C5 seems sluggish compared to my LT4

[6 Shooter]

Check your handbrake lol

Ya know, maybe a few plug wires are loose also! ​

 

[Eric]

Not sure what to make of this...

My 6-speed has no problem breaking traction in second gear. It throws my head back every time!

Same here, only mine doesn't have one of them thar shifter thingies, it's an automatic.

 

[Remo]

Ya know, maybe a few plug wires are loose also! ​

Make sure the "turn-a-pile-pinion-gear" isn't worn.

Remo:cool

 

[jonecap]

For what it's worth, my '96 LT4 with 80,000 miles is strong. The motor is stock with 4.10 gears and a catback exhaust. It's been dyno tuned and runs mid 12's in the quarter at 111 to 112 on drag radials. Here's a timeslip. It was 84 degrees when I made this pass and I bumped the rev limiter in the top of 2nd gear.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[DRTH VTR]

Welcome to the CAC, jonecap!

Nice time slip. That is pretty close to what my Z06 runs on DR at 3000ft elevation. It has been my experience that LT4's run right with the LS1's assuming the same setup and tires.

 

[gmjunkie]

Ah Heck, Lets face it The Junk traded for a Dog,I came to that conclusion this morning when I came in the shop and it had Rolled over and was Licking it's Tail Pipes!!!! otfl Actually I have a Suspicion that the cat's may have some restriction the vacuum just don't act right,it's slow about gaining vaccum when you let off of it!!

 

[B17Crew]

For what it's worth, my '96 LT4 with 80,000 miles is strong. The motor is stock with 4.10 gears and a catback exhaust. It's been dyno tuned and runs mid 12's in the quarter at 111 to 112 on drag radials. Here's a timeslip. It was 84 degrees when I made this pass and I bumped the rev limiter in the top of 2nd gear.

[/URL][/IMG]

Pretty impressive time!:eek My best with my LT4 is 13.2 @ 107. Track elevation was approximately 890 ft above sea level, Goodyear Eagle GSC’s @ 30psi. I’m bone stock all but for a K&N air filter, 52,000 miles.

I’ve never had it dynoed but would expect it to be in the high 290 to 300 hp from what I’ve read over the years. Only C5 I’ve run against was a 2003 Z06. He ran a 12.5 @ 113... he had just over 500 miles on his car.

B17Crew

 

[jonecap]

Pretty impressive time!:eek My best with my LT4 is 13.2 @ 107. Track elevation was approximately 890 ft above sea level, Goodyear Eagle GSC’s @ 30psi. I’m bone stock all but for a K&N air filter, 52,000 miles.

I’ve never had it dynoed but would expect it to be in the high 290 to 300 hp from what I’ve read over the years. Only C5 I’ve run against was a 2003 Z06. He ran a 12.5 @ 113... he had just over 500 miles on his car.

B17Crew

Thanks. 13.2 @ 107 is not too shabby. My car dyno'd 305rwhp and 306rwtq. I think the big thing helping my e.t.'s is the gear. Best mod for the buck on an LT4. I just installed a Meziere electric water pump yesterday and I'm headed back to the track this weekend. The car feels stronger now and with the cooler temps, I think a 12.4 is in the cards.

 

[B17Crew]

Thanks. 13.2 @ 107 is not too shabby. My car dyno'd 305rwhp and 306rwtq. I think the big thing helping my e.t.'s is the gear. Best mod for the buck on an LT4. I just installed a Meziere electric water pump yesterday and I'm headed back to the track this weekend. The car feels stronger now and with the cooler temps, I think a 12.4 is in the cards.

Great info, keep us posted on your times... and welcome to the !

B17Crew

 

[Hrtbeat1]

Welcome Jonescap!

