When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Given that Chevrolet rated the 1992 LT1 at 300 hp and with all of the improvements that they made in this motor since 92' Even though Chevrolet never changed the hp rateing. What is an educated guess as to the true hoursepower of my 1995? I have a friend who has a 92' and I beat him by 2 car lengths.
...Well then you're friend either can't drive (at all), the engine was not running well, or a little of both. There is no reason that you should have beaten him by that much when they are the same engine with essentially the same specs (I think they may have added like 5-10hp).
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17
95s and 96s should be pretty close. Here is a dyno sheet from mine that was taken a couple of months ago with basically a stock LT1 with a Corsa catback and an A4.
I have since added a few more mods but havent's had a chance to dyno it. See sig for details.
The LT1 was not underrated, nor overrated, if you look at dyno results that have been posted here over the last few years. A few cars are especially strong, as you should expect, but most fall right where theyre supposed to.
what trans?if both auto's,what kind of gears do you have?they came with either 2.59's(GM1)or 3.07's(G44)those gears are usually about .2sec quicker 0-60 and 1/4mile.also,are both cars totally stock,and same mileage,state of tune?lots of variables with used cars.theoretically,they are the exact same engine,besides cam,and fuel metering,92(speed density)and 95(mass air)rumor for both vettes and f-bods is speed density cars are slightly faster than mass air cars from the factory.
Last edited by vette&f-bod lover; May 5, 2005 at 12:37 AM.
2.59 vs 3.07s is a lot of it + the torque diff but I swear theres a big diff in performance from a 92 vs 95-96 well really 94-96...I walk off from any 92 I've ever raced my friend has a nice 92 wth 43k miles on it he bought new (he's way older than me ) but it just don't got it when compared to my 95
From what I've read, the big difference is when they went
to the 4L60-E or "electronic" transmission. I think that the
tranny made the biggest performance difference.
And I think they did that in '94.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
And yes, my vert. has 3:07's. I would not have bought it
without them. It makes the car zippy....
Differences in manufactoring can also contribute. When you make a billion identical engines, using all the same parts in each one. Some will invariably make more power. 300 hp is a baseline average, some will make more some will make less, sounds like you got a good one. As stated before, check for gearing.
From: St. Peters MO Sometimes you have to prove yourself by doing alot of killing or alot of dying...
Originally Posted by vette&f-bod lover
what trans?if both auto's,what kind of gears do you have?they came with either 2.59's(GM1)or 3.07's(G44)those gears are usually about .2sec quicker 0-60 and 1/4mile.also,are both cars totally stock,and same mileage,state of tune?lots of variables with used cars.theoretically,they are the exact same engine,besides cam,and fuel metering,92(speed density)and 95(mass air)rumor for both vettes and f-bods is speed density cars are slightly faster than mass air cars from the factory.
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Slideshow: A Jaguar designer's personal project imagines what a modern front-engined Corvette might look like if Chevrolet revisited the golden age of the Stingray.