What don't you believe me about? 4 tenths faster 0-60 with 3.23 gears and a 220 lb. weight disadvantage? Way better seat of the pants acceleration? Less dead spots from a roll?

 

I never made any 1/4 mile difference claims about 2.73s vs. 3.23s. I asked you a question. I asked you if you thought 5-7 tenths faster 0-60 would only be 2 tenths faster in the 1/4. What do you think?

 

All of the above. I actually own a 3.23 geared car that wasn't that impressive stock (13.5 @ 103). I have dead spots galore and know for a fact it does not have way better sotp acceleration. Believe me, I wish you were right because then I could say I am leaps and bounds faster then the rest of the 2.73 geared crowd. But I know that my car stock was not much faster then a 2.73 geared TA I raced and I had a slight weight advantage on him.

Trust me when I say (and I can say it because I own the car in question) the 3.23 geared auto LS1 is not at a loss for dead spots

 

I have no idea what or how 0-60 times could relate to a 1/4 mile time. Maybe there is a formula to figure it out but I have no idea what it would be.

 

It just occured to me, traction plays a huge role in the 60' time so it would have to be the same for 0-60 mph. I have had passes where I had a 2.2 60' time and others where I had a 2.0 60' time. Auto LS1's should be in the neighborhood of 5 second 0-60 but that number could be affected by your launch. So in other words Steve, if you had a 2.0 60' time when you ran the 3.23 geared car from 0-60 and a 2.1 60' time when you ran the 2.73 geared car from 0-60 then some of the number increase could be from the launch and or tires and not just the gears.

Besides that, we all know LS1's don't dyno the same. It's possible that you could have a 3.23 geared auto that has 295 rwhp and and race an auto with 280 rwhp and 2.73 gears. It's also possible that the 3.23 geared car got a slightly better launch for whatever reason. Then when the two cross the finish line it appears that the the 3.23 geared car is greatly superior which it is but not because of the gears alone.

Now take a 2.73 geared car with 300 rwhp and race a 3.23 geared car with 280 rwhp. Suddenly the cars don't look so different in 1/4 mile times. I still stand by my statements that in a 1/4 mile the 3.23 gears are worth 2 MAYBE 3 tenths but that's it. Like I said before, I researched hours and hours of threads on gears and torque converters and at least 20 out of 25 people were saying what I am here about how gears help but not as much as a torque converter and only one jump up (like say 3.23 to 3.42) is a minimal gain in 1/4 mile ET. Oh and the other general concensus was that all LS1's should have come with 3.42 gears because 2.73 & 3.23 gears suck ***. This I agree with 110%.

 

I believe that. The two cars I raced had LT1s not LS1s. They were run on a g-tech, so I don't have 60' times. But, I launched each car as well as I could. I ran both cars 5+ times. The best time with the 3.23 car was 4 tenths faster than the 2.73 car. The 3.23 car also had an extra 220 lb. passenger in it at the time. The sotp difference was huge between these two LT1s, as well as less dead spots in the 3.23 car. I also drove an LT1 auto. with 3.73s. Talk about NO dead spots at all! That thing took off SO hard from ANY speed roll.

 

I went from 2.73 gears to 3.73's. SOTP was a big jump with new gears. Also my gas mileage didn't go down much at all. I still get an easy 20mpg. Now that i got myself a good Daily Driver truck i'm good to go with the major mods (stall, DR's, LT's) Looking for low 13's.

TONY

PS i don't think i shaved a 1/2 second off my 0-60 time with gears. I did get a 5.2 0-60 time on a new G-tech.

 

Stock for stock, back in July when i was stock with 3.23's, I raced another LS1 car with a flowmaster catback, lid, DR's, and 2.73's. We both cut a 2.0? 60", and by the end of the 1/8, I beat him with a 8.9 @ 81 or 82 ( dont have the slip in front of me) to his 9.5 @ 75 mph. I say stock, but my car had a LS6 cam already....Everything else was stock, though! And BTW on stock tires, just about all of the 3.23 auto cars beat the M6 cars at our track. My 91' with the HOT LT1 has a M6 and I only cut like 2.11's on street tires. I was amazed how much better the auto launched at the track. On the street though, the 91' doesnt spin hardy any where it fries the tires on the track!!??! Need NITTO's!! Now in the 99, Im cutting 1.98-1.99 60" times with the same tires....Guess the HOT LT1 builds more bottom end torque. Maybe if the auto ever goes out, Ill swap me in a T56...Who knows!!

 

Your gas mileage is still that good? I went from 3.23s to 4.10s and my mileage suffered big time. That was with just my SLP flowpac and hypertech tuning. I think at that time my milage was around 16mpg. With my current setup it's a lot worse, but I mostly use the car for racing now.

 

to ad to this arguement between you two. I have a stock 93 z with 3.23 gears and i raced a 95 trans am (10 more horse than me from the factory) he had a full length exhaust cold air intake and a prted intake and i took him by half a secont at the strip. And ha had 2.73 gears

 

Just got back from a road trip to Fl. from S.C and could put 375 miles on a full tank. Could have gone MAYBE 400 miles, but didnt want to run out of gas out on I-95!! Does our cars have 15 gallon tank??? Thats the most Ive ever fillled mine was like 14 gallons. I was also running an average of about 80 mph or so at around 2700-2900 rpms average. Cleaned my filter after I got home and you could definately tell on the filter where the FRA cutout is!! That thing pulls in alot of air it seems!!

 

No argument to add to. He was talking about LT1's and I was talking about LS1's. Two different worlds.

 

actually when they tested a C5 auto vs manual
the manual was only few inches faster