Age old debate - C5 vs. F-body rwhp (stock)
11-23-2008, 02:36 PM
#22
TECH Regular
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rolesville, NC
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do know that all 01+ F-bodies also had the LS6 intake right? You know they also had the 241 heads, right? YES
And you know the LS6 block means exactly ZERO as far as performance is concerned, right? Performance, most likley no difference - Reliability HUGE DIFFERENCE do to the LS6s better oiling and coolant gallies.
Unless it was a Z06, there was ZERO difference between a C5 LS1 and a F-Body LS1
And you know the LS6 block means exactly ZERO as far as performance is concerned, right? Performance, most likley no difference - Reliability HUGE DIFFERENCE do to the LS6s better oiling and coolant gallies.
Unless it was a Z06, there was ZERO difference between a C5 LS1 and a F-Body LS1
11-23-2008, 03:31 PM
#24
some one mentioned in the bimmer thread that corvettes tend to be owned by older men while camaros tend to be owned by young guys. the ratings on the hp would help save on insurance for the young guns while letting the older men eat it a little. just a thought out there.
11-23-2008, 03:51 PM
#25
Staging Lane
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All '01 and '02 F-bodies had the LS6 intake (and no EGR), some had the LS6 block- which didn't make much difference , horsepower-wise. None of them had the LS6 heads, with the bigger, lightened valves.
GM claimed the differences in HP ratings were due to 'better intake and exhaust' and some of that was gotten back on the SS/WS6 models with the upgrades. How many of those lesser F-bodies from '01 and '02 remained stock is anybodies guess-
No differences in pistons, Compression, cam, etc. The range of measured horsepower was well within the range of manufacturing tolerances.
GM claimed the differences in HP ratings were due to 'better intake and exhaust' and some of that was gotten back on the SS/WS6 models with the upgrades. How many of those lesser F-bodies from '01 and '02 remained stock is anybodies guess-
No differences in pistons, Compression, cam, etc. The range of measured horsepower was well within the range of manufacturing tolerances.
11-23-2008, 07:46 PM
#26
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think you guys understand, the LS1 has a hidden secret code that lets them know to send one to Bowling Green and the other to the F-body factory. The Corvette LS1 is normal but the F-body LS1 is slightly italicized.
From the racing camshaft out of the first LS1 based C5R's to cnc ported heads they are designed to look the same on the outside to throw off GM car owners. When mine was dynoed stock it put out 483 to the wheels, and soon after the engineers from GM showed up. I have just now been able to talk about what happened since the F-body is no longer made as well as the C5.
Basically the LS9 was found to actually put less hp out then the original Corvette LS1. So they had to raise the boost on the LS9. It's all very simple the Corvette is the # 1 GM car and the LS1 the first LS series engine. And they had to rate them at 345 for insurance purposes.
From the racing camshaft out of the first LS1 based C5R's to cnc ported heads they are designed to look the same on the outside to throw off GM car owners. When mine was dynoed stock it put out 483 to the wheels, and soon after the engineers from GM showed up. I have just now been able to talk about what happened since the F-body is no longer made as well as the C5.
Basically the LS9 was found to actually put less hp out then the original Corvette LS1. So they had to raise the boost on the LS9. It's all very simple the Corvette is the # 1 GM car and the LS1 the first LS series engine. And they had to rate them at 345 for insurance purposes.
11-24-2008, 06:15 AM
#28
11-24-2008, 09:29 AM
#29
Back in they day 98-02, it was very true the base Corvette would usually show less rwhp than the same year fbody all other things being equal. Sometimes a vette would dyno a little high and an fbody a little low but that was pretty rare. I spent a lot of time around dyno's back in the day and that's what I saw.
11-24-2008, 10:03 AM
#30
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My car was made march of '00 has 241 heads 
so that could of helped me. My other friends car is also a 00 made a month older and has 809's or whatever the other casting # is.
so that could of helped me. My other friends car is also a 00 made a month older and has 809's or whatever the other casting # is.
11-24-2008, 10:25 AM
#31
YES the O2 to 04 normal vettes have the LS6 Block and LS6 Intakes as well. Still had the 241 heads. Not the 243 heads in the Z06.
Yes there is a difference between the LS1 and LS6 blocks, not hp wise just structurally.
The LS6 Intake on the 02-04 vettes is a far better performance the the LS1 intake. 25-30 hp by some standards.
and as some one mentioned the Rev limiter is higher on the vette.
So yes there is quite a bit of difference stock f-body to stock corvette.
The stock vette uses the MN6 manual transmission, the Z06 used the MN12. The MN12 had better launch gears lower fist and second gear.
all the rear gears were 3.42s on the manuals
Yes there is a difference between the LS1 and LS6 blocks, not hp wise just structurally.
