bolt on lt1 vs near stock m6 firehawk
08-06-2010, 09:38 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bolt on lt1 vs near stock m6 firehawk So the other day I was going down Interstate Mexico and noticed a nice pewter firehawk in my rear view a few hundred yards back so I slowed down so he could catch. One he got close i downshifted and gave it some gas to let him know I was game. He came quickly up beside me but didnt do anything after that because of traffic. So we cleared traffic now were doing 85 and im in 4th around 4k rpms and i tap the gas one time and get right back off however he things im going so he goes, so i quickly(and dumbly) shift to third and my rpms fly to 5700(i shift at 6300) and i quickly grab 4th and stop his pull and by the top of it around 130 i have completly got the 1/2 car he pulled on the hit and put almost a full other car on him and i let off...He was def a m6 and atleast had a catback...other than that idk...
So basically bolt on lt1 pulls stockish ls1 hawk 1.5 cars from 80-130
So basically bolt on lt1 pulls stockish ls1 hawk 1.5 cars from 80-130
08-06-2010, 10:03 PM
#3
Launching!
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: eastern shore, VA
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so are firehawks only ls1's or only lt1's. im not up on the pontiacs. because if its a ls1, that's a damn good pull you got on him. especially you being auto, him being manual.
08-07-2010, 08:29 AM
#4
Nice kill, looks like a real solid bolt-on setup you have there!
I believe the first year Firehawks were available was 1992, and they were offered right up through 2002, so they could be TPI, LT1, or LS1. I think they only made a few of them in 1992 though.
I believe the first year Firehawks were available was 1992, and they were offered right up through 2002, so they could be TPI, LT1, or LS1. I think they only made a few of them in 1992 though.
Trending Topics
08-07-2010, 11:49 AM
#10
It's not the first car ever to hit those times with bolt-ons. As for the dyno numbers, some cars have hit 300+. Besides that, no one has asked what kind of dyno, corrected and uncorrected, SAE, STD, etc...
For a comparison, my LT1 made 289/325 on a dynojet, SAE corrected and ran 13.1 @ 105 mph. This was untuned, with shorty headers, 2.5" cutout (the intermediate pipe actually reduced to 2.5" at the cutout), stock 3.23 gears, and most of the other bolt-ons, through a 4L60 trans. I did not have rockers or a throttle body, and believe that I could have come close to 300 through the auto if I had finished the bolt-on mods.
For a comparison, my LT1 made 289/325 on a dynojet, SAE corrected and ran 13.1 @ 105 mph. This was untuned, with shorty headers, 2.5" cutout (the intermediate pipe actually reduced to 2.5" at the cutout), stock 3.23 gears, and most of the other bolt-ons, through a 4L60 trans. I did not have rockers or a throttle body, and believe that I could have come close to 300 through the auto if I had finished the bolt-on mods.
08-07-2010, 12:03 PM
#11
95Prplppletrz28 is local to me and a bunch of GM guys don't believe he ran his 7.9 times. No one saw it and he has no proof of it as far as I know when they call him out. So I'm not sure if his times are accurate or not.
The story just doesn't sound right to me. A LS1 car gets the hit from a roll and a lightly bolt on LT1 not only stops his pull but makes up the 1/2 car jump and then puts a full carlength on it? Maybe I'm not up to date on LT1 cars but that doesn't sound right to me.
The story just doesn't sound right to me. A LS1 car gets the hit from a roll and a lightly bolt on LT1 not only stops his pull but makes up the 1/2 car jump and then puts a full carlength on it? Maybe I'm not up to date on LT1 cars but that doesn't sound right to me.
08-07-2010, 12:17 PM
#12
Having first hand knowledge of him, you're in a better spot to call bs for sure.
I can say that the mods he has there highlight the majority of the LT1 bolt-ons and the ones that are left do gain, but not huge. I will say that the dyno numbers are on the high side, and the track numbers are quite fast, even though they aren't out of the question.
The big red flag is not having proof in the form of a timeslip. People that care enough to put their track numbers in their sig and tell people what they ran don't usually lose their timeslips. Usually when someone can't produce a timeslip it usually comes out later that the numbers were on a G-Tech or something.
I can say that the mods he has there highlight the majority of the LT1 bolt-ons and the ones that are left do gain, but not huge. I will say that the dyno numbers are on the high side, and the track numbers are quite fast, even though they aren't out of the question.
The big red flag is not having proof in the form of a timeslip. People that care enough to put their track numbers in their sig and tell people what they ran don't usually lose their timeslips. Usually when someone can't produce a timeslip it usually comes out later that the numbers were on a G-Tech or something.
Last edited by ScreaminRedZ; 08-07-2010 at 12:24 PM.
08-07-2010, 12:55 PM
#13
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Glendale
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had full bolt ons in my 93Z and pulled 284 RWHP best on a dynojet. Lost every race to a LS1 and that includes stock ones. I ran a best of 13.6 at 105 MPH at 100+ degree weather with a bad clutch, bad meaning i needed a tow home, high temps just killed the clutch. Even though i could never pull on a LS1 and ive had 3 LT1's and 2 LS1 cars. I did fairly well and beat many other bolt on LT1's. Racing LS1's plenty of times i would keep up 1st and 2nd gear and once we get into 3rd the race was over for me.
08-07-2010, 01:45 PM
#15
08-07-2010, 02:16 PM
#16
08-07-2010, 03:24 PM
#20
