Lt-1 Vs. Ls-what?
03-04-2005, 06:29 PM
#42
TECH Addict
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few weekends ago, I raced a LS1 Firehawk. We started from around 70ish. I actually stayed with him until around 90ish. After that, he put several cars on me within a matter of few seconds. It was absurd how badly and QUICKLY he walked my ***. I shut down probably about 110 or so. He definitely got up to 140ish. Yeah. I want a ******* LS1.
03-04-2005, 06:33 PM
#43
Banned
iTrader: (92)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shackleford
A few weekends ago, I raced a LS1 Firehawk. We started from around 70ish. I actually stayed with him until around 90ish. After that, he put several cars on me within a matter of few seconds. It was absurd how badly and QUICKLY he walked my ***. I shut down probably about 110 or so. He definitely got up to 140ish. Yeah. I want a ******* LS1.
03-04-2005, 06:42 PM
#44
TECH Addict
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FIREHAWK#608
That's what I thought the first time I raced an LS1 with my modded LT1.
03-04-2005, 08:46 PM
#45
Originally Posted by WhiteTXMach
Again, typing too fast at work owned me, big deal. You got the point, its not my fault your **** retentive.
omg!!!!!!!!!!
After your long statement complaining about "grammer" you owned
yourself by not typing a perfectly phrased sentence, then defend yourself by calling the correcting poster "****"..............
03-04-2005, 10:28 PM
#46
TECH Addict
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hugger1975
omg!!!!!!!!!!
After your long statement complaining about "grammer" you owned
yourself by not typing a perfectly phrased sentence, then defend yourself by calling the correcting poster "****"..............
After your long statement complaining about "grammer" you owned
yourself by not typing a perfectly phrased sentence, then defend yourself by calling the correcting poster "****"..............
03-05-2005, 01:49 AM
#47
Originally Posted by Shackleford
A few weekends ago, I raced a LS1 Firehawk. We started from around 70ish. I actually stayed with him until around 90ish. After that, he put several cars on me within a matter of few seconds. It was absurd how badly and QUICKLY he walked my ***. I shut down probably about 110 or so. He definitely got up to 140ish. Yeah. I want a ******* LS1.
03-05-2005, 02:07 AM
#48
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5-2 versus LSXs in the Vette (lost to Stock C5 when I was stock and a modded Z06 last year
) No losses in the Z (but no wins either 
) Love my LT1s....
BUT story just doesn't sound right. I can see a stock LT1 M6 hanging with a stock LS1 A4 especially w/2.73s, but I highly doubt one will put 2-3 cars on a modded one at that speed. Just my $0.02
) No losses in the Z (but no wins either ) Love my LT1s.... BUT story just doesn't sound right. I can see a stock LT1 M6 hanging with a stock LS1 A4 especially w/2.73s, but I highly doubt one will put 2-3 cars on a modded one at that speed. Just my $0.02
03-05-2005, 12:22 PM
#49
Launching!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
allright, at least hear me out, im not trying to argue or anything at all, i never said i dislike ls1's, i really do like them, thats why i want one obvisuoly.all b.s. aside you dont think its possible for a 1996 camaro ss 6 speed, stock putting down 275-ish to the wheels, plus intake and exhaust, with a 3.42 gear, couldnt hang with a automatic basically stock t/a that weighs more, and puts down relatively the same number to the wheels?i clearly dont see why not.my car will run 13.3-4, no doubt, and ive seen several ls1's especially early auto. models go into the high 13's even 14's.i will see if they will register to post and tell you what happend, i just want to know why this is such a big deal that everybody thinks lt1's are so slow.honestly, has any ls1 guys in here while there car was stock race a lt1?chances are yes, but more than likely the car was owned by a 16 year old and it probally was a 1993 auto with 180k on the clock, and from that point on you got a bad perception of lt1's by the get go.but have any of you honestly raced an extremely low mile, perfect running car ss car m6, with a pretty good driver.from a first gear roll lt1's are pretty strong b/c they make good torque at such a low rpm, so that will benefit from a first gear roll, now granted i was spinning the tires, but i know how to drive my car and if you play with it it will hook.is it honestly so impossible to believe?
03-05-2005, 12:57 PM
#50
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jaredwayt
allright, at least hear me out, im not trying to argue or anything at all, i never said i dislike ls1's, i really do like them, thats why i want one obvisuoly.all b.s. aside you dont think its possible for a 1996 camaro ss 6 speed, stock putting down 275-ish to the wheels, plus intake and exhaust, with a 3.42 gear, couldnt hang with a automatic basically stock t/a that weighs more, and puts down relatively the same number to the wheels?i clearly dont see why not.my car will run 13.3-4, no doubt, and ive seen several ls1's especially early auto. models go into the high 13's even 14's.i will see if they will register to post and tell you what happend, i just want to know why this is such a big deal that everybody thinks lt1's are so slow.honestly, has any ls1 guys in here while there car was stock race a lt1?chances are yes, but more than likely the car was owned by a 16 year old and it probally was a 1993 auto with 180k on the clock, and from that point on you got a bad perception of lt1's by the get go.but have any of you honestly raced an extremely low mile, perfect running car ss car m6, with a pretty good driver.from a first gear roll lt1's are pretty strong b/c they make good torque at such a low rpm, so that will benefit from a first gear roll, now granted i was spinning the tires, but i know how to drive my car and if you play with it it will hook.is it honestly so impossible to believe?
ok, check this out.i went to a meet /car show where a bunch of f-body boys hang out down here in tampa, and i rolled up in my stone stock 1996 camaro SS.
