4th Gen 1/4 mile times versus 5th Gen 1/4 mile times

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by jimmyallgm

hey guys ran a 13.5 at 111mph wed night in my 2010 2ss, i was pissed!!! my 2000 ss runs a consistant 12.6

I wouldn't be pissed with 111 mph trap speed. You just need a good launch. My guess is your 60' times were in the 2.2+ range. You have the trap speed to run easy 12s with a 1.9 sec 60' time (which is very possible with a decent launch). I pulled 1.99 sec 60' in my bone stock 06 GTO (13.3 @ 105 mph). With 111 mph trap speeds, I'd have my GTO running mid 12s for sure.


And your 2000 SS must be modded. I owned 2 different LS1 Fbody's and in average air (70 degrees, sunny), they both ran mid 13s @ 104-106 mph.

[shinzon]

Originally Posted by jimmyallgm

hey guys ran a 13.5 at 111mph wed night in my 2010 2ss, i was pissed!!! my 2000 ss runs a consistant 12.6

hahahahaha that was a great Troll right there nice one. You win the award !!!

[Gentry78]

Originally Posted by shinzon

hahahahaha that was a great Troll right there nice one. You win the award !!!

haha

[SubSolar]

The 5th gens are mile per houring a lot more than the 4th gens. Also, wait till you start modifying it, you have more cubic inches. If you want to know how well the LS3 is responding to mods, go to some Corvette forums.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by SubSolar

The 5th gens are mile per houring a lot more than the 4th gens. Also, wait till you start modifying it, you have more cubic inches. If you want to know how well the LS3 is responding to mods, go to some Corvette forums.

I've only seen the MPH about ~2 more than what the LS1's were running. That's not a whole lot more.

[SubSolar]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

I've only seen the MPH about ~2 more than what the LS1's were running. That's not a whole lot more.

Most of the stock LS1's were running 105-107 mph when new. GM High Tech Performance ran a 12.8@109 in a Z28, but that was with near freeing temperatures. I think there's a big diff between 110-111 and 105-107, but hey that's just me.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by SubSolar

Most of the stock LS1's were running 105-107 mph when new. GM High Tech Performance ran a 12.8@109 in a Z28, but that was with near freeing temperatures. I think there's a big diff between 110-111 and 105-107, but hey that's just me.

it is just you, considering all the REAL track MPH's (non-magazine GPS track runs) from the 5th gen have been 107-108. My argument still stands.

[SubSolar]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

it is just you, considering all the REAL track MPH's (non-magazine GPS track runs) from the 5th gen have been 107-108. My argument still stands.

My real world 2000 SS would only hit 104 mph, unless I powershifted.

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by SubSolar

Most of the stock LS1's were running 105-107 mph when new. GM High Tech Performance ran a 12.8@109 in a Z28, but that was with near freeing temperatures. I think there's a big diff between 110-111 and 105-107, but hey that's just me.

Even with the mph difference, there are differences that are non-hp specific that are to the advantage of a 4th gen...specifically smaller tires and a solid rear axle.

it is perfectly plausibile to have a car running a 13.1 @ 110 mph and another running 13.1 @ 107 mph.

Hell my car ran a 13.0 @ 105 mph...but there are reasons for that beyond just horsepower and weight.

That doesn't change my overall opinion that a 5th Gen is faster, I just think the 4th gen can still give it a run for its money.

[Treadstone]

You guys sure the 4th gen is 3300 lbs? That's close to Corvette weight.

But I agree, there are multiple times I have seen stock C4 Vettes (LT1 +) beat LS1 C5 Vettes in the 1/4.

On the road at 100+ though is where the difference is greater.

[shinzon]

I would be happy to run someone in NJ

[Foglin]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

but as nineball said, the LS3 really opens up in the top end. the LS1 and LT1 motors both have their weak and strong points. not to mention the lower weight overall.

First time out on the track today, albeit lousy 60ft time, I managed to outrun a 4th gen equipped with drag radials (otherwise bone stock, I think), his 60ft time was 2.0, mine was 2,4 with wheels spinning. His trap speed was +100 at 13.9s and mine was 105 at 13.8s. mine was really pulling once I got it hooked.
Yes, I know, it's a lousy ET but anyway, I had a blast!
Just need to learn how to get out of the hole! (only got one Timed run as it was a "street legal race event" with arm drop starts (where one could buy a timed pass for 2 bucks, or 3 for 5!)).
tried to start with rpms between 1000 and 2000, 1500 to 1750 seemed to work best. otherwise I would either bog the engine or spin the tires too much.

