ZR-1 Net Registry Forums  

Go Back   ZR-1 Net Registry Forums > C4 ZR-1 > C4 ZR-1 Technical Postings

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-27-2014   #21
edram454
 
edram454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: ..
Posts: 693
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike100 View Post
the 2104's run 12.70's. the new 2015's are porkers and most people are getting 13.0's out of them.

but back to my 2012...
-it was a first gear roll race
-he drove it like he stole it because not his car, lol
-geared low
-vvt

I lost by half a car at 85 mph (not safe to keep going)- before I put headers, probably a 12.90-13.00 car at 111-112 at best (street tires). It was close and I had a long rev range, but it just did not have the power in that configuration. Over 100 mp[h would have turned my way. Definitely have more top end with the improved exhaust now. Anyways- we are talking 300 cubic inches in a car that weighs 100 lbs more- a lot of the mustang pop comes from the VVT 4 cam variable timing and the deep trans gearing. 1st gear is 3.66:1 ratio. fifth is 1:1. First gear is 13:1 ratio with 3:55 rear gears. Cheapest 12 second car I've ever owned. My friend was laughing his *** off too.
This is my biggest fear of these new models. I just dont find it acceptable to lose to a stock mustang while driving my zr1. I respect the coyote engine but its natural power against natural power so losing is not an option. Headers, porting and tuning are the solutions to this problem. Losing weight is another way to go. Get rid of your spare tire and carrier, cats and resonators and any unnecessary items you dont need. Keep the steering wheel and accelerator pedal.

ed ramos #3028
edram454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014   #22
spork2367
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 879
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
i've seen lightly breathed on 5.0's go low 12s. Make no mistake that car is a serious contender
It's all relative. What do you call "lightly breathed?" I would call that a cold air intake and maybe a tune. In which case those combined aren't getting the new mustang into low 12's by a long shot.

Cold air intake, full exhaust and tune....maybe. But decent money and not what I would call "lightly breathed."

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike100 View Post
the 2104's run 12.70's. the new 2015's are porkers and most people are getting 13.0's out of them.

but back to my 2012...
-it was a first gear roll race
-he drove it like he stole it because not his car, lol
-geared low
-vvt

I lost by half a car at 85 mph (not safe to keep going)- before I put headers, probably a 12.90-13.00 car at 111-112 at best (street tires). It was close and I had a long rev range, but it just did not have the power in that configuration. Over 100 mp[h would have turned my way. Definitely have more top end with the improved exhaust now. Anyways- we are talking 300 cubic inches in a car that weighs 100 lbs more- a lot of the mustang pop comes from the VVT 4 cam variable timing and the deep trans gearing. 1st gear is 3.66:1 ratio. fifth is 1:1. First gear is 13:1 ratio with 3:55 rear gears. Cheapest 12 second car I've ever owned. My friend was laughing his *** off too.

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.
spork2367 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014   #23
XfireZ51
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Posts: 9,708
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by spork2367 View Post
It's all relative. What do you call "lightly breathed?" I would call that a cold air intake and maybe a tune. In which case those combined aren't getting the new mustang into low 12's by a long shot.

Cold air intake, full exhaust and tune....maybe. But decent money and not what I would call "lightly breathed."




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.

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.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Former Membership Chairman
Former ZR-1 Registry - BOD
1972 Corvette 4speed base Coupe SOLD long time ago
1984 Corvette Z-51/4+3 SOLD
1992 Corvette ZR-1 Aqua/Gray #474 SOLD
1992 Corvette ZR-1 Black Rose/Cognac #458
2014 Honda VFR Interceptor DX
XfireZ51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014   #24
spork2367
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 879
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by XfireZ51 View Post
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.
.7 liters is pretty meaningless. Especially in this day and age. HP and torque are close. The VVT is a huge factor though. That's the only thing that makes the 5.0 even remotely competitive with the ZR1. It can optimize the valve timing for ideal torque anywhere in the rpm range. Eliminate that and give it fixed valve train geometry and it would be very pedestrian.

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.
spork2367 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014   #25
mike100
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Marcos CA
Posts: 1,802
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by spork2367 View Post
.7 liters is pretty meaningless....
I agree with everything you said except for the quote above... 48 cubic inches is almost the difference between the regular C6 to the LS7.

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.

Last edited by mike100; 10-27-2014 at 11:54 PM.
mike100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014   #26
mike100
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Marcos CA
Posts: 1,802
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by edram454 View Post
This is my biggest fear of these new models. I just dont find it acceptable to lose to a stock mustang while driving my zr1. I respect the coyote engine but its natural power against natural power so losing is not an option. Headers, porting and tuning are the solutions to this problem. Losing weight is another way to go. Get rid of your spare tire and carrier, cats and resonators and any unnecessary items you dont need. Keep the steering wheel and accelerator pedal.

ed ramos #3028
I put headers on right after that incident- it was already ported and chipped so it woke the hell up- best believe. I may not get another chance at a rematch, but I knew once i started dusting off c5-Z06's that the situation was looking up.
mike100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2014   #27
Kevin
 
Kevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 4,632
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by spork2367 View Post
It's all relative. What do you call "lightly breathed?" I would call that a cold air intake and maybe a tune. In which case those combined aren't getting the new mustang into low 12's by a long shot.

Cold air intake, full exhaust and tune....maybe. But decent money and not what I would call "lightly breathed."




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.
exhaust and DRs from what I hear
__________________
It's not the car, it's the people - Doug Johnson
90 r/r "KEYS ON" nick named "T.L.B"
Kevin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2014   #28
edram454
 
edram454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: ..
Posts: 693
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike100 View Post
I put headers on right after that incident- it was already ported and chipped so it woke the hell up- best believe. I may not get another chance at a rematch, but I knew once i started dusting off c5-Z06's that the situation was looking up.
that sounds about right. I have beaten c5-z06 cars and they are very fast cars. I tried a c6-z06 and it was able to pull away slowly from me from start to finish. those ls7 engines have good torque and rev to 7 grand.. they also go 195mph. they put around 450 to the wheels. It would take a stroked lt5 to take one on.

ed ramos #3028
edram454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2014   #29
Hog
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Woodstock, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,275
Default Re: LS1 vs.LT4 vs.LT5 vs.LS6 vs.LS7 etc. discussion continued

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike100 View Post
I agree with everything you said except for the quote above... 48 cubic inches is almost the difference between the regular C6 to the LS7.

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.
Both engines have Variable Valve Timing(Coyote and LT1), the Ford Coyote has Twin Independent Variable Camshaft Timing which allows the exhaust and intake cams to be passed individually.

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.
__________________
peace
Paul

ZR-1 Net Registry Member #1494
Hog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2014   #30
RyanChappel
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Boone County, Indiana
Posts: 132
Default 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!"
RyanChappel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ZR-1 Net Registry 2020