just curious

**purplebat66** · 03-29-2009, 05:40 AM

I was just curious what would be faster stock a 1990 zr1 corvette or a 1998 trans am, thank you.

**Smittro** · 03-29-2009, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by purplebat66

I was just curious what would be faster stock a 1990 zr1 corvette or a 1998 trans am, thank you.

It would probably be close. The 90' ZR1 had a 32v motor that crancked out around 375hp and rated 13.4 sec 1/4 mi. time @109mph. The LT5 motor was a very interesting engine with one injector per intake valve 2 per cyl. The car was rather heavy @3520 lbs. All the ZR1 engines were hand assembled in Stillwater Oklahoma. I'd have to say it would depend on the drivers too.

I think I'd lean towards the ZR1 on this one. But I'm sure some will disagree.

**Smittro** · 03-29-2009, 06:35 AM

The ZR1 was just a bad ass car and it would'nt have taken much more to get it into the 12s' I'm thinkin. I'm not too familier with the 1/4 times of the 98' T/A but I'm thinkin' it probably is'nt a 13.4sec 1/4mi. car.

**TransAm11973** · 03-29-2009, 08:46 AM

it would be an interesting line up though

**9T8W66** · 03-29-2009, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by Smittro

I'm not too familier with the 1/4 times of the 98' T/A but I'm thinkin' it probably is'nt a 13.4sec 1/4mi. car.

What rock did you crawl out from under ?

Most LS1 F-bodies will run that fast stock.

**Smittro** · 03-29-2009, 11:04 PM

On second thought Motor Trend has the 98 T/A 305hp@5200rpm and 335ft lbs tq stock. I'd say thats 70hp less than the 90 ZR1. So I'd say the rock I crawled out from under is the same as the one you've been under.LOL Also 98' RAM AIR with 320hp, stock! I'd say that's 55hp less than the 90 ZR1. Car craft lists only the ram air WS6 as being a 13.4sec car. ZR1 was faster 0-60 @ 4.9sec. and 5.5sec for the ws6. Standard stock T/A not touching the ZR1. Op asked about the 98 T/A not the ram air. Any more dumb questions? Next time I'd suggest you actually read the opening question! LOL.......Also more "standard" T/A's where produced than the RAM AIR. So "most f-bodies from 98 were NOT 13.4sec cars! Maybe you should stay retired! LOL

**knightryda01** · 03-29-2009, 11:17 PM

Everthing I have heard says the ls1's were underrated for power and torque. They wanted that extra 20 grand your spending on a vette to make you actually believe you were buying a much faster car....

The vette could very well be a little faster... but for 20 grand that's alot of mods...

**Smittro** · 03-29-2009, 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by knightryda01

Everthing I have heard says the ls1's were underrated for power and torque. They wanted that extra 20 grand your spending on a vette to make you actually believe you were buying a much faster car....

The vette could very well be a little faster... but for 20 grand that's alot of mods...

my post is for 9t8w66 not you but those are the numbers.

**Smittro** · 03-30-2009, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by TransAm11973

it would be an interesting line up though

Yep with the 98 WS6 puttin' down a mirror time as the 90 ZR1 it would come down to drivers.

**JoshieDoom** · 03-30-2009, 01:05 AM

While were at it some zr1 fun taken by myself

**Smittro** · 03-30-2009, 01:10 AM

Originally Posted by JoshieDoom

While were at it some zr1 fun taken by myself

Good Post

**Too Fast** · 03-30-2009, 02:53 AM

About 10 years ago I was at Muncie Dragway, watching a ZR-1. He was running mid 12s @ 111 if I remember correctly, all he had was slicks with his 6-speed. I was impressed.

**PhillyLs1** · 03-30-2009, 03:29 AM

i love bench racing threads!

**SINISTER-TA** · 03-30-2009, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by Smittro

On second thought Motor Trend has the 98 T/A 305hp@5200rpm and 335ft lbs tq stock. I'd say thats 70hp less than the 90 ZR1. So I'd say the rock I crawled out from under is the same as the one you've been under.LOL Also 98' RAM AIR with 320hp, stock! I'd say that's 55hp less than the 90 ZR1. Car craft lists only the ram air WS6 as being a 13.4sec car. ZR1 was faster 0-60 @ 4.9sec. and 5.5sec for the ws6. Standard stock T/A not touching the ZR1. Op asked about the 98 T/A not the ram air. Any more dumb questions? Next time I'd suggest you actually read the opening question! LOL.......Also more "standard" T/A's where produced than the RAM AIR. So "most f-bodies from 98 were NOT 13.4sec cars! Maybe you should stay retired! LOL

The first problem is that your source is Motor Trend. There has been numerous "car magazines" that have recorded much faster times than Motor Trend. The hp quotes that you have listed above are pretty much generic and don't hold much water in the LSX community. LS1 were generally underrated from the factory and Ws6's or "Ram Air's" (as you call them) were not much (if any) faster than the basic TA or Formula.

With that said, the 90's ZR1 with the LT5 (32 valve engine) was definately a cool ride and was very fast for that era. The engine was designed and developed by lotus and was "state of the art" for that time. The only aftermarket tuner that did much with it was LPE and everyone knows that you better have a big pocket book if you have anything that has LPE's name on it. The truth is, an LS1 can easily make more hp with minor mods. The ZR1 would be better left untouched and tucked into a garage to preserve it's value in the collector market.

