94 Z28 6 speed Vs 01 Z28 6 speed

**c5z28** · 11-19-2008, 08:32 PM

Sucks you couldn't go from a dig but those lt's make great torque down low, kind of like mustangs decent 60 ft times but after that they're crap. Glad we could have some closure nice runs.

**karpetcm** · 11-19-2008, 09:07 PM

Honesly i was a bit suprised i did not expect it to do so well at the bottom end i know some of us have talked about how the LT1 feels faster lower in the rpms but i was a bit suprised that it did so well till i got to my higher rpms. I must say 3rd gear on the LS1 always suprises me as to how well it pulls, in the end im not a very good driver but its nice to see the car makes up for it when you need it.

**c5z28** · 11-19-2008, 09:08 PM

the ls-1's pull like a gorilla on meth, never had the balls to see the top end.

**Eric1987** · 11-19-2008, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

^^

Care to explain?

**big hammer** · 11-20-2008, 04:09 AM

well i'l be. the car that was suppoed to win, won! nice runs

**big hammer** · 11-20-2008, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by Eric1987

Care to explain?

it means he has an lt1, and you said the ls1 is faster than an lt1. then he got all butt hurt.

**hutch1999** · 11-20-2008, 06:14 AM

good races man

**karpetcm** · 11-20-2008, 06:27 AM

Thanks guys and hopefully in the near future i will race 2 other friends one has a Acura RSX Type S about 260 FWHP(too many mods) and the other has a Mitsu Eclipse Turbo he is trying to get 22psi out of a new turbo set up he has but needs to change injectors and get a better tune, both cars have a little work left till there done. Also the RSX has easily pulled on a 08 Mustang GT 5speed(bone stock) and the eclipse with 19psi was dead even with my 310rwhp M3 once my M3 got above 7000rpms, but the M was a Vert at 3781lbs. Those 2 cars i will most likely lose to but either way those are good guys and wouldnt mind going up against them. Sorry guys it too so long to race my LT, my concern was getting a good driver and the only excuse for either car loosing was one had less power and thats it.

**Cayenne97** · 11-20-2008, 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by c5z28

Sucks you couldn't go from a dig but those lt's make great torque down low, kind of like mustangs decent 60 ft times but after that they're crap. Glad we could have some closure nice runs.

Really, they're crap? I could of swore my LT1 had a great top end?

Originally Posted by big hammer

it means he has an lt1, and you said the ls1 is faster than an lt1. then he got all butt hurt.

Man I wish you were close enough to run Hammer, then we would see who was really hurtin' in the butt!

**Cayenne97** · 11-20-2008, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by Eric1987

Care to explain?

What I really mean't (which was not what the guy that "Mustang sucks" seems to be the only two words in his entirely vocabulary said) is that you need to stop text book racing. Consider the variables my friend...consider the variables.

**TLS_Addict** · 11-20-2008, 08:03 AM

LT1 to the LS1 is just evolution.....like the LS2 > LS1 talk. Its all true.

LT1s are fast, LS1's are faster. Granted you get high and low numbers from each car but the top STOCK LS1 vs the top STOCK LT1 should see the LS1 as a clear winner. Using same transmissions, rear gears, weight, suspension........etc

Not hammering down on LT1 cars, but GM wouldnt switch to an engine that was only "equal" to the LT1.

**Cayenne97** · 11-20-2008, 08:27 AM

We've already established that LS1's put out higher numbers bone-stock. It's starting to sound like a broken record in here.

Here's a few pics of my baby for anyone who feels I may be LT1 nut-hugging, which i'm sure some of you do. 2002 WS6 M6 w/ 38k on the clock. STOCK H/C/I, STOCK Bottom, BOLT-ON only -- Best of 11.773 @ 113.02 w/ 1.59 '60 at 3,390 race weight (3,189 dry).

[IMG]

[/IMG]

I've been owning/building/modding both engines for 9 years. 3 LSX's and 6 LT's. One of each in my stable now, along with an LS1-powered '90 RX7 in the works. I have the pleasure of enjoying both phenominal (for their time) powerplants!

**c5z28** · 11-20-2008, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

Really, they're crap? I could of swore my LT1 had a great top end?

It's the heads, they give a good torque number down low, but when people want more power they go with something along the lines of the lt-4, lt-1 heads just dont flow as well at top end.

**Cayenne97** · 11-20-2008, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by c5z28

It's the heads, they give a good torque number down low, but when people want more power they go with something along the lines of the lt-4, lt-1 heads just dont flow as well at top end.

Well the heads on my '97 are "worked" Lingenfelter 195cc LT1's, which flow TONS better than a stock head. But yes LT4's are superior to LT1's. I have a set of Canfield LT4's which were the first aftermarket LT4 head and are no longer produced sitting in the garage.

**JwMonE99** · 11-20-2008, 11:36 AM

Yea I would love to pick up some LT4 heads and send them down to mr. loyd elliot.

**Cayenne97** · 11-20-2008, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by JwMonE99

Yea I would love to pick up some LT4 heads and send them down to mr. loyd elliot.

Ever heard of A.I.?

**Eric1987** · 11-20-2008, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

What I really mean't (which was not what the guy that "Mustang sucks" seems to be the only two words in his entirely vocabulary said) is that you need to stop text book racing. Consider the variables my friend...consider the variables.

Well but see thats what is stupid. I think its dumb to say so and so car is faster because he is a shittier driver. Thats like saying I can beat up jackie chan when he is high and drunk. It'd be stupid to say. You cant call me a newbie for that. I know the variables.

**Cayenne97** · 11-20-2008, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Eric1987

Well but see thats what is stupid. I think its dumb to say so and so car is faster because he is a shittier driver. Thats like saying I can beat up jackie chan when he is high and drunk. It'd be stupid to say. You cant call me a newbie for that. I know the variables.

Yes I do agree with you in that you can't call a car faster just because the other driver is 'racing impaired'. And no you couldn't beat up Jackie Chan even if he was high and drunk.

**Eric1987** · 11-20-2008, 12:20 PM

Well it was just the point im trying to make. And yeah I think I could take him high and drunk.

**lemons12** · 11-20-2008, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

Really, they're crap? I could of swore my LT1 had a great top end?

Man I wish you were close enough to run Hammer, then we would see who was really hurtin' in the butt!

crap no... inferior. and no your lt1 didnt have great top end **Stock**

as i wish you were closer, and YOU would be butt hurt my friend..

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

What I really mean't (which was not what the guy that "Mustang sucks" seems to be the only two words in his entirely vocabulary said) is that you need to stop text book racing. Consider the variables my friend...consider the variables.

and YOU need to consider the variables that there are people just as fast and WAY faster than you... especially with fewer mods.. consider the variables my friend... consider the variables..