Great times there. I am eventually going to swap to the 4.10 gears in mine. For what its worth mine bone stock dyno'ed 308rwhp and 314 rwtq. I've added a few mods (LT headers, exhaust, CAI, electric H20 pump, Granatelli MAF) when I went back in Aug. it dyno'ed 298rwhp 309rwtq. Just goes to show how important a tune is. My A/F ratio was 11.5, I need to lean it out a bit and re-dyno. I was shocked that I lost 10HP and 5 ft/lbs by adding the headers and less restrictive exhaust. The temps and humidity levels were almost the same for both dyno sessions so I ruled that out.

Junkie that's no dawg I'll tell ya' Even if it can lick its tailpipes :lol There are lots of little things like you said. Once you give it the going over I think you will be quite impressed.

 

[jonecap]

Welcome Jonescap!

Great times there. I am eventually going to swap to the 4.10 gears in mine. For what its worth mine bone stock dyno'ed 308rwhp and 314 rwtq. I've added a few mods (LT headers, exhaust, CAI, electric H20 pump, Granatelli MAF) when I went back in Aug. it dyno'ed 298rwhp 309rwtq. Just goes to show how important a tune is. My A/F ratio was 11.5, I need to lean it out a bit and re-dyno. I was shocked that I lost 10HP and 5 ft/lbs by adding the headers and less restrictive exhaust. The temps and humidity levels were almost the same for both dyno sessions so I ruled that out.

Hey...I had a '90 Coupe as well before my '96. Good minds think alike.

What brand of headers are you running and do you like them? Also, if you ever make it to NC, there is a great GM only dyno tuner in Durham, Carolina Auto Masters. I'm sure bringing your A/F back up to 13 to 1 would make big power.

 

[stgry1]

Man this thread has some in it. Let's stop talking and start lining up! Who lives in or around tampa with a C5??

 

[Hrtbeat1]

I went with the ones from my '90. Coated TPIS long tubes with the Y, to a Borla XR1 3" in and out, to my custom rear Y dump out. I called TPIS about ordering a new set for Z15 but they talked me into using the old ones. $$$ for other mods. They fit right in and everything lines up great.

 

[jonecap]

Man this thread has some in it. Let's stop talking and start lining up! Who lives in or around tampa with a C5??

What kind of times are you running with that LT4?

 

[dmd]

I currently own both an LT4 and an LS1. I had a stock '98 for 6 years until I replaced it with my current, heavily-modified '01. The LT4's torque curve is different. It's fatter on the bottom, and that makes it feel stronger and more responsive. It also winds 300rpm higher than an LS1, but it doesn't make quite as much midrange to top-end power as the LS1 does. All those factors combine to make it about a dead heat between the two.

I dynoed my then-new '98 vs. my friend's '96 LT4 CE on the same day at the same dyno in 1997. Guess who won?

We both did. He pulled 298hp, I pulled 296. BUT - he pulled 305ft-lbs, and I pulled 310.

Here's the dyno sheet:

http://www.geocities.com/crazydms/dyno/dyno1.jpg

Subjectively, the LS1 is considerably smoother and sounds more refined. But LT4's were unquestionably underrated. I love 'em both too much to have just one or the other, so I've got both. Winding through the gears on the '96 and hearing that ZF singing its song along with the LT4's roar is just incomparable. And winding it all the way to redline, it makes this unholy scream past 5500 that raises the hair on the back of your neck, and it feels like you're going further than you should with it. Awesome! It's such a shame that only a few thousand people have been given the opportunity to appreciate this magnificent rarity in the Corvette world. Now if there'd been a way to appreciate it in a C5 chassis as a 1st-year carryover, that would be a carryover viewed much differently than the cross-fire '84 carryover. If not for the low hood in the C5's design, it would have - they tried to do this in development when the LS1's oiling problem was being resolved, but it wouldn't fit.

Dave

 

[Roadster Guy]

Great Post!

Great post Dave! Informative and interesting.
RG

 

[jvp]

I dynoed my then-new '98 vs. my friend's '96 LT4 CE on the same day at the same dyno in 1997. Guess who won?

We both did. He pulled 298hp, I pulled 296. BUT - he pulled 305ft-lbs, and I pulled 310.

