ch@0s

It depends are what you are going to do with the car and the 91 should be cheaper. Maybe you should use that as a bargaining point. I bought the 91 because I knew when I was done with the car there would not be much stock left and there is more aftermarket support for the traditional SBC. In your shoes I would probably by the 95.

auggy

[QUOTE=johnny diamond;1586656705]I am looking at two (at least) C4s. 1991 and 1995. about same price, etc. seem comparable cars. I know they have different engines.

Is one a better buy than the other? in daily driving will I notice the horsepower difference? Is one more pleasurable to drive? any reason to prefer one over the other?

Thanks.[/QUOTE

It depends. The 95 uses the newer 134a in the a/c and a fuel injector for every cylinder. I have driven both and the power seems about he same. The 91 uses throttle body fuel injection---so what. The 91 does not have the opti-spark which is a big plus. Big difference in the seats, so if your a fatty buy the 95. If the 91 is a lot less money then buy it , otherwise buy the 95.

ch@0s

"If you'r a Fatty"

Winnin'

[QUOTE=auggy;1586662743]?!?!?!?! 91 used Tuned Port Fuel injection and 8 Fuel injectors. No throttle body fuel injection.

Tom400CFI

Everything above is wrong. Except that "The 95 uses a fuel injector for every cylinder."...but so does the '91.

auggy

134A and opti spark look it up!

auggy

What don't you understand about the seats between a 91 and a 95 and --- if your a fatty ??

auggy

Well, I may have wrong about the fuel injection.

ch@0s

I'm not confused at all. I just can't believe you said that.

91 black convert

If you look at the graph closely, you should notice that there are 3 hp lines. The third being for the 3rd generation LT-1 engine mentioned in the graph legend. That is the one that has 315hp.

dtana

Yes, I understand that. But this is the first time I have ever seen a stock '92-95 LT1 quoted with anything but 300hp

auggy

Well your right. Pretty in-sensitive to those of us who are carrying too much weight--which is why someone would favor the 95. Forgive me----- since I am irritable because of the diet I am on. Sorry to those who were offended. Won't happen again.

Tom400CFI

I have no need to "look it up". I already am well aware of the refrigerant used and the marketing name applied to the distributor. You may want to have a closer look at what I quoted you on, and what I was therefore, commenting on.

*'91 does not use throttle body fuel injection like you claimed that it does.
*There is a substantial difference in power. Beware of the misleading SOTP meter!

astepup

I would say "Hey! Some of us resemble that remark!!" But I'm laughing too damn hard

astepup said that

solaris_vii

don't be afraid to look at older c4s too. many agree that the 89 was the best year

Paul Workman

No... Not the best graphic, but I believe the solid line is the 92 LT1 line; the one showing the 315 hp.

This graph more clearly makes the case for the two engines pretty well. The torque advantage region afforded by the L98 is pretty slim, compared side by side with the over all performance of the LT1.



And, speaking of the opti, the 95 opti is vented which addressed the moisture problem, leaving the far superior ignition characteristics afforded by the Opti's design (over the rear-driven distributor) intact.

mixalive

92-95.. All the way..

Mr. Peabody

If possible do drive them both for a least 30 minutes ........ then you need to decide which one you prefer to drive.

All other things being equal ....there are reasons to buy the 95 and they've already been mentioned.

Which car seems to have better maintained & have a better set of receipts for service?

With the C5 already in full development by the time the 95 was going into production a lot of effort was put into smaller improvements lots of extra Velcro in certain places to eliminate squeeks. Better 13" front rotors were now standard.

The sport seats in the 95 are the most comfortable in any generation and were made with higher quality leather (Connolly Leather hides)than what was used in the past. I've put 90K in my 95 and have been very happy with it.

corvette Stu

the seats are enough to make your decision, the 91 seats suck

H P Bushrod

...Except for those Multec injectors and head gasket failures on the right head. I'd love to find a early C4 (including the '89), but I'd check them out very closely.