The LS6 Intake on the 02-04 vettes is a far better performance the the LS1 intake. 25-30 hp by some standards.
and as some one mentioned the Rev limiter is higher on the vette.
So yes there is quite a bit of difference stock f-body to stock corvette.
The stock vette uses the MN6 manual transmission, the Z06 used the MN12. The MN12 had better launch gears lower fist and second gear.
all the rear gears were 3.42s on the manuals
11-24-2008, 11:19 AM
#32
11-24-2008, 04:07 PM
#33
YES the O2 to 04 normal vettes have the LS6 Block and LS6 Intakes as well. Still had the 241 heads. Not the 243 heads in the Z06.
Yes there is a difference between the LS1 and LS6 blocks, not hp wise just structurally.
The LS6 Intake on the 02-04 vettes is a far better performance the the LS1 intake. 25-30 hp by some standards.
and as some one mentioned the Rev limiter is higher on the vette.
So yes there is quite a bit of difference stock f-body to stock corvette.
The stock vette uses the MN6 manual transmission, the Z06 used the MN12. The MN12 had better launch gears lower fist and second gear.
all the rear gears were 3.42s on the manuals
Yes there is a difference between the LS1 and LS6 blocks, not hp wise just structurally.
The LS6 Intake on the 02-04 vettes is a far better performance the the LS1 intake. 25-30 hp by some standards.
and as some one mentioned the Rev limiter is higher on the vette.
So yes there is quite a bit of difference stock f-body to stock corvette.
The stock vette uses the MN6 manual transmission, the Z06 used the MN12. The MN12 had better launch gears lower fist and second gear.
all the rear gears were 3.42s on the manuals
LS1=350hp whatever the damn car(except with the LS6 intake and/or heads)
C5 Z06 was lighter, not the C5. You cant compare Z06 to fbody. Z06 is clearly and easily faster and was much more expensive.
11-25-2008, 03:15 PM
#34
On The Tree
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as a race..250lbs, fatter tires, stiffer suspension and better aerodynamics are always more valuable than 10-15hp in ANY race. The F-Body, even with a few extra ponies to the wheels, should come up a little short in every aspect of a race. That is of course...on paper. But driver skill is subjective and therefore the race could float either way stock vs. stock.
11-25-2008, 06:24 PM
#36
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[B]
In some cases, which is subjective since the driver has everything to do with that outcome. Not to rain on the F-Body parade, but it's been understood that the only SIGNIFICANT variable is the rear-end. The Vette and GTO rear-ends rob more power. I thought this was covered already? Apparently there are still people in here arguing other reasons, like "the F-Body makes more power because it's got a better setup." No, the F-body is under-rated and the Vette is over-rated, but both make the same HP output. It's the rear-end that makes one 'under' and one 'over'.
As far as a race..250lbs, fatter tires, stiffer suspension and better aerodynamics are always more valuable than 10-15hp in ANY race. The F-Body, even with a few extra ponies to the wheels, should come up a little short in every aspect of a race. That is of course...on paper. But driver skill is subjective and therefore the race could float either way stock vs. stock.
In some cases, which is subjective since the driver has everything to do with that outcome. Not to rain on the F-Body parade, but it's been understood that the only SIGNIFICANT variable is the rear-end. The Vette and GTO rear-ends rob more power. I thought this was covered already? Apparently there are still people in here arguing other reasons, like "the F-Body makes more power because it's got a better setup." No, the F-body is under-rated and the Vette is over-rated, but both make the same HP output. It's the rear-end that makes one 'under' and one 'over'.
As far as a race..250lbs, fatter tires, stiffer suspension and better aerodynamics are always more valuable than 10-15hp in ANY race. The F-Body, even with a few extra ponies to the wheels, should come up a little short in every aspect of a race. That is of course...on paper. But driver skill is subjective and therefore the race could float either way stock vs. stock.
why are people argueing lol?
11-26-2008, 09:59 AM
#37
wow ....you guy are funny both models are fast when setup right ! who cares if one is faster when there stock ...stock sucks who wants to go 13 sec 1/4's **** im not happy with 10's ! the bottom line is putting the numbers down at the track is all that matters ive seen vette's that had 800 hp and ran 11's cause they were not setup ! then there cam only f-bodys going 10's !
11-27-2008, 01:33 PM
#38
[B]
In some cases, which is subjective since the driver has everything to do with that outcome. Not to rain on the F-Body parade, but it's been understood that the only SIGNIFICANT variable is the rear-end. The Vette and GTO rear-ends rob more power. I thought this was covered already? Apparently there are still people in here arguing other reasons, like "the F-Body makes more power because it's got a better setup." No, the F-body is under-rated and the Vette is over-rated, but both make the same HP output. It's the rear-end that makes one 'under' and one 'over'.
