video's, you can say what you want, but the video shows the closest thing to documented truth on vid of a stock to stock race so far. Everyone says the video "sucks". Why?? Is it because you don't believe what you are seeing? Or because it goes against your beliefs here? The video was real, as well as its results. If we were talking about mod to mod stuff here, then sure, the other video would count. But AGAIN, we are talking about bone stock cars here (NOT MODDED ONES).

If people want to make a valid case here, continue to post up sites with times (hopefully more accurate ones), or actual dyno sheets, or best yet, some vids of STOCK runs either against each other or at the track.

ZFan88
02-05-2007, 02:22 PM
This thread needs to end...

ChocoTaco369
02-05-2007, 02:30 PM
I'm afraid I also disagree with your logic Choco. I mean no disrespect here, but our motors peak torque is down low and HP is up high in the RPM band.
again, this is incorrect. power gets your car moving. torque is NOT a measure of power. torque is simply a measure of how much twisting your engine makes. watts is a measure of power, and horsepower is a larger scale to measure watts. low rpm horsepower is what gets your car moving. horsepower increases in high rpm's because it's a multiplication of rpms x engine torque, so of course it's going to increase higher in the rpm range.

again, power moves the car. low rpm grunt is NOT torque, it's low rpm horsepower. the LT1 feels like it has more horsepower down low because it twists at a low rpm than the LS1 making it feel more powerful down low. the LS1 is still making more power than the LT1 down low, and that is all that matters. power you "feel" and power you make are two totally different things.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 02:45 PM
If you no longer wish to discuss what we are discussing, end your subscription to this thread and look on.

ChocoTaco; I won't even continue to try to argue the basics of difference between HP and Torque with you. It's probably best we just agree to disagree on it.

However, on your theory of the LS1 cars being faster down low compared to the LT1 cars, show me proof. Show me another stock to stock race? Show me stock to stock dyno's? (I feel like a broken record here) Show me something other than ChocoTaco says so. Your statement of LS1's are faster off the line isn't any more valid or fact than my statement of LT1's are faster off the line. We need documented proof here.

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 03:07 PM
darrensls1; first off, thanks for putting up some actual posted times. Although they are posted by the "experts" at C&D, I think we can mostly all agree that these are probably not the average times (15.1 1/4 mile from a 95 Formula, 14.8 1/4 mile from a 93 Trans Am, 13.9 1/4 mile from a 98 Formula ect.) They may call themselves pros, but if they are getting those times out of those cars (even stock), I would say they are far from pros. It would almost be better getting vids of stock cars with F-body owners who know how to drive them to their potential at the track.

No problem. And while there were some times that were off there were plenty of others that were right on. You have to remember that not all cars were tested at sea level.

But how about:

1995 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.6 14.0
1996 Pontiac Firebird Formula 5.8 14.3
1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.1 13.4
2000 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (WS6) 4.9 13.4

Those numbers look to be right on. Here is another link for more 0-60 times:

http://www.geocities.com/edmodscarspecs/

The ones I was looking at specifically was:

1993 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.8 14.4
1994 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.7 14.2
1994 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Conv. 6.2 14.5
1995 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.7 14.2
1995 Chevrolet Camaro 3800 7.4 15.7
1996 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.7 14.1
1996 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.3 13.8

Looks about right to me.

As for another bash on my video's, you can say what you want, but the video shows the closest thing to documented truth on vid of a stock to stock race so far. Everyone says the video "sucks". Why?? Is it because you don't believe what you are seeing? Or because it goes against your beliefs here? The video was real, as well as its results. If we were talking about mod to mod stuff here, then sure, the other video would count. But AGAIN, we are talking about bone stock cars here (NOT MODDED ONES).

The videos sucked IMO for three reasons.

1). Both were taken at night and you can't see shit.

2). Both show two cars racing with no indication of transmission types or gears to be sure we are dealing with apples to apples.

3). Both can not be verified that they were in fact "stock".

You can give me all the speculation you want and descredit all the 0-60 times you like. But what you can't do is convince to believe what I all ready know is not true. Because unlike those dark videos, I know the 95 Z28 I raced was stock because I know the original and current owner. I know my car was stock (back then). I know we had the same gears and A4 transmissions so our 1/8 mile roll races were as fair as they could possibly be. And I know we were neck and neck with neither of us gaining until I finally started pulling towards the end. We both ran 1/4 miles at Rt. 66 Speedway and I know his car ran 14.2 @ 99 while mine ran 13.5 @ 103 in good weather. Add .2 to both our times on hot and humid days.

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 03:31 PM
Here is a video I found. This is a full quarter mile race but I can not confirm if the transmissions are the same. But you'll see the intro says stock LT1 Vs stock LS1. Now after you watch this race picture me and my buddy in that parking lot because this is what our races looked like.

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?rurl=videos.streetfire.net&oid=4c5412021d38d806&

Notice how they are neck and neck until about the 1/8 when the LS1 starts to pull.

ChocoTaco369
02-05-2007, 03:33 PM
ChocoTaco; I won't even continue to try to argue the basics of difference between HP and Torque with you. It's probably best we just agree to disagree on it.
there is no argument. torque is NOT power. torque is force. it's the physical definition of torque.

torque - Mechanics. something that produces or tends to produce torsion or rotation; the moment of a force or system of forces tending to cause rotation.

torque - Machinery. the measured ability of a rotating element, as of a gear or shaft, to overcome turning resistance.

if you EVER say torque is power on a physics test, you'll fail it. again, torque is NOT power.

what gets you off the line is NOT torque. it's low rpm horsepower. torque is just the rotational force of your engine. what gets you off the line is how well the engine rotates at a very low rpm - or horsepower (torque x rpm). you can't argue a physical definition.

CALL911
02-05-2007, 04:33 PM
Here is a video I found. This is a full quarter mile race but I can not confirm if the transmissions are the same. But you'll see the intro says stock LT1 Vs stock LS1. Now after you watch this race picture me and my buddy in that parking lot because this is what our races looked like.

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?rurl=videos.streetfire.net&oid=4c5412021d38d806&

Notice how they are neck and neck until about the 1/8 when the LS1 starts to pull.

darrensls1; thanks again for keeping it professional here. I am not here to bash anyone, I am simply here to debate this. I totally agree with the times you agree on as "general stock times".

The video you posted was another good comparison. Its hard to tell which was actually ahead at 60 MPH from the camera's view unfortunatly though. To me at first it looked like the LT1 may have been inches in front of the LS1, and then at second look, they looked even. My video was at night and grainy as all get up, however you can clearly see the position of the cars to each other during the run. Either way, good vid to post up, and thanks.

ChocoTaco, I told you before, I'm not going to debate your TQ vs. HP any further. You can keep arguing your theory all you want, and I can argue mine, or we can just do it the easy way, and agree to disagree.

sdm1234
02-05-2007, 04:35 PM
i made a picture on photoshop comparing the LT1 and LS1 dyno graphs. these are CORVETTES, but the same principle applies. i got the data from these two links...
http://www.hypertech.com/images/dynocharts/vette96LT1.jpg << LT1
http://www.hypertech.com/images/dynocharts/vette00LS1.jpg << LS1

i really hope this helps... i spent a lot of time on this, and i know it's not perfect, but i worked damn hard on it. i did not just draw lines. i took each data point and plotted everything entirely out with individual dots, then connected all of them. so, it should be pretty much exact.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e344/sdm1234/LT1LS1comparison.jpg

JKDZ28
02-05-2007, 04:59 PM
283rwhp from a stock LT1, isn't that typically a bit high?

