1991 v. 1995?
#1
Instructor
Thread Starter
Member Since: Nov 2013
Location: just South of the Zoo Michigan
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1991 v. 1995?
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.
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.
#3
Race Director
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.
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.
#5
Team Owner
GM made improvements to the C4 for each model year. And in some cases, there improvements made during the production run.
You will find the seats are more comfortable and physically larger. The suspension is a little softer depending on whether or not the car has the base suspension or the performance suspension RPO Z07.
If the 95 has an auto trans, it will be electronically controlled. And as mentioned, the LT1 will have more HP and torque over the '91's L98 motor. The '95 will also have 13" front rotors as standard; the '91 will have 12" rotors that are thinner.
You will find the seats are more comfortable and physically larger. The suspension is a little softer depending on whether or not the car has the base suspension or the performance suspension RPO Z07.
If the 95 has an auto trans, it will be electronically controlled. And as mentioned, the LT1 will have more HP and torque over the '91's L98 motor. The '95 will also have 13" front rotors as standard; the '91 will have 12" rotors that are thinner.
#7
Advanced
Another vote for the '95. I looked at early C4's for a long time because I always loved the styling of those early cars, then one day I looked at a '94. I haven't looked back since, you will greatly appreciate the newer vehicle and the refinements that come with it.
#8
GM made improvements to the C4 for each model year. And in some cases, there improvements made during the production run.
You will find the seats are more comfortable and physically larger. The suspension is a little softer depending on whether or not the car has the base suspension or the performance suspension RPO Z07.
If the 95 has an auto trans, it will be electronically controlled. And as mentioned, the LT1 will have more HP and torque over the '91's L98 motor. The '95 will also have 13" front rotors as standard; the '91 will have 12" rotors that are thinner.
You will find the seats are more comfortable and physically larger. The suspension is a little softer depending on whether or not the car has the base suspension or the performance suspension RPO Z07.
If the 95 has an auto trans, it will be electronically controlled. And as mentioned, the LT1 will have more HP and torque over the '91's L98 motor. The '95 will also have 13" front rotors as standard; the '91 will have 12" rotors that are thinner.
#10
Team Owner
#11
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: South-central Missouri
Posts: 6,314
Received 500 Likes
on
395 Posts
Well, that's the trouble with hanging one's hat on PEAK values - torque, in this case. Consider:
The L98 produces only about 20-25ft# more torque when it peaks than the LT1 is making at that rpm, but the LT1 is making 100 ft# MORE than the L98 at around 4800 rpm, and continues to make usable torque 1000 rpm beyond that of the L98.
Considering rear differential ratios of 3.07 for the L98s vs. 3.45 for the LT1, RWT favors the LT1 by ≈ 6%, all else being equal - both the 91 and the 95s had the ZF/M6 transmissiion.
So, comparing torque under the curve - averaged over 0-5800 rpm, the LT1 has the practical torque advantage as well, in spite of that moment between ≈ 2800 and 3800 where the L98 peaks above the LT1, and hence that is where the LT1 HP advantage comes from.
However, stoplight to stoplight, or on an autocross course, or even on a twisty mountain road, the L98 cars - with their peaky torque curves and all, will do very well, especially for their time (ask any Corvette Challenge driver!).
The L98 produces only about 20-25ft# more torque when it peaks than the LT1 is making at that rpm, but the LT1 is making 100 ft# MORE than the L98 at around 4800 rpm, and continues to make usable torque 1000 rpm beyond that of the L98.
Considering rear differential ratios of 3.07 for the L98s vs. 3.45 for the LT1, RWT favors the LT1 by ≈ 6%, all else being equal - both the 91 and the 95s had the ZF/M6 transmissiion.
So, comparing torque under the curve - averaged over 0-5800 rpm, the LT1 has the practical torque advantage as well, in spite of that moment between ≈ 2800 and 3800 where the L98 peaks above the LT1, and hence that is where the LT1 HP advantage comes from.
However, stoplight to stoplight, or on an autocross course, or even on a twisty mountain road, the L98 cars - with their peaky torque curves and all, will do very well, especially for their time (ask any Corvette Challenge driver!).
Last edited by Paul Workman; 04-15-2014 at 04:12 AM.
#12
Team Owner
Member Since: Dec 2000
Location: SE NY
Posts: 90,675
Likes: 0
Received 300 Likes
on
274 Posts
Cruise-In II Veteran
Is one a better buy than the other?
I prefer the fit of the early seats and the star-wars dash appearance.
With a few mods I had my prior '88 up to 300chp and would out run any bond stock LT1 in the 1/4 mile. Of course the LT1 can be modded as well.
#13
Well, that's the trouble with hanging one's hat on PEAK values - torque, in this case. Consider:
The L98 produces only about 20-25ft# more torque when it peaks than the LT1 is making at that rpm, but the LT1 is making 100 ft# MORE than the L98 at around 4800 rpm, and continues to make usable torque 1000 rpm beyond that of the L98.
Considering rear differential ratios of 3.07 for the L98s vs. 3.45 for the LT1, RWT favors the LT1 by ≈ 6%, all else being equal - both the 91 and the 95s had the ZF/M6 transmissiion.
