lt1, 4.6 or 5.0?

Yep factor in driver and its always anyones race. 99% of drivers suck and the rest are hobbists or more like us and even then .5 prob. are not that great either. The other .5 is a range from ok to pro. with pro being like .001 or less. So even us 1%ers of the car pop. have room to grow.

well when i was a senior i had my car. so yea

What we are arguing here is which car is considerably faster I guess because who wants to get blown away on the road. When I think in terms of that, you always want to compare apples to apples so you would use a comparison with equal drivers in most cases..

My car had a 3.23 rear (or 3.27 ..I forget). I have never seen a LT1 Z28 run as slow as mid 14's but I guess that is possible with 2.73's or something. Then again, I think the quarter mile time of 15 sec is for a 3.08geared sn95. But there's about a 1 second difference between the cars all being equal. That's a large difference in the quarter.

With 3.23's I have seen stock Z28's 6 speeds run 13.7 no problem and auto's running 14.0-14.3. That's my experience and after owning one and whitnessing several track events. We are at 500ft above sea level as well.

Main thing is that after driving a stick 94GT and turning around and driving an AUTO LT1, there was no comparison. The GT wasn't even close. Go test drive for yourself.

BTW, I wonder what the percentage of LT1 drivers nowadays have no mods, lol. That's what I am thinking. They all mod them and they respond much better to mods than our cars...so you are not going to be racing one that is not modded in 90% of the cases in my o.

ain thing is that after driving a stick 94GT and turning around and driving an AUTO LT1, there was no comparison. The GT wasn't even close. Go test drive for yourself.

Click to expand...

I just did drive an LT1...two in fact. I'd been car shopping for months before buying my 03 Monte Carlo SS last week (don't worry, I kept the 5.0 too). One was a six speed 95 Z28, the other was an A4 96 Z28. Neither felt as quick as my bolt-on 5.0 without nitrous.

I drove a six speed 98 Z28 as well- that was a whole different beast. That car really had me wishing it doesn't snow heavily around here in the winter.

With 3.23's I have seen stock Z28's 6 speeds run 13.7 no problem and auto's running 14.0-14.3. That's my experience and after owning one and whitnessing several track events. We are at 500ft above sea level as well.

Click to expand...

Eh...I head to the track a few times a year. I also have a few close friends who've owned LT1s (they've all upgraded to LS1 cars)...

I have NEVER, EVER seen a stock LT1 Fbody run 13s. Could it happen? Sure, it's not that much of a strecth but it's not likely with 99% of drivers at 99% of tracks on 99% of days.

Hell, most stock six speed LS1s turn high 13s in the hands of most. My good buddy has yet to go better than 14.0 in his 00 T/A...hell, another good friend can't get better than 14.0 in his Vette. Before you all call them bad drivers- they're HONEST times, not blown up internet hype.

I'm sure 99-04 GTs can bust into the 13s as well...but most bolt-on 99-04 GTs at the track I've seen go 14.5 or so...they say the STI can do 13.0 stock...my buddy's 05 STI when stock never did better than 13.7...ect ect

Buddy of mine just got rid of his flowmaster cat back (only mod) non-t-top 94 auto lt1 z28 and it was in no way a 13 sec car. The buddy that ran a 13.8 in his bone stock 87gt that he got from his mother raced when both had recently gotten them. Both are good drivers and the z28 lost by 2-3 cars every time, they switched drivers and same outcome.

Another buddy had a 96 lt1 for a short time a few years ago and he ran a best of 13.9. Another buddy sold his 98 GT for a 98 Formula and that is a moster for only gears and a tuner for the auto ran 13.2 @ 105. He has walked alot of other LS1's though himself.

Another buddy had a brand new in 2000 00gt he took it too the track with the temp tags still on it and ran a 13.9 @101.

After the first day at the track with my 94 I was down to a 14.8 with 2.73 gears.

In my track exp. and street exp. the F-body is either a runner or not. I myself almost bought a 96 firebird after I found out the 96 cobra I was looking at had been sold. I could not stand the int. of the f-body. Thin hard seats, football field dash, pass hump in floor, and I really liked the mustangs int. I decided to hold out for a mustang and got my 94 gt 2mo later.

"I have NEVER, EVER seen a stock LT1 Fbody run 13s. Could it happen? Sure, it's not that much of a strecth but it's not likely with 99% of drivers at 99% of tracks on 99% of days."

HAHAH!! We must live in 2 different worlds because 99%of my experiences are totally the opposite.. The stick LT1's I have seen at the track (stock) were always hitting 13's.

What is strange to me about your statement is this:

Here we are 10+ years after the cars were built and you are suggesting that you have whitnessed STOCK LT1's at a track? And you have seen them racing STOCK and not hitting 13's... I haven't seen a stock LT1 in years. My experiences were from when I was at the track years ago before a lot of mods were out for these cars. SO unless you were at the track years ago, I find your story well... I would have to see it to believe it considering my experience and mostof my friends.. I have raced right next to these cars myself and witnessed it..

You drove a stang with bolt ons and then an LT1 and though your car felt faster?? They must have mistakingly put diesel in the z28's...or they had bad plugs..

I have owned a lot of cars and have to admit that your findings seem off to me. Auto LT1's average 14.3 where I live and 6 speeds hit 13's (unless the driver really sucks). But that is not even true anymore because most are all modded now and run low 13's and 12's with bolt ons. Thanks.

"Hell, most stock six speed LS1s turn high 13s in the hands of most."

WHAT!!?? If you look around practically anywhere on the net, you will see ls1's some of them hitting 12's stock! Again, I am not trying to accuse you of lying or anything, it is just our 2 experiences are night and day!!

BTW, this is argument all in fun. Amazing we have such different experiences but again..I will admit to witnessing driving in an SS and witnessing an LT1or 2 on the beltway that was a dud. I will admit that...Thanks.

get a '96 cobra. Considerably faster stock than an untouched 5.0, but you'll pay a little more. I have no real experience so far as drag racing but i think those 32v dohc 4.6's could take down a stock LT1 in the 1/4. (305hp vs. 275?)

Pokageek said:

You drove a stang with bolt ons and then an LT1 and though your car felt faster?? They must have mistakingly put diesel in the z28's...or they had bad plugs..

Click to expand...

There are plenty of stock lt1 left out there...hell there are bone stock foxes too and they are older and the most modified car in history (I think even the T and A's early fords are now second to the mustang). Yes a bolt on mustang will make a poor running stock lt1 or even possible (depending on bolt on) a good running lt1 feel slower.

With pullies, gears, 14*, and a K&N I ran a 14.3 on street tires...that is not alot of dough and really getting close to a stock lt1 in times...think about it on the street it is totaly fair to say a car that runs within .3 of another will be a fair race and has a chance.

again I will agree that stock for stock the lt1 was faster but with the int. IMHO and how little it would really take to get a 5spd 5.0 to be close....I still would vote 5.0.

Now 96-98 cobra...I would love to have one and almost did and will someday I hope (a 4v anyway). Buddy of mine who had the 00gt now has a 97 cobra with 4.30's and MGW shifter and beats the other buddy who has the 98 ls1 that runs 13.2's that now has longtubes and catless Y too.

I have to agree with what most you have said blksn955.o. Here are some various quotes I found on stock LS1 owners BTW...and some interesting facts they have encountered..

"I started with 272rwhp in my 2001 Z28."

Reading further, this guy went and got a tune ONLY and claims he is up to 337rwhp. That's hard to believe but wow.

"I was at a 1/4 mile track and talking to a fellow LS1 owner. His car was a auto 2001 TRANS AM with a magnaflow catback as the only mod. Temp was good and he was running 13.1-13.3 @ 104/105 all day."

"Now take a M6 LS1 that will be starting at 13.2 @ 106 with a good driver (remember Evan Smith got 12.9's so I don't want to here how 13.2 is unreasonable)."

"You have ls1's that run 14.0 quarters and on the other end of the spectrum there were LS1's running 12.9's. Most of us were inbetween. I've always been a believer that you can't take what a few did (good or bad) and call it gospal. The average stock LS1 is a 13.5 car. The average stock LT1 is a 14.0 car."

Again, what I was saying about stock LT1 and stock sn95 is almost exact of the norm. LS1's run average from 13.2-13.5. The autos aren't far from the sticks because they have so much torque and good shifting transmissions.

To sum up, Interestingly, I remember in the late 80's early 90's when the Z28 and GT were a good race. What was cool about it was that they had .7 liters on us and it was still real close. Many times the stangs came out ahead cause they were lighter. BUT Ford dropped the ball in 93' and chevy made the change to LT1. The gap widened even more with the LS1.

The H/C/I applied to the sn95 closes the gap again (at OUR expense) and puts us neck and neck for the most part making it fun. But when it all comes down to it and they mod there cars, the race begins again. Simply put, the chevys have bigger engines. But like you, I like the ford better even though our years are the underdogs.