Not trying to start anything, but isn't that unusual?

sdm1234
02-05-2007, 05:05 PM
keep in mind that these are corvettes, not f-bodies.

EDIT: plus i'm just going by what the site said... haha

CALL911
02-05-2007, 05:05 PM
Keep in mind that the Vette's had better exhaust flow, and yeilded higher RWHP #'s than the F-bodies.

sdm1234, thanks for spending time on this and posting it. I am starting to think even dyno's will vary too much for this to ever be settled though.

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 05:18 PM
darrensls1; thanks again for keeping it professional here. I am not here to bash anyone, I am simply here to debate this. I totally agree with the times you agree on as "general stock times".

The video you posted was another good comparison. Its hard to tell which was actually ahead at 60 MPH from the camera's view unfortunatly though. To me at first it looked like the LT1 may have been inches in front of the LS1, and then at second look, they looked even. My video was at night and grainy as all get up, however you can clearly see the position of the cars to each other during the run. Either way, good vid to post up, and thanks.

No problem bro. I'm not looking to bash anyone either. When I watched that video they basically looked neck and neck. If either one pulled the other good out of the hole then it would have been obvious. And like the guy on the video said "that's a damn close race".

That was also my personal experience. We were neck and neck until about 70 MPH when I would start pulling away. It's actually kind of cool to race a stock LT1 with a stock LS1 in the 1/8 mile. The R/T (and of course launch) can determine which one comes out on top.

ChocoTaco369
02-05-2007, 06:00 PM
keep in mind that these are corvettes, not f-bodies.

EDIT: plus i'm just going by what the site said... haha
yea but the vettes have IRS and the f-bodies have a solid rear. this is exactly why the LS1 f-bodies dyno higher than LS1 corvettes. the IRS should take away more hp from the dyno than the little bit better the exhaust flow. are you sure you didn't get a dyno from an LT4 corvette?

Greedynessnish
02-05-2007, 06:20 PM
oh, i'm not saying the LT1 is a bad motor. the LT1 is a very good motor, has proven to hold up well past the 100,000 mile marker and can be deadly built up. i'm simply saying stock for stock, it's not match for an LS1 anywhere in the powerband. yes, the LS1 is a superior motor, but what do you expect? it's newer and was DESIGNED to outperform the LT1. you can't hold it against the LT1.
:werd: I'm an LT1 owner and that's exactly how I feel. After the modding begins it depends on what you know,how you drive and how fat your wallet is, and everybody knows that.

sdm1234
02-05-2007, 06:56 PM
yea but the vettes have IRS and the f-bodies have a solid rear. this is exactly why the LS1 f-bodies dyno higher than LS1 corvettes. the IRS should take away more hp from the dyno than the little bit better the exhaust flow. are you sure you didn't get a dyno from an LT4 corvette?

it says LT1.

sdm1234
02-05-2007, 07:11 PM
lets say on topic here tho, boys. the LS1's TQ is still ultimately higher than the LT1 at any given RPM, except for practically idle speed. this disproves that the LT1s are superior than LS1s from 0-60. i think it's because the LS1s have trouble with traction more-so than do the LT1s, because of they're power.

slick1851
02-05-2007, 07:27 PM
When you start modding/building motors etc its anyones game then..

CALL911
02-05-2007, 09:11 PM
I've seen other dyno's (I'm cursed under my own law though because I can't remember where I saw it) that show slightly different graphs with the LT1 having more torque at 2400 RPM than the LS1.

I'll continue to look for it. Meanwhile, if someone could find a race of an auto vs. an auto, this may eliminate the theory of a "better driver" scenario as well as a traction scenario.

1LoudTA
02-05-2007, 09:55 PM
Heres one from a dig

96 Camaro Z28 M6, LTs, ORY, Borla CB, 1.6RRs, Electric Waterpump, KNN FIPK
vs
99 Camaro Z28 M6, Stock

http://media.putfile.com/Jim-Vs-Stock-99-Z28

darrensls1
02-05-2007, 09:55 PM
I've seen other dyno's (I'm cursed under my own law though because I can't remember where I saw it) that show slightly different graphs with the LT1 having more torque at 2400 RPM than the LS1.

I'll continue to look for it. Meanwhile, if someone could find a race of an auto vs. an auto, this may eliminate the theory of a "better driver" scenario as well as a traction scenario.

By watching and listening to that video I posted it sounds like they are both autos to me. Either that or they both power shifted perfectly. I've all ready given you my personal experience of A4 vs A4 at a 10-75 roll. You're just choosing to ignore it or not believe it.

Either way it still happened and that video I posted backs up my standing that LT1 = LS1 0-60.

sdm1234
02-05-2007, 10:13 PM
By watching and listening to that video I posted it sounds like they are both autos to me. Either that or they both power shifted perfectly. I've all ready given you my personal experience of A4 vs A4 at a 10-75 roll. You're just choosing to ignore it or not believe it.

Either way it still happened and that video I posted backs up my standing that LT1 = LS1 0-60.

yea, but remember... that's only your personal experience, and that's only one race. you can't expect people to believe something that's only happened once, or just because you've had the experience. i've seen NUMEROUS LS1s start take a lead by 60mph, and so have many other people. out here there are PLENTY of f-bodies that go to the strip and they're mostly stock (except for filters and catbacks). and by the 1/8th, the LS1 is already pulling hard. just look at various timeslips throughout the boards. the general consensus will say that LT1s aren't quite equal to LS1s even to 60mph. the LT1 is quick, but the LS1 is quicker.

ZFan88
02-06-2007, 12:07 AM
Here is a video I found. This is a full quarter mile race but I can not confirm if the transmissions are the same. But you'll see the intro says stock LT1 Vs stock LS1. Now after you watch this race picture me and my buddy in that parking lot because this is what our races looked like.

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?rurl=videos.streetfire.net&oid=4c5412021d38d806&

Notice how they are neck and neck until about the 1/8 when the LS1 starts to pull.

The LT1 outlaunched the hell out of the LS1...this is why this is a waste of time

darrensls1
02-06-2007, 05:11 AM
The LT1 outlaunched the hell out of the LS1...this is why this is a waste of time

I watched that video three times in a row just now and I have to respectfully disagree. They look like they both run out of gate side by side and stay that way for maybe a little over a third of the track. But it would have been nice to see all the numbers on those slips, especially the 60'.

It's like the old saying goes. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Some guys are going to continue to believe the LT1 is dominant down low. Some guys are going to continue to believe the LS1 is dominant down low. And some guys are going to accept that they are both pretty damn close when everything is equal from 0-60.

First gear for me is 0-40 and that is where we were always neck and neck. Second gear is 40-80 and this is where I would start pulling. Third gear is 80-140 and this is where I run away and it gets ugly.

But look at our cars. I was very average for an auto LS1 (13.5-13.7) and my buddy was average for an auto LT1 (14.2-14.4). You put his car up against a stronger stock LS1 (13.0-13.3) and he probably gets pulled a little from the start. You put me up against a stronger stock LT1 (13.7-14.0) and maybe I get pulled a little from the start. But you put strong vs strong, weak vs weak or average vs average and I think the results from myself and that video happen alot more often then some people would like to believe.

wickedwarlock
02-06-2007, 06:54 AM
Funny how the LS1 guys get all defensive when they even hear that someone believes an older LT1 might actually be faster at one small part of a race.

