ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

Lt1's are low 14 second cars

GTA matt

iTrader: (1)

Hemiswapped??? lol fancy meeting you here.

I usually dont get involved in these debates, but I have a lot of first hand experience with these cars stock. All of these I either personally witnessed, or I was the driver... 1990 L98, automatic @3600 lbs, stock w/ a k&n filter 14.03 @95, 1987 lb9 5spd, stock, air pump belt was removed, 14.5, mph was low 90s. 1997 lt1 auto, stock 13.75 mph was upper 90s. 2002 ls1 camaro t56, stock w/drag radials 12.92 in the low 100s. All were on a good track in good air.

ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

Come on a stock L98 weighing 3600 lbs pulling off a 14.03? The math doesn't add up. The 2002 Ls1 is somewhat believable tho.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Been here for years Matt. You are just supporting what I have been saying all along. There is more to racing that HP/TQ on paper and vehicle weight.

Having had a stock TPI setup in something that weighed 5,300 lbs and still having run 15.00, I completely believe the 14.03 time for that setup. My engine had a LT1 cam, stock 081 305 TPI heads and headers.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Guess your not looking hard enough, perhaps...?

https://www.dragtimes.com/video-view...THfd34&feature

Bone stock 93 TA, 149k miles, m6, stock lt1...

ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

You are just taking someone's word for it that the car is stock.LOL

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

He is the one that embellished on "Drag Times" as being a credible source of information, so that is what I gave him. Not to mention, I can guarantee you that foot braking an automatic LT1 will yield a much closer 2.00 sixty foot in comparison to that 2.17 with the M6 in the video, and every tenth in the sixty equates to 2-3 tenths in ET...

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

I've seen quite a few autos under 2.00s 60' times. Not to mention this track just has good prep when they are running events. I ran 5 passes between 14.30-14.36 all on 2.04 and 2.05s 60' times recently at this same track and my NIssan Titan has an open differential. That says alot about the track prep in itself. Run on a good track in good weather with a decent driver and the times that can be produced can be very good.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

I know for a 100% fact this chicks car was stock.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Some dip well into the 13s stock in the right conditions. Especially the later ones with dual cats and ram air.

Drag radials, valve springs, 1.6:1 full roller rockers, tb heat bypass, 160*F thermostat, a Moroso cai, catback exhaust and some ecm tweaking by me put one in the high 12s. The LT1s generally run very fat in stock form.

If I can run 14.20s in a 5,350 lbs truck that has an open differential, highway gears, and does not even dyno 300 rwhp I know an F car that is over 1,500 lbs lighter and making only 20 rwhp less can easily hit 13s.

project89

iTrader: (1)

u guys do relize the driver has alot to do with it as well right

me vs a ls1 car with an ex system but stock other wise

and btw this was done with around 225whp and a car wieght of 3455
i do belive i have video of this as well

this what happens when u put a crappy driver in a capable car

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Hmm, that says Shawn as driver with Paul's hand writing lol...

project89

iTrader: (1)

yeah shawn drove, lol u were there that night, i think u even drove my car to the track and back home

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

I remember, Shawn was slouching in his seat trying to pretend he was you cuz he's so damn tall lmao. Didn't we video it? Same night the car raced Paul's GN, right...?

project89

iTrader: (1)

no that 13.9 was the only complete run that night iirc next time out is when it ran against pauls gn and the car ran 13.008 @ 106

yeah i think i have video of the race against the trans am,

the night against pauls car the first race was against that mustang gt which we smoked then we had the race against pauls gn with the 2.5 second head start and still lost lmao

project89

iTrader: (1)

heres the video vs that mustang gt and then pauls gn
lmao at the stangs 2.8 60'

cant seem to find the video of the run against that transam though i know we videoed it for sure though



so yeah thats 270 whp going 13 flat

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

I guess your not reading enough. I said dead stock AUTO that can run 13.4, as claimed. I also said, I know one could pull off a high 13. There isn't an LT1 auto F body on there near those times and is dead stock down to the filter, as claimed.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Just keep thinking that pal!!!

