My STi vs LS1 z28 - Page 2
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30

This is a discussion on My STi vs LS1 z28 within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally Posted by Neversatisfied I am thinking he is in need of a good tune. I don't know guys i ...

  1. #16
    Registered User elohdaeh78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Long Valley, NJ
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by Neversatisfied
    I am thinking he is in need of a good tune.
    I don't know guys i never saw any Stock Camaro or Firebird run a 108, most of them run low 100s. Perhaps they are capable at running that time with a perfect run on a perfect day at a perfect track with a perfectly running stock car, but how often does that happen? 108 on a stock LS1 is not likely. Perfection is rarely obtained. Thats like saying my stock wrx should run a 14.1.....HAHA
    2005 WRX (Short throw shifter, lightweight pulley,STI Splitters,Tein H-Tech springs,Up/Down Pipe, ERZ Catback, Cobb Stage 2, ASA JH8 with Yokohama ES 100s) 13.680@100.46mph

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In Ray's house while he's jacking it in his car.
    Posts
    2,599
    Quote Originally Posted by elohdaeh78
    I don't know guys i never saw any Stock Camaro or Firebird run a 108, most of them run low 100s. Perhaps they are capable at running that time with a perfect run on a perfect day at a perfect track with a perfectly running stock car, but how often does that happen? 108 on a stock LS1 is not likely. Perfection is rarely obtained. Thats like saying my stock wrx should run a 14.1.....HAHA
    Well, Car and Driver was able to run a 13.6 @ 106mph with a 2002 Firehawk. That should tell you something. (And before anyone asks, yes a Firehawk is factory rated at a higher horsepower than other f-bodies, when put on a dyno, all f-bodies dyno about the same).

  4. #18
    Registered User SGOSWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,059
    Quote Originally Posted by zoophagy
    Well, Car and Driver was able to run a 13.6 @ 106mph with a 2002 Firehawk. That should tell you something. (And before anyone asks, yes a Firehawk is factory rated at a higher horsepower than other f-bodies, when put on a dyno, all f-bodies dyno about the same).



    About the dyno thing. Yes, most LS1's (same year and model - 6 speed or A4) will dyno pretty close. But an A4 (Automatic) dyno's substantially lower than 6 speeds.

    Bone stock 01-02 model 6 speeds can dyno as high as 326 rwhp.
    Bone stock 98-99 model A4 can dynoed as low as 270 rwhp.

    I've seen it with my own eyes using the same dyno on the same day.

    That right there shows you how one stock LS1 can trap 108 mph while others may only trap 103 mph.

  5. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In Ray's house while he's jacking it in his car.
    Posts
    2,599
    Quote Originally Posted by SGOSWRX
    About the dyno thing. Yes, most LS1's (same year and model - 6 speed or A4) will dyno pretty close. But an A4 (Automatic) dyno's substantially lower than 6 speeds.

    Bone stock 01-02 model 6 speeds can dyno as high as 326 rwhp.
    Bone stock 98-99 model A4 can dynoed as low as 270 rwhp.

    I've seen it with my own eyes using the same dyno on the same day.

    That right there shows you how one stock LS1 can trap 108 mph while others may only trap 103 mph.

    Oh yeah, I definitely agree. But someone said LS1s won't trap 108 stock, and I think there are ones that can. I also believe that a full bolt on and cammed LS1 should be running a lot faster and having a much higher E.T. than 13.5 @ 105mph.

    I don't doubt your story or anything at all.

  6. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    147
    Some of you guys don't realize he has UTEC now, plus his other mods so he's probably 300+awhp or so versus the much heavier LS1 that dyno around 305 or so usually. We also have better areo dynamics even though they are better geared.

    Stock LS1s can trap 108 and have dipped into the 12s stock in perfect conditions, driver, etc..

    A cammed, intake, exhaust LS1 should be atleast a mid 12 on stock tires or not, and trap atleast 113-120. Depending on tune and the cam, it should easily be 340-380whp.