Whats even more interesting is the fact I opened this thread on both this forum, and the "other" big f-body forum that has more LT1 guys than LS1 guys, and how the results from both threads go with the majority of specific engine owners.

:funny:

Now that's priceless! :search:

ZFan88
02-06-2007, 10:20 AM
I watched that video three times in a row just now and I have to respectfully disagree. They look like they both run out of gate side by side and stay that way for maybe a little over a third of the track. But it would have been nice to see all the numbers on those slips, especially the 60'.


I can't watch that video at work, but when I watched it last night it looked like the LT1 got a good launch while the LS1 bogged a little. Of course I was tired and trying to remember that lol. I own an LT1, and my roommate has an LS1. Before I did the mods to my car, I would hang for a good 20ft and then he would walk me easily. I mean easily as he could wave and just keep on goin

ChocoTaco369
02-06-2007, 11:51 AM
it says LT1.
i think they messed up and it was really an LT4. no way is a stock LT1 with 285hp putting down 280 peak. no chance in hell. if that corvette was truly stock, it was an LT4 corvette i'd be willing to bet. if it truly does have an LT1, it has quite a bit of mods done. by the hp numbers, i'd be willing to bet at least full exhaust and intake.

}Anti_Ricer_X{
02-06-2007, 12:26 PM
why are LT1 and LS1 guys getting mad at each other in the first place? It's like walking into a trekkie convention and yelling "kirk is a bitch!"
:funny:

It all comes down to driver. M6 or A4 i know alot of people think A4 is just press gas and go but if you have a noob that doesnt stall and bogs or someone who stalls to much and spins could cost you the race. :judge: Not every race is the same i dont care how many vids you post there are tons of variables that we dont know about the people racing. Just chill and enjoy the ride.......................GO COLTS!!!!!!!!!!!

Benjamin Russick
02-06-2007, 01:55 PM
I'll throw my $.02 in...
By the logic in this thread an L98 will beat a LT1 up to the 1/8 because its torque curve peaks sooner (and, for that matter, produces more). Truth? Nope.

The LT1 Corvette is rated at 285HP. Truth? Nope...it's 300HP

GMHTP already covered this topic when the LS1 first came out and even had dyno graphs. At no RPM was the LT1 ahead. The author was an LT1 owner and he grudgingly admitted that the LS1 beat down the LT1.

I admire people sticking up for their rides, but there are too many variables for a video to prove crap without serious planning.

The Postman
02-06-2007, 02:05 PM
I have personal experience with LT1's vs LS1's..i run a 99 Z28 bone stock and a buddy of mine runs a modified LT1..cam, exhaust, intake, rockers....and from a dig/roll i walked away from him no problem...its a proven fact that the LS1 is more tech advanced than the LT1.

ZFan88
02-06-2007, 02:14 PM
He must have a shitty cam if you're stock and still walking away

darrensls1
02-06-2007, 02:29 PM
He must have a shitty cam if you're stock and still walking away

:stupid:

CALL911
02-06-2007, 03:18 PM
Agree with above 2 posts

Greedynessnish
02-06-2007, 03:47 PM
Agree with above 2 posts
:werd:

gtman316
02-06-2007, 08:43 PM
Whats even more interesting is the fact I opened this thread on both this forum, and the "other" big f-body forum that has more LT1 guys than LS1 guys, and how the results from both threads go with the majority of specific engine owners.

I wouldn't call the lounge on cz28 a great place for info since half the people who hang out there don't even own f bodies.

GXPPOWER
02-07-2007, 01:56 AM
i go off of personal experience. im the slowest "supposedly" of the ls1s. a vert TA. i ran 13.5@105 and 8.6@85 stock. i ran many many lt1s stock and mildly modded. and every time i was atleats 2 cars ahead by the 1/8. i even paused a couple times vs a buddy and let him get the jump and before 1st gear was done i woulf be pulling back. and i think of guys who have run vs lt1 experience much of the same.

CALL911
02-07-2007, 06:04 AM
I wouldn't call the lounge on cz28 a great place for info since half the people who hang out there don't even own f bodies.

:read: The thread was started initially to get a video, not start the debate it has turned into.

burnzilla
02-07-2007, 12:02 PM
its a proven fact that the LS1 is more tech advanced than the LT1.
Really?! HOLY SHIT!

I have personal experience with LT1's vs LS1's..i run a 99 Z28 bone stock and a buddy of mine runs a modified LT1..cam, exhaust, intake, rockers....and from a dig/roll i walked away from him no problem....
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f400/topenlt1/bsflag.gif
Welcome to the Site!

Greedynessnish
02-07-2007, 12:34 PM
Really?! HOLY SHIT!


http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f400/topenlt1/bsflag.gif
Welcome to the Site!
ROFLMAO :jest: :jest: :jest: :jest: :jest: :jest:

Irunelevens
02-07-2007, 01:21 PM
i think they messed up and it was really an LT4. no way is a stock LT1 with 285hp putting down 280 peak. no chance in hell. if that corvette was truly stock, it was an LT4 corvette i'd be willing to bet. if it truly does have an LT1, it has quite a bit of mods done. by the hp numbers, i'd be willing to bet at least full exhaust and intake.
LT4s tend to put down 290-295rwhp... so if it was an LT1, it was way too strong, and if it was an LT4, it was kinda weak.

Greedynessnish
02-07-2007, 01:48 PM
i think they messed up and it was really an LT4. no way is a stock LT1 with 285hp putting down 280 peak. no chance in hell. if that corvette was truly stock, it was an LT4 corvette i'd be willing to bet. if it truly does have an LT1, it has quite a bit of mods done. by the hp numbers, i'd be willing to bet at least full exhaust and intake.
I can't remember where I saw it or exactly what it said but there is some explanation for the 10 horse difference (been a year or two ago since I read this) in the f-bods and the vettes after a certain year. I wanna say it was 94 but that can't be right anyway I don't ever remeber seeing anything else supporting that info. I may be totally wrong but if I find a link i'll post it.If I'm correct it was only the vettes and not the f-bods that got this particular change.


Derrell

ChocoTaco369
02-07-2007, 03:49 PM
LT4s tend to put down 290-295rwhp... so if it was an LT1, it was way too strong, and if it was an LT4, it was kinda weak.
automatic LT4? if it's stock, it CAN'T be an LT1. no way is a 285 hp motor putting down 280 rwhp :lol: unless the dyno is uncorrected :confused:

Irunelevens
02-07-2007, 06:38 PM
My bad, didn't see that it was an A4.

ChocoTaco369
02-07-2007, 09:03 PM
My bad, didn't see that it was an A4.
lol is it? i don't know, i just gave a reason that could explain the dyno numbers :lol:

99corvette
02-07-2007, 09:34 PM
Dang i watched a video not to long ago of a stock lt1 camaro and stock ls1 camro racing from a dig not to long ago, i will see if i can find it.

Juiced2000SS
02-07-2007, 09:55 PM
:read: The thread was started initially to get a video, not start the debate it has turned into.
Ben, what were you thinking? Anytime you put "LS1 vs. LT1" the thread gets long fast. Reminds me of when Darren and I used to go back and forth years ago with my other car.

Greedynessnish
02-08-2007, 09:34 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/ga/cincity/4thGen_FAQ_Engine.html

Corvette has 25 extra horses due to exhaust and .........???? but theres the link.

gtman316
02-09-2007, 02:42 AM
:read: The thread was started initially to get a video, not start the debate it has turned into.

I'm pretty sure I posted a video way back on page 2.