03-05-2005, 01:02 PM
#51
Just Posted:
First Post:
There it is! The standard “oh ****, they’re calling BS on my story, I better add more mods to my car and remove mods from the other persons car” …. PWND.
.
….. its possible for a 1996 camaro ss 6 speed, stock putting down 275-ish to the wheels, plus intake and exhaust, with a 3.42 gear, couldnt hang with a automatic basically stock t/a that weighs more, and puts down relatively the same number to the wheels?
he (the 2000 ta he raced) was a a4 with a slp lid.bellow and a set of loudmouth .keep in mind my car is stone stock with some bald *** good-years.
.
03-05-2005, 01:10 PM
#53
Originally Posted by jaredwayt
....for a 1996 camaro ss 6 speed, stock putting down 275-ish to the wheels, plus intake and exhaust, with a 3.42 gear, couldnt hang with a automatic basically stock t/a that weighs more, and puts down relatively the same number to the wheels? i clearly dont see why not.my car will run 13.3-4, no doubt, and ive seen several ls1's especially early auto. models go into the high 13's even 14's.
P.S. You're using the the advertised HP (275), which is your Fwhp, NOT RWHP. Please, just stop trying.
.....honestly, has any ls1 guys in here while there car was stock race a lt1?chances are yes, but more than likely the car was owned by a 16 year old and it probally was a 1993 auto with 180k on the clock, and from that point on you got a bad perception of lt1's ......
.
03-05-2005, 01:37 PM
#54
Launching!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my car comes with intake and exhaust its an SS, rated at 310 hp, not 275, and i will guarentee my car will put down 275 wheel, yes WHEEL.ok your car put down 309 to the wheels with a lid and it a ws.6 and probally a m6, and what year is it?is it a early model auto?a lid isnt stock.if you would like i will show you numerous posts on many sites where lt1' put down 275 stock, and ls1 auto's do the same if not less at a higher rpm.sorry brother, numbers dont lie......
03-05-2005, 01:54 PM
#55
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=xphantomws6x]My WS6 put down 309hp to the wheels (that would be right around 350fwhp) with only a lid ... my old LT1 was in the 250rwhp range if I remember correctly (which would put it around 280fwhp). I would say a 70 hp difference is no where near the same number ... it's the same difference between you an a 80's camaro (with their 180hp) ... and we all know how fast they were.
I would definately not compare the difference between an LT1 and LS1 with that of an LT1 and an 80s model. 250-260 RWHP equates to more like 300 FWHP. Sorry that just hit a nerve man.
At any rate 275 RWHP is a bit of a stretch on an M6 LT1. The last few I have read or seen in mags have been putting down 260ish RWHP which is still about 30-40 less stock for stock vs an LS1. And the "exhaust and CAI" on the SS doesn't amount to enough to take a modded LS1 like you said. Please quit bouncing around with your stories.
I would definately not compare the difference between an LT1 and LS1 with that of an LT1 and an 80s model. 250-260 RWHP equates to more like 300 FWHP. Sorry that just hit a nerve man.
At any rate 275 RWHP is a bit of a stretch on an M6 LT1. The last few I have read or seen in mags have been putting down 260ish RWHP which is still about 30-40 less stock for stock vs an LS1. And the "exhaust and CAI" on the SS doesn't amount to enough to take a modded LS1 like you said. Please quit bouncing around with your stories.
03-05-2005, 02:24 PM
#56
11 Second Club
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Boring Green, Kentucky
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02BlueFormula
And look at this first line does it make any sence?
BTW, I had 2 LT1's before my present 98 LS1. Ain't no way a slightly modded LS1 loses to a stock LT1. Unless there was something wrong with the car and an orangutan was behind the wheel.
03-05-2005, 11:03 PM
#57
Originally Posted by METALBEAST
I would definately not compare the difference between an LT1 and LS1 with that of an LT1 and an 80s model. 250-260 RWHP equates to more like 300 FWHP. Sorry that just hit a nerve man.
At any rate 275 RWHP is a bit of a stretch on an M6 LT1. The last few I have read or seen in mags have been putting down 260ish RWHP which is still about 30-40 less stock for stock vs an LS1. And the "exhaust and CAI" on the SS doesn't amount to enough to take a modded LS1 like you said. Please quit bouncing around with your stories.
