11.9 at 112 mph Z28 with 337 RWHP?? bs or what?
08-08-2011, 05:07 PM
#21
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
I saw where he listed the stall but where he states what he had when...
"Times: This run was a while back on Nitto 275/40R17 555RII tires, ONLY the UMI LCAs (not the rest yet), a Magnaflow catback, and with 40-50 degree air temps. I left the line pretty soft with the tire and track temp combination. With the suspension mods, cutout, wider tires that are actual drag radials, and decent air it should run even faster now. This time was ran at full weight minus the spare and jack. 1.6543 =60' "
...... is a little confusing. He had to of meant he ran it with the stall and I'm just misunderstanding him.
"Times: This run was a while back on Nitto 275/40R17 555RII tires, ONLY the UMI LCAs (not the rest yet), a Magnaflow catback, and with 40-50 degree air temps. I left the line pretty soft with the tire and track temp combination. With the suspension mods, cutout, wider tires that are actual drag radials, and decent air it should run even faster now. This time was ran at full weight minus the spare and jack. 1.6543 =60' "
...... is a little confusing. He had to of meant he ran it with the stall and I'm just misunderstanding him.
08-08-2011, 06:02 PM
#22
Mish-ogynist
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Helena, MT
Posts: 3,780
He was talking about the suspension, he added suspension and cut-outs since that run, he had everything else.
Yeah, if he was basically stock i'd say complete BS.
I think the part where the new 5.0 outshines the 98-2002 and 2010+ camaros is that nothing more than a rousch tvs blower and bigs/littles people have gone high 9s. otherwise stock car. engine has handled 700whp safely (performance shops have blown up several though) low 10s are very common in s/c'd 5.0s. n/a so far can match an LS1, we'll see how things go with R&D on it, i'd expect people to beat it.
with the setup i'll have installed on saturday i'd expect to run mid 12s up here, mid 11s at sea level(and good air). with a stall low 12s/11s. and yes.. parts are fairly expensive still, 700 for cai+tuner, 300 for o/r x (should be 150, but prices are still inflated and I'm impatient) boss intake was 375, decent deal i think, 4.10 gears standard 200. torque converter is 1,000.
Yeah, if he was basically stock i'd say complete BS.
I think the part where the new 5.0 outshines the 98-2002 and 2010+ camaros is that nothing more than a rousch tvs blower and bigs/littles people have gone high 9s. otherwise stock car. engine has handled 700whp safely (performance shops have blown up several though) low 10s are very common in s/c'd 5.0s. n/a so far can match an LS1, we'll see how things go with R&D on it, i'd expect people to beat it.
with the setup i'll have installed on saturday i'd expect to run mid 12s up here, mid 11s at sea level(and good air). with a stall low 12s/11s. and yes.. parts are fairly expensive still, 700 for cai+tuner, 300 for o/r x (should be 150, but prices are still inflated and I'm impatient) boss intake was 375, decent deal i think, 4.10 gears standard 200. torque converter is 1,000.
Last edited by Mishri; 08-08-2011 at 06:13 PM.
08-08-2011, 08:10 PM
#23
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
At least my car doesn't start breaking piston rings after a tune 
Seriously though, the 5.0 has proven itself already, and is (as it should be) a superior engine mod for mod.
As for this guy running what he said he did.... stall or not, 1.6 or not, I don't fully buy it. I ran a 4k stall in my old LS1 with the same mods this guy has, and only a tenth slower on the 60', yet I was a full second and 3-4 miles per hour slower. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe my car was just on the rag or something, idk.
Seriously though, the 5.0 has proven itself already, and is (as it should be) a superior engine mod for mod.
As for this guy running what he said he did.... stall or not, 1.6 or not, I don't fully buy it. I ran a 4k stall in my old LS1 with the same mods this guy has, and only a tenth slower on the 60', yet I was a full second and 3-4 miles per hour slower. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe my car was just on the rag or something, idk.
08-08-2011, 08:19 PM
#24
At least my car doesn't start breaking piston rings after a tune
Seriously though, the 5.0 has proven itself already, and is (as it should be) a superior engine mod for mod.
As for this guy running what he said he did.... stall or not, 1.6 or not, I don't fully buy it. I ran a 4k stall in my old LS1 with the same mods this guy has, and only a tenth slower on the 60', yet I was a full second and 3-4 miles per hour slower. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe my car was just on the rag or something, idk.
Seriously though, the 5.0 has proven itself already, and is (as it should be) a superior engine mod for mod.
As for this guy running what he said he did.... stall or not, 1.6 or not, I don't fully buy it. I ran a 4k stall in my old LS1 with the same mods this guy has, and only a tenth slower on the 60', yet I was a full second and 3-4 miles per hour slower. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe my car was just on the rag or something, idk.
08-08-2011, 09:26 PM
#25
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
Must of been, haha! It was a rare occasion that that POS 4l60 even shifted when it was supposed to. It left like a bat out of hell though. I'll try to dig up some vids of that old car. I've got bunch of vids on VHS, its just tough to convert them over. If anything, I'll stand in front of the TV and video them with my digital, lmao.
I'm still going to run faster than you NA!
I'm still going to run faster than you NA!
Last edited by Stone629; 08-08-2011 at 10:12 PM.
08-09-2011, 01:05 AM
#26
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 1,278
Must of been, haha! It was a rare occasion that that POS 4l60 even shifted when it was supposed to. It left like a bat out of hell though. I'll try to dig up some vids of that old car. I've got bunch of vids on VHS, its just tough to convert them over. If anything, I'll stand in front of the TV and video them with my digital, lmao.
I'm still going to run faster than you NA!
I'm still going to run faster than you NA!
4L80E
08-09-2011, 08:58 AM
#28
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,478
Time seems legit to me... He may have had the car on a mustang dyno, who knows? At any rate, he is close to a 113mph trap which is 4mph slower than mine. But look at his 1/8th Mile trap. I trap 91mph in the 1/8th and he is trapping 89mph with a 1.6 60ft as opposed to my 1.7. With me having a 1.6 60ft should drop me into the 11.5-11.6 range so him being .3-.4 tenths behind with a 4mph slower trap but almost equal 1/8th seems believable. Having said that, I doubt the car with its current mods is going to run much better. He had pretty much perfect conditions.
Last edited by Kerns; 08-10-2011 at 10:46 PM.
08-12-2011, 07:13 PM
#29
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 4,438
This sounds about right, especially considering the air temps. My car ran 12.7 @ 109 with the stock crapass converter and 2.73 gears, 296 RWHP. It was probably around 60* that night. One friend of mine with a 2002 Z28 ran 11.76 with a Yank 4400 stall and 3.23 gears, stock engine. High 1.5x 60 ft IIRC. Another guy I know has an LS1 Formula with a 4000 stall and 3.42 gears and ran 12.0s with the stock engine, high 1.5/low 1.6 short times IIRC. He swapped out the cam and had the heads ported and now runs mid 11s.
08-12-2011, 11:30 PM
#30
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
Hmm. Glad I asked then. Maybe he is telling the truth.
I really think that 98 I had must of been a slow car or something. Everyone else's LS1s always seem to be light years ahead of that car.
I really think that 98 I had must of been a slow car or something. Everyone else's LS1s always seem to be light years ahead of that car.