So, comparing torque under the curve - averaged over 0-5800 rpm, the LT1 has the practical torque advantage as well, in spite of that moment between ≈ 2800 and 3800 where the L98 peaks above the LT1, and hence that is where the LT1 HP advantage comes from.
However, stoplight to stoplight, or on an autocross course, or even on a twisty mountain road, the L98 cars - with their peaky torque curves and all, will do very well, especially for their time (ask any Corvette Challenge driver!).
The L98 produces only about 20-25ft# more torque when it peaks than the LT1 is making at that rpm, but the LT1 is making 100 ft# MORE than the L98 at around 4800 rpm, and continues to make usable torque 1000 rpm beyond that of the L98.
Considering rear differential ratios of 3.07 for the L98s vs. 3.45 for the LT1, RWT favors the LT1 by ≈ 6%, all else being equal - both the 91 and the 95s had the ZF/M6 transmissiion.
So, comparing torque under the curve - averaged over 0-5800 rpm, the LT1 has the practical torque advantage as well, in spite of that moment between ≈ 2800 and 3800 where the L98 peaks above the LT1, and hence that is where the LT1 HP advantage comes from.
However, stoplight to stoplight, or on an autocross course, or even on a twisty mountain road, the L98 cars - with their peaky torque curves and all, will do very well, especially for their time (ask any Corvette Challenge driver!).
BTW, why does that chart look like it has the LT1 HP at 315, when it's supposed to be 300? Or did I have too many beers tonight?
#14
#15
Burning Brakes
It depends on what YOU like as a potential owner, as well as condition, mileage and style combinations. The L98 has a very strong, torquey low-end, so unless you intend to push the car at higher speeds (i.e. racing), you'd be just fine with either engine on the streets.
With that said, the C4 did get more refined as time passed. If you have two cars in equal condition and mileage, the '95 is very likely to be the better car. But don't get too caught up in that. Pick the C4 that speaks to you.
This.
With that said, the C4 did get more refined as time passed. If you have two cars in equal condition and mileage, the '95 is very likely to be the better car. But don't get too caught up in that. Pick the C4 that speaks to you.
This.
#17
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: South-central Missouri
Posts: 6,314
Received 500 Likes
on
395 Posts
Interesting & thanks for that chart, which I haven't seen before............but I'm not sure the part I highlighted is entirely appropriate considering the fact that the L98 is really out of breadth at 4500rpm. There's no doubt the '92-'95 LT1 had a flat & long torque curve & that overall it certainly kept torque over say 300lbs for much longer than a L98................but I'm not sure I would have characterized it as having "more" torque, because it really doesn't, nor does it feel like it does either.
BTW, why does that chart look like it has the LT1 HP at 315, when it's supposed to be 300? Or did I have too many beers tonight?
BTW, why does that chart look like it has the LT1 HP at 315, when it's supposed to be 300? Or did I have too many beers tonight?
As for the 315 hp, it would be a guess as to why 315 vs. "300", except to say no two motors are identical...and neither are dynos or conditions during the test. Peak torque for the 95 LT1 is advertised as 340# feet. That of the 91 L98 varies between 350 and 355, depending on source quoted.
But, in the end, BOTH cars have performance capabilities that exceed that of perhaps MOST Corvette drivers have anyway. So, the advantages one over the other may be somewhat esoteric and lost on all but those few that thrash their Corvettes.
I have had a 95 and own a 90 now. Motor (LT1 vs. LT5) performance aside, the 95 is on another level, refinement wise, e.g., ride quality, ASR, etc. (In fact, I removed my 90 sport seats from my ZR-1 and replaced them with standard 95 seats. Love 'em!)
Just my 2 cents.
#18
Burning Brakes
I had a 92 Auto with the 2.59 and I currently have an 85 Auto with the 3.07 and my first car was an 84 Auto with a 3.07 rear and I can tell you having the 3.07 makes any corvette LT-1 or L-98 more fun to drive IMHO. If I were choosing between the 91 and 95 and both had = miles and wear and color was the same I would choose the one with better options (Z51, G44, Etc) and call it a day. Drive both, see which one you prefer. If you plan on doing a lot of 0-speed limit driving I don't think you will notice a performance difference between the 2 cars given the same axle ratio. 70-120 freeway sprints would be a different story. Just my 2 cents.
#19
I agree with the statement on the 91 seats my buddy has them and yes they are made for kids not adults. My 95 Sport Seats are very comfortable, no comparison between the two, but his has the rare orange piping around the black seats.
#20
I had a 92 Auto with the 2.59 and I currently have an 85 Auto with the 3.07 and my first car was an 84 Auto with a 3.07 rear and I can tell you having the 3.07 makes any corvette LT-1 or L-98 more fun to drive IMHO. If I were choosing between the 91 and 95 and both had = miles and wear and color was the same I would choose the one with better options (Z51, G44, Etc) and call it a day. Drive both, see which one you prefer. If you plan on doing a lot of 0-speed limit driving I don't think you will notice a performance difference between the 2 cars given the same axle ratio. 70-120 freeway sprints would be a different story. Just my 2 cents.