  7. #21
    Registered User elohdaeh78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Long Valley, NJ
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by DenniSTi
    Some of you guys don't realize he has UTEC now, plus his other mods so he's probably 300+awhp or so versus the much heavier LS1 that dyno around 305 or so usually. We also have better areo dynamics even though they are better geared.

    Stock LS1s can trap 108 and have dipped into the 12s stock in perfect conditions, driver, etc..

    A cammed, intake, exhaust LS1 should be atleast a mid 12 on stock tires or not, and trap atleast 113-120. Depending on tune and the cam, it should easily be 340-380whp.
    Shoulda coulda woulda, but it just didn't happen the kid is a good driver and the car is fast, it ran a 13.1. What i car can do and should do on paper is different then what it does in the real world. LIke i said 108mph on a stock LS1 doesn't happen here in NJ at island dragway.
    2005 WRX (Short throw shifter, lightweight pulley,STI Splitters,Tein H-Tech springs,Up/Down Pipe, ERZ Catback, Cobb Stage 2, ASA JH8 with Yokohama ES 100s) 13.680@100.46mph

  8. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    147
    Track conditions will not really affect the trap speed adversely; infact the better the launch the lower the trap speed will be. Either he was lying about his mods, it was an pre-98 LT1, he missed atleast 2 shifts, or there is really something messed up with his car (not just a bad tune).

    But back to the topic at hand, nice race, those LS1's are a beast because I've lost to a couple lightly modded ones from a stop and a roll in my modded STi.

  9. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Atlantic City, NJ
    Posts
    215
    I Support ClubWRX
    Quote Originally Posted by DenniSTi
    We also have better areo dynamics even though they are better geared.
    Are you smoking crack??? Since when is a 4 door Subaru more aerodynamic than an LS1 Camaro? I have my roommates' '99 z28 and an '01 SS out in front of my house, and next to my WRX, you're going to tell me the WRX is more aerodynamic???
    "Don't hate me because my Impreza's beautiful"
    -04 FXT 20g'd 343 whp
    -04 FXT 35r/6mt 430 whp 11.6@118 on 93 oct
    -95 NSX SC'd 450 whp
    -70 Chevelle SS

  10. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by annointed
    Are you smoking crack??? Since when is a 4 door Subaru more aerodynamic than an LS1 Camaro? I have my roommates' '99 z28 and an '01 SS out in front of my house, and next to my WRX, you're going to tell me the WRX is more aerodynamic???
    Before you make assumptions, you should know what you're talking about.

    I am just stating wind tunnel proven facts. The coefficient drag of an STi is .33 compared to
    the Camaro's .34.

    So yes, the square 4door is more aerodynamic than the giant cheese wedge 2door.

  11. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Atlantic City, NJ
    Posts
    215
    I Support ClubWRX
    Quote Originally Posted by DenniSTi
    Before you make assumptions, you should know what you're talking about.

    I am just stating wind tunnel proven facts. The coefficient drag of an STi is .33 compared to
    the Camaro's .34.

    So yes, the square 4door is more aerodynamic than the giant cheese wedge 2door.
    Wow, man, news to me. Do you have verfication of the data you mentioned? Everything I've ever read describes the WRX is an aerodynamic loser against nearly any sleek bodied sporty car. Any idea how a "normal" WRX stacks up, since you mentioned the STi's coefficient of drag? The two LS1 Camaros out front are so much more aerodynamic than my '02 WRX that it makes the Suby look silly when considering 120+ mph pulls. Only raw power can account for my top end pull...
    "Don't hate me because my Impreza's beautiful"
    -04 FXT 20g'd 343 whp
    -04 FXT 35r/6mt 430 whp 11.6@118 on 93 oct
    -95 NSX SC'd 450 whp
    -70 Chevelle SS

