EZRIDN Vs. C5
 

Crusing last night in the LS1 and i rolled up to a light on the same 3 lane road that i ran the '96 GT on the other night. This road is awesome, just ask sedanman. I see this red C5 (one i have seen at my church) a couple cars ahead of me. Anyways, light changes and i get beside this C5 that is an M6, sounded mean, has racing strips, Roll Bar, Factory crome wheels, an NX sticker on the hatch window, and a couple A pillar gauages. I'm thinking, EZRIDN is about to get killed..ha ha.

We exchange glances and smiles and he knows whats up:D

He is a half car behind me and i hear him downshift (M6), and i kicked it when i heard him nail it at around 60. He started to pull instantly. I let off at around 105 when he did and he was about 2.5-3 cars ahead and pulling hard. I slowed down and gave him a thumbs up, and we both waved and headed our own ways.

Re: EZRIDN Vs. C5
 

Maybe it's time for some steeper gears. You'd probably have a 12-second car with minimal modifications. Not bad.

Re: Re: EZRIDN Vs. C5
 

Yea Sedanman is trying to get me to put 3.42s in it. But i kind of like the 2.73s b/c they don't really spin and i can pull 2.01-2.03 60's at the track all the time. So i don't want to put gears in that will make me spin you know.

I am hoping with just a few inexpensive mods i can hit the 12s.

Thanks for the reply.

Re: Re: Re: EZRIDN Vs. C5
 

So put some drag radials on at the same time as the 3.42's. Problem solved.

hell yeah, i would put the gears in too. there was a LT1 z28 at the track last saturday w/ pullies, control arms, slicks, cold air, and 3.42 gears going 12.8's on motor and 11.6 on a 150 shot. he was pulling the front tires off the ground in 1st and 2nd gear. you got a LS1! you should be even quicker with the same light mods he had.

Sorry, majority rules BUY GEARS!!!!

Well your at it, buy full exhuast, converter, mass air meter, and drag radials. Cause you are gonna need it........

What does the C-5 have that the F body LS1 doesn't have other than a better exhaust system?

Rev

The C5 Corvette has a more aerodynamic design and weighs a couple hundred pounds less.

What are the curb wts. and coefficient of drag. I'm really only curious. I wouldn't have thought that the C-5 was really significantly more areodynamic.

Where the heck is Aquaman when we need him, hee, hee?

Rev

Right here of course;)

The vette has a C/D of .29 and the LS1 camaro has .31 the LT1 camaro had .33 due mainly to it's headlamp's the old ones caught alot of air.

The Vette's usually weigh in at 3220 (mines 3189) But the FRC Vette's weigh 3180 or less and most of the LS1 F bods are 3450 or so depending on options. The T-Tops add about 30 pounds and the A4 adds about 10. I have seen alot of F bods run as good at the track as Vette's but after 100 or so the Vette usually has the advantage and will walk away pretty steadily.hope that helps

Why are the vettes rated with more hp then if they have the same motor? Just chevy under rating the camaros to sell more vettes?

EZRIDN: I gotta agree with the majority get the gears!(and a converter!)

Yeah kinda. They have different plumbing to the intake and thats really about it. The Vette intake is a straighter shot to the intake manifold but the diff. is so miniscule. They (GM) didn't want there big boy car (Vette) to have the same power rating as the Camaro. This is all speculation on my part from different things I have heard from people who "should" know. They the F bods and Vetes usually Dyno around 285ish stock with the A4 I have seen M6 cars dyno as high as 312. Both a Vette(mine) and a WS6. both stock. I don't know if that clears anything up for ya.

Yeah that's pretty much what I figured. I did notice the straight shot to the intake... there is a vette running around here that has his liscence plate where it swings up and the cai is behind that, pretty cool.

3200lbs for a vette? Really? Is it stripped down? I've heard they're more like 3500lbs stock.

mysweetlx,

I would say 3200 pounds sounds about right.


