BadCamaro

I like the 96-97 SS looks and close to LS1 power which has 310hp and 335 torque (LT1 SS) LS1 305 hp and 310 torque and LT1 is cheaper than LS1 for car price and also for mods parts. My questions are what is the different btw 96 and 97 SS? How much did the produce for both models? Are there problems on these mods? Of course I will buy manual trans.

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

Though the LT1 SS camaros were more on par with what an LT1 actually produces the LS1s were grossly underated at between 305-325 HP. A typical M6 LS1 puts down 300 RWHP bone stock where an M6 LT1 puts down between 260-270 RWHP.

There were a few visual differences between the 96 and 97 SS. Most noticible is the rear tail lights. The 97 has the same rear tail lights as the LS1 Camaros. In 1996 they were called Camaro Z28/SS. In 1997 the Z28 moniker was dropped and they were called simply SS. The interior was also revised in 1997 and has a new dash and instrument cluster.

You can find the production numbers here:

http://www.projectcamaro.com/camaroproduction.htm

93ZM6

I dont know the exact differences but the 97 is the 30th anniversary edition which had an option for a white exterior with orange stripes and a white leather interior which in my opinion is one of the best looking camaros ever made. They have one for sale a little south of where i live i wish i could of afforded that one

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

Here is a 97 SS for an absolute steal in Kansas City.

http://lt1tech.com/cgi-bin/ultimateb...949;p=1#000002

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

Interior was also different in 97. I personally liked my LT1 interior over my LS1 interior, but that is all personal preference. I also think the LT1 SS is the best Camaro they made in the 4th gen in the looks deperatment. But it won't be faster than an LS1, or all that much faster than a regular Z28.

Buy an LS1 if you can afford it and your main goal is speed close to stock form IMHO. But you cannot go wrong with either

BadCamaro

[QUOTE=Gloveperson]But it won't be faster than an LS1, or all that much faster than a regular Z28.
QUOTE]
0-60 @1/4
1996 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.3 13.80
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.2 13.60
I don't see that much diff.

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

[QUOTE=BadCamaro]I remember those times from Motor Trend. The trap speed was 3 or 4 MPH lower for the LT1 however. The LT1 trapped at 101 vs 105 for the LS1 if I am not mistaken. Even thought the LT1 is no slouch. Stock for stock the LS1 is going to take the LT1. The horsepower difference is anywhere from 30 to 50 RWHP. Remember too the only Z28 SSs are the 1996 models

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

Don't bother quoting magazine times. Best an LT1 will do is a 13.8 A poorly driven LS1 will do a 13.2. Best an LS1 will do is 12.8.

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

Thats certainly not the best an LT1 can do. About average. And I doubt a "poorly" driven LS1 is going to hit 13.2. 12.8 is at the highest end for a stock LS1. LT1s have hit 13.4s bone stock. Its rare but no more rare than a 12.8 LS1 I really have never understood what people's problem is with magazine test though. They have the test equipment and experienced drivers running them.

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

I was speaking with an F-body for a 13.8 of course. I've seen a 13.4 in a Vette LT1, but certainly not with an F-body.

I pulled off a 1.91 60 footer in my stock LT1 back in the day and got a 13.92. I doubt I could have gotten that 60 footer to a 1.7 or below to get a 13.4 (on the stock tires of course)

Poorly driven, in my opinion is a 2.0-2.2 60 footer and that will hit a 13.1-13.6 for any LS1 (adjust for altidude of course).

Reason mags are worthless is because they print averages and adjust their times with mathmatical equations for altidude, humidity etc.

