96LT4

I'm almost willing to bet that the originator smokes....I just have that feeling.....

redwing76

Yeah, buddy. And we do pay the most!

conv90

Are you afraid of a 2.50 a gallon?
Try to use your corvette here in Italy where a gallon is about $6.00 ...

Lone Ranger

We didn't just arbitrarily pick the Corolla. We did our homework. It is the best choice for safety, fuel economy, resale value, and overall practicality as a grocery getter/commuter.

Any vehicle can score a good frontal crash rating, but the kicker is how does it fare in a *side impact* from an SUV? The Corolla is among the safest small cars to be in during a side impact, when equipped with optional side curtain airbags, which is what we are getting.



But the Beetle eats it in a side impact crash-- poor side impact rating by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

28 on the highway. Taurus's don't exceed 20 or 21mpg around town, on a good day. Our Taurus was an okay car, but it was not an MPG machine and was not built to be.

So does mine, what's the point here?

Can't find where any side impact crash tests were performed on the LS by IIHS, but perhaps there are others that have tested it. My cousin had an LS and usually reported about 17mpg around town.



Agreed. Resale value, for instance. Which is where most (not all)domestic passenger cars bite the dust, at least in comparison to Toyota and Nissan (and the Euro cars).

Red Tornado

good one

to the original post, i'm wondering why the 93 octane. your LT1 in stock form with factory rating of 10.3:1 c/r should be fine with 91 octane.

i'm at 10.2:1 c/r. the stock L98 for 90/91 is rated by factory at 10.25:1. head cc, gasket and piston selection yields almost exactly the same as when it was stock. datamster scans reveal knock count on the order of 5-7 knocks total over a 20 min. period of driving, this is with several throttle spikes @ 90%+ and 5,500 rpms. i will start using 91 octane from now on.

redwing76

Side impact, important point.
I was in a side impact collison. I was driving a 1985 Ford Mustang up a steep hill full of blind corners. I came around a corner at 45 mph on a 6% percent grade and was hit in the drivers door by a Kodiak Chevy tow truck.

The Kodiak is a 6 ton truck without the wrecker equpiment.

The Kodiak rolled down the steep grade with no-one in it. I went from 45 mph to 0 in an instant and was knocked completely of off the hiway and my car ended up hanging over a 10 foot drop backwards off of a ravine.

It took two wreckers to pull my Mustang back onto the road. The car was totaled as was the Kodiak. The Kodaik went down the ravine and impacted a Redwood tree.

After the CHP took the accident report I drove the Mustang home.
Thier carrier paid for my car and injuries. I drove that Mustang for 2 years with the body wrecked.

That would never have happened in a Toyota. Sure you might survive the crash but you wont be able to drive the car home.

Point is that Mustang saved my life. Not so sure a Toyota would have.

You're right SUV's have some serious results to those that are hit by them.
I know that smaller imports can't take a hit from a SUV.

My experience is a real time event and not a test under a controlled enviorment.

Its a reality that the bigger the car the safer the car. A large car will always have a larger impact on a smaller car.
Good luck with whatever you buy. Did anyone get hurt in the Tauras?
Thats the only important factor.

Of course I did suffer some life long injuries but I still feel lucky.
A side impact is the worst of the worst.

redwing76

Actually the Chevy Cobalt does better.
Rear end collison the Toyota is rated poor. Rear enders are quite common.

Darth Vader

I use the regular gas in my 1996 Vette and it runs like a top.
You are wasting money using premium gas. Gordon Kilbrew said regular gas was fine. Hes right my vette runs great on regular...

Dougs 90

While we are talking gas prices, someone help me understand why they change the prices on the gas already in their tanks.....Just doesn't seem right, but I don't know how it is "paid" for by the station.

Thanks,
Doug

rufneck

My '95 gets about 10mpg more than my wife's Tahoe w/ the 327 in it. Really love my economy Car

Midnight89

Letting the price of gas deter one from driving their Corvette (a more expensive, less-practical sports car) is a perfect example of the tail wagging the dog (instead of vice versa)!! It's unfortunate that gas prices are so high, but the gas prices won't make me shy away from driving the Corvette! But that's just my opinion, and to each his/her own!!

vettes555

Look at it this way... The price difference in regular unleaded and premium is about the same as the several trips a week to Taco Bell for a late night snack. So keep buying Premium, give up the late night snacks and not only will the Vette thank you but also your waistline will too and you'll fit in the car better too!

Red Tornado

good idea.....a better one might be to quit buying 93 octane and start using 91 like any stock LT1 should....forget taco bell that stuff will kill you....instead take the "double" savings and keep buying beer

Lone Ranger

We compared the Cobalt. It got a marginal rating on side impact torso, which stated a moderate risk of internal injuries. Corolla got Acceptable rating on side impact, indicating moderate risk of pelvic fracture. I worked a moonlighting job as Deputy Coroner for a year 2001- 2002 to supplement my LEO pay. From that experience I can tell you I'll take a pelvic fracture to upper torso internal injuries anytime. Of course no injuries is ideal, but internal organ damage and bleeding is more likely to kill you. Worked a number of t-bone side impact deaths, but no rear-ender ones. And a couple head-on's, as well.

The Corolla did about as well in rear impact ratings as the Cadillac CTS, BMW 3 and 5 series, Audi A4, Honda Accord LX, Infiniti G35, Lexus ES, Mercury Sable (Taurus sister ship), Toyota Camry and Avalon. So it has plenty of upscale company in the rear impact rating dept...

Interesting you mentioned Cobalt, because that was our second choice. But the Corolla is a proven ultra-reliable platform vs. the Cobalt is brand new. So we went with the Corolla.

Lone Ranger

Why is 91 better than 93 for a stock LT1?

Red Tornado

all things being equal and generally speaking, 93 isn't justified for a 10.3:1 compression, reverse-cooled engine. 93 and 91 behave very similarly anyway. one engine is a little different from the next however, there are alot of variables at play.

its kind of like spending $12 for a mobil 1 oil filter, using synthetic oil, and the goofball owner changes the oil filter every 3,000 miles anyway. (and the oil for that matter)......this really makes me crack up laughing, and the wallet of the poor sob only gets lighter for no reason.

oh, the rationale for the beer is solid, i'm sticking with that

Lone Ranger

But the comp ratio on stock LT1's is 10.5:1. LT4 is 10.8:1

Corvette Kid

Plus it's the most totally and complete ghey vehicle on the road.....

USAFPILOT

I think it will blow up if you use regular...wont it?

Johns94

It might at that