Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 79

1997 RS vs. 1986 Iroc-Z

This is a discussion on 1997 RS vs. 1986 Iroc-Z within the Drag Racing forums, part of the Racing Forums category; Originally Posted by Firebirdjones Thats the problem with people comparing times today with old TPI cars,,,most have over 100,000 miles ...

  1. #21
    Bolt-On Pimp ImpalaSSpeed96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    360

    Black
    01 Camaro SS

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Thats the problem with people comparing times today with old TPI cars,,,most have over 100,000 miles easily and have been run hard. There are very few low mile TPI cars left that still have life left in them like mine did.
    Those times seem irregular to me..... Besides, my Impala has 140k on it and runs as strong as ever. Mileage doesn't mean a tired motor......

  2. #22
    Bawlz Deep andrew rs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ohio
    Age
    29
    Posts
    786

    gold
    2000 honder accord

    Yes the only real 4th gen RS were V6's. They were made in 96 and 97. They have an appearance package that was basically an RS pacage for the V8's but it wasnt considered an RS.

    ATI no its not the guy on here its a kid that lives in my area.

  3. #23
    HUNTER S. THOMPSON FAN Raoul-Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BURBANK
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    It's just a stocker LT1, a convertable at that, with a 3580 lbs. weight at 1/2 tank of gas,,,,with my 200 lbs. butt in there it's a 3780 lbs. race weight,,,which is about typical for most of my cars anyway.

    My Iroc has a slight weight advantage at 3440 + me so a 3640 lbs. race weight. About 140 lbs. difference between the cars,,,but still the LT1 has alot more going for it,,,,gears, transmission, a better designed engine with a better intake and cylinder heads, more compression, more camshaft etc, etc...

    But my Iroc seems to run a little better than most TPI cars, although it only had 50,000 original miles on it,,,most running around nowadays are pretty much ran into the ground and worn out. Not many low mileage ones left that really give a good example of how these cars used to run.

    It's just a snappy running TPI car, I can't really explain it more than that.

    But ya, 14.20's from my LT1 is about right on the money from most road test times back in the day when they were new, even the mph is spot on from most. As a matter of fact, I ran accross another 97 LT1 at the track while I was running my 02 SS camaro,,,this was a hardtop car, 6-speed as well, and a very nice low mileage example, one of the cleaner ones I have seen in a while,,,it was still bone stock as well,,,when we lined up he turned a respectable 14.40 at 97 mph,,,,again very typical of a stock LT1,,,,I think his best run that day was in the 14.30's at 98 mph so my vert runs about right for a stocker. Keeping in mind this is all street tire stuff,,,,some stickies would nab a high 13 second run,,,,but my Iroc didn't have that advantage either,,,and the 7.5 rear wouldn't like it anyway.

    Sorry gents, we should get back on topic. So did this happen yet Andrew?
    i believe ya man..especially if your tpi runs stronger than your lt1... just usually its the other way around,lol...

  4. #24
    Senior Member mrr23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    orlando, fl
    Posts
    7,134

    dark bowling green
    2000 corvette

    Quote Originally Posted by andrew rs View Post
    This kid thinks he will get me on the highway. I told him there is no way. What do you guys think?
    1997 RS 3.8 V6 = 15.70 ish
    1986 IROC = 15.80 ish

    i used to own a 1986 TA. www.fla-thirdgen.org/mrr23

    there's a local guy with a 3.8 V6. he took everything off the car. air intake, AIR pump, took exhaust off just after the cat. he's been 14.50 in it.

  5. #25
    Member drewhenderson13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    400

    Dark Blue
    2000 S-10

    not all RSs had the body kit... im really not sure what the RSs were in the 4th gens
    i think the v6 rss had disk brakes all around and better suspension or something like that

    if u ask me it was just an exuse to jack the price up a bit by just putting a badge on and a few bodykits

    but they did make v8 rss in the pre 98 cars... they didnt make an rs of any kind in 98up

  6. #26
    Senior Member mrr23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    orlando, fl
    Posts
    7,134

    dark bowling green
    2000 corvette

    the last V8 RS package was in the third gen cars. 1992. came with the 305 TBI. the auto version went 17.4 in the 1/4 mile. my 1995 3.4 V6 5 speed went 16.9 i nthe 1/4 mile.

  7. #27
    Member drewhenderson13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    400

    Dark Blue
    2000 S-10

    they didnt put rs badges on them caus they already had the z badges but im almost positive 93-97s had v8 rs

    did anyone know they made 5 speed v8 cars in 93-97?