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

There is definately not a full second difference between the fastest LT1 and LS1 times. Actually the fastest LT1 vette I have read is 13.21 @ 107.33 in The September 1992 issue of Vette magazine. Got it setting next to me. That time is a straight up drag time not corrected mathmatically. Not the norm, but it does happen. As for the 13.4 for a stock F-body, check the link below and look at the 96 Z28 SS.

http://www.execulink.com/~hamming/fast.html


True, they adjust the times, but they do that ACROSS THE BOARD for every car they test. So therefore it is a valid comparison. If you read my previous post I stated that I remembered the article quoted above and that the LS1 actually trapped 4 MPH higher than the LT1. I am in total agreement with you that the LS1 is faster. Remember I said that even though in the article quoted, there was only 2 tenths difference in ET, the trap speed was 4 MPH faster

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

The calculations are **** though. And you know there times aren't even close. They got a 12.7 in the new Gallardo..that thing is AWD and 500 HP...they got the STi to do only .2 slower than that? (The Gallardo is my favorite example)

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

How are they ****? They correct for standard altitude, temperature and humidity? What is wrong with that? There times are real close. You site one bad example, I can site 20 good examples. I agree that some magazines seem to get lower times (Road & Track comes to mind, they are horrible). Car & Driver does seem to get it right most of the time and Motor Trend starting to get there. Lets not forget all the test done in Chevy High Performance, GM High Tech Performance, 5.0, Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords. Most of those magazines publish actual drag times. Just because a car performs better or worse than your expectations does not mean they screwed up testing it. So what if a magazine got 12.7 out of a Gallardo. Maybe they are a bitch to drive. I don't know, I have never driven one, have you? The guys that did the test did. I use magazines as a reference, that is all. I race at the track and spend alot of time there during the Summer and Fall so I do have real world experience in the matter.

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

For Reference, I trust these:

Becuase they publish accurate drag times, not averages of who knows how many times, how the corrected for altidude etc.
(and the seem to always race at E-town..which is where I race at)

Corrections do not acount for everything though, specifically traction problems. The trap speeds of all of those mags are usually pretty close though.


I have not driven a Gallardo, but seriously, a 12.7?

METALBEAST

iTrader: (1)

I agree that sounds slow. A lot of times I don't know where these magazines get there times either. Hell, I have saw early test of LT1s at 14.8s I did not mean to offend you Gloveperson by anything I said BTW. You have always impressed me with your knowledge . I still agree with you, stock for stock LS1 > LT1

I don't think either of us are going to change our minds. Guess we're both too stubborn

BizZzatch350

iTrader: (33)

Bad Camaro,

I love the LT1 SS cars, they just look awesome, what are your plans for the car you buy? You can make it a quick car and very enjoyable

Neil

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

Thanks, as you as well. And you didn't offend me at all. 14.8 though

That is..2.7 60 footer style.

DietCoke

iTrader: (18)

Go back to the LS1 forums, please. You contribute nothing here. Quoting magazine times is silly. Obviously, the LS1 is faster. Obviously, it has roughly 30-35 horsepower more. That said, quit your damn bitching or GTFO. This is a technical section, not a gloveperson gets to bitch about what other people post section. Thank you and have a nice day.

Gloveperson

iTrader: (9)

I was at this section before you were thank you. I had an LT1 at one point, and if you bothered to read the thread, you should notice my first post. In case you didn't, here it is:

My first post clearly was made to help the thread maker out, and it probably did. He then asked about something with magazine times.

I not only have not quoted magazine times, I argued their non-validity.

Instead of post whoring (your post was an entire post comprised of "gets to bitch about what other people post section") and calling another member out who has almost double your posts (and if they counted racers louge and street racing posts, I would have well over 4000) and read the thread.

Have a nice day.

DietCoke

iTrader: (18)

" Best an LT1 will do is a 13.8 A poorly driven LS1 will do a 13.2. Best an LS1 will do is 12.8."

Misinformation. BAD misinformation. My car stock went better then 13.8, A poorly driven LS1 can go 16.0, and the best an LS1 will do isnt relavant to the case in point. Is there anything about your post I missed? On darn, post whoring. That my first, and this my second irrelevant post in LT1 tech, because generally I havent had a reason to flame anyone for making a bad post and/or series of posts. You've changed that. Have a nice day.