vmapper

iTrader: (8)

Correct!

First:2.97
Second:2.07
Third:1.43
Fourth:1.00
Fifth:0.84
Sixth:0.57

Reverse:2.9

whitew01ws6

iTrader: (12)

Hey what did u do with ur old heads... Pm me.

vmapper

iTrader: (8)

If your talking about the OP, they were in the classifieds some time ago...

98cobra

iTrader: (32)

Thats why I rev to 7k from 3rd to 4th, otherwise my 408 drops out of its powerband. 480 wheel and a being a tank dosent do much for me. It is fun to drive at least.

07CTS-V

iTrader: (6)

My 418 doesn't drop out of the powerband from 3-4 at 6200 rpms. Maybe it's the extra 33 to the wheels.

98cobra

iTrader: (32)

33 hp? You might pull half a fender with that. Still leaving you with a slow car.

itsslow98

iTrader: (18)

^ Your both slow, N/A V1's FTL.








P.S. I am not saying I am fast by any means.

aurora40

iTrader: (1)

If you look at the ratios, 1-2, 2-3, and 3-4 are all exactly the same gap. Each of those shifts will drop the revs down to 70% of what they were before the shift. 4-5 is a very small gap at 85%, and 5-6 is about like the others @ 67%. 6th is shorter than on most GM 6-speeds, and the 3.73's help too.

I think 6th is a performance gear in the V, I believe it's needed to reach top speed? 5th will run out of revs around 160mph I believe.

Derek98z

iTrader: (55)

Check fuel pressure with a gauge. I'm going to guess when he tuned it, he watched the fuel trims but you never know.
Have you cleaned the air filter in a while. Believe it or not, I saw a freshly built Camaro that had an old filter on it and ran like dogsht. Replaced the filter and felt like it added 100 horses.
Did the heads come fully assembled? I've also seen a set of dual valve springs where the valve seats were not replaced. This dual spring did not sit on the seat properly and the car ran like crap due to bind. Also, are the rocker arms overtightened?

big reg

iTrader: (28)

Actually top speed is achieved in 5th. You need a **** ton more power than stock to accelerate above 163 with the stock rev limiter in 5th. Either way the V1 is a huge disappointment performance wise for me. I cannot drive a car that feels like it will break if I get on it nor do I want to keep changing bushings, mounts etc... I tried to save money by purchasing this car but it will be sold shortly once I am settled in my new job for a newer sport sedan. 117mph traps with a 513rwhp car. Lmfao . They look awesome and I get tons of compliments especially with the wheels but overall have been left disappointed with this car.

For comparison sake. IS-f with 415rwhp = 120-121 traps. E60 M5 with 410rwhp stock traps 116. C63 with 415-420 is also a 120+ car. Guess why. exceptional gearing.

vmapper

iTrader: (8)

I know were you are comin from... the edge of feeling something is going to break on ya...


stock does ~112 having 350rwhp
+125shot n2o does 124mph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrbZo...eature=related

aurora40

iTrader: (1)

All of those cars you mention have close to 100whp on a stock V1 (320-330whp).

That said, it does seem like the best way to enjoy these cars is stock. Sink a lot of money into mods, and it sounds like it can be disappointing.

z28C4maro82z

iTrader: (33)

Hey, I'm still happy with the car don't get me wrong. I just think that the car should feel more than what it is now. I really think a lot of the disappointment is in the clutch, and how slow it revs. They did a junk job on that. On the agenda in August is to switch the clutch.

vmapper

iTrader: (8)

Stock for an IS-F is 350rwhp not 100+ on a V1. (more like 20)

I think the point was that when you get your V1 up to those stated levels, the mentioned vehicles pull good traps vs a 400rwhp V1.