I messaged two different friends that had LT1 cars from stock to modified and got stock dyno sheets from both of them. Both had 1997s, one was a ram air equipped WS6 and the other a standard induction system. Look at that torque curve and for the time HP. This is the lower HP sheet the ram air car had 10 RWHP and 10 RWTQ more. They BOTH have the power to hit mid 13s in stock form.



Hell my Hemi Ram weighing in at a whooping 5,400 lbs + driver ran 14.3s with less than 300 HP to the wheels. My Titan at 5,350 lbs with me in it runs 14.20s with only 296 RWHP.

I ran 14.34 @ 93 mph in 95*F temps with my 06 quad cab ram, had at the time, SCT tune, pacesetter long tubes, single 3" exhaust, magnaflow muffler, 4" cai and stock 4.7 torque converter. 285 RWHP and 301 RWTQ and 5,600+ lbs raceweight. Below is the dyno taken around that same time.

I keep bringing up the truck examples because they don't have all that much more power, but are running damn near as well as you claim a F-car LT1 can best despite weighing over 1500 lbs more.

89rs454

Well that about settles it. Don't hate on the stock lt1, there still a force to be reckoned with.

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

Ok, and I have more torque than them both, and close to the same HP as the higher one I'd say, plus a better gear ratio than you can get stock in an auto, and only ran 13.54@98.7 on street tires with a 1.91 60'. I've also lost weight from the car. So how do you expect a car with 30-40 lbs.ft. less torque and around the same HP as me, plus a gearing & weight disadvantage, to beat me? I can see high 13's out of one no problem, but I just can't see one touching 13.4 on street rubber and a dead stock auto LT1.


http://www.cobranet.com/roadtest.htm

http://www.zeroto60times.com/Pontiac...mph-Times.html

http://www.streetfire.net/video/mw-1...est_638570.htm

http://www.exoticcarsite.com/0-60-qu...mile-times.htm

hhmm, don't see an LT1 close to 13.4 that isn't an SS or firehawk out of all of those, and those ones probably didn't have autos either. Also saw a test of an LT4 SS, and you guessed it, no 13.4.

ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

your not running the stock tpi intake are u.

89rs454

The torque curve on the lt1 is way more consistent throughout the power band, it's just simple logic It's faster then your car.

ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

guys,remember gm's Corvette LT1 was the mid 13 sec. car back then,not the trans am's.

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

Nope, I have a superram and ram air. I dynoed it with nothing done but the superram, tune, and flowmaster muffler, everything else was stock. With it running really rich (mid 11 a/f), I made 235 WHP and 318 WTQ. Now it is full bolt on and been retuned, so I suspect those numbers are much better now.

89rs454

Your just mad you spent as much for that super ram as you would a good running Lt1 swap

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

Hahaha, try again. I have about 5K in my GTA, including the car itself. Spent 800 for the complete intake (base,runners,plenum,lid) w/ 58MM TB, #24 injectors, AFPR, fuel rail, and new gaskets. Plus the previous owner had it professionally cleaned before sending it.

89rs454

Cool man i like your GTA, but don't you think your being a little irrational towards the stock lt1?

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

Thank you, Sir.
No, I really don't. I am just stating facts as I know them and presenting proof of those facts. I have nothing against the LT1, but I do have something against people spreading info. all over the place like it is gospel, with not a bit of real proof. Until I see indisputable proof of a bone stock auto 275/285 HP LT1 running a 13.4 on street tires, I'll never believe it. I spent over an hour reading forums and factory times, and saw NOTHING indicating it could be done with the car in the form he describes.

project89

iTrader: (1)

an lt1 with the right driver will go 13.4 or better
here is my dyno sheet and i run low 12's 2 more hp then the ram air ws6 and 80 more ftlbs and im going low low 12's

89rs454

This is why your wrong, this is why this thread has gone on an on because your being a stubborn know it all.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Are you kidding with this statement? No, really, are you? Your putting way too much faith in a manual transmission, as I will pull a much lower sixty foot with a bone stock LT1 and automatic then I would with a bone stock LT1 and manual tranny, and I am talking "dead" stock down to the air filter and tires. You think the rate of acceleration is that much greater going down the track because you have the ability to over rev the engine with a stick lol? Show me any magazine or member tested bone stock 14 second LT1 with an "automatic" pulling UNDER a 2.00 sixty foot, and I will believe you. If you can't, then 14 seconds is the drivers fault, and not the LT1 w/auto...