As far as a race..250lbs, fatter tires, stiffer suspension and better aerodynamics are always more valuable than 10-15hp in ANY race. The F-Body, even with a few extra ponies to the wheels, should come up a little short in every aspect of a race. That is of course...on paper. But driver skill is subjective and therefore the race could float either way stock vs. stock.
In some cases, which is subjective since the driver has everything to do with that outcome. Not to rain on the F-Body parade, but it's been understood that the only SIGNIFICANT variable is the rear-end. The Vette and GTO rear-ends rob more power. I thought this was covered already? Apparently there are still people in here arguing other reasons, like "the F-Body makes more power because it's got a better setup." No, the F-body is under-rated and the Vette is over-rated, but both make the same HP output. It's the rear-end that makes one 'under' and one 'over'.
As far as a race..250lbs, fatter tires, stiffer suspension and better aerodynamics are always more valuable than 10-15hp in ANY race. The F-Body, even with a few extra ponies to the wheels, should come up a little short in every aspect of a race. That is of course...on paper. But driver skill is subjective and therefore the race could float either way stock vs. stock.
I never said the fbody had a better setup. In fact, I really hate the GM 10bolts; broke 3 already.
About the weight, some striped out Z28 with 2.73 are lighter and faster than any C5 or SS stock for stock...Hell, my SS is not that heavy, sitting at 3450lbs...I'm sure some z28 are lighter outhere.
11-28-2008, 09:35 PM
#39
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Az
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the LS1 was first introduced in the Fbody it produced considerable more power than the LS1 in the Y Bod. We presumed that it was losses from the different and shallower oil pan in the Y bod.
the first 98 FBody dynoed (rated at 305 flywheel hp) was Lou Gigliotti's 98 Camaro. His was delivered in early September of 1997. He dynoed it the day he got it on his dynojet at 305 rwhp. I picked up my 98 1LE the same day and drove it to Sacramento that next morning and ran an autocross, left there went to Sacto Raceway made three passes and drove to Fairfield and put it on a Dynojet and made 312.4 rwhp. That was the first hint at how strong the Fbods were. Most of the M6 cars delivered in 98 were particularly strong. David Tittermary also had a fairly early deliver 98 1LE and also laid down about 315 rwhp on a dynojet.
At that time most YBods were laying down 285-290 rwhp so the difference was very significant (25-30 hp)
That difference only held through the 98 model year however. For whatever reason the 99 FRC Ybody was a fair bit stronger than the 98s. By 2000 the dyno readings for the Ybod and the Fbod were much more similar. Frankly and for unknown reasons the 1999 and 2000 FBods were dynoing more normally at 295-305 rwhp as were the Ybodies of those years.
Than, of course the Z06 was introduced and the Y bods pulled away. My Aug 2000 build date Z06 dynoed around 342 rwhp I recall but that was on an Australian dyno and is not comparable to the Dynojet numbers. It was probably more conservative.
Interestingly enough when I did heads/cam on my 98 it was not as strong as I suspected for the change. In fact it wasn't a whole lot stronger than the stock setup. I let the heads and cam go but I do suspect that some of the early FBody parts were a little bit better than normal.
Perry
the first 98 FBody dynoed (rated at 305 flywheel hp) was Lou Gigliotti's 98 Camaro. His was delivered in early September of 1997. He dynoed it the day he got it on his dynojet at 305 rwhp. I picked up my 98 1LE the same day and drove it to Sacramento that next morning and ran an autocross, left there went to Sacto Raceway made three passes and drove to Fairfield and put it on a Dynojet and made 312.4 rwhp. That was the first hint at how strong the Fbods were. Most of the M6 cars delivered in 98 were particularly strong. David Tittermary also had a fairly early deliver 98 1LE and also laid down about 315 rwhp on a dynojet.
At that time most YBods were laying down 285-290 rwhp so the difference was very significant (25-30 hp)
That difference only held through the 98 model year however. For whatever reason the 99 FRC Ybody was a fair bit stronger than the 98s. By 2000 the dyno readings for the Ybod and the Fbod were much more similar. Frankly and for unknown reasons the 1999 and 2000 FBods were dynoing more normally at 295-305 rwhp as were the Ybodies of those years.
Than, of course the Z06 was introduced and the Y bods pulled away. My Aug 2000 build date Z06 dynoed around 342 rwhp I recall but that was on an Australian dyno and is not comparable to the Dynojet numbers. It was probably more conservative.
Interestingly enough when I did heads/cam on my 98 it was not as strong as I suspected for the change. In fact it wasn't a whole lot stronger than the stock setup. I let the heads and cam go but I do suspect that some of the early FBody parts were a little bit better than normal.
Perry
11-29-2008, 08:51 AM
#40
I respect any street car that can run 13 sec 1/4's. Further, if putting down times @ the track is all that matters, then a stock Vette will destroy a stock F-body on a Road Course "track."