C4 perf. I don't get it...

[Henri 79]

Hello all,

I'm comparing the performance figures of C4's found elsewhere on this site. I've compiled all the et's for the diff. speed traps (0-30, 0-60 etc) in an Excel sheet. (interesting data!!!)

To my big surprise the '92 6-speed LT1 beats all other C4's (except the Z's of cours), including the LT4 GS!!! How is that possible??? The GS LT4 has the 330 hp engine as opposed to the 300 hp '92 LT1. The only other advantage the '92 has over the '96 GS is an weight advantage of 33 lbs.

Now I'm really puzzled... :confused

 

[twiget]

Thats very intresting Henri. I have no idea why the '92 would be so special. It's cool to know though.

And welcome to the CACC.

Jason

 

[69MyWay]

Henry,

As you compare this data, are all the tests being performed at the same height above sea level and ambient temperature?

This is critical. I will tell you that on average cars in Florida during the fall and spring turn quarter mile times at least an entire second faster than you will see in the magazines.

Back in the fall of 94 a good friend of mine ran a bone stock 94 Vette with an auto trans and performance axle. It ran a solid 12.9 in the quarter on street tires, pump gas etc. No tricks. That same car has a low 14 or high 13 on any official performance data out there from G.M. or popular magazines.

The more dense the air (Sea Level), and cooler the temps the faster the car goes.

So, if you could find a way to factor that into your spreadsheet you should get the real story.

 

[Henri 79]

The data found on this site does not list the altitude, temp & humidity at time of the tests.
Only the magazines are listed, maybe someone knows where they usually test their cars?
Although the '92 and one of the '96 GS tests was performed by Car & Driver...

Didn't know there can be so much difference between performance figures due to these factors. The Netherlands are 'quite' flat so we don't have to worry about an altitude difference :cool

Thanks for replying.