General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech For general F-Body discussion that does not fit in any other forum.
For F-Body Technical/Information Discussion ONLY

How much faster is a LS1 compared to an LT1?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 3, 2008 | 04:33 PM
  #16  
BLUE OVAL NUT's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11
From: McDonough ,Ga
To the original poster sorry for not starting a new thread !!! For those i offended sorry also !!!! For those who gave me an answer thank you kindly for your input

Last edited by BLUE OVAL NUT; Jun 3, 2008 at 04:36 PM.
Old Jun 3, 2008 | 05:36 PM
  #17  
Counted Out's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
From: Tucson, AZ
Originally Posted by TeamingTealZ28
"Not to thread jack"

LOL

Post a new thread.......this is how threads get all messed up.
In this case he probably did the right thing as it was the same question with just a slight difference. It would have been weird seeing two threads, one after another, "LT1 vs. LS1" and then "LT4 vs. LS1" when they can be easily be answered here.

But to the original poster. You seem to care WAY to much what people on the internet think about your car. You have an LT1, be happy. Sure it's not the fastest car in the world, but they sure as hell are fun.

I also suggest you actually take your car in, or get pictures to actually see if it's a 383 before you go dumping it for an LS1.
Old Jun 3, 2008 | 08:08 PM
  #18  
Billy Biker's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by Counted Out

But to the original poster. You seem to care WAY to much what people on the internet think about your car. You have an LT1, be happy. Sure it's not the fastest car in the world, but they sure as hell are fun.
For the way I drive, my LT1 fits me perfect I don't drag race and almost never street race. I just use my formula for grunting through traffic and getting sideways on occasion, and for that the instant, brutal low end hit is perfect. For keeping folks from cutting you off, or trying to squeeze you out on lights or freeway on-ramps, I've never had a rig yet of any kind out punch me for a spot For me the LT's powerband is perfect, and honestly I wouldn't trade it for a peakier engine with more power, cause I rarely wind mine up tight enough to matter. If I do any mods, a big part of what I do will be greatly affected by what it does to my low end.......cause for me, just like my bikes, I prefer a big juicy low end over a peaky powerband in my cars
Old Jun 3, 2008 | 09:46 PM
  #19  
Eric1987's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 18
Originally Posted by Capn Pete
Good use of "advertised" numbers for the LS1 .

Mine dyno'd 317HP/335Tq at the WHEELS!! And mine was a "lowly" Z28, rated at a mere "310 HP" .

The LS1's in F-bodies made pretty much the same ~345 - 350 HP as they did in the Corvettes .

Sure, LT1 cars are/can be quick. But stock-for-stock, "average-for-average", the LS1's are typically at least ~1/2 second or more faster in the 1/4 mile.
Holy **** 317HP and 335tq at the wheels? Is that freakish or normal? Thats faster than the new Mustang GT by far.
Old Jun 3, 2008 | 10:15 PM
  #20  
Capn Pete's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,308
From: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
Originally Posted by Eric1987
Holy **** 317HP and 335tq at the wheels? Is that freakish or normal? Thats faster than the new Mustang GT by far.
I don't think it's out-of-the-norm for an '01/'02 LS1 with a T56? I had previously dyno'd the car when I still had the original 4L60E (yes, I did a 6-speed conversion) and through the A4 and 4.10 gears, the car dyno'd 289 RWHP/307 RWTQ.

Yes, that's a 28 RWHP difference from the A4 --> M6!

Faster than a new Mustang? No ****!! Did you ever have any doubt?
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 02:24 AM
  #21  
LSWHO's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 927
From: Az
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
Someday, maybe video proof (I'll find and post it later... can't access any video streaming sites from work) will be enough to dispell this myth.
You can find a video of ANYTHING. One video is far from definitive proof of anything.
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 02:51 AM
  #22  
Eric1987's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 18
Originally Posted by Capn Pete
I don't think it's out-of-the-norm for an '01/'02 LS1 with a T56? I had previously dyno'd the car when I still had the original 4L60E (yes, I did a 6-speed conversion) and through the A4 and 4.10 gears, the car dyno'd 289 RWHP/307 RWTQ.

Yes, that's a 28 RWHP difference from the A4 --> M6!

Faster than a new Mustang? No ****!! Did you ever have any doubt?
I have a 1999 Z28 with 72k would that dyno near the same or were the 01 02 faster? 6 speed too. Its fully loaded. And wtf is wrong with Ford? How come the new mustang GT's are STILL slower?
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 07:39 AM
  #23  
Ironxcross's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
On average, a full second and 5mph faster in the quarter mile.