So... go back and hide under your rock.

**ls1camino** · 03-30-2009, 06:57 AM

I was actually looking at buying a LT5 and swapping it into a 97 Camaro SS, but then I researched the motor and found that it is almost impossible to find one, just short of stealing one out of a ZR1.

**Smittro** · 03-30-2009, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by SINISTER-TA

The first problem is that your source is Motor Trend. There has been numerous "car magazines" that have recorded much faster times than Motor Trend. The hp quotes that you have listed above are pretty much generic and don't hold much water in the LSX community. LS1 were generally underrated from the factory and Ws6's or "Ram Air's" (as you call them) were not much (if any) faster than the basic TA or Formula.

With that said, the 90's ZR1 with the LT5 (32 valve engine) was definately a cool ride and was very fast for that era. The engine was designed and developed by lotus and was "state of the art" for that time. The only aftermarket tuner that did much with it was LPE and everyone knows that you better have a big pocket book if you have anything that has LPE's name on it. The truth is, an LS1 can easily make more hp with minor mods. The ZR1 would be better left untouched and tucked into a garage to preserve it's value in the collector market.

So... go back and hide under your rock.

So going by what you're saying, that the LS1's are underrated then would'nt the ZR1 LT5 be so aswell? I pulled the HP quotes from two different sources. Not to mention the third by JosieDoom. Also the standard T/A is NOT the same as the Ram Air cars. Also the OP was asking about the 98 T/A not the ram air. Motor Trend has been testing cars since before "The LS1 community existed." So I'll be going with their test results. Do you have any facts to back up what you're saying? I somehow dought you do. So I'll go ahead and sit on the that rock, you say I'm under with facts that have been posted about the ZR1 for over 18yrs. You also talk LS1 mods the OP was talking stock.
I dought you've even seen a real ZR1 from 1990 other than maybe a car show probably before you could even drive a car. I actually test drove one back in 90 with my step father who owned Corvettes then and a few LS1s too. I've owned 4 f-bodies my self aswell as drove a couple of LS1 "stock" powered ones. While the LS1 is an impressive it,s NOT the same calibur of car as the ZR1 was period. Hence the price tags. We can argue up and down on this subject getting nowhere fast or we can just enjoy what we drive and shoot the breeze about them. Up to you I'm tight on the subject now.

**JoshieDoom** · 03-30-2009, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Smittro

So going by what you're saying, that the LS1's are underrated then would'nt the ZR1 LT5 be so aswell? I pulled the HP quotes from two different sources. Not to mention the third by JosieDoom. Also the standard T/A is NOT the same as the Ram Air cars. Also the OP was asking about the 98 T/A not the ram air. Motor Trend has been testing cars since before "The LS1 community existed." So I'll be going with their test results. Do you have any facts to back up what you're saying? I somehow dought you do. So I'll go ahead and sit on the that rock, you say I'm under with facts that have been posted about the ZR1 for over 18yrs. You also talk LS1 mods the OP was talking stock.
I dought you've even seen a real ZR1 from 1990 other than maybe a car show before you could even drive a car. I actually test drove one back in 90 with my step father who owned Corvettes then and a few LS1s too. I've owned 4 f-bodies my self aswell as drove a couple of LS1 "stock" powered ones. While the LS1 is an impressive it,s NOT the same calibur of car as the ZR1 was period. Hence the price tags. We can argue up and down on this subject getting nowhere fast or we can just enjoy what we drive and shoot the breeze about them. Up to you I'm tight on the subject now.

Im heading down to bowling green today... anybody want more pics/info GM opinion on them?

I do believe f-bodies were underated from the factory so it wouldnt hurt corvette sells.

**JoshieDoom** · 03-30-2009, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by ls1camino

I was actually looking at buying a LT5 and swapping it into a 97 Camaro SS, but then I researched the motor and found that it is almost impossible to find one, just short of stealing one out of a ZR1.

You dont look to hard

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1991-...Q5fAccessories

**Smittro** · 03-30-2009, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by JoshieDoom

Im heading down to bowling green today... anybody want more pics/info GM opinion on them?

I do believe f-bodies were underated from the factory so it wouldnt hurt corvette sells.

I agree this is done too, I'm just sayin' it was probably done with the ZR1 too.
Heck they used to do it with the old Muscle Cars too. Lots times I believe it was also for insurance reasons too. I also know exactly what you're talking about when you say they under rate them so not to hurt sales elsewhere. That exact thing was done when the prototype for the 60*DTC v6 was being built by GM in the early 90's. The test motors had 265hp but there was'nt a trany then that could hold it for a FWD. Also put it in direct conflict with the Z28 of the day which had less base HP in thier v8 Camaros. Not to mention the FWD z34 came standard with more ops than than the base Camaros. The only thing "not" powered on my z34 is the mirrors. I'm not sure Camaros then even had ABS my 89 and 92 25th anni did'nt have it. Only thing my 92' Camaro "did" have that the z34 did'nt(besides a v8) was a driverside airbag and leather.