Bob

Whitet78supra, That's a serious mod list you have there on that Supra. WHat kind of track times are you running? Have you dynoed it or have any estimate on power? I have always liked the twin turbo Supras.

Yeah man that supra sounds sweet. Are the 93's the new body style or the old one? We have an older model single turbo in auto shop that we were gonna fix up and race it but the project kinda died because i guess it had more problems that we thought since we got it free after it had been wrecked. The new body styles are better anyways

Later,
Nick

93 is the year they changed the body and added another turbo. I used to have a 90 Supra Turbo, but I had so many problems with it I got rid of it. What was wrong with your project Supra?

Supra Bob...Sedanman (jeff) has told me alot about your car. When i was in school in Indiana i used to go to the Steak and Shake and hang out. Too bad i never got to see your ride. Sedanman says its a sweet ride.

Anyways...glad to see you here.

If you go with gears & slicks you had better go with a Ford rear end. Late model camaro's bust the factory rear ends like rubber bands around here. jus my 2 cents.

I know he has a killer traction problem, but traps well into the 120's.

I am going on a guess of atleast 450RWHP, but I am not sure if Bob has ever dynoed it.

So have I, and his is a fine speciman.

Infact Bob its been a while since I have ridden in your car I am about due for another ride. Maybe this weekend if its back together?

A Moser 12 bolt does the job just fine.

As long as you don't go over 3.73's with slicks you will be OK the stock Rear will hold. If you do DR's instead of slicks you could do 4.10's. Seen 100+ cars with this set up.

I had a 88 Tyrbo Supra and the damn thing went thru 3 engines before I sold the F'in thing. The guys at the dealer told me all alot of the gen 3 Supra's had problems because of oiling restrictions in the motor. I know first hand about that. I liked the way they looked and with some mods it was a reasonably fast car high 13's but 3 engines in 2 years...:mad:

As for Bob's Supra It's a beautifull example or it was till someone rear ended his butt;) Hope to see it out next time.

I did the exact same thing, blew two engines in two years. I ended up selling it to the head mechanic at the Toyota dealership without an engine. My mom still has a 90 Supra with 160k miles on the original motor, but it doesn't have a turbo.:mad:

It's the newer body style. :)

I have never had it on the dyno but it should be around 550 rwhp at 17 pounds of boost.

I have the rearend fixed now. I am just waiting for my new GReddy 4 row frontmount intercooler and my FJO wide band O2 to come in. I am hopeing for just under 700 rwhp with a little tuning and some more boost.


Bob

The Vettes do have longitudinally engineered better exhaust systems while the F-Bodies have those transverse things that (by almost anybody's criterion suck badly) and rob power from the Vette ratings. Not a flame. I know that almost anyone with any knowledge agrees with that.

Rev

Yea i know of some guys here at Moroso that run real quick with A4s and stock rear ends. That is why i bought the auto b/c i knew i would be draging it alot. I'm not sure which route i want to go with the car. I am thinking a stall though, but i don;t want to run into traction issues. I will research it and find the best way to go. The stall though looks real good right now though.

Thanks for the reply's :)

One guy in my area has broke 2 rubber bands all by himself. He runs MT ET streets and 3:73 rear. His is a stick. None of the stangs in my area have rear end problems, except 1 7.5 inch rear and one auburn unit gone south. i would be gentle with it, but I would also trade it for a Stang.

Oh, jesus, thanks alot. For a moment, I thought folks we'are gonna question those goofy transverse exhaust systems? Pfwew, maybe we got by that one?

Rev

No it's true. Thats why the quad center exit SLP system picks up so much HP on the SS. I forgot to mention it on my original post about the Diff. between them thanks for adding it

I wouldn't touch the gears. With a 2.73 rear you have about the same contact area as a 4.10 Ford 9" rear. Go with a good sized stall with high STR to take advantage of the 2.73 rear gears. On LS1.com in the group purchases section check out the post about a GP on the MidWest torque converters. I used a 3200 2.5 STR MidWest converter in my 99 Z28 A4 3.23 car. I went from 13.1s @ 107mph to 12.2s @ 111mph from the converter on stock tires. I would go with a 3500-3600 with 3.0 STR and your car will fly. I drove mine 104 miles for work every day and the stall was not an issue.


