Stock 2011 L99 vs 1996-2002 SS or Z28

[bw26ss]

L99 wins, would never own an Lslow1 again

[red70tvhs]

Originally Posted by 11fastss

L99 wins, would never own an Lslow1 again

if you think an Ls1 is "slow" well... Its not nice to say what i'd call you so I just shut up

[bw26ss]

Originally Posted by red70tvhs

if you think an Ls1 is "slow" well... Its not nice to say what i'd call you so I just shut up

good, it would be better for everyone if you did.

[red70tvhs]

Originally Posted by 11fastss

good, it would be better for everyone if you did.

In all honesty tho, if you thought your ls1 was slow and that the l99 is faster in the camaro your ls1 musta been sick. Ive came across a few sick ls1's, my close friends T/A is errr sick even tho he wont believe me. I'd still give it the edge against a l99 camaro off the showroom floor.

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by BlackM6RS/SS

Ls1 Fbody m6 will beat a l99 any day of the week. 3900lbs 325rwhp l99 to 3500-3600lb 315rwhp Fbody

You are comparing an automatic vs. manual. Using the rwhp/weight argument doesn't work.

Don' t forget an LS1 Fbody (automatic) dynos in the 270 - 280 range. With considably less RWHP it can easily run with the LS1 manual.

My L99 A6 was running 12.9s @ 109 mph with 330 rwhp (tune only). I beat every stock LS3 M6 I raced with that setup (only 330 rwhp)

My L99 A6 was running 12.4s - 12.5s @ 111 mph (intake, headers, tune) with 354 rwhp. That's with just 354 rwhp (less RWHP than a stock LS3 M6)
This was full weight - stock wheels, just bolt on mods (354 rwhp).

Later I added lighter wheels and I was down to 12.16 @ 114 mph. Converter got me down to 12.10 @ 113 mph (still only 354 rwhp).

Automatics consistantly run faster times with less RWHP.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

You are comparing an automatic vs. manual. Using the rwhp/weight argument doesn't work.

Don' t forget an LS1 Fbody (automatic) dynos in the 270 - 280 range. With considably less RWHP it can easily run with the LS1 manual.

My L99 A6 was running 12.9s @ 109 mph with 330 rwhp (tune only). I beat every stock LS3 M6 I raced with that setup (only 330 rwhp)

My L99 A6 was running 12.4s - 12.5s @ 111 mph (intake, headers, tune) with 354 rwhp. That's with just 354 rwhp (less RWHP than a stock LS3 M6)
This was full weight - stock wheels, just bolt on mods (354 rwhp).

Later I added lighter wheels and I was down to 12.16 @ 114 mph. Converter got me down to 12.10 @ 113 mph (still only 354 rwhp).

Automatics consistantly run faster times with less RWHP.

m6 ls1 > l99

[bw26ss]

Originally Posted by red70tvhs

In all honesty tho, if you thought your ls1 was slow and that the l99 is faster in the camaro your ls1 musta been sick. Ive came across a few sick ls1's, my close friends T/A is errr sick even tho he wont believe me. I'd still give it the edge against a l99 camaro off the showroom floor.

By no means was my 2001 WS6 TA slow, but it is not as quick as my camaro, mainly because it couldn't hook as well(really needed 315's on rear), but also I modded my L99 with exhaust, tune, and intake a week after i bought it(now i need 315's on this), so they probably would be pretty close stock for stock, but after a good tune the 6.2L will whip it all day long. I was just kidding about the LSlow comment, I wish I would have kept my T/A, especially now that pontiac is no more. All I can say is if your not doing dod delete with a tune on your l99, you are definitely missing out, it is a completely different animal, if i didn't know that it was possible to disable dod, I would not have bought the automatic car.

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by big hammer

m6 ls1 > l99

barely.
I watched a bone stock L99 A6 run 13.3 @ 105 mph in 88 degree weather with high humidity.
DA corrected 12.9 @ 108 mph. So L99 A6s aren't slow.


But previously owning an LT1 Auto, LS1 manual, LS1 auto, LS2 auto (GTO), LS2 manual (GTO), I've got a ton of time slips to back up what I'm saying. But I would give the edge to an LS1 M6 (skilled driver) over an L99 A6.

Here's the best stock L99 A6s in this forum. Not bad, but only a few cars have made it into the 12s.

Stock, L99 A6, Fast List

NO	Member	Engine	Date	60'	1/8 ET @ MPH	1/4 ET @ MPH	Details
1	8secpumpgasdad	L99	3/8/10	1.9059	8.321 @ 85.54 MPH	12.868 @ 108.7 MPH	270
2	8ty8 ls1	L99	10/20/09	1.923	8.385 @ 83.54 MPH	12.971 @ 107.61 MPH	99
3	1stGM	L99	11/29/09	1.935	8.399 @ 85.09 MPH	12.985 @ 107.34 MPH	159
4	Motion427	L99	9/17/11	2.017	8.473 @ 84.79 MPH	13.009 @ 109.05 MPH	1029
5	1badbish	L99	3/13/11	2.019	8.494 @ 84.62 MPH	13.102 @ 107.23 MPH	809

[Bob Cosby]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

....Stock, L99 A6, Fast List

That list is very similar to what a bone stock LS1 M6 list would look like - though the LS1 would generally have a higher trap speed.

[Animal]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Superfly

I have a hard time believing that a bone stock LS1 f-body even exists. How could you own a car with that much potential still be stock +10 years later?

My friend's wife was selling a bone stock all original 2002 Z28 convertible with 42,000 miles last year.

Gas prices, kids, carpools and BMWs kept the miles down. I think its ugly inside (can you say rubbermaid interior) and out ( the pontiacs look better) so I didn't consider it but these things exist. It was immaculate, holy crap, dealer serviced, not a scratch on the kick panels and minor scuffs on the rocker sills.

Not bad for 6000 though. Someone apparently scored, who knew? Again this was last year in LA.

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by Bob Cosby

That list is very similar to what a bone stock LS1 M6 list would look like - though the LS1 would generally have a higher trap speed.

I agree that looks pretty dead on, but I can't say that I've seen any stock LS1 F-body trap 110 mph though more like 108-109 mph, but since most of those L99s are 107 mph, then yeah... ha ha.

[Bad70supreme]

Originally Posted by Rock36

I agree that looks pretty dead on, but I can't say that I've seen any stock LS1 F-body trap 110 mph though more like 108-109 mph, but since most of those L99s are 107 mph, then yeah... ha ha.

Thats because most of them trap 104-106 bone stock... out of 300 thousand stock ls1 runs, 15 of them ran 110 in perfect weather and a great driver... then there all high 12s and trap 110

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by Bad70supreme

Thats because most of them trap 104-106 bone stock... out of 300 thousand stock ls1 runs, 15 of them ran 110 in perfect weather and a great driver... then there all high 12s and trap 110

LOL you know how fast lists are, my Z06 is a 10 second car bone stock

[_Nick_]

I think this all this debate is pretty comical.

Despite 8 years of hiatus, and more advanced engines with more power, this current gen only runs 1 or 2 tenths faster in the quarter at best.