Stock Camaro SS beats a stock Corvette?
08-27-2006, 05:12 PM
#41
Advanced
Member Since: Aug 2005
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A M6 F-body will proably beat an Auto C5 stock for stock. An M6 C5 vs M6 F-body with equal drivers the edge would go to the C5. The 1/4 mile time would be close but the trap speed on the c5 should be 2-3 mph higher. A C5 is about 200-300lbs lighter and more aerodynamic which equates to a better trap speed.
08-27-2006, 09:18 PM
#42
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Redsox, Pats, Celts & Bruins !!! Redsox Nation !!!
Posts: 17,786
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12
Originally Posted by Cgillies86
A M6 F-body will proably beat an Auto C5 stock for stock. An M6 C5 vs M6 F-body with equal drivers the edge would go to the C5. The 1/4 mile time would be close but the trap speed on the c5 should be 2-3 mph higher. A C5 is about 200-300lbs lighter and more aerodynamic which equates to a better trap speed.
Again, It will come down to the driver.
08-28-2006, 01:58 AM
#43
Instructor
Member Since: Apr 2006
Location: Guntersville/Arab Alabama
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well i ran the 1/4 mile today for the 1st time. I keep running 13.2's. It was so hot! It was about 95 degrees in the middle of the day, i want to go back when it gets cooler, and i think i can get a 12.9. The track was not prepped good at all either. I did run a ws6, but he had slicks and he ran a 13.0
08-28-2006, 01:07 PM
#44
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Redsox, Pats, Celts & Bruins !!! Redsox Nation !!!
Posts: 17,786
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12
Originally Posted by Anti-Ford
Well i ran the 1/4 mile today for the 1st time. I keep running 13.2's. It was so hot! It was about 95 degrees in the middle of the day, i want to go back when it gets cooler, and i think i can get a 12.9. The track was not prepped good at all either. I did run a ws6, but he had slicks and he ran a 13.0
Thats a good time, is your Vette stock?
08-28-2006, 04:04 PM
#45
Supporting Vendor
Member Since: Nov 2005
Location: Supporting the Corvette Community at Abel Chevrolet in Rio Vista, CA 707-374-6317 Ext.123
Posts: 14,498
Received 1,426 Likes
on
597 Posts
St. Jude Donor '08
Originally Posted by screw991le
Oh yeah and BTW the 87' GN was the fastest GM car built that year not the Vette.
08-28-2006, 04:18 PM
#46
Supporting Vendor
Member Since: Nov 2005
Location: Supporting the Corvette Community at Abel Chevrolet in Rio Vista, CA 707-374-6317 Ext.123
Posts: 14,498
Received 1,426 Likes
on
597 Posts
St. Jude Donor '08
F body will win
I have a 2001 SLP SS and it has beat EVERY '97-'04 A4 Vette that was stock. I had many vette guys bet money that an F body could not beat a vette stock for stock. I won a couple free tanks of gas from their stupid bets. BTW the best 1/4 mile I ran in the SS was a 13.20 BONE STOCK. I do not think there are many stock A4's running that low.
Last edited by RichieRichZ06; 08-28-2006 at 05:37 PM.
08-28-2006, 04:21 PM
#47
Drifting
Originally Posted by corvette-pilot
The way GM makes their cars the same year Z28 NEVER will be faster than the same year Vette (stock vs stock). Why would they make the flagship car slower than a Camaro ??
Heck, you could take the same year Vette, one with auto other manual and it will be a very close race
Heck, you could take the same year Vette, one with auto other manual and it will be a very close race
My buddy's 98 C5, A4 with 2.73's ran a best of 13.7 at the track while my 98 Z28 A4 with 2.73's ran 13.59 in the 1/4 mile. My current C5 (01 A4 with 3.15's) ran 13.1 bone stock.
We all know that the Corvette is the flagship car at GM for a reason. It is by far the better, more sophisticated vehicle.
08-28-2006, 06:13 PM
#48
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Member Since: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well my Corvette isn't exactly stock. It has a K&N intake and the the B&B Bullet catback exhaust. His camaro ss is completely stock. I know my mods don't add up to much, but after I had these done I felt a little difference in how the car ran.
08-28-2006, 07:01 PM
#49
Instructor
Member Since: Apr 2006
Location: Guntersville/Arab Alabama
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by screw991le
Thats a good time, is your Vette stock?
08-28-2006, 07:51 PM
#50
Team Owner
Originally Posted by NoOne
Cozmo,
Thankfully you can do a search in the Internet, and USENET archives with my username and find all the information you are looking for.
I had the one, and only, LS1 powered car at opening day at Milan Dragway in Michigan back in April of '98.
I ran the car, dead stock, to 13.28 @ 107.8mph, posted it on the internet and got a boat load of crap for it.
David Tittermary with a 1LE went 13 flat @ 110 and got more crap than I did.
Check around, its more than well documented. I'd have to go through my 400 or so slips, but there are plenty posted out there, if your that
interested you can find it. I spent enough time proving what those cars would do until more people started to buy them.
As far as the converter. Drag racing is about traction and getting upto speed as fast as possible, not going fast as possible. We've been to the strip and see properly setup drag Mustangs run high twelves, at only about 100mph. Car would leave wheels in the air, settle down and putter down the track.
Its all in the launch. When you have a converter the engine RPM rises before the trans actually engages so you launch with this huge torque spike, that torque gets the car upto speed and moving.
Good comparison is watch NHRA drag racing and funny cars or top fuel. Concept is the same, they'll launch and blow the tires off at the 60' mark and just idle down the track, usually to mid 10's at 70-80mph.