Jess


P.S. I forgot to mention the price is around $450 for the converter. Cheaper than gears, install and a speedo calibration device.

I have been looking for you forever, well at least since i got my car. I remember your car well, and it was an inspiration for me to buy an Auto. No lie. It was red right?

I was wanting to talk with you, and get your thoughts. I will send an PM and get ur email. Glad i ran into you!

Jess, much like Ezridn I have (had) followed your camaro (no former camaro) very close. I found the times that it ran awsome and respect your input. My question is do you think he is better sticking with the 2.73's rather than swapping to 3.42's (what I would think would work best). I just figured the 3.42 would help it out giving a better power band as it crosses the line in third. I figured this would play a even larger part if (when) he adds more performance parts which only help the higher RPM's.

Just wanted to stir your head a little and gain a little info.

Thanks.

Yep, it was red. :) I'm flattered guys, thanks!


Honestly, I would stick with the 2.73s for a bolt on/modified car. A high torque multiplier (STR) of 3.0 would do an awesome job getting the car off the line. Next I would have a higher stall of 3500-3600 to help overcome the gears on the top end and give you a better shift extention (RPMS do not drop as far on the shift. You will probably come into each gear at 4200rpms). The higher stall speed will do the same for you as gears do when going through the traps as the 4L60E does not lock up in 3rd like the AOD/AODE trannies do. But, by using more stall and sticking with the 2.73s you will have a strong rear vs the 3.42 rear.


It's a lot different than the Mustang setup and alot of people are not used to it. I'm actually going in the opposite direction with my 93 AOD coupe. The difference is that if I were to stay with the old 2.73s my coupe has but use a high stall/STR converter it would be great in 1st and 2nd but when lockup occured in 3rd my rpms would drop way down since the difference between a high stall & 2nd gear and a locked 3rd gear would be huge. What I did instead is to go with 3.73s and a high STR (3.0) with a low stall (2800). This way I have the power of the torque multiplication off the line, The 3.73s and 2800 stall help with the shift extention and when 3rd locks up There isn't too much stall difference coming off of second that the 3.73s won't be able to help make up in 3rd. ;)


Sorry there's so much but there is much more to converters than alot of people think about.:)

A better site to check out for GOOD LS1 info also is www.LS1tech.com and www.converter.cc and go to the dyno section to see some conveters in action and what STR does for you.

My E-mail on this board has to be updated. You can reach me at work at jesse.o.guilbault@chase.com if you need more info. I'll be at that addy until 10:30PM week nights.

Jess

"I went from 13.1s @ 107mph to 12.2s @ 111mph from the converter on stock tires." Holy crap that is a damn good mod. I wish a converter would pick up that much time on my car!

Uhm, I wouldn't count on it FivepointOH, it didn't do that for me.

Rev

Thats the thing with the 5.0s. The long runner intakes make good torque off the line. The LS1s make their torque higher up in the rpms. You use the converter to skip the weak part of the rpm band down low.

While a converter will help an AOD car it does more for the LS1s


Jess

LS1, the problem as I see it with the high stall converter (3000 or above) is in driveability, no matter which car it's in. For normal driving, it will never be locked up, always slipping, especially with that 2.73. You just can't accomodate a really high rear end with a high stall converter in every day driving. I think most everyone will see that.

Rev

I never had a problem with mine nor did any of my friends. Mine was a 3200 with 3.23s. When ever you get less than 1/3 throttle while cruising above 45mph the tranny will go into OD and lock the converter. I drove mine 104 miles a day round trip for work. I did this for 36000 miles and no issue. My wife drove the car all the time and was completely fine. Some of the 4400 and higher stall converters are definately loose. With the OD and lockup it's a lot different than having a high stall in a C4, C6, TH400, TH350 etc. with no lockup.


Jess