CALL911
02-09-2007, 06:30 AM
I'm pretty sure I posted a video way back on page 2.

What does that have to do with my choice to ask for a video in the lounge at cz28?

Joezee
02-09-2007, 08:54 AM
here is something to think about......a 92 viper has over 100ftlbs MORE torque than a 93 ZR1 down around 2-4k rpms....they weigh the same.....they both make 400 hp......yet 0-60....1/8 mile....and 1/4 mile the viper barely beats the ZR1 in most cases.......think about that.
so my point is , how can 5 or 10 ftlbs more at ONLY UNDER 2400rpms (2500 ALL THE WAY TO REDLINE the ls1 makes more) give any advantage to the LT1 ???

I responded again because I think it's pretty cool this thread has remained civil and NOT locked.....

ZFan88
02-09-2007, 10:29 AM
Isn't your question contradicting your example or am I reading it wrong?

SIC FUQR
02-09-2007, 11:27 AM
why are LT1 and LS1 guys getting mad at each other in the first place? It's like walking into a trekkie convention and yelling "kirk is a bitch!"
:jest: :jest: :jest: thats halarious and so true...cheers to that one :chug:

Bitemark46
02-09-2007, 12:48 PM
What is more worse? The LT1 vs LS1 saga or the Ford vs Chevy? Who gives a shit.

-Mark

darrensls1
02-09-2007, 01:25 PM
What is more worse? The LT1 vs LS1 saga or the Ford vs Chevy? Who gives a shit.

-Mark

M6 vs A4 :devil:

gtman316
02-09-2007, 02:01 PM
What does that have to do with my choice to ask for a video in the lounge at cz28?

Nevermind then, I thought you were talking about this thread. Even though I think I posted the video over there too.

sdm1234
02-10-2007, 05:37 PM
just raced a stock LS1 with my car. here's the thread...

http://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=656544

i'm modified and still couldn't hold him off.

305 h.o.
02-10-2007, 05:53 PM
I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths. The ls1's are in a totally different league so no contest your talking bout low 13's for a ls1 and high 13's even seen them run low 14's. Put a gear and some gas on your car and put em in both rear view mirrors.

burnzilla
02-10-2007, 06:16 PM
I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths. .
Your High 16 second car beat a high 13/low 14 second car by two lengths? :eyes:

CALL911
02-10-2007, 06:29 PM
Maybe he didn't know you were racing him :D

TonyGXP
02-10-2007, 06:32 PM
I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths. The ls1's are in a totally different league so no contest your talking bout low 13's for a ls1 and high 13's even seen them run low 14's. Put a gear and some gas on your car and put em in both rear view mirrors.

while I have seen a DD 305 Iroc with a Vortech on it run 9's years ago (yeah, it's insane), your sentence, and everything after it is absolute NONSENSE extenuating circumstances within that race to say the least..
I owned one (84'Z28) with the H.O. option and 3.73's and it was NEVER a race with an LT1 F-Body, I could beat my brother's ImpySS's...

unit213
02-10-2007, 06:48 PM
I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths.

I had a '86 T/A with the 305. They were absolute roaches. That is
a fact...no disputing that. I bet my 6 cylinder TrailBlazer would give it
a run for it's money. :lol: You have no chance of running down a LT1
with that car. There is another expanation for you being 2 cars up on
him...like the guy wasn't racing.

Greedynessnish
02-10-2007, 09:32 PM
I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths. The ls1's are in a totally different league so no contest your talking bout low 13's for a ls1 and high 13's even seen them run low 14's. Put a gear and some gas on your car and put em in both rear view mirrors.
WTF? I need to make a trip to Atlanta and do some H.O. hoppin'

Greedynessnish
02-10-2007, 09:34 PM
And a massive quadrajet! :supergay:


I'm sorry I don't have enough posts to be a DICK.

Joezee
02-11-2007, 09:37 AM
I had an 86 quadrajet 305 auto mint with only 60k miles ....stock G-teched MID 16s......we removed the air filter , and replaced the cat with a " test pipe " , and advanced the timing alot.......g-teched awesome mid 15s !!!.....

180 hp can easily beat a 275 hp lt1.....common knowledge , duh......

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 03:01 PM
I had a 3:42 gear and a 2400 stall. TO the guy with the mustang that said i had no chance and the lt1 wasnt racing me thats why i won why were we in a parking lot with 2,000 people on each side of us lined up with a flager and a clear 8th mile shot stright ahead? I know its hard to believe but there is a recipe to making a 305 run. A lot has to do with the timing. Remember those cars only came with 2:73 gears. I ran 9.43 at 76mph in the eith stock engine with a 3:42 grear and a 2400 stall converter, 2.006 60 foot. Mid 14's in the 1/2. As the car sits now i rape lt1's bad. Cam shaved heads, flat top pistons 4.10 gear's 800cfm Quadrajet by jet series carboraters torker 2 intake. Believe what you want but find a old guy who started building motors back in the 70's and they can pretty much make any small block chevy run. Im used to all the 305 bashing i just put em in the rear view.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 03:06 PM
I mean come on the lt1 camaro z28's only came with 285hp and that's at the fly wheel. I dont have any reason to lie to you guys. Wait a minute, if my car run mid 16's in the 1/2 dont that put some where around 11.20's in the 8th and not 9.43? Strange............... i tell you what ill get my boy to make a vid of my 18 sec 305 going down one of these back roads so you can see what it runs like.

Stopsign32v
02-11-2007, 03:08 PM
305 Tbi Ftw!!!!!!!!!

Joezee
02-11-2007, 05:10 PM
holy crap you sound like a ricer!!!!!!!!!!!

YOUR CAR IS NOT STOCK like you said....don't post bullshit.

86 305 has 100 less hp than an lt1 .....STOCK......

and then you post again defending 305s.....

maybe now your "fast"......unless you've added OVER 100hp your not wasting anybody.

Joezee
02-11-2007, 05:17 PM
does anybody live near this 305 that "rapes lt1s bad" ???

considering that Ls1s don't "rape lt1s bad", your pushing what...400-500 hp ?

DON'T post bull and ruin a good thread.

darrensls1
02-11-2007, 05:28 PM
I had a 3:42 gear and a 2400 stall.

Really? Because in your first post you said:

I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths.

No mention of a stall here. Not that it would make much of a difference anyway.

You also said:

The ls1's are in a totally different league so no contest your talking bout low 13's for a ls1 and high 13's even seen them run low 14's. Put a gear and some gas on your car and put em in both rear view mirrors.

Umm, a 1986 Z28 would need a LOT more then gears to run with a 300 rwhp LS1. And why would anyone put gas on a car? To burn it and collect insurance?

I know its hard to believe but there is a recipe to making a 305 run. A lot has to do with the timing. Remember those cars only came with 2:73 gears.

Gears are not what's holding them back. The crappy 190 HP engine is.

I ran 9.43 at 76mph in the eith stock engine with a 3:42 grear and a 2400 stall converter, 2.006 60 foot. Mid 14's in the 1/2.

Sure you did. Mid 14's by a car that runs what stock? Mid 15's maybe? So you dropped a full second with a converter and gears alone? Not likely. And I hope you meant the 1/4 and not the 1/2 :jest:


As the car sits now i rape lt1's bad. Cam shaved heads, flat top pistons 4.10 gear's 800cfm Quadrajet by jet series carboraters torker 2 intake. Believe what you want but find a old guy who started building motors back in the 70's and they can pretty much make any small block chevy run. Im used to all the 305 bashing i just put em in the rear view.

And I bet you're still slow and only putting other slow cars in your rearview mirror. What's it run in the quarter now? low 13's? :jest:

I mean come on the lt1 camaro z28's only came with 285hp and that's at the fly wheel.

And 86 Z28's came with 190 HP at the fly wheel. Your point is? 285-190=95 HP difference and that's not in your favor.

I dont have any reason to lie to you guys. Wait a minute, if my car run mid 16's in the 1/2 dont that put some where around 11.20's in the 8th and not 9.43? Strange............... i tell you what ill get my boy to make a vid of my 18 sec 305 going down one of these back roads so you can see what it runs like.

Perhaps you just stretched the truth a tad :jest: I believe your car should run mid to high 15's and trap in the low 90's (back when it was stock). A LT1 runs mid to low 14's and traps high 90's stock.

You need to get a video of your car running a 1/4 mile track. Watching you drive down some back road would tell us nothing about how fast or slow your car is.

CALL911
02-11-2007, 05:32 PM
This thread has turned from the decent argument to a rediculas one.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 06:30 PM
Well i guess i cant defend my self with a 190hp engine. Going from a 2.73 gear to a 3.42 is a big step. 305's are sluggesh motors you are right but it's certian things that gm did to those motors to make them that slow. Not saying that im faster than all of these ls1's im not but i hav raced several lt1 cars and ive never lost to one. My car beats 04 GT's by 3 1/2 to 4 car length's every time and dont tell me they aint racing cause i have out ran a lot of them and they aint just watching me run by myself. Those cars run 14.1 stock with a good driver and i have some witnesses who are on this site that can vauge for that race. I built that motor in that car my self i know what it runs i know what it has out ran so no one on this site can tell me that im posting bull on here this is stuff that i have allready done, i have no reason to lie to any one. I thought this was a camaro site your acting like this is some ricer forum.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 06:49 PM
I dont know what ls1's you have seen run but every one ive seen that ran a lt1 car has lost by more than 2 car lengths. There's stock ls1's running around here that went 13.2 on street tires then 12.8 on drag radials. You tell me if you have seen a lt1 car that broke 12's stock or even ran 13.5, hell they barley run 13.7 after putting a gear under it. And for the 190hp comments that's at the rear tires they started rating them at the flywheel after the late 80's. It makes around 240 hp to the flywheel. Look it up 1988 Iroc runs 15.2 at 88mph not 16's or 17's with a 305 in it the motor made 250hp the most hp for the 305 stock in the 80's. You guys are acting like you cant make these small block chevy motors run, i mean come on look at the 4.3, a V6 that motor runs damn good and the 283, 307, chevy dz 302, and a 305. I tell you what i had a 82 z28 with a cross fire 305 with a 2.73 gear and a Th350 trans only ran 10.6 in a 8th mile. Hell yea it was slow but i didnt know how to make it run. People ask me all the time why do i waste my time with a 305. My car runs damn good for a 305 most people dont believe that it has one in it they swear that im lieing. My last pass at the track i only had 1st and 2nd gear cause 700r4's are weak and it broke but i lined up with a s10 with a 350 in it i pulled this dude the whole way down the track cut a 2.15 60ft cause i have just a stock converter in it now let out at the 1,000 foot mark and still out ran this dude. 9.001 at 79mph thats letting out. Hey you aint got to believe me its all good.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 07:06 PM
holy crap you sound like a ricer!!!!!!!!!!!

YOUR CAR IS NOT STOCK like you said....don't post bullshit.

86 305 has 100 less hp than an lt1 .....STOCK......

and then you post again defending 305s.....

maybe now your "fast"......unless you've added OVER 100hp your not wasting anybody.



Ricer, funny
The car had a stock motor with a 2400 converter and a 3.42 gear.
raced a 96 black z28 heads up from a dead stop in a parking lot with a flagger and a croud of about 2,000 people. I out ran him by 2 CAR LENGTHS! I even talked to the guy afterwards. I defend chevy's and you guys asses so dont act like im some aragant dude on this site posting bull shit. Ive built these motors and i am a machanic of 5 years i know what im talking about. Hell im allways defending yall all that's around here is mustang lovers infact im buying a 99 or 00 model WS6 this year.

Camaro Fan
02-11-2007, 07:16 PM
And for the 190hp comments that's at the rear tires they started rating them at the flywheel after the late 80's. It makes around 240 hp to the flywheel.

Not to argue too much, but no they didn't. They were rated at the crank back then just like w/ the LT1s. The 350 TPIs were doing good to hit 190-200 hp at the rear wheels stock, the smaller cammed 305 TPIs and the H.O.s were significantly less powerful.

The hotter 305 5spds could maybe come close (close being with .5 second or so slower in the 1/4...), but they're not going to take out a LT1 that is driven well. My 86 IROC w/ the 190hp 305 TPI, with the addition of a mild cam, ported intake, headers, catback, 2200rpm stall, and 3.42s lost by 2-3+ cars in a run a little shorter than a 1/4 mile to my dead stock 94 Z28 LT1 A4 w/ 3.23s.

99Silverado5.3
02-11-2007, 07:22 PM
nb4 :lock:

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 07:26 PM
Really? Because in your first post you said:



No mention of a stall here. Not that it would make much of a difference anyway.

You also said:



Umm, a 1986 Z28 would need a LOT more then gears to run with a 300 rwhp LS1. And why would anyone put gas on a car? To burn it and collect insurance?



Gears are not what's holding them back. The crappy 190 HP engine is.



Sure you did. Mid 14's by a car that runs what stock? Mid 15's maybe? So you dropped a full second with a converter and gears alone? Not likely. And I hope you meant the 1/4 and not the 1/2 :jest:




And I bet you're still slow and only putting other slow cars in your rearview mirror. What's it run in the quarter now? low 13's? :jest:



And 86 Z28's came with 190 HP at the fly wheel. Your point is? 285-190=95 HP difference and that's not in your favor.



Perhaps you just stretched the truth a tad :jest: I believe your car should run mid to high 15's and trap in the low 90's (back when it was stock). A LT1 runs mid to low 14's and traps high 90's stock.

You need to get a video of your car running a 1/4 mile track. Watching you drive down some back road would tell us nothing about how fast or slow your car is.




I find your jokes amusing
I never said i raced a 300hp ls1 car read carefully
The timing on those engines was way to low by advancing the timing picks the car up a good bit. There's a formula for caculating your 8th time to get your quater time or 1/4 thanks for the correction.
Take your 8th time multiply it by 1.58 and it gives you your 1/4 time right around 3 tenths of your time.
SO 9.43 times 1.58 gives you 14.8-14.5 not 15.90's or mid to high 16's.
As the car sits now i only give it 13.6 to 13.7. I need to invest in a good stall and a holly carb some where aound 750cfm
Your off just a few tenths with that low 13's statment though close but no cookie.

burnzilla
02-11-2007, 07:33 PM
I find your jokes amusing

I dont even think you could beat a 3800 V6.

Get a timeslip, post a vid or bust :judge:

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 07:34 PM
Not to argue too much, but no they didn't. They were rated at the crank back then just like w/ the LT1s. The 350 TPIs were doing good to hit 190-200 hp at the rear wheels stock.