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

Nevermind, I am tired of fighting about it. I'll go ahead and give credit and say MAYBE it could be done, but everything and the driver would have to be absolutely ideal, and that better be one strong running motor.

PhoenixFirebird

iTrader: (2)

Alright, I'll take the bait.

If anyone's suggesting driver skill to be a huge variable in an auto car, I call bs. There's very little skill in driving an auto. Launch rpm, burnout, and weight are the only factors an auto driver have to offer.

Launch rpm is a process of elimination. It took me 3 passes to figure out where to leave at. The car spins the tires at 1700. It pushes through the beams at 1600, but doesn't spin the tires until I leave, resulting in a horrible 60'. 1500, I don't spin, and I don't push through, and I don't spin off the line. Ta-da, 2.0x 60' all day long out of a near stock 305.

Burnout is also pretty simple. Since you guys are talking about stock rubber, this one is easy too. Street tires don't need to be heated up. My "burnouts" are me spinning any crud or water off the tires that I pick up in the staging lanes. No need to spin them for any length of time or make them smoke, they aren't meant for that. Drive around the waterbox.

And of course, weight. Not skill by any means, but it's just fact. I weigh 128 lbs. I'm going to be give or take one tenth faster than someone that weighs ~230.

I'm of the opinion that the driver skill argument is only valid for manual cars. If there's any other "skill" involved in driving an auto, I'd honestly love to know

fasteddi

iTrader: (2)

My brother had a bone stock 1993 LT1 Trans am that he beat the ***** outta at the track. It was a 6 speed and with him power shifting it only made 13.60's before he gernaded the rear end at the line. He could shift so I dont wana hear that argument there. Phoenixfirebird has hear about it at the track with us. But thats besides the point as its just a memory now.

But plain old facts. Heres a video of a stock LT1. I dont car how bad he is at the line??? He didnt spin and its automatic so theres no shifting error. No way a "stock Auto LT1 makes a 13.4 pass" I would say yes it could run a 13 second pass but more like 13.8-9 at best on a good day with a auto.


Troll arround on the ls1/lt1 sites and you'll hear the same from 90% of the ppl there.
http://ls1tech.com/forums/lt1-lt4-mo...1-4-times.html

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

That is completely wrong, not to mention, you cannot compare the potential of your naturally aspirated 305 sixty foot with the potential of an LT1 engine. Two completely different power bands, resulting in two completely different sixty foots, and the LT1 has the ability to reach 2.00 easily, and if it doesn't then the DRIVER screwed up.. "Launch RPM, burnout and weight" is how you base your sixty foot? It's no wonder those who agree with you cannot pull a decent sixty foot themselves. Driver doesn't make the difference with an automatic lol? You think everybody can just run a sub 2.00 sixty foot because of "launch RPM, burnout and weight"? This is a bone stock LS1 and trans swapped into an '88 GTA, and the former owner could only muster a 2.00+ sixty foot (which is very good, by the way), best he could do, resulting in a 12.90 pass, which is excellent for a BONE stock engine. This is after an experienced driver launched it, in fact, the same driver that cut the .003 in Dave's time slip above. Shawn got the sixty down to 1.75, almost three tenths of a difference, resulting in eight tenths of a difference in ET, and yes, I took the video. The driver most certainly has a lot to do with it, because it's more than just press pedal down and release when your running a stock tire. I'm sure the guys who run the F.A.S.T class would be scratching their heads in confusion after reading "launch RPM, burnout and weight", because it's more like two porcupines having sex, meaning it is a very delicate situation, and you need to feel the throttle as you lay into it...

Bone stock LS1...



LS1 with Cartek tune and 75 shot...

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Dave's car is another example why the driver makes the difference, those were back to back runs w/out touching the engine in between runs that night...;

First run w/Shawn driving - 1.94 sixty foot, 13.4 @ 101

Second run w/Shawn driving - 1.83 sixty foot, 13.0 @ 104

He shaved four tenths in ET just by dropping one tenth in the sixty foot...