His stock SS includes a slightly upgraded intake and exhaust ... it is by NO means equivillent to an aftermarket system. Every stock LT1 I know have has dyno'd in the 235-265 range, the higher part of that range being the WS6/SS models. Stock LS1's dyno in the 280-315 rwhp range, which is a good average of 50rwhp higher ... (about the same difference of an LT1 and a 80's f-bod....which is what I was saying before, Metalbeast.)
Also, comparing an auto LS1 to a manual LT1 is benchracing at its very finest. Autos have a much higher drivetrain loss then an M6 would, so obviously they will dyno lower ... but it is made up for in the lack of shifts, and swiftness of shifts. Why do you think most 10 second and lower cars are Auto's????
Bottom line here, is this story is BS. A slow roll would have the auto LS1 drop to its sweet *** first gear, and while you sat and spun your tires he would hook right up and proceed to put buslengths on you.
.
03-06-2005, 09:49 AM
#58
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by xphantomws6x
Actually, No, it was not off topic .... Try rereading his post then mine. He is stating He puts down 275 to the wheels. BS. 275rwhp is a HUGE stretch for a stock LT1. I am sorry but this guy is retarded.
His stock SS includes a slightly upgraded intake and exhaust ... it is by NO means equivillent to an aftermarket system. Every stock LT1 I know have has dyno'd in the 235-265 range, the higher part of that range being the WS6/SS models. Stock LS1's dyno in the 280-315 rwhp range, which is a good average of 50rwhp higher ... (about the same difference of an LT1 and a 80's f-bod....which is what I was saying before, Metalbeast.)
Also, comparing an auto LS1 to a manual LT1 is benchracing at its very finest. Autos have a much higher drivetrain loss then an M6 would, so obviously they will dyno lower ... but it is made up for in the lack of shifts, and swiftness of shifts. Why do you think most 10 second and lower cars are Auto's????
Bottom line here, is this story is BS. A slow roll would have the auto LS1 drop to its sweet *** first gear, and while you sat and spun your tires he would hook right up and proceed to put buslengths on you.
.
His stock SS includes a slightly upgraded intake and exhaust ... it is by NO means equivillent to an aftermarket system. Every stock LT1 I know have has dyno'd in the 235-265 range, the higher part of that range being the WS6/SS models. Stock LS1's dyno in the 280-315 rwhp range, which is a good average of 50rwhp higher ... (about the same difference of an LT1 and a 80's f-bod....which is what I was saying before, Metalbeast.)
Also, comparing an auto LS1 to a manual LT1 is benchracing at its very finest. Autos have a much higher drivetrain loss then an M6 would, so obviously they will dyno lower ... but it is made up for in the lack of shifts, and swiftness of shifts. Why do you think most 10 second and lower cars are Auto's????
Bottom line here, is this story is BS. A slow roll would have the auto LS1 drop to its sweet *** first gear, and while you sat and spun your tires he would hook right up and proceed to put buslengths on you.
.
But yes this story = BS
03-06-2005, 11:52 AM
#59
Launching!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there you go metal beast, its not that hard to forget, bte i have a old motor trend sitting right in front of my face that dynoed 274.6 rwhp on a m6 Z28, so thats that enough said that is saying though my ramair intake 3" y-pipe and slp TOL make me loose a good 25 rwhp?thats odd.granted this number may be rare, but very possible none the less, so lets try and put 2 and 2 togther, a car with 275 plus rwhp and a good drivrer vs. an auto with 280 rwhp at a much higher rpm, yea, your right totally impossible......damb
03-06-2005, 12:20 PM
#60
STF Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jaredwayt
there you go metal beast, its not that hard to forget, bte i have a old motor trend sitting right in front of my face that dynoed 274.6 rwhp on a m6 Z28, so thats that enough said that is saying though my ramair intake 3" y-pipe and slp TOL make me loose a good 25 rwhp?thats odd.granted this number may be rare, but very possible none the less, so lets try and put 2 and 2 togther, a car with 275 plus rwhp and a good drivrer vs. an auto with 280 rwhp at a much higher rpm, yea, your right totally impossible......damb
Last dyno graph I saw of a stock SS LS1 showed torque over 300 ft/lbs (to the wheels mind you) by 2500rpm and it stayed above 300 until about 5000-5500. The LS1 peaks higher because it makes all of the power of the LT1 at low rpm and then doesn't fall off at higher rpm. 
BTW, if you are really running 13.3-13.4 stone cold stock (which seems to keep changing), then you are running one of the fastest stock LT1s I've ever seen. Most I've seen are in the 13.8-14.2 area. It's like the 12.9 SS and WS6 LS1 cars, they exist for sure, but I've personally never seen one. If you can show off a 13.3 timeslip, then I'll accept that maybe you beat an LS1 on a trip to 100mph... but carlengths by 140? Ram air or not, that LS1 pulls like a beast above 100mph for a N/A engine.