  8. #28
    Senior Member mrr23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    orlando, fl
    Posts
    7,134

    dark bowling green
    2000 corvette

    Quote Originally Posted by drewhenderson13 View Post
    they didnt put rs badges on them caus they already had the z badges but im almost positive 93-97s had v8 rs

    did anyone know they made 5 speed v8 cars in 93-97?
    with the introduction of the 4th gen cars, they quit the RS line of cars. GM wanted a definate way to distiguish the V6 cars from the V8.

    you will have to show me some info on these V8 RS cars. GM quit putting the T-5 behind 350 motors back in the 80s. which is why you could not get a 5 speed 350 TPI car. the T-5 could not handle the torque output from the 350. for the 4th gen, the T-56 was the only manual put behind the LT1 and LS1 motors.

  9. #29
    Senior Member mrr23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    orlando, fl
    Posts
    7,134

    dark bowling green
    2000 corvette

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-...evrolet_Camaro

    the RS came back when they introduced the 3.8L V6 in 1996. then, in 1998, the RS designation was dropped. the ground effects package stayed.

  10. #30
    Member drewhenderson13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    400

    Dark Blue
    2000 S-10

    not true... i personally know a guy who owned a 94or 95 z28 with a 5 speed factory equiped.. he had the papers and everything

    gm does shit like that, if its an option that only goes on a certain kind of car chances are it went on one it wasnt supposed to (not on accident or anything)

    some of it was special ordered some of it was using up parts they had extra

  11. #31
    HUNTER S. THOMPSON FAN Raoul-Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BURBANK
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by mrr23 View Post
    with the introduction of the 4th gen cars, they quit the RS line of cars. GM wanted a definate way to distiguish the V6 cars from the V8.

    you will have to show me some info on these V8 RS cars. GM quit putting the T-5 behind 350 motors back in the 80s. which is why you could not get a 5 speed 350 TPI car. the T-5 could not handle the torque output from the 350. for the 4th gen, the T-56 was the only manual put behind the LT1 and LS1 motors.
    the main reason they was no stick to be put in the l98 f-bods is to boost the sales for the vette...which had a l98 350, and could be optioned in manual
    01 m6 z28 - lid / lt headers / 3' ory w no cats / flowmaster catback w 3' dmh e-cutout / nelson pcm tune

  12. #32
    Rollo Tomassee AKIRA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Outside the box
    Age
    37
    Posts
    2,887
    Quote Originally Posted by mrr23 View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-...evrolet_Camaro

    the RS came back when they introduced the 3.8L V6 in 1996. then, in 1998, the RS designation was dropped. the ground effects package stayed.
    Thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by drewhenderson13 View Post
    not true... i personally know a guy who owned a 94or 95 z28 with a 5 speed factory equiped.. he had the papers and everything

    gm does shit like that, if its an option that only goes on a certain kind of car chances are it went on one it wasnt supposed to (not on accident or anything)

    some of it was special ordered some of it was using up parts they had extra

    I remember the RS coming into production after a couple of years of the 4th generation hit the streets.

    I remember they (well some were) were 5 speeds and they ran 15.7s. I remembered it clear as day cuz I was driving and thinking "jesus, my 89 formula, which was a v8 couldnt even get into the 15s when it was stock."


    Quote Originally Posted by mrr23 View Post
    the last V8 RS package was in the third gen cars. 1992. came with the 305 TBI. the auto version went 17.4 in the 1/4 mile. my 1995 3.4 V6 5 speed went 16.9 i nthe 1/4 mile.
    Yeah, can you believe this shit? 17.4?! That is incredibly HORRIBLE for a v8, let alone, an f-body. No wonder Mustangs were dominating back then.

  13. #33
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by blackz-lt1 View Post
    the main reason they was no stick to be put in the l98 f-bods is to boost the sales for the vette...which had a l98 350, and could be optioned in manual
    Actually the main reason for the auto behind the L98 was because it wasn't rated for the torque output of the 350,,,,vette sales had nothing to do with it. Later on a manual was available in the vettes behind the L98, but it wasn't the 5 speed that came in the 305 cars, it was a redesigned 6-speed of german origin I believe,,,long before GM started using the Tremec 6-speed behind the LT1. GM just wouldn't put that whimpy 5 speed behind a 350. The warranty claims would have killed them.

    Even with the 305 TPI that 5 speed was marginal at best. You could grenade one with a few power shifts. They are simply not what everyone talks them up to be.

  14. #34
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by AKIRA View Post
    Thank you.




    I remember the RS coming into production after a couple of years of the 4th generation hit the streets.

    I remember they (well some were) were 5 speeds and they ran 15.7s. I remembered it clear as day cuz I was driving and thinking "jesus, my 89 formula, which was a v8 couldnt even get into the 15s when it was stock."




