nonojoe66

exactly why is a 96 or 97 car superior in performance then the previous years? infact from what ive seen stock for stock 93s with speed density seem to run slightly faster, and the rest of the years are pretty much dead even except for a few special 96 and 97 cars with the lt4, and what makes a 94 different from a 95 performance wise? pretty much nothing lol i cant see doin an engine swap to either engine worth it unless you have a very special bond with YOUR car. i vote sell it and buy a lt1 car, i got mine for 3700 in very good shape bone stock, and insurance wise i have state farm and i quoted many different cars and as far as v6/v8 there isnt much difference.

nonojoe66

oh and by the way ive never seen a stock lt1 run low 13s lol must b a freak

hsyr

Where do you get this info that 94-95s are slower? I have raced many 95-97 LT1s and your theory has yet to be proven right. Don't spread false information considering that the motor/tranny/weight is practically identical on those years.

nonojoe66

"i've never ran at the track"... then dont post 1/4 mile times. lol i hate it when people do that

Kevin_315

i wasn't posting q-mile times i was stating what i thought it would run. and i've seen several websites that tell the dif's, I'll try and find it again, for example the 94 and 95 were rated at 275 hp and the 96 97 were rated at 285, there are dif's such as dual cats ect. I dont know them all off the top of my head but i know theres like 4 difs. also i'm thinkin i might have a factory freak or something cuz the guy said he had never lost to a stock lt1 and he raced several of them. (made a comment sayin its possible mine was a freak) I'm not tryin to sound like a jack *** or anything i'm just stating what i've encountered, what i've been told, and what i've researched. I may be wrong on some things but i'll let you know what happens when i go to the track. But i do know for a fact there are differences between those years. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...rticleId=66170
i just found that, originally when i looked it up the site i found actually listed each difference. If i find it again i'll post it

Also looking at LT1-Z's sig it says he has 2.73 gears, i know my car has 3.42's I dont know if that was stock but i dont know why he'd downgrade it if it was. LT1-Z did it come that way?

Silvershark

I saw a 1998 LS1 for 6000 just yesterday. I bought my 1994 Z28 for 4000 last year. So it would prolly be easier for you to pickup a used LT1 and sell your v6.

LUDA0840

the 93-97 fbodys came with 2.73 stock gears. They had a performance option which bumped your gears to 3.23's.

And yea the 96-97 had 10 extra horses b/c of that dual cat setup. The 95-97 got that vented optispark.

Kevin_315

didnt mean to post this message

Feenix

factory ratings and actual output are two different things. I don't know how many people I"ve discussed this with but I for one hate seeing people use factory ratings when discussing a particular cars output. ITs just a round about figure, thats it, nothing more. Doesn't mean just because a 04 GTO that is rated from the factory at 350 horse is going to out run a 98 C5 corvette thats rated at 345. Or to make more sense out of it with more similar cars (eg. weight, gearing etc.), a firehawk rated at 345 horse just because of its rating doesn't mean its going to out run a 2000 Z28 thats rated at just 305 horse, because to be honest I've heard of and seen races like this that ended up with the lower rated car out running and out trapping the higher rated car. This is my favorite comparison as far as the 93-95 and 96-97 rated figures go. I had a buddy with a 97 WS6 trans am dyno 243 horse bone stock with a 6 speed, then had a friend with a 95 formy A4 turn around and put down 268 horse power with just a CAI and Airfoil. We'll give a generous gain from the CAI and foil and say he gained 10 rwhp from those mods, thats still 258 at the wheels in a 95 auto. 15 more to the wheels than the 6 speed 97. Not only does that alone smash the factory rating theory, but whats really sad is that it was even a Auto 95 comparing to a 6 speed 97. The changes from 94 to 95 is the vented opti, and the changes from the 96-97 was a change in ecm from OBDI to OBDII, and dual cats. I've heard tale of the 96-97's also having slight head flow improvement but I"ve seen nothing to prove this.

nonojoe66

sorry i didnt meant to bash you so much, but the fastest stock lt1 ive ever heard about was somthing like 13.5-13.6 from a 93 firebird on drag radials i think, so it wasnt even realy stock. if that was true or not i couldnt tell you. but low thirteens out of a stock lt1 on street tires is probably impossible even if it is a factory freek. let me ask you this, when you raced the srt-4 was it from a roll or from a stop? what speed did you start at and end the race at? these are two completely different style cars, one is a turbo fwd 4 cylinder and one is a NA rwd v8, and they make it down the track in different ways. say you have 2 cars that run a 13.5, one is a srt4 and one is a camaro. if you are starting from a roll at say 30mph you may have very different results from the quarter mile. in a quarter mile that srt probably only made it to less then 110 mph, after that the car could start to run out of breath on the street where the camaro could pass him, even tho the would have won the quarter.
sorry for such a long post, but what im saying is that the track and street are completely different

Alvin@pcmforless.com

Have you guys actually checked the difference between a Z28 and a V6 with your insurance? Mine was only a $10 a month difference and on top of that I pay more for this stuiped honda prelude I bought for my little brother and my 89 5.0 mustang than I do for my firebird. My firebird I thought was way more dangerous (especially for a younger kid) than any of the other cars but it was cheapest.

LT1-Z

For who ever asked yes my car did come from the factory with 2.73 gears, it has the GU2 RPO code and the G80. It was stock until 98 i believe, then it changed, otherwise you needed the G92 option that made it 3.23.

And all this bickering about quarter stock mile times, lets just say they range from 13.5-14. Cause to me it's not that big of a deal when your girlfriends dad races a 9 second '68 camaro

Kevin_315

just to answer your question was from a stop to about 100mph both on stock street tires ect. had a guy who started the race and all. just thought i'd answer that for ya and thats true no one can say how a car runs until they see it in action ex: i hear all the time how ppl with cobras say they rape lt1's (cobra @ 305) and i've not lost to one so i dunno it just depends on the car and driver, and no one knows till they see it in action. But i'm gonna run it and i'll let you know.

Black1995Z

you mean slowbra... and that cant be right... I raced one when all I had was a cutout and free mods, it ran the same as a 99-04 GT(slow ). I did have a badass race today with a modded dodge ram srt-10, this truck was faster than the C5s Ive raced.

back to topic, I say LT1 (I'm partial), great low end grunt and good daily drivers as far as longevity is concerned. These cars last. Mine has 145,100 on the clock and still holds up. Definitely will last if you maintain it.

Tom 97ss #25