Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
ed ramos #3028:mad: |
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
Cold air intake, full exhaust and tune....maybe. But decent money and not what I would call "lightly breathed." Quote:
2012 was only 100 lbs lighter for an identically equipped car. The 2015 is slower. But the best MT got out of the 2014 was a 0-60 of 4.3 and a 1/4 mile of 12.7. That's a best time with an above average driver and certainly not indicative of what the cars are averaging. And again, it depends on the car. Some are simply better than others. That's not out of the range of a stock ZR1 though. The funny thing is, we're arguing about a car that was designed in the late 80's against cars designed and built 30 years later...The new ones should be faster. |
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
However, in a bow towards total transparency we also are comparing a 5.0 to a 5.7L motor with similar weight. At higher speeds, I suppose the aero on the Vette also comes into play. |
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
Someone get started on some VVT heads for the LT5... I had a Toyota 1GZ-FE...5.0 liter V12 with VVT on the intake side. 280 ft. lbs. of torque off idle...mmm. |
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
VVT is the only way to get an engine now. I'm actually disappointed that the C7 only has cam phasing and no way to change overlap. Even my other car with the LS3 feels primitive in its power delivery (thankfully 376 ci in a light car go a long ways). The mustang is nothing special, but it's a good cradle for a great engine. It is nice to have a car you don't feel bad about parking outside. |
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
|
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
|
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
ed ramos #3028 |
Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued
Quote:
Much easier to do on DOHC engine than a single cam pushrod engine. Plus the smaller 5.0 required the IVCT to make power/torque, the larger GEN 5 LT1 6.2 makes more power/torque than the Coyote. It can be done though, the V10 Dodge V10 uses a cam-in-a-cam setup that allows some differentiation in the intake and exhaust valves. Ive even seen drawings of GEN 5 SBC with the same technology, but GM could reach its goals without it. A GEN 4 LS3 would feel "primitive" compared to a GEN 5 LT1, both of which are 6.2 liters. The Direct Injection of the LT1 completely changes the character of the engine(has the torque of a GEN 4 LS7). The LT5 with its Variable Intake Manifold Technology, was the beginning of GM's fight for upper rpm power while attempting to provide excellent low rpm torque. Way back in the 80's. Engine tech is amazing, what we have done with the good old ICE. |
DAMMIT!!!
Now I am seriously considering (again) sending my Z(#1929) to Haibeck for the winter.......
You guys simply cannot leave well-enough alone...... "I feel the need for (more) speed!" |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ZR-1 Net Registry 2025