    Yeah, can you believe this shit? 17.4?! That is incredibly HORRIBLE for a v8, let alone, an f-body. No wonder Mustangs were dominating back then.
    Well you are talking about the Throttle body injected cars,,,those were pigs. If you had a tuned port injected car and couldn't at least run in the mid to low 15's with a 305,,,then the car had problems and/or issues.
    I was around when these cars were new, and a buddy of mine bought a brand new 86 Z-28 with the 305 Tuned Port which was the highest engine option for the time, with an auto behind it and I believe it had 3.23 gears or better, he loaded this car with everything. And it ran damn strong for a 305. He was running low 15's with it and the car barely had 5,000 miles on it back then.
    The 350 tuned port injected car were easy 14 second cars bone stock. Mine ran 14.40's with nothing done to it,,,still had the original plug wires and all just a couple years ago. It weighed 3440 with 1/2 tank of gas and 3640 with me in it (race weight). There were a ton of engine options available for the 3rd gens, with carbed 305's,,,throttle body 305's,,,,, tuned port 305's and tuned port 350's. Not to mention trans and gear ratio options. We have to compare apples to apples here if we want to be accurate.

  15. #35
    HUNTER S. THOMPSON FAN Raoul-Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BURBANK
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Actually the main reason for the auto behind the L98 was because it wasn't rated for the torque output of the 350,,,,vette sales had nothing to do with it. Later on a manual was available in the vettes behind the L98, but it wasn't the 5 speed that came in the 305 cars, it was a redesigned 6-speed of german origin I believe,,,long before GM started using the Tremec 6-speed behind the LT1. GM just wouldn't put that whimpy 5 speed behind a 350. The warranty claims would have killed them.

    Even with the 305 TPI that 5 speed was marginal at best. You could grenade one with a few power shifts. They are simply not what everyone talks them up to be.
    and that six speed in the vettes were never once ever offered in the l98 f-bods...hmmm wonder why??

  16. #36
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Yes the 5.0 mustangs were quick back then running low 15's to high 14's when stock. Which is why GM decided to up the anty in 1987 and offer the 350 Tuned port engine from the vette. Only difference was the vette got aluminum heads while the F-bodies got stuck with the cast iron pigs.

    Right off the bat the F-body 350 TPI's were finally giving the mustang boys a run for their money. The war of the pony cars were started all over again. Now it seems GM can't get off their ass to make anything anymore

  17. #37
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by blackz-lt1 View Post
    and that six speed in the vettes were never once ever offered in the l98 f-bods...hmmm wonder why??
    Well that german 6-speed was a mammoth trans, and wouldn't fit in the tunnel of the Fbodies, much like the 6speeds of today. When the Fbody was redesigned for the 93 model year room was made for the then new tremec 6speeds.

  18. #38
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Well that german 6-speed was a mammoth trans, and wouldn't fit in the tunnel of the Fbodies, much like the 6speeds of today. When the Fbody was redesigned for the 93 model year room was made for the then new tremec 6speeds.
    Just to add to that,,,,SLP started getting involved around this time as well toward the end of 3rd gen production and made a few firehawks and such,,,,and they made the 6speed an option behind it. It took extensive mods to make it fit, and SLP didn't sell many, the price tag was pretty high

  19. #39
    HUNTER S. THOMPSON FAN Raoul-Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    BURBANK
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Well that german 6-speed was a mammoth trans, and wouldn't fit in the tunnel of the Fbodies, much like the 6speeds of today. When the Fbody was redesigned for the 93 model year room was made for the then new tremec 6speeds.
    i dont think so man..i know someone who had an iroc that got a l98 outta a vette with the manual tranny and dropped it in there...i almost traded my old monte for it...i used to have pics on my other forum

  20. #40
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by blackz-lt1 View Post
    i dont think so man..i know someone who had an iroc that got a l98 outta a vette with the manual tranny and dropped it in there...i almost traded my old monte for it...i used to have pics on my other forum
    That was GM's excuse,,,I am not saying it won't go in,,,,SLP did it when GM wouldn't offer the manual behind the 350's,,,,but GM didn't screw with it until the car was redesigned to better accomodate the larger trans.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. LSX 1986 Camaro
    By 1nasty86 in forum LSx Retrofit and Swap
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-10-2012, 08:28 PM
  2. Gauging Interest: 1986 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
    By 86 IROC-Z in forum Vehicles For Sale / Trade
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2008, 10:25 PM
  3. 1986 Iroc
    By Larsen89 in forum General Help
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-07-2006, 07:48 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •