somebody help me...

umm...see that? that's my first post in this thread. notice how i say "the only purpose i can see is to make the stall feel tighter". so, where did i leave this out?

please read first...

 

how in the hell do you have over 350 hp w/ your mods???? maybe at the fly but not at rears... must be the k&n

 

once again, i got .25 in the 1/4 by just changing gears, all else equal. that is over twice the gain that you keep repeating. when coupled with my stall, i dropped .55 off of my 1/8 mile time. and once again, my untuned 4k stall / 373 geared auto is still capable of 24+ mpg.

you're really making an *** out of yourself, chocotaco. for the sake of argument, let's say a gear swap is STUPID and only something a bonified dumbass would do...with that said - last time i checked, it is within the rights of those who choose to do so. get off your high horse with the gear swap issue. put down the shovel and agree to disagree, insulting people (like me) doesn't get you anywhere, nor does it prove your opinions in any way, shape, or form.

 

I'm sorry but that logic makes NO sense. The biggest reason to get gears is for everyday feel. If you're car is not an all out race car, it will feel WAY better with something more than the shitty 2.73s. General everyday cruising is way more fun with like a 3.42 or 3.73.

And if you're car is an all out race car and you don't care about everyday drivability, I don't see why you wouldn't want them there either since they WILL improve your ET. I know someone who gained 7 mph in an LT1 vette from going to 2.59s to 3.73s

 

yes, at the fly. you know, what the engine is rated for? i missed where i listed whp? and i don't have a K&N i'd never put that **** in a basically stock car. waste of money for a dirtier engine.

 

lol this argument is bullshit. if you're too much of a nancy boy to drive around with the looseness of a stall, maybe you shouldn't be modding your car. aftermarket parts are nearly always more uncomfortable than OEM parts. aftermarket rears/gears howl and whine, poly mounts can make things vibrate uncomfortably, aftermarket exhaust systems can make things potentially unbearable for loud trips...

i find it so funny that some of the people in here yell at people after hearing noises due to aftermarket parts that "you're putting racecar parts on a street car, get over it", then complain over the looseness of a stall. it's a paradox i tell you.

my argument is the gears have more downsides. if you wanna lose major mpg, increase engine wear and cut your rear's life all because you're uncomfortable with a stall and need that extra tenth in the quarter, i think your priorities aren't in order. there are better things that can be had with the money.

i'm sure this is an already stalled auto right? haha. this argument is moot if it's a manual or auto with no stall. of course you're going to see those gains. guess what? with a stall, you'll see 1-2 tenths at best - if you can grab traction. if you can't, your ET will be worse. launches are far harder on 3.73's.

 

this is the question you have to ask yourself.

gears + install kit + install run around $500-$600. i'll take the low end of $500 just to be a good sport. going from 2.73's to 3.73's should cut on average 3mpg from your car. no one should argue this, it's a good estimate. now, let's assume before the gear swap, you'll see 21mpg and let's assume you drive your car is a daily driver and you drive 250 miles a week. let's also assume premium gas is $3.30 a gallon, which by now may be the low average

[(250 miles)/(21mpg)] = 11.9 gallons of gas used each week
11.9 gallons of gas @ $3.30 a gallon = $39.28 a week to drive
$39.28 x 52 weeks in a year =~$2043

okay, it costs about $2043 a year to drive your car. now, let's assume you'll keep this car for 3 years.

$2043 x 3 = $6129

over 3 years, it costs you $6219 dollars to drive your f-body with 2.73's. now let's apply the same logic with 3.73's @ a rate of 18mpg.

[(250 mles)/(18mpg)] = 13.9 gallons of gas used each week
13.9 gallons of gas @ $3.30 a gallon = $45.84 a week to drive
$45.84 x 52 weeks in a year =~$2384

okay, it costs $2384 a year to drive your car. now, let's again assume you'll keep this car for 3 years.

$2384 x 3 = $7152

it cost you an extra $1023 to daily drive your f-body because of those 3.73's, and again, this is assuming you see absolutely $0 in adverse effects from engine wear and a broken rear. remember, 3.73's amplify the chances of both dramatically which could add thousands more to your bills.

okay. so add the $500 for gears, install kit and installation to the $1023. you get $1523 for the final cost of your 3.73's over the course of a meager 3 years (i will tell you, i plan to drive my f-body for a lot more than 3 years. i'm sure most of you would too )

okay, you spent $1523 to pick up 1-2 tenths in the quarter mile. now, what other mods can we get for $1523? hmm...you could get a t-rex cam and some forged internals, installed!

who here, on this site, would be happy with a 1-2 tenths gain in the quarter mile after a trex cam? if you honestly think 1-2 tenths are a great pickup after a trex cam, by all means, do the gear swap since you have no concept of good money spent. i'm done with this argument. it's total BS. anyone with any concept of wise spending and dollar per horsepower can see this.

 

With 2.73s I went from 13.6 to 13.3 with just Yank 3000.With DRs I believe in 12s.Traction was a major issue but that is what im after(more power) just need better tires

 

So do I get 3.73s or Pacesetter long tubes next?

 

Then go do the math for us on extra gas consumption of the heads/cam after 3 years and get back to us so you can do a fair comparison...

Also, you need to consider the setup as a whole. After doing a cam and stall, you usually want to bump the gear ratio a bit. You need not consider each mod on its own, but the setup as a whole.

 

you know, the engine is NOT rated that high from GM. Its 310. IF you have a full SLP dealer optioned car, they claim its 345. So you are either off by 40hp or 5hp. Either way, numbers claimed should be those at the rear, otherwise don't claim numbers because it causes confusion like the above post. Get your car dynoed when you have the chance.


Also, how the hell do you get 20+ around town???? I get 14 best in city.

 

actually, the engine is rated at that from GM. look at the corvette. it was rated at 350hp. last time i checked, it was the same engine. the f-bodies were dumbed down so it would seem like you're getting more out of the corvette when crank hp was actually the same since it was the same damn engine.

and for the record, i have the SLP package, so if it was on the corvette, it would theoretically be rated at 375hp since it was some like a 25hp package.

and FWIW, i have a 2001 bird w/LS6 intake, they were rated higher than 310 weren't they (even though the rating for the vette was still 350)?

i've never seen less than 21mpg in my car either. it's not detriot-style city driving. the lights are separated by .5 - 1 mile, not 100 feet. still stop-and-go for 8 miles straight.

first of all, heads and cam will yield less gas consumption than a gear swap as long as you drive responsibly. why? heads and cam will suck a lot of gas, but only when you get on it. gears suck the gas all day every day. also, if you get your heads done and tuned properly, theoretically, you can pull BETTER than stock gas mileage because your engine requires less effort to turn at lower rpm's. where you would usually have to rev to 2500rpm's in order to go anywhere decently, now you can do it at 2200rpm's. also, there are varying degrees of heads and cam setups. with tuning taken into consideration, it would be very possible to add a mild heads/cam package that would yield better gas mileage, all the while increasing your quarter mile times by a hell of a lot more than 1-2 tenths.

my whole reasoning this whole time has been: if you're going to hurt your mileage, for the same damn price, why settle for 1-2 tenths off your quarter when you can get over half a second or more? i guess no one has figured this out yet as i have put it in nearly every post

err, didn't i say i was done with this argument?

 

Sorry, you are wrong. 98-2000 Fbodies were rated at 305hp factory (except SS and WS6 at 325). 2001-2002 added the LS6 intake, bumping it to 310. Do your research. I've had my car for 5 years. You've had yours for 2 months. Get your facts straight. The Vette motor is the same, but i think has a different cam profile, it also has a completely different exhaust system, giving it that 350 hp.

GM never offered any SLP package on Corvettes, because the Vettes don't need it since they flow very well stock. So your arbitrary logic of 25 more hp on a vette is just dumb.

EVERY 01' and up LS1 engine has the LS6 intake manifold. INCLUDING THE CORVETTE. Originally, the LS1 in the Vette was rated at 345 hp. Which i believe was upped to 350 with the intake change, but done in 2000.

As for the mileage, i still think its amazing you get that high with that kind of driving. Where did Detroit come into this? Weird how yours is so much higher.


You know, i understand you argument about the gears, you have some good points. But constantly repeating those points over and over is not helping you and you are coming off like a jackass. You made you points, people dissagree, now move on. With the hp reasoning you stated above, maybe you are wrong on other things as well.

 

i won't quote all of that just because it sucks. anyhow...

YOU need to do YOUR homework...again.

 

monica i love you

btw she owns all you

 

nope, wrong. same LS1. no different profiles, you're thinking of the LS6. you've owned the car for 5 years. get your facts straight. and FWIW, i've owned f-bodies for 3 years. mmmk?

i never said the vettes offered an SLP package. they don't flow much different at all over the LS1. the LS1 f-body dynoed the same as the vette also. ever see this?



yea, same motor. the camaro actually dynoed significantly higher than the vette due to the independent rear. get your facts straight, man. i mean god, it's even a sticky!

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=458711

the f-body was dumbed down so the vette would LOOK more powerful. it's the same damn engine, same damn profile, same damn power. i think you're confused with the LS6 motor offered in the ZO6. the base corvette had the same LS1 as the f-body right down to the intake manifold (which was later switched in 2001 to the LS6 design).

fwiw, i'm trying to move on, but sometimes it's difficult as people keep putting words in my mouth and that drives me crazy.

 

incorrect, sir. same LS1. no different profiles, you're thinking of the LS6. you've owned the car for 5 years. get your facts straight. and FWIW, i've owned f-bodies for 3 years. mmmk?

i never said the vettes offered an SLP package. they don't flow much different at all over the f-body. the LS1 f-body dynoed nearly the same as the vette also. ever see this?



yea, same motor. the firebird actually dynoed significantly higher than the vette due to the independent rear. get your facts straight, man. i mean goodness, it's even a sticky!

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=458711

the f-body was dumbed down so the vette would LOOK more powerful. it's the same damn engine, same damn profile, same damn power. i think you're confused with the LS6 motor offered in the ZO6. the base corvette had the same LS1 as the f-body right down to the intake manifold (which was later switched in 2001 to the LS6 design).

fwiw, i'm trying to move on, but sometimes it's difficult as people keep putting words in my mouth and that drives me crazy.

 

haha, we all need to get our facts straight. the intakes ARE NOT the same for the vettes and f-bods. the ls1 vettes had NO egr...

man, school is in session and all of you are failing miserably.

 

FYI, the LS1 WS6 was later bumped to an advertised 325hp with the ram-air package.

 

so the new question is should i instead get slp's long tube headers with slp y pipe instead of the 3:73's......