With a good stall and tires you can do very well. Even a small stall but beware it does change the driving characteristic of the car too much for my taste.
Thankfully you can do a search in the Internet, and USENET archives with my username and find all the information you are looking for.
I had the one, and only, LS1 powered car at opening day at Milan Dragway in Michigan back in April of '98.
I ran the car, dead stock, to 13.28 @ 107.8mph, posted it on the internet and got a boat load of crap for it.
David Tittermary with a 1LE went 13 flat @ 110 and got more crap than I did.
Check around, its more than well documented. I'd have to go through my 400 or so slips, but there are plenty posted out there, if your that
interested you can find it. I spent enough time proving what those cars would do until more people started to buy them.
As far as the converter. Drag racing is about traction and getting upto speed as fast as possible, not going fast as possible. We've been to the strip and see properly setup drag Mustangs run high twelves, at only about 100mph. Car would leave wheels in the air, settle down and putter down the track.
Its all in the launch. When you have a converter the engine RPM rises before the trans actually engages so you launch with this huge torque spike, that torque gets the car upto speed and moving.
Good comparison is watch NHRA drag racing and funny cars or top fuel. Concept is the same, they'll launch and blow the tires off at the 60' mark and just idle down the track, usually to mid 10's at 70-80mph.
With a good stall and tires you can do very well. Even a small stall but beware it does change the driving characteristic of the car too much for my taste.
Coz
08-28-2006, 09:58 PM
#51
Race Director
Pro Mechanic
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Fort Wayne IN
Posts: 12,247
Received 813 Likes
on
431 Posts
C5 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
2017 C5 of the Year Finalist
2016 C5 of the Year Finalist
2015 C5 of the Year Finalist
I Believe In The Beer Fairy
Originally Posted by inoyourtrippn
kill him on the RT and he will spin. get him all worked up before psych him out 
. dont forget your helmets.
. dont forget your helmets.I say it's a drivers race. My other 93 T/A, when it was a bolt on car (we're comparing LT1 to LS1 at this point again) I have on video with me driving taking down a C5 at Atco. My car ran a 13.3 to the C5's 13.4. I woulnd't put it past an LS1 based F-Body to beat a same year C5 in a straight line with a better driver.
08-29-2006, 01:51 AM
#53
Advanced
Member Since: Oct 2005
Location: California City CA
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO, if you both suck at driving, you will have the edge because he is more likely to burn the tires out of the hole in the 6sp. That will be your best hope of putting him in his place.
08-29-2006, 02:08 AM
#54
Le Mans Master
Originally Posted by frckid
IMHO, if you both suck at driving, you will have the edge because he is more likely to burn the tires out of the hole in the 6sp. That will be your best hope of putting him in his place.
lol i agree with you. I suck and ran my BOLT ON z06 in the 1/8th this weekend and ran 8.7 first and 8.5 second time... i just suck at the track. I need sticky tires!
08-29-2006, 02:53 PM
#55
Instructor
Member Since: Apr 2006
Location: Guntersville/Arab Alabama
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 5W0P3
lol i agree with you. I suck and ran my BOLT ON z06 in the 1/8th this weekend and ran 8.7 first and 8.5 second time... i just suck at the track. I need sticky tires!
08-29-2006, 04:15 PM
#56
Le Mans Master
Originally Posted by Anti-Ford
yep i agree, because my 99 non z vette ran a 8.5 with just exhaust and intake.
08-29-2006, 04:58 PM
#57
Team Owner
The '98 SS had 320 bhp and 345 lb/ft of tq, weighed 3360 lbs. The Corvette on the other hand had 345 hp and 350 lb/ft of tq and tipped the scales at 3218 lbs. 10.5 lbs/hp for the SS and 9.3 lbs/hp for the Corvette. Tell your buddy NFL (Not F#$*ing Likely).
08-29-2006, 05:11 PM
#58
Le Mans Master
Originally Posted by themonk
The '98 SS had 320 bhp and 345 lb/ft of tq, weighed 3360 lbs. The Corvette on the other hand had 345 hp and 350 lb/ft of tq and tipped the scales at 3218 lbs. 10.5 lbs/hp for the SS and 9.3 lbs/hp for the Corvette. Tell your buddy NFL (Not F#$*ing Likely).
tell me why i stock 99 with free mods made 330rwhp, but is rated at "305bhp"
08-29-2006, 05:49 PM
#59
Team Owner
Originally Posted by 5W0P3
everyone knows GM advertised the camaro's to have less power than the vette. they couldn't have them making the same, or they wouldnt' sell any vettes!
tell me why i stock 99 with free mods made 330rwhp, but is rated at "305bhp"
tell me why i stock 99 with free mods made 330rwhp, but is rated at "305bhp"
08-29-2006, 05:59 PM
#60
Melting Slicks
themonk,
I would say you have been reading too much not actually seeing any LS1 f-bodies in action. Stock LS1 Camaros and Firebirds dynoed the same as a stock C5. The 320 hp for a '98 Camaro SS was underrated. My '99 Camaro SS (MN6) with an SLP air intake dynoed higher than my '03 C5 Coupe (MN6) with a Donaldson Blackwing. The Camaro is a little heavier, but it is definitely close enough to come down to the driver.
I would say you have been reading too much not actually seeing any LS1 f-bodies in action. Stock LS1 Camaros and Firebirds dynoed the same as a stock C5. The 320 hp for a '98 Camaro SS was underrated. My '99 Camaro SS (MN6) with an SLP air intake dynoed higher than my '03 C5 Coupe (MN6) with a Donaldson Blackwing. The Camaro is a little heavier, but it is definitely close enough to come down to the driver.