A car length? You're dreaming, or you're racing crappy LS1 drivers.

Check out this thread -- you can get an '02 LS1 for under $7000 if you work at it.
Stop talking about me! I know I got a good deal
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 07:41 AM
  #24  
JakeRobb's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,507
From: Okemos, MI
Originally Posted by LSWHO
You can find a video of ANYTHING. One video is far from definitive proof of anything.
Fine, I won't provide any evidence then. Less work for me.

All other things being equal, stock LS1 F-bodies perform than stock LT1 F-bodies in EVERY measurable way. LT1s just feel faster off the line. It's fine to prefer them because of that, but it doesn't make them faster.
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 08:18 AM
  #25  
SNOTGREEN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 139
From: Lexington Park, MD
Originally Posted by onebadponcho
Motor Trend 1997 Camaro SS LT4
0-60 in 4.9 seconds
1/4 mile in 13.2 seconds @ 108mph
I would have to concur, as I owned one, a high mile one at that ('97 LT4 Firehawk), that I believe would have ran very close or a little quicker. I'd say for argument's sake, to drive one felt about the same as a strong running LS1 with perhaps a catback & lid.

Back to topic, I agree with 5-6 tenths quicker for 1/4 mile on the LS1 cars. With even normal bolt-ons, I've been reeled in by LS1 cars in the past. It takes quite a few bolt-ons to keep pace with most LS1's at the track, unless they simply cannot drive for sh*t.

Edit - I think it should also be noted, that very similar to the LS1, the LT4 was indeed under-rated just a bit, and also revs nearly 1,000rpm higher than a stock LT1, as placed in those fbodies. That is/can be proven, as I did so many times prior to selling that car. Breathes very well. With that said, horsepower numbers will vary slightly throughout all those production years and models, and '01-'02 LS1's also came w/LS6 manifolds didn't they? And some w/LS6 heads as well...can this be confirmed, or was that just some GM Hi-Tech hype? I believe the casting numbers proved this. Some of those cars were just plain factory fast - the LS1s were brutal as-is.

Last edited by SNOTGREEN; Jun 4, 2008 at 08:32 AM. Reason: Added LT4 note
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 08:24 AM
  #26  
SNOTGREEN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 139
From: Lexington Park, MD
Originally Posted by Billy Biker
If I do any mods, a big part of what I do will be greatly affected by what it does to my low end.......cause for me, just like my bikes, I prefer a big juicy low end over a peaky powerband in my cars
Then in my opinion, for you, this is what I would do: 3.73 or 4.10 gears, stock converter, stock manifolds or small tube shorties w/catback, and a cold air induction.
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 12:28 PM
  #27  
LSWHO's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 927
From: Az
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
LT1s just feel faster off the line. It's fine to prefer them because of that, but it doesn't make them faster.
Nobody ever said the LT1 is faster. Calm down, nobodies insulting your unbeatable LS1.
Old Jun 4, 2008 | 07:48 PM
  #28  
Billy Biker's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by LSWHO
Nobody ever said the LT1 is faster. Calm down, nobodies insulting your unbeatable LS1.
Yep I don't think anybodies saying a stock LT1 is faster. But for me personally I prefer the LT1's characteristics more. But I've only driven one LS1 and it was pretty much stock like my 95 formula. If you could combine the LS1's top end power with the LT1's bottom end I'll be all in on that one

Originally Posted by SNOTGREEN
Then in my opinion, for you, this is what I would do: 3.73 or 4.10 gears, stock converter, stock manifolds or small tube shorties w/catback, and a cold air induction.
Thanks for the info Green I'd like to mod my car abit....but honestly my modding experience is mainly with bikes. I do know that with engines in general its hard to have the ultimate top-end and ultimate low end in the same engine, its always a compromise. I've learned through bikes, and abit through cars, that I prefer the big low end hit as long as it pulls consistent all the way through. I don't need anymore soft bottom ends, then the big high rpm hit, the motors don't last as long cause of the r's you need to run to get the power.....and in real world driving sometimes they can be more of a pain. Of course if I was a racer my opinion would be the opposite lol. But I'm def gonna save your info for future reference How would 3.42's work for me you think? I don't want to give up too much mpg
Old Jun 5, 2008 | 12:00 AM
  #29  
Jazsun's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,834
From: Indiana
Smoken an Ls1 is just about as good as a mustang these days.
Old Jun 5, 2008 | 12:10 AM
  #30  
Eric1987's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 18
lol why would you want to race another camaro? And what would be the realistic dyno on my 1999 Z28? 72k miles. Would it get 310RWHP? its a 6 speed btw



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:49 PM.