The hotter 305 5spds could maybe come close (close being with .5 second or so slower in the 1/4...), but they're not going to take out a LT1 that is driven well. My 86 IROC w/ the 190hp 305 TPI, with the addition of a mild cam, ported intake, headers, catback, 2200rpm stall, and 3.42s lost by 2-3+ cars to my dead stock 94 Z28 w/ a LT1 A4 w/ 3.23s.

Thanks for not being a ass whole
at least you show some respect for other chevy owners on here.
I dont know man, ive never lost a race to a lt1 car ever.
Thats when i was stock and right now. Last year i went to a local street race strip that we have down here. There was a 04 gt mustang and a friend of mine with a 97 ta lt1. They raced 4 times. The ta lost twice by juts a bumper each time and won twice by just a bumper. I raced the stang and out ran him by 3 1/2 to 4 cars. I talked to this guy afterwards and he said he ran 14.1 at the track. I dont know man my car aint the fastest thing on the street but it wont run in the 14's it's a mid to high 13 second car. If you build any motor right with the right parts and every matches up right you can make any thing run.

thebufenator
02-11-2007, 07:35 PM
Take your 8th time multiply it by 1.58 and it gives you your 1/4 time right around 3 tenths of your time.


Cars with torque but no horsepower will do well in the 1/8 but not in the 1/4.
Have you ever done the 1/4? How about a time-slip? Dyno graph?

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 07:38 PM
I dont even think you could beat a 3800 V6.

Get a timeslip, post a vid or bust :judge:

What ever man i have nothing to prove to you i know what my car runs you dont. I dont care what you think or say cause obviouslly you dont know any thing about racing to say some stupid stuff like this.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 07:43 PM
Im dynoing the car in a few weeks. the only quater mile track around me is like 2 hours away and im not driving that far to run this car. So i just go to the 8th mile tracks. Since i have added all my mods to the motor every time i go to the track somthing brakes in the trans or i have fuel issues, its allways somehting. I ran a fox body stang in a street race here back in march of last year beat him by a car and a half. 302 was in it and it run 7.80's on the gas and 8.60 on the motor. For some reason my car just ran right that night i allso made him unhook the bottle.

99corvette
02-11-2007, 07:49 PM
I beleive you............you might have beat a lt1........but it was because the guy couldnt drive or launch his car. So dont play it off like you beat him because your car was faster, when you only beat him because he couldnt drive.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 07:59 PM
I beleive you............you might have beat a lt1........but it was because the guy couldnt drive or launch his car. So dont play it off like you beat him because your car was faster, when you only beat him because he couldnt drive.

How do you not know how to drive a auto matic.
Wait a minute this is more than one lt1 owner
so are you saying none of these lt1 owners couldnt drive.
STRANGE................
considering all you have to do is know how to mash the gas
and push the shifter foward.
Telling me that ive never out ran a lt1 car and my car is not faster is like standing in my face and trying with all your might to convience me that im white. Come on man make some since when you post these stupid comments.

CALL911
02-11-2007, 08:13 PM
Dude, do a search, you will get the same answers we have given you. There's just no way a stock LT1 would loose a race to a stock 3rd gen.

I started this thread stating that I believe that the LT1 is quicker than the LS1 0-60. But even I can admit the LT1 is no match for the LS1 the 2nd half of the quarter mile. The LT1 and LS1 is a much closer battle than a 3rd gen vs a 4th gen. Your car made decent torque, but had no HP even close to comparable with the LT1, hence there is just no way you could beet him in a full 1/4 mile race, ESPECIALLY if it was an auto. If it were a manual, then I might be able to give you some benefit of the doubt if the dude didn't know how to drive at all, but even if the auto you ran smoked his tires unit 30 MPH, he still would have ran you down before it was over.

If you want to proove your argument here, you will never do it by just saying you did. Show us an actual 1/4 mile time slip, or an actual video of your car vs an LT1.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 08:21 PM
Your right, 9 times out of 10 you wont find a 3rd gen that will out run a lt1 car im not saying 3rd gens are faster. I had a 82 crossfire 305 camaro that lost to v6 firebirds and stuff it was a slug. My 86 was a snail to but an old gear head who built these small block chevy engines and big block showed how to make a 305 run with just a stock motor. I laughed at him when he told me that but he told me to change the gear and we jeted up the stock carb put a converter in it and advanced the timing way up. Yea no one is going to believe me with out a vid of my car running. Remember it was just a stock motor the rear end wasnt stock and it had a converter also. No bs ive never lost to a lt1 car.

chaman
02-11-2007, 08:52 PM
I raced a few lt1 cars in my 86 camaro when it had a stock 305 and a 3:42 gear and out ran one by 2 car lengths. The ls1's are in a totally different league so no contest your talking bout low 13's for a ls1 and high 13's even seen them run low 14's. Put a gear and some gas on your car and put em in both rear view mirrors.


Its a good thing you posted this. It is so absurd and full of NONSENSE that you have achieved what it appeared to be impossible....LT1 and LS1 guys in accord to bring you to the new era of REAL cars. Buddy, 305 are TURDS. No way around it, nothing you can do to change it. If you beat a LT1 the guy most probably was cruising around listening to some tunes or something like that. You are right LS1 are another league but you live in another world. Please do yourself a favor and shut up...... :lock: :lock: :judge:

Greedynessnish
02-11-2007, 09:27 PM
Your right, 9 times out of 10 you wont find a 3rd gen that will out run a lt1 car im not saying 3rd gens are faster. I had a 82 crossfire 305 camaro that lost to v6 firebirds and stuff it was a slug. My 86 was a snail to but an old gear head who built these small block chevy engines and big block showed how to make a 305 run with just a stock motor. I laughed at him when he told me that but he told me to change the gear and we jeted up the stock carb put a converter in it and advanced the timing way up. Yea no one is going to believe me with out a vid of my car running. Remember it was just a stock motor the rear end wasnt stock and it had a converter also. No bs ive never lost to a lt1 car.
Crossfire=Ceasefire same shit, but it does take some "know how" to drive an auto mainly on the launch especially in the street. To me now anyway it seems like your not a some assclown but a 305 is pretty much a lost cause compared to a 350. Fuck being the underdog a 305 is too far under.Remember your car aint stock and in the south with traction and decent driving in a stock LT1 13.8's are possible even lower but street and track are 2 diff things. Lack of torque would equal better traction and with the mods you have your top end is better than a stock 305 so you may have a slight advantage from a dig "IN THE STREET" and not much if any. At the track though you'll get ASSRAPED again and again.Oh and qaudrajets are still :supergay:

chaman
02-11-2007, 09:36 PM
No bs ive never lost to a lt1 car.


Probably because you have never REALLY run one........ :jest: :gtfo:

Greedynessnish
02-11-2007, 10:18 PM
Probably because you have never REALLY run one........ :jest: :gtfo:
:werd: :stupid:

exeter
02-11-2007, 10:29 PM
I can tell you what will happen..... Me and my friend lined up at aatco raceway.. i have a 98 ta .. with catback exhaust and slp airlid.... he has a 97 ta with catback slp and cool intake... so same mods... and i ran a 13.1 on his 13.6 ... and he has been there about 5 more times than me. it was my 2nd time going.