PhoenixFirebird

iTrader: (2)

To begin, I wasn't comparing my 305 to an LT1. I was merely comparing my very mildly modified 305 to a stock 305. I've just finished my first full race season, so I'm not an experienced driver by any means. But I'd love to see someone hop in my car and run a 1.90 60', just because they are a better driver. What other variables are there? Launch higher and feather the throttle off the line until it grips? 1, that's horribly inconsistent. 2, I'm pretty sure out of a stock motor, you're going to lose more time feathering the throttle than the gain from the extra 100 rpm you're leaving off of.

I would absolutely love to see someone with better skill pull off a 1.80 or 1.90 60' in my 305. But you know what? I have to call BS on that. With that logic, you're supporting Fast's claim of a stock 305 running 13.9. That's just laughable.

Again, what other variable is there?

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Apparently your reading skills seem questionable. Who is talking about your 305? Did you even read what I wrote? I said that you cannot compare your 305 to an LT1, and a stock LT1 can hit a 2.00 with an automatic, your 305 apparently cannot. Every single time that was allegedly quoted with a bone stock LT1 was with a sixty foot that was way over 2.00, and not only have I provided a video of a bone stock LT1 proving an even quicker sixty foot and ET (13 seconds), a video that was edited by Tru2Chevy who is a moderator here not to mention so one need only to PM him to ask if it is authentic or not, but I have also shown the difference one tenth in the sixty makes in ET, that being normally 2-3 tenths. As for you putting up your BS flag regarding it not being about the driver, that is obviously your opinion giving your own track experience, which doesn't show me much, not to mention, I will put up a thousand dollars that says you yourself cannot replicate Shawn's sixty foot using Dave's car with the same exact setup, and I'll even give you three chances...

project89

iTrader: (1)

shawn is a very talented driver he managed to cut a low 1.8x 60' in my car on street tires, i couldnt cut better then a high 1.9x in my own car that i drove alot on street tires, and most of my 60's were 2.0x range

another example of driver is when i put my ex gf in the same car, same tune etc and she could only get like 14.00 out of it

im not sure u could get a 13.4 out of a stock lt1 on street tires but put some good drag radials or slicks on it and i know it will go that fast

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

He's in his forties, the guy has twenty plus years experience, on bikes, muscle cars, and especially in the turbo buick world. Also, my argument is that a bone stock LT1 with an automatic is a 13 second car from the factory. It was only clocked at 14 seconds because those who tested it in the magazines didn't beat the snot out of it, they never did when testing back then. As for 13.4 in the 1/4 mile, that would essentially need a 1.8x - 1.9x sixty foot for an LT1 w/automatic to run that time. Has anyone ever did that yet? Who knows, but the fact remains, drop that sixty foot, and the ET follows substantially, and in the video I provided above Shawn got the sixty down to a 1.72 in a bone stock LS1 w/automatic on street tires. To think he couldn't manage a 1.90 - 2.00 sixty foot with an LT1 and automatic in say a 94 Z28 would be ridiculous...

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

Now your seeing the light. I never argued that it couldn't do 13's, and you'll find in one of my previous posts where I said it would. What I said is it couldn't do 13.4 dead stock on street rubber, and even you question it.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Now I'm seeing the light lol? Been racing for fifteen years, had so many third gens that I built I literally lost count, and what I said is common knowledge to most people who religiously hang out the track like we do. Your right though, I would seriously question 13.4 on street rubber, but I would question it running on the street. A well prepped track makes a tremendous difference, and even then I said that an LT1 w/automatic should see a 2.00 sixty foot no problem at the track, which should net you a high 13 second pass. I have seen some crazy things happen at the track before, and if the air is right, and if Shawn was driving, I wouldn't rule out 13.40. But not on a consistent basis though, of course. People would have been returning their C4 Corvette's to the dealer while saying wtf, Camaro's are beating me...

budfreak1

iTrader: (7)

I've been drag racing for over 15 years myself, and granted I might not be there very often, but I didn't just fall off a turnip truck lol. Dosen't mean I didn't do plenty of street racing too, so I know what stuff runs in real life. I had no argument about a LS1, or any arugument about a 13 second LT1, my argument is that a stock street tired non ws6 or SS LT1 can NOT run a 13.4, and also that a stock LB9 can't run 13.9. I know anything can happen, but come on now. I know a well prepped track can mean the world to times, but I still don't see it happening. In my mind, if it could, someone would have done it by now and have proof, and I haven't found a thing.

fasteddi

iTrader: (2)

Come on now rob. Dont say that just becasue I agreed with him says that I cant push out a somewhat decent 60ft time. I got 1.90's off in my car and I think that was damm good considering all my issues and my begginer status driving a turbocharged car. Its a different fact with my car. Its not stock at all and what I AM agreeing with is a stock automatic low Hp car at the dragstrip. A few shots and any idiot can pull of good 60ft times on a once again "stock automatic" street car.

Your right his lil 305 is nothing compared to a Lt1 as for 60ft times and such. I do agree with that. I also do agree that when we have a nicely modded car that the drivers skills do come into play such as for a modded Lt1 or Definitly a Turboed car. It was easy to knock down great Rt's and constant 60ft times before I did that turbo crap.

But what im definitly saying is there is NO STOCK Lt1 automatic running a 13.4 unless its going down hill. And there is no damm way a LB9 all STOCK is running 13's at all. Thats just complete bull crap as ive seen them run so many times at the track. Theres no freaking way!

60ft times are not always a guarenteed 1/4 mile time. Look at mars makign a 1.9x 60 foot like i had for a good time but making a 11 second pass at 128mph....lol

PhoenixFirebird

iTrader: (2)

Um, excuse me? My reading skills are questionable? Read again please. Then you might see who has the questionable reading skills. You jump the gun way too fast way too often to prove somebody wrong, and you make a fool out of yourself.

Who is talking about my 305? Yourself and I, that's who. And are you serious right now about my 305 not being capable of 2.00 60'? Look again, 2.02 is pretty darn close to 2.00. A simple change in the air will net me that 2.00.

Again, I've just completed my first full year of racing. That doesn't make me an idiot. You haven't shown me any other driver skill variables that affect a STOCK AUTOMATIC car's 60' times. Again, STOCK AUTOMATIC. Dave's car is clearly not stock, why bring it up? 270 whp is NOT stock. This whole thread is about stock.

Oh really? What else is there? Again Rob, please put up some driver skill variables that will drop me to 1.9x 60', on a stock auto car.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

A good running stock 305 is more than capable of pulling down a 2.00s 60' time. My stock 305 pushing 5,300 lbs with a 3.08 gear ratio was pulling a 2.24s 60' time and it got better with a few bolt ons.

270 RWHP is right inline with a stock LT1 F-car with an automatic even if the car that he is driving it is not stock it makes similar power numbers.

A G92 1LE 305 TPI 5spd car with 3.45 gears is more than capable of hitting the 13s in the right weather on stock tires with a capable driver. They put over 220 RWHP down and are multiple hundreds of lbs lighter than a GTA or Z28 just as a LT1 can run mid 13s.

Driver skill plays a HUGE part of it. My best launches in my trucks have been launching at idle, nail the pedal half-way off the line and open it up around 30 ft out. 2.00s 60' times from stock autos that dipped into the low 1.9s on my Ram with the 4.56 gears.

Don't make me go buy a stock 305 TPI car or LT1 car to prove my point.

I have a 305 powered corvette that has a stock 305 Vortec engine with a hydraulic flat tappet cam and an edelbrock intake on it that runs low 9s in the 1/8 despite 3.07 gears and a 2psd powerglide with stock stall.

89rs454

Here's an old piece of footage claiming a 1989 Stock IROC-Z 5.0 230hp running 13.9s is the 1/4.

Skip to 2.49 for what it's worth.

Fast355

iTrader: (2)

Video just further proves my point. I have personally witnessed a speed density car run a 13.9 @ 98 mph.

ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

Like I said they would never make the F-body quicker than or as quick as the vette. The c4 vette may have barely seen a 13.9

ninetyone

iTrader: (2)

Motor Trend tested the 1990 Corvette back then with the 6 speed 250 HP version and clocked 14.1 @ 101.5 MPH through the 1/4 mile. U think the F-body is quicker? As far as I know the 90' Iroc 350 TPI was the quickest at 14.4 in the 1/4 and a 5.0 is not quicker than any 5.7 stock