I'm the 'Jason' that did the dyno run with Dave that day, many years ago. Back then, I harassed Dave to no end, telling him he bought a slug, and made a mistake. But, my mind was changed after spending time in his car. And now I agree with everything Dave's said. I've owned both an LT4 and an LS1. Both engines are superb, but superb in a different way.

The LT4 has that raw, kick-you-in-the-butt torque. Now. Not now, but RIGHT now. The torque curve is very ideal in that it's flat as a pancake, therefore making the throttle response very predictable. And because of that instant throttle response at any point in the rev range, it makes the engine seem more powerful. It isn't.

The LS1, on the other hand, has a slightly weaker lower end, which makes it feel a little sluggish when compared to the LT4. But, it clearly makes up for this lack of low-end when it hits the mid-range. It is here where the LS1 shines and really shows its stuff. And it makes the engine feel like it's more powerful. It isn't.

Truth be told, the LT4s were all sold as 330HP engines, and were terribly underrated. They were all putting out a good 340-350 HP at the crank. So are the LS1s. In the end, it's a tie, with each engine shining in a certain part of the rev range.

I miss my LT4. Dearly. An auto writer once said (I'll paraphrase here) "Second gear with a Chevy small block is one of the most wonderful gears ever invented. It starts at 0MPH and ends north of legal." This was made more apparent with the LT4 and the ZF.

However, the LS1 showed its stuff on the road course, where I (and my 99 C5) spent a lot of time. The mid-range grunt kept me far ahead of everyone else on the track. And the valve train whine that's evident on all LSx engines was an intoxicating sound. But you had to listen for it.

This is a comparison that will never end. It started in 1997, and seems to be as strong and fiercely argued as is was almost 10 years ago. That, my friends, is testament to both engines, and just how wonderful they are. I mean, come on... they're both small blocks. What more needs to be said?

jas (now LS7-powered.. >)

 

[6 Shooter]

jas - thx for your input...

...and Welcome to the ​

Later . . . . . .​

6 Shooter

 

[JoeMackin]

I'm the 'Jason' that did the dyno run with Dave that day, many years ago. Back then, I harassed Dave to no end, telling him he bought a slug, and made a mistake. But, my mind was changed after spending time in his car. And now I agree with everything Dave's said. I've owned both an LT4 and an LS1. Both engines are superb, but superb in a different way.

The LT4 has that raw, kick-you-in-the-butt torque. Now. Not now, but RIGHT now. The torque curve is very ideal in that it's flat as a pancake, therefore making the throttle response very predictable. And because of that instant throttle response at any point in the rev range, it makes the engine seem more powerful. It isn't.

The LS1, on the other hand, has a slightly weaker lower end, which makes it feel a little sluggish when compared to the LT4. But, it clearly makes up for this lack of low-end when it hits the mid-range. It is here where the LS1 shines and really shows its stuff. And it makes the engine feel like it's more powerful. It isn't.

Truth be told, the LT4s were all sold as 330HP engines, and were terribly underrated. They were all putting out a good 340-350 HP at the crank. So are the LS1s. In the end, it's a tie, with each engine shining in a certain part of the rev range.

I miss my LT4. Dearly. An auto writer once said (I'll paraphrase here) "Second gear with a Chevy small block is one of the most wonderful gears every invented. It starts at 0MPH and ends north of legal." This was made more apparent with the LT4 and the ZF.

However, the LS1 showed its stuff on the road course, where I (and my 99 C5) spent a lot of time. The mid-range grunt kept me far ahead of everyone else on the track. And the valve train whine that's evident on all LSx engines was an intoxicating sound. But you had to listen for it.

This is a comparison that will never end. It started in 1997, and seems to be as strong and fiercely argued as is was almost 10 years ago. That, my friends, is testament to both engines, and just how wonderful they are. I mean, come on... they're both small blocks. What more needs to be said?

jas (now LS7-powered.. >)

Insightful, nostalgic, well written, your a salesman! Welcom to the .

 

[B17Crew]

WOW! Great info!

B17Crew