  12. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    243
    My bros camaro has 02 Z28 Manual Full boltons including headers. He is dynoing at 350 rwhp (which is good for mid 12s at 110-113 trap speeds) but he has a problem launching. his best was 12.9@110 and he was spinning. LS1s are faster then people think.
    My cars:
    2008 VW GTI, DSG
    14.269@96.3 Bone Stock!
    2002 Hyundai Elantra GT MT

    Family:
    2003 Audi RS6 (Sold will be missed,used to be my dads.)
    2004 Subaru Forester XT (Family car)
    15.3@90.5 Stock

  13. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In Ray's house while he's jacking it in his car.
    Posts
    2,599
    Quote Originally Posted by audirs6
    My bros camaro has 02 Z28 Manual Full boltons including headers. He is dynoing at 350 rwhp (which is good for mid 12s at 110-113 trap speeds) but he has a problem launching. his best was 12.9@110 and he was spinning. LS1s are faster then people think.
    I don't know that they are faster than people think, because it has been my experience that people think they are really, really faster. However, I believe that they handle better than a lot of people give them credit for.

  14. #28
    Registered User Shaitiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Streamwood, IL
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by elohdaeh78
    Wow 108 stock??? I never saw one run a 108 stock before, i saw a kid i know that has a cam, exhaust, intake and a few other things on his 35th anniversary SS with the 6speed run a 13.1@106
    I ran a 13.2 at 107mph w/ 2.1 60ft. in my bone stock 2002 Camaro SS. I'm sure I would have hit 108mph if I would have tried more.

    I also ran a 12.4 at 115mph w/ 2.0 60ft in that same car but tuned with a mild cam, headers w/ catless y-pipe, ported stock throttle body and super sucker ram air. Everything else was stock.
    Team Mullet Racing
    2004 White Evolution VIII - Wingless and Altezzaless
    www.forgivendriven.com

    SOLD - Stage 4 WRX Wagon - 12.7 at 106mph - SOLD

  15. #29
    Registered User Dan00Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    759
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaitiger
    I ran a 13.2 at 107mph w/ 2.1 60ft. in my bone stock 2002 Camaro SS. I'm sure I would have hit 108mph if I would have tried more.

    I also ran a 12.4 at 115mph w/ 2.0 60ft in that same car but tuned with a mild cam, headers w/ catless y-pipe, ported stock throttle body and super sucker ram air. Everything else was stock.
    Witness! I drove Gabe's SS to a 13.3 at 107 that same day back when it was stock (down to the tires and airbox). And he beat me at the track head to head the last time against my Hawk by 1/10 of a second when his Camaro was cammin'. Bastard... LOL

    I think it's nearly scientific fact that New Jersey times and Chicago times and Houston times all vary to some extent. Us Midwesterners always feel like we're chasing those sealevel low humidity great racing conditions that they always seem to get down in oil country.

    Here's a website that backs up the WRX vs SS drag coefficient: http://www.darklair.com/cd.html


    2007 VW GTI 6 spd. No times yet
    2000 Firehawk convertible 6spd- 12.52 @ 114.7 mph. 2.09 60'

    Sold: 2004 Mini Cooper S. 14.95 @ 93.8 mph.
    Sold: 2004 GTO 6 spd. 13.4 @ 104.5 mph
    Sold: 2002 WRX 5spd. 13.39 @100.7 mph. 1.81 60'

  16. #30
    Registered User Shifty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Corvallis OR / OSU go BEAVS
    Posts
    323
    Nice kill. My dad is a muscle car freak and his favorite saying is "there is no sustitution for cubic inch" My reply "oh yes there is a sustitution its called a TURBO, bi@tch!"
    TINA..... come eat your ham!!!

    04 white wrx wagon stage 2.5

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself. We strongly suggest that you stay away from using aol, yahoo, msn, and hotmail accounts. Sometimes the mail server blocks the emails from our server. As a result you will not receive any notifications including the confirmation email.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •