Notices
Motorsports The Z in its Natural Habitat

Highway Run: Ran a SS from ~85-135

 
Old Apr 23, 2003 | 01:30 PM
  #61  
ELESWON's Avatar
ELESWON
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte
Default

I didnt mean that the T56s dont pull past 4th, they do. Its just you can tell a marked diffrence when you hit 5th. But hey, ive got 4.10s on the list of things to do this summer. That, along with some long tubes, ORY, and a few other minor bolts ons, I ought to see solid 12's. In regards to the high speed stuff, i dont care too much anymore for anything over 140.
Old Apr 23, 2003 | 02:09 PM
  #62  
zxsaint's Avatar
zxsaint
Thread Starter
Fairlady Stalker
Premier Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,860
Likes: 0
From: Studio City, CA
Default

Originally posted by JamRWS6
I would SERIOUSLY doubt a 350Z has better triple digit acceleration....while 5th gear is an overdrive it is still not bad for pulling hte car from 130mph....the 5th gear in Mustangs is another story...absolutely falls off.
I felt the same way before, but now its a little up in the air for me, i'm not as convinced anymore about the 100+ scenario. I'd love to try this again whenever I get the chance (and its safe enough) Last run like that was fun as hell. Lots of addrenaline at those speeds.

Hey CLS, when are you and JP00SS doing this 100+ run for us?

Question, I know most cars from all manuf. have slightly slower/faster cars straight out of the factory..

I keep hearing how 1997+ LS1's vary a lot. Are there large established differences in power output within certain VIN ranges or model years? or is this just a rumor?
Old Apr 23, 2003 | 04:05 PM
  #63  
JP00SS's Avatar
JP00SS
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Hendersonville, NC
Default

I'm up for it whenever we can, I'm sure CLS is too.
The 01 and 02 Fbodies usually put down more power due to the LS6 Intake and more aggresive cam.
Old Apr 23, 2003 | 04:13 PM
  #64  
Maximam's Avatar
Maximam
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
From: Las Vegas
Default

Originally posted by S8ER95Z
Interesting..at 150 ...well at that high in the RPMS (4900~5100rpms) I can't really hear much over the exhaust..but I never noticed the windows pull away. Can you hear the air come in?? That would be insane. I do agree with the way the car feels planted.. Seems to be smoother as well.

As far as gears.. 3:42s in an Auto are supposed to be equiv to 3:73s in a T56.. so I guess Im ok.
Ya all I noticed was the car all of a sudden felt very stable. At that time my buddy said the windows are pulled away from their frame
Old Apr 23, 2003 | 04:13 PM
  #65  
ELESWON's Avatar
ELESWON
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte
Default

Originally posted by zxsaint
I felt the same way before, but now its a little up in the air for me, i'm not as convinced anymore about the 100+ scenario. I'd love to try this again whenever I get the chance (and its safe enough) Last run like that was fun as hell. Lots of addrenaline at those speeds.

Hey CLS, when are you and JP00SS doing this 100+ run for us?

Question, I know most cars from all manuf. have slightly slower/faster cars straight out of the factory..

I keep hearing how 1997+ LS1's vary a lot. Are there large established differences in power output within certain VIN ranges or model years? or is this just a rumor?
Rumor. There was a slight power bump in '01 (like 5hp). Otherwise, pretty much all the same. Ive seen stock A4s pull as low as 278-280 rwhp, ive seen M6s pull 320 bone stock. But as a general rule, A4 is gonna be about 300 flat, the M6 maybe 10 more than that. But the flip side is the tq. Autos get a healthy dose of that. I have to say 2000 seems to be the "ringer" year for modded cars. They seem to take to mods really well. And about that race, seriously, for all this talk, the higher up in the mph range you get, the worse we're gonna pull on you. If you wanna beat an LS1 in your 350Z, find a retard with an M6 and go from a dead dig up to 60, its you only prayer. From say a 90 roll, id put car lenght after car length on you. The LS1 is known for a nasty top end pull.
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 06:46 AM
  #66  
CLS's Avatar
CLS
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
From: GA
Default

If you wanna beat an LS1 in your 350Z, find a retard with an M6 and go from a dead dig up to 60
Hey Jason, wanna run? When ever we get together and find some open road we will run!
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 07:54 AM
  #67  
JP00SS's Avatar
JP00SS
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Hendersonville, NC
Default

Originally posted by CLS
Hey Jason, wanna run? When ever we get together and find some open road we will run!
I knew that was coming
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 10:46 AM
  #68  
ELESWON's Avatar
ELESWON
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte
Default

Originally posted by JP00SS
I knew that was coming
LOL Sorry bro didnt mean to open you up for that one. But way to see the opportunity there CLS. Yeah i meant what i said though. With stock gearing, i would have to consider it a very decent launch to get a car up on a 350 up to 70 mph. Third is where the magic happens. But low speed races, stock geared LS1s aren't in their sweet spot. If you compare 1/8 vs 1/4 mi times you'll see what i mean. Most cars are faster in the 1/8 than a high 8 if they are running low 13s. But now LT1s are a diffrent story. They're all about some bottom end. Yall go bang 'em out off the line and see what happens. Thats a real race anyhow, all this from a roll crap is worthless really.
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 01:19 PM
  #69  
S8ER95Z's Avatar
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
From: Quad Cities
Default

Originally posted by zxsaint
I keep hearing how 1997+ LS1's vary a lot. Are there large established differences in power output within certain VIN ranges or model years? or is this just a rumor?
Thats because the 97 is still an LT1

Actually I think you meant 98+ .. regardless..yeah they vary as all engines do. I have heard rumors of some small percentage of the motors being hand tightened, thus creating more power. 1998 year seem to be lower 290ish.. however thats not true in a sense. I guess Ive seen more 98 cars dyno lower than I have 99+ years..so Im not sure if something changed or if the dynos Ive seen were from engines with low miles still (Owners rushing out to dyno..). Regardless there is a decent gap from lowest dyno to highest, I guess its all circumstantial. 295~315 seems to be the range, with a few breaking out of it.. either higher or lower. The LT1 was the same way... 240~260 was the gap from what I remember. It may very well have to do with some of the cars getting really low gearing. Really hard to say.
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 03:46 PM
  #70  
JP00SS's Avatar
JP00SS
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Hendersonville, NC
Default

Originally posted by S8ER95Z
Thats because the 97 is still an LT1


Except the Vettes
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 03:52 PM
  #71  
JamRWS6's Avatar
JamRWS6
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,622
Likes: 0
From: TX
Default

Originally posted by JP00SS
I'm up for it whenever we can, I'm sure CLS is too.
The 01 and 02 Fbodies usually put down more power due to the LS6 Intake and more aggresive cam.
The 01-02 cam is actually less agressive....i can find the specs if you want them. The 01-02 is a truck cam which is better for low end torque....the 97-00 LS1s (97 vette ls1) had a more agressive upper RPM cam.
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 03:58 PM
  #72  
JP00SS's Avatar
JP00SS
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Hendersonville, NC
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JamRWS6
The 01-02 cam is actually less agressive....i can find the specs if you want them. The 01-02 is a truck cam which is better for low end torque....the 97-00 LS1s (97 vette ls1) had a more agressive upper RPM cam. [/QUOTE
I wasn't sure, I knew the cam was different though
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 04:09 PM
  #73  
S8ER95Z's Avatar
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
From: Quad Cities
Default

Originally posted by JP00SS
Except the Vettes
Got me on that one LMAO.. I was going Fbody specific.
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 06:23 PM
  #74  
JP00SS's Avatar
JP00SS
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Hendersonville, NC
Default

Originally posted by S8ER95Z
Got me on that one LMAO.. I was going Fbody specific.
Old Apr 24, 2003 | 09:10 PM
  #75  
CLS's Avatar
CLS
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
From: GA
Default

All this talk about domestics and F-bodies and Ls1's is getting me excited I think I am gonna go put some more cars on blocks in front of my trailer while my mullet grows out longer.
















Haha just kidding guys, all in good fun
Old Apr 25, 2003 | 12:28 AM
  #76  
mshadow's Avatar
mshadow
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: hell
Default

Originally posted by JamRWS6
The 01-02 cam is actually less agressive....i can find the specs if you want them. The 01-02 is a truck cam which is better for low end torque....the 97-00 LS1s (97 vette ls1) had a more agressive upper RPM cam.

1998 - 2000: 202/210 .496/.496 116 LSA

2001 - 2002: 198/197 .478/.478 115 LSA
Old Apr 25, 2003 | 06:15 AM
  #77  
JP00SS's Avatar
JP00SS
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Hendersonville, NC
Default

Originally posted by CLS
All this talk about domestics and F-bodies and Ls1's is getting me excited I think I am gonna go put some more cars on blocks in front of my trailer while my mullet grows out longer.


















Haha just kidding guys, all in good fun
Your just a high tech redneck
Old Apr 25, 2003 | 09:58 AM
  #78  
ELESWON's Avatar
ELESWON
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte
Default

Originally posted by mshadow
1998 - 2000: 202/210 .496/.496 116 LSA

2001 - 2002: 198/197 .478/.478 115 LSA
The reason being the swap to the LS6 intake, which of course was perfectly timed with the new cam. They already had our cars underrated in first place, the 01-02 would have been putting 325 rwhp down strait from the factory with the new intake and the more aggressive cam. I wouldnt have been complaining personally. But the Vette owners might have. Oh well just have to get my own damn cam! Peace.
Old Apr 25, 2003 | 10:07 AM
  #79  
S8ER95Z's Avatar
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
From: Quad Cities
Default

Originally posted by ELESWON
The reason being the swap to the LS6 intake, which of course was perfectly timed with the new cam. They already had our cars underrated in first place, the 01-02 would have been putting 325 rwhp down strait from the factory with the new intake and the more aggressive cam. I wouldnt have been complaining personally. But the Vette owners might have. Oh well just have to get my own damn cam! Peace.
Another thing the new cam allowed them to do was remove the EGR I think that was just a perk though...
Old Apr 25, 2003 | 10:54 AM
  #80  
CLS's Avatar
CLS
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
From: GA
Default

This post is turning into LS1.com Hey Jason, does it surprise you that I still don't have my springs?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:22 AM.