Greedynessnish
02-11-2007, 10:40 PM
I can tell you what will happen..... Me and my friend lined up at aatco raceway.. i have a 98 ta .. with catback exhaust and slp airlid.... he has a 97 ta with catback slp and cool intake... so same mods... and i ran a 13.1 on his 13.6 ... and he has been there about 5 more times than me. it was my 2nd time going.
LS1 Vs. LT1 yep that would be about right that's not the argument though not argument, reseacrh. CALL911 wanted know how long the LT1 could hold off a LS1 stock for stock in the 1/4.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 11:06 PM
Its a good thing you posted this. It is so absurd and full of NONSENSE that you have achieved what it appeared to be impossible....LT1 and LS1 guys in accord to bring you to the new era of REAL cars. Buddy, 305 are TURDS. No way around it, nothing you can do to change it. If you beat a LT1 the guy most probably was cruising around listening to some tunes or something like that. You are right LS1 are another league but you live in another world. Please do yourself a favor and shut up...... :lock: :lock: :judge:


Say what you want man its not impossible ive have done it several times. I am in a real world i built this motor i know what it does you dont. So until you can see my car run and make the desission that its slow or not than i think you need to hold your tounge.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 11:08 PM
Probably because you have never REALLY run one........ :jest: :gtfo:

Im sorry what grade are you in again i missed it.

305 h.o.
02-11-2007, 11:22 PM
Crossfire=Ceasefire same shit, but it does take some "know how" to drive an auto mainly on the launch especially in the street. To me now anyway it seems like your not a some assclown but a 305 is pretty much a lost cause compared to a 350. Fuck being the underdog a 305 is too far under.Remember your car aint stock and in the south with traction and decent driving in a stock LT1 13.8's are possible even lower but street and track are 2 diff things. Lack of torque would equal better traction and with the mods you have your top end is better than a stock 305 so you may have a slight advantage from a dig "IN THE STREET" and not much if any. At the track though you'll get ASSRAPED again and again.Oh and qaudrajets are still :supergay:

The last lt1 ta i raced was about a year and a half ago. 97 ta set me out a car length we raced 4 times i lost once due to spinning off the line. He set me out cause he said i had a 305. He gives me a car length and we take off as i hit second gear he starts to fade back and i pulled on him every race. Now it was 35-40 people who witnessed this same race 4 different times 3 times with the same result. I built my shit right with the right parts that match up. Ive built 350's to put im short for cash right now and my engine is just as fast as any flat top 350 around. yea 305's are slugs so what? If you know what to do to them and what to put in them they will run nothing like your average 305.

sdm1234
02-11-2007, 11:38 PM
305 HO has a modified 305. therefore, this doesn't really contribute to the thread...

Greedynessnish
02-11-2007, 11:41 PM
The last lt1 ta i raced was about a year and a half ago. 97 ta set me out a car length we raced 4 times i lost once due to spinning off the line. He set me out cause he said i had a 305. He gives me a car length and we take off as i hit second gear he starts to fade back and i pulled on him every race. Now it was 35-40 people who witnessed this same race 4 different times 3 times with the same result. I built my shit right with the right parts that match up. Ive built 350's to put im short for cash right now and my engine is just as fast as any flat top 350 around. yea 305's are slugs so what? If you know what to do to them and what to put in them they will run nothing like your average 305.
I think you may know your shit but that Qaudrajet is still :supergay: I'm not insulting YOU , I understand the $$$ thing Bro but I just can't let that one go.

unit213
02-12-2007, 06:29 AM
Well i guess i cant defend my self with a 190hp engine. Going from a 2.73 gear to a 3.42 is a big step. 305's are sluggesh motors you are right but it's certian things that gm did to those motors to make them that slow. Not saying that im faster than all of these ls1's im not but i hav raced several lt1 cars and ive never lost to one. My car beats 04 GT's by 3 1/2 to 4 car length's every time and dont tell me they aint racing cause i have out ran a lot of them and they aint just watching me run by myself. Those cars run 14.1 stock with a good driver and i have some witnesses who are on this site that can vauge for that race. I built that motor in that car my self i know what it runs i know what it has out ran so no one on this site can tell me that im posting bull on here this is stuff that i have allready done, i have no reason to lie to any one. I thought this was a camaro site your acting like this is some ricer forum.

Undeleted so you guys can read more ignorance.

unit213
02-12-2007, 06:30 AM
9.001 at 79mph thats letting out.

:funny: Where did you let out...the 330' mark? I let out and it's a 7.0 @ 100mph.

darrensls1
02-12-2007, 06:33 AM
I think the only thing worse then his story telling is his spelling :lol:

Greedynessnish
02-12-2007, 06:51 AM
I think the only thing worse then his story telling is his spelling :lol:
yeah WTF is vauge? :eek2:

Justin00SS
02-12-2007, 06:58 AM
What is the point of this again?

The LS1 was designed to be a step up from the LT1. Why would GM reverse engineer?

305 h.o.
02-12-2007, 08:15 AM
:funny: Where did you let out...the 330' mark? I let out and it's a 7.0 @ 100mph.

wow im so happy for you.
Glad to see your one of those snobby guys with a lot of money that can afford to go fast.

305 h.o.
02-12-2007, 08:16 AM
[QUOTE=darrensls1]I think the only thing worse then his story telling is his spelling :lol:[/QUO

LOL ha ha!

NightWindDriftr
02-12-2007, 10:02 AM
This turned into a request for a vid of stock LT1 and LS1 going heads-up, then turned into a debate as to which engine makes more torque down low, and has now turned into 305 bashing. :jest:

I have an '86 TA with a 305. No offense, but I doubt your car can take a (equally modded) LT1. You have a better chance with an L98, but I'd STILL doubt it. Swap in 4.10s and cam it all you like.. you're just trying to teach an old DOG new tricks. Your best bet is saving your mod money to do an engine swap. Like I said, I have a 305 and I understand what it's like to be ragged on. After all, with the L98 in existence, we have NO excuse (save a few hundred dollars) to NOT get a 350 over the lethargic LG4 or any other variation of the POS 305.

Back on "topic" ( :jest: ) I had a '94 TA, A4 with 2.73s. Judging by SOTP, it outlaunched my current A4 2.73 LS1 for the first 30mph. Again, that's SOTP; I'm not claiming that my LT1 was faster.

Greedynessnish
02-12-2007, 10:19 AM
This turned into a request for a vid of stock LT1 and LS1 going heads-up, then turned into a debate as to which engine makes more torque down low, and has now turned into 305 bashing. :jest:

I have an '86 TA with a 305. No offense, but I doubt your car can take a (equally modded) LT1. You have a better chance with an L98, but I'd STILL doubt it. Swap in 4.10s and cam it all you like.. you're just trying to teach an old DOG new tricks. Your best bet is saving your mod money to do an engine swap. Like I said, I have a 305 and I understand what it's like to be ragged on. After all, with the L98 in existence, we have NO excuse (save a few hundred dollars) to NOT get a 350 over the lethargic LG4 or any other variation of the POS 305.

Back on "topic" ( :jest: ) I had a '94 TA, A4 with 2.73s. Judging by SOTP, it outlaunched my current A4 2.73 LS1 for the first 30mph. Again, that's SOTP; I'm not claiming that my LT1 was faster.
What did the difference in top end feel like?

NightWindDriftr
02-12-2007, 10:45 AM
What did the difference in top end feel like?

Between the LT1 and the LS1? The difference is night and day. The LT1 loses steam very quickly once you hit highway speeds (+60mph). And as we know, the LS1 continues to pull and pull.

My LT1 after 60mph pulled as slow as my LS1 past 130mph. All SOTP here. There's no way I can factually measure that. :jest:

darrensls1
02-12-2007, 11:12 AM
I find your jokes amusing
I never said i raced a 300hp ls1 car read carefully
The timing on those engines was way to low by advancing the timing picks the car up a good bit.

No but you did say this:

The ls1's are in a totally different league so no contest your talking bout low 13's for a ls1 and high 13's even seen them run low 14's. Put a gear and some gas on your car and put em in both rear view mirrors.

You're not clear about who's car your referring to so I took it as a statement saying gears and gas on a 305 (still not sure what gas on the car does) makes you able to beat LT1's & LS1's. You seem to think you have a monster on your hands so this was by no means a stretch. If you would be more clear in your posts then there would be less confusion.

There's a formula for caculating your 8th time to get your quater time or 1/4 thanks for the correction.
Take your 8th time multiply it by 1.58 and it gives you your 1/4 time right around 3 tenths of your time.

Yes I was aware there is a mathamatical formula for estimating a 1/4 mile time from a 1/8 timeslip. I never said there wasn't.

SO 9.43 times 1.58 gives you 14.8-14.5 not 15.90's or mid to high 16's.

I said your car was mid 15's stock which it was. You had 190 FWHP 305 with an automatic so consider yourself lucky that those turds could run 15's stock :lol: And a 2800 stall + 3.42's do not = 1.0 off your 1/4 mile time. Now here are the numbers on that monster 305 engine:

HP 190@4000 TQ 285@2800

As you can see these motors were not overly powerful at upper RPM's. You're 1/8 mile is going to be more impressive then the 1/4 mile due to the fact that they hit a "brick wall" at 80 MPH. Maybe this is why the speedos only went to 85 :lol:

As the car sits now i only give it 13.6 to 13.7.

Stop bench racing and go actually run a 1/4 mile. Until then you're just speculating which means two things around here. Jack and s***.


I need to invest in a good stall and a holly carb some where aound 750cfm.

No offense but you really need to invest in a better motor. LS1 swap would be a good start :)

Your off just a few tenths with that low 13's statment though close but no cookie.

No I'm not. Your car ran a mid 15 stock and it certainly didn't get a full second faster with a stall and 3.42's. Especially since you only managed a 2.006 60' which is nothing to brag about. I have done that on stock stall and street tires.

What no cookie? How about a Brownie then?

Greedynessnish
02-12-2007, 11:53 AM
Originally Posted by 305 h.o.
SO 9.43 times 1.58 gives you 14.8-14.5 not 15.90's or mid to high 16's.

A 9.42 1/8 w/ a 1.58 short time???? O.K now I do believe that anything can happen in a street race but I run a 9.19 on 2.08 60ft bone stock. Your top-end can't be that hot so I say let's get a 1/4 mile time here. I think you'll shit yourself when you see the timeslip. Looking at that E.T. and that 60ft your story aint adding up as far as any LT1 you've run being in good running shape. Those cars might have needed tune-ups,the driver mod etc ,but you would have an advantage over a car with issues like those in a street race. Your 60ft shows that.Like I said earlier It will be a nightmare at the track for you especially in the 1/4 mile.

Irunelevens
02-12-2007, 11:58 AM
Apparently you didn't understand what he said. He was not saying he had a 1.58 60' time. He was saying to MULTIPLY your 1/8 mile time by 1.58 to get a projected 1/4 mile time.

ZFan88
02-12-2007, 12:06 PM
So what was the 1/8 mile time? My LT1 VERT ran a 8.74 with a horrible 2.18 60' (first time at the track) in the 1/8th with just intake and exhaust...

darrensls1
02-12-2007, 12:09 PM
So what was the 1/8 mile time? My LT1 VERT ran a 8.74 with a horrible 2.18 60' (first time at the track) in the 1/8th with just intake and exhaust...

He said that his 305 with a 2800 stall and 3.42's as his only mods ran 9.4 @ 76 with a 2.0 60'. Then he wanted to use math to try and prove his car was capable of mid 14's.

ZFan88
02-12-2007, 12:19 PM
Ya...I don't think so. I'll be looking out for the vid though

Greedynessnish
02-12-2007, 12:20 PM
Apparently you didn't understand what he said. He was not saying he had a 1.58 60' time. He was saying to MULTIPLY your 1/8 mile time by 1.58 to get a projected 1/4 mile time.
My bad I'm with you now I knew that 1.58 sounded familier
:hail:

Greedynessnish
02-12-2007, 12:26 PM
So what was the 1/8 mile time? My LT1 VERT ran a 8.74 with a horrible 2.18 60' (first time at the track) in the 1/8th with just intake and exhaust...
That was the only time I went to the track but mine is slug til 3rd gear. I'm looking forward to getting a 1/4 E.t have'nt had the time yet.

chaman
02-12-2007, 05:00 PM
Honestly I think is better to IGNORE the 305 BS and fuggedaboutit..!LOL!!

At least it was a good laugh!!!!

Stopsign32v
02-12-2007, 05:05 PM
What the hell is a WS7?

Joezee
02-12-2007, 05:17 PM
305ho , you started this bullshit by claiming your SSSSSSTTTTTTOOOOOCCCCCKKKKK 86 305 beats LT1s .


and it is rated at the flywheel ......stock REARwheel 160 at best AND mid 16s 1/4 mile.

and I know about the timing issue, read my first response to you.

the rude responses your getting could have been avoided if you did not post BULLSHIT.

305 h.o.
02-12-2007, 06:40 PM
I dont post bull shit my car really did beat some stock lt1 cars i was just using it as an example to compare the ls1 to an lt1. Maybe some of them did need tune up's but my car ran a hell of a lot better than any stock 305 around. Yea it was a good laugh wasnt it.

305 h.o.
02-12-2007, 06:42 PM
Honestly I think is better to IGNORE the 305 BS and fuggedaboutit..!LOL!!

At least it was a good laugh!!!!


You know what?
I think you need to sell your T/A and go hang out on the SRT forums where all the smart ass are.

305 h.o.
02-12-2007, 06:47 PM
This turned into a request for a vid of stock LT1 and LS1 going heads-up, then turned into a debate as to which engine makes more torque down low, and has now turned into 305 bashing. :jest:

I have an '86 TA with a 305. No offense, but I doubt your car can take a (equally modded) LT1. You have a better chance with an L98, but I'd STILL doubt it. Swap in 4.10s and cam it all you like.. you're just trying to teach an old DOG new tricks. Your best bet is saving your mod money to do an engine swap. Like I said, I have a 305 and I understand what it's like to be ragged on. After all, with the L98 in existence, we have NO excuse (save a few hundred dollars) to NOT get a 350 over the lethargic LG4 or any other variation of the POS 305.

Back on "topic" ( :jest: ) I had a '94 TA, A4 with 2.73s. Judging by SOTP, it outlaunched my current A4 2.73 LS1 for the first 30mph. Again, that's SOTP; I'm not claiming that my LT1 was faster.



Ow yea man, i am looking out for a 99-02 T/A
im trying to get one by late summer. I love those cars. Im short for cash now so i just had to build what i had. With the money i had buying a 350 would have not make my car any faster than it was. Im posting a vid on here in a little while of my car running down the road.

305 h.o.
02-12-2007, 07:05 PM
What the hell is a WS7?

LOL WS7

Justin00SS
02-12-2007, 07:33 PM
LOL WS7

Its a trans-am with the ws-6 package added on by the buyer of the car and not GM.

or

they bought the badge.

Why do you keep responding anyway? There is a reason why the fastest 305 is only running like low 12s.

Upgrade to a 327/350 block and call it a day. :judge:

unit213
02-12-2007, 08:05 PM
I think we've had enough ignorance for the day (and for the month).