[Speedfreak]

Originally Posted by Nine Ball

When you shift the car, the throttle blade momentarily closes down to 27% open, then ramps back up to 100%. Torque management. The computer does this to ensure that the transmission has more longevity. Consider torque management as "abuse management". But, it also hurts performance. With a custom tune, this can be reduced. In stock form, powershifting is relatively boring and feels no different than lift-n-shift since the throttle closes automatically.

Also, some of you guys are comparing the best possible LS1 and LT1 stock times to average and worst case Gen 5 times. Here is what we should be noting:

Assuming 100% showroom stock, on stock tires, stock curb weight:

1993-1997 LT1 4th Gen = 13.6 extreme case, 13.8 on the good side, 14.1 typical
1998-2002 LS1 4th Gen = 12.8 extreme case, 13.1 on the good side, 13.4 typical
2010 Camaro SS = 12.8 extreme case, 13.0 on the good side, 13.4 typical

I don't see 12.7s happening with the 100% stock tune or 100% stock 20" tires anytime soon. In negative DA weather, 12.9-13.0 no problem. In positive DA weather mid-13s will be the norm. In 2,000 ft DA weather even the 4th Gen LS1 cars run 13.5-13.7, not 12s.

I have not seen a 2010 run but the others are dead nut on.

[ls6 zo6]

I owned a 1998ss white ordered bone stock with ss package. hardtop,crank windows,no cruise no foglamps nothing. I street raced for two years before losing. It ran consistent 12.90 with a lid, and drag radials. Turned a personal best of 12.77 on a cold 45 degree march day. I still miss that car!

[shinzon]

My invite is still open.

[WayneE]

Originally Posted by Nine Ball

Also, some of you guys are comparing the best possible LS1 and LT1 stock times to average and worst case Gen 5 times.

I think this is the issue right now. There is so much data out there for LS1 4th-gens, but precious little available for the 5th-gens. Also, most people aren't racing in fall/winter -DA conditions, like most of us did with our 4th-gens. They're racing right now, in summer heat.

I had a 2001 WS6 TA. It ran 12.76@110.05 with a 1.92 short on drag radials (bog) in ~65 deg weather (I used the weather history on wunderground.com to get the temp) at MIR here in MD. I had 600 miles on the car at the time, still had paper tags on it. Timeslip

IIRC, the weight of the car was 3690 at the local truck scales.

I expect we'll start seeing 5th-gens down there once more guys get track time in the cooler weather on prepped tracks.

[S8ER01Z]

Originally Posted by Treadstone

You guys sure the 4th gen is 3300 lbs? That's close to Corvette weight.

But I agree, there are multiple times I have seen stock C4 Vettes (LT1 +) beat LS1 C5 Vettes in the 1/4.

On the road at 100+ though is where the difference is greater.

I just had my 2001 on a scale a few weeks ago. It was 3440lbs (full tank, full weight). 3600 with me in it.

I also dynoed two weeks ago with the free ram air mod being my only mod and made 322rwhp/341rwtrq on a land and sea 1200.

Bone stock at the same track speedy runs at I went 13.19 @ 108.59mph 2.1 60ft. I am confident that same day, same track I would be close on his tail but still lose the race. With the FRA mod I have I couldn't say for sure but I think it would be a rediculously close race.

I will post my dyno graph and weight pics tomorrow, it's a pita to do it from my iPhone.

Edit: As mentioned above...
Curb Weight (Nothing removed, full weight, full tank of gas)
2001 Camaro Z28 - 6 Speed


Dyno - Land and Sea 1200 - No Smoothing (I asked but they said it was disabled for tuning purposes)

The numbers to go with the chart...

[kunkelz28]

the 4th gens were made for the track and track only, the 5th gen was made to be an all around car (IRS,styling,brakes,20 in rims). So yes the 4th gen is close to the same 1/4 mile times but the 5th gen will blow it away in so many other catagories and with some mods it will start turning better track times as people start experimenting. just my 2 cents

[S8ER01Z]

Originally Posted by kunkelz28

the 4th gens were made for the track and track only, the 5th gen was made to be an all around car (IRS,styling,brakes,20 in rims). So yes the 4th gen is close to the same 1/4 mile times but the 5th gen will blow it away in so many other catagories and with some mods it will start turning better track times as people start experimenting. just my 2 cents

I know what you are saying but the 4th gen isn't exactly a great 1/4 mile car... in stock form they leave a lot on the table with their skinny width tires and less than ideal gearing. They are not slouches on a roadcourse either.. the 5th may surpass it's performance in some cases but it's not like its leaps and bounds ahead.

If we were talking interior/build quality or something then sure.

Mod for Mod the LS3 will definately trump the LS1...no question there.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by S8ER01Z

I know what you are saying but the 4th gen isn't exactly a great 1/4 mile car... in stock form they leave a lot on the table with their skinny width tires and less than ideal gearing. They are not slouches on a roadcourse either.. the 5th may surpass it's performance in some cases but it's not like its leaps and bounds ahead.

If we were talking interior/build quality or something then sure.

Mod for Mod the LS3 will definately trump the LS1...no question there.

I think performance-wise, the 5th Gen. is at least as good as a 4th Gen. but the 5th Gen. is a lot better all-around car. I'm not sure that's arguable at all. Leaps and bounds ahead of a 4th Gen. - probably not. To think performance is going to get better than now is really encouraging to me too.

[m1tankr]

Compare stock to stock from same independent tests (magazines and auto web sites with no bones to pick), the 5th gen is consistently running faster times. You have to compare apples to apples. Looking at the ls1 sites, there are a few that have gone into 12's stock, but those are the exception, not the rule. From the 4th gen owners posts, most of them were able to get their ls1 f-bods to low 13's in good conditions. There are plenty of 13-14sec passes to get there. The 5th gen times will get faster as they break in and the drivers learn to launch their new IRS car better. As more 5th gens come out, more factory freaks will pop up.
My memory isn't as selective as some others on here. I ran 12's in my old T-Type also, but I had plenty of 13 sec time slips to go with the couple of 12's ('til I made it faster). I don't remember running 14's, but I'm sure I did depending on the conditions. I've watched plenty of stock LS1's running 14's when I was running 13's. Saw plenty of 15 second GT's that looked like SVO catalogs under the hoods. Running through archives, there are plenty of LS1's guys posting about running 14's to 13's when they 1st started. There's a reason LS1 guys are upgrading to LS3 parts and LS3 guys aren't going to LS1 parts. Technology moves on, engines get more power, tires get stickier, things get better, cars get faster. The 4th gen guys have nothing to apologize for, just remember the fish tends to get bigger each time you tell the story, your old girlfriends get better looking, and your car always gets a little faster each year.

[shinzon]

Originally Posted by m1tankr

. The 4th gen guys have nothing to apologize for, just remember the fish tends to get bigger each time you tell the story, your old girlfriends get better looking, and your car always gets a little faster each year.

I not apologizing, No one has taken me up on my invite yet.

Bottom Line here is that the 4th Gen is what the 2010 is being measured against, ain't nothing like setting the bar.

Seriously though, the 2010 is 12 years newer than the ls1 fbody it should be better. It is also considerably much more loot now.

I love my 4th gen, 5th gen is a great car I can see why you could love that. It is what you like. My car is 11 years old and look super new, it runs like a mofo and I can't to run a fith gen, but alas if I could put a LS3 in my fourth gen then that would be super tiities..

[S8ER01Z]

Originally Posted by m1tankr

From the 4th gen owners posts, most of them were able to get their ls1 f-bods to low 13's in good conditions. There are plenty of 13-14sec passes to get there.

I honestly have never had a 14 second slip in this car... the fiancee tagged a 13.1 @ 105mph on her 3rd pass down the strip (in anything) and even her first attempts were 13.5 ~ 13.6. The launch is tricky but it's not exactly difficult to row gears after getting it off the line. Not sure where people find these horrible drivers at that struggle to get a 13 in an LS1 car but they should be rounded up and shot. haha... hell my LT1 automatic car ran 14.1 @ 97mph on it's very first pass at Cordova.

Compare stock to stock from same independent tests (magazines and auto web sites with no bones to pick), the 5th gen is consistently running faster times. You have to compare apples to apples.

You have to keep in mind that the magazines testing methods have changed over time... the GPS equipment they use now isn't the same stuff they used 10 years ago while testing. It's not an apples to apples comparison. Most of the magazines switched testing equipment about 5 years ago if memory serves so you can look it up for yourself. If you really don't believe it (or think it's some crazy excuse) I can go get it for you.

Looking at the ls1 sites, there are a few that have gone into 12's stock, but those are the exception, not the rule.

This is true...however it makes it a fact and not a tall tale. It does take talent to launch properly on 245 width tires as anyone here 'SHOULD' know...

My memory isn't as selective as some others on here. I ran 12's in my old T-Type also, but I had plenty of 13 sec time slips to go with the couple of 12's ('til I made it faster). I don't remember running 14's, but I'm sure I did depending on the conditions. I've watched plenty of stock LS1's running 14's when I was running 13's. Saw plenty of 15 second GT's that looked like SVO catalogs under the hoods. Running through archives, there are plenty of LS1's guys posting about running 14's to 13's when they 1st started. There's a reason LS1 guys are upgrading to LS3 parts and LS3 guys aren't going to LS1 parts. Technology moves on, engines get more power, tires get stickier, things get better, cars get faster. The 4th gen guys have nothing to apologize for, just remember the fish tends to get bigger each time you tell the story, your old girlfriends get better looking, and your car always gets a little faster each year.

I certainly wouldn't apologize... it's a well known fact that the majority of drivers can't drive. Anytime someone will talent pulls off a great pass the rest of the community starts talking about how the car is a freak yet when said car hits the dyno it makes the same numbers as the others. There is a reason why people like Jaime Furman, Ranger, Evan Smith, Jordan Muser(sp?), etc get a lot of credit for their skills. Not everyone can drive a car to it's potential and people seem to think they are not in the majority when they are. I know people who brag all the time about their 'skills' and when they hit the strip they come away with 'ok' times for their car. The problem is their egos get inflated and suddenly half a second slower than the fastest times becomes 'what the car should do' instead of 'I can do better'.

I am far from a great driver, I just studied up on what Ranger was preaching (www.rangeracceleration.com). All of my passes have been made using things he has talked about.. my launch RPM was taken directly from Evan Smiths 12 second passes, the fiancees 13.1 ~ 13.3 (ALL DAY LONG and I'm talking 20+ passes) were all done using these same methods.

Before people start cementing their beliefs on what something should or should not do maybe they should just start looking around more.

Honestly if I was clueless I would be walking around talking about 5th gens being mid 13 second cars and downplaying the 12.87 done at Cordova. Fortunately I am far too open minded to be blinded like that.

Bottom line... I've never stated the 4th gen is 'FASTER' than the 5th gen... they are just very close in performance (look at nineballs post). Fact is I would embarass most of the drivers currently cruising around in 5th gens right now (others like Nineball and Speedy would embarass me). The 5th gen is not worlds above the 4th gen in performance and it doesn't do any good to pretend it is. If fragile egos need that reassurance look elsewhere... come winter you will be seeing 12 second slips (12.6 if my prediction is correct) but you will STILL be seeing guys in the 13s. Welcome to reality... not everyone can drive and not all tracks are created equal.

I apologize to the guys are know what they are talking about..didn't mean to waste your time with my post.

[m1tankr]

Originally Posted by shinzon

Bottom Line here is that the 4th Gen is what the 2010 is being measured against, ain't nothing like setting the bar.

Seriously though, the 2010 is 12 years newer than the ls1 fbody it should be better. It is also considerably much more loot now.

I love my 4th gen, 5th gen is a great car I can see why you could love that. It is what you like. My car is 11 years old and look super new, it runs like a mofo and I can't to run a fith gen, but alas if I could put a LS3 in my fourth gen then that would be super tiities..

For most, it's being measured up against the new Mustang and Challenger.

The pricing is actually pretty similar. I found 2 tests of 2002 SS. Both priced out at $32k. Now you get a more refined version with Brembo brakes, nav, Onstar, IRS, more power, other new tech for a similar price, 7 yrs later. Compare apples to apples and it's looking pretty good.

I like your car, but it's sort of like comparing yours to a 69 Camaro, everyone has their own taste, but they are different cars from a different period. so the comparisons don't hold up.

If you're just looking for 1/4 times, I think they'll be pretty comparable as they break in and more are running. I think the edge will go to the 5th gens over the next couple of years. So your same money now buys a nicer car that satisfies all the current regs that increased weight, and runs the same or faster. I don't see the issue.

Enjoy them all.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by shinzon

I not apologizing, No one has taken me up on my invite yet.

Bottom Line here is that the 4th Gen is what the 2010 is being measured against, ain't nothing like setting the bar.

Seriously though, the 2010 is 12 years newer than the ls1 fbody it should be better. It is also considerably much more loot now.

I love my 4th gen, 5th gen is a great car I can see why you could love that. It is what you like. My car is 11 years old and look super new, it runs like a mofo and I can't to run a fith gen, but alas if I could put a LS3 in my fourth gen then that would be super tiities..

The only thing I don't agree with you on is that the 2010 camaro costs considerably more money than the 2002. There are a lot of factors involved but if you just take the base price and factor in inflation, the 2010 is not more expensive.