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.
Just curious if anyone had the specs or details on the 0-60 times on a stock automatic 95 vette and 0-60 times on a stock 6spd 95 vette. basically i want to know how much faster is a 6spd then a automatic of the same year. Thanks!
In most Corvette books I have ready, the difference between auto and manual was only 1/10-3/10ths of a second. Unless you are a pro driver, the auto should be significantly faster than the manual.
Thats what I wanted to hear thanks guys the reason i was asking is that a freind of mine has a stock 92 6spd and he swears up and down its faster then my stock 95 automatic.... and as far as i know from different websites a 92 6spd hit 0-60 around 5.7 secs and a 95 6spd tested around 5.2 ......do you think that my 95 automatic should be able to beat his 92 6spd? (note: not on a track or anything just red light to red light kinda thing)
do you think that my 95 automatic should be able to beat his 92 6spd? (note: not on a track or anything just red light to red light kinda thing)
The are both the sames cars, same engines...only difference is the trans. Judging by your avatar, you have a conver....if your friend has a coupe, he will most likely beat you.
The are both the sames cars, same engines...only difference is the trans. Judging by your avatar, you have a conver....if your friend has a coupe, he will most likely beat you.
So being a convertible makes it slower by at least .6 seconds 0-60 then a coupe of the same year? and his 92 will win even though the 95 6spd coupe does 0-60 5.2 and the 92 shows at 5.7 secs?
So being a convertible makes it slower by at least .6 seconds 0-60 then a coupe of the same year? and his 92 will win even though the 95 6spd coupe does 0-60 5.2 and the 92 shows at 5.7 secs?
I question those stat differences. They are the same engines makeing the same power give or take a few HP. Also both of those sites list the times as the highest I have ever seen for either year. It's going to come down to the rather large weight difference.
Last edited by saniterium; Sep 18, 2005 at 10:10 PM.
Well i would think that gm would continually improve the performance of a car even if its the same gen from year to year whether it be from trimming weight or other variables and improvements. so since there is 3 years in between the cars i would have thought that a 95 automatic convertible would still be as fast if not aster then a 92 6spd coupe???
Well i would think that gm would continually improve the performance of a car even if its the same gen from year to year whether it be from trimming weight or other variables and improvements. so since there is 3 years in between the cars i would have thought that a 95 automatic convertible would still be as fast if not aster then a 92 6spd coupe???
Again, they are makeing the same power in both HP and Torque. They don't continue to improve the same engine for the same generation because that would cost alot of money they GM would never spend...they are the SAME CAR. Unless he didn't take good care of his car, his should (not definitely) take yours. Also, with him haveing a manual, he has the abillity to rev it up before the light turns green (street race), so it would be over instantly. He would put multiple car lengths on you that you would never be able to make up in a 0-60 race.
Last edited by saniterium; Sep 18, 2005 at 10:17 PM.
So your saying that all 92-96 stock lt1 6spd's have the same 0-60 times?
Maybe not EXACTLY...but not anywhere near over half a second like ur sites suggested.....for the 3rd time...they are the SAME car. Your car being a convertible puts you at a disadvantage...thats just the way it is.
Last edited by saniterium; Sep 18, 2005 at 10:29 PM.
I question those stat differences. They are the same engines makeing the same power give or take a few HP. Also both of those sites list the times as the highest I have ever seen for either year. It's going to come down to the rather large weight difference.
I believe that 92 is rated at 330 lb ft which is 10 less lb ft of torque than a 95's 340 lb ft. However, I would believe that if the a4 has the 2.59 rear it will lose.
Last edited by aboatguy; Sep 18, 2005 at 10:37 PM.
In most Corvette books I have ready, the difference between auto and manual was only 1/10-3/10ths of a second. Unless you are a pro driver, the auto should be significantly faster than the manual.
lol then why did you post this reply a little bit up? Im getting mixed signals.... Im not dense and i know youve said it 3 times but i would figure they would make SOME changes to improve the performace of the car over a 3 year period whether it be triming weight or other things that dont necessarily have to do with the engine. I assume your thinking that the convertible is heavier then a coupe which is true but ive also read that the 92 coupe is heavier then a 95 coupe. I really dont care either way because his car is nice but mine is nicer with half the miles
I believe that 92 is rated at 10 less lb ft of torque than a 95. However, I would believe that if the a4 has the 2.59 rear it will lose.
Yeah that sounds about right. Thats why I said that they have the same, give or take a few HP. Either way...10HP is not nearly enough to make up for the weight difference.
I will tell you right now since I own both a LT1 6 speed and a LT1 automatic, in stock form they both accelerate about the same off the line. The six speed will pull away after the 330' mark, but at the 60' they are identical.
This is with 3.45 gears in the six speed and 2.59 in the automatic.
This is fact, I have the timeslips to prove it. My automatic does 1.95 at the 60' mark and the six speed did it in 1.93.
Now with the 3.45 gears I have in the automatic car, I can turn a 1.67 60' which going by the auto math calculators equals about 0-60 in 2.9 seconds. I'm doing 48 mph at the 60' mark.
I believe that 92 is rated at 330 lb ft which is 10 less lb ft of torque than a 95's 340 lb ft. However, I would believe that if the a4 has the 2.59 rear it will lose.
I just bought the car a couple of weeks ago and havent even put 50 miles on it.....so i really dont know everything about it so where do i look to see what gear it has? Did another gear came in the car as an option in 95?
I will tell you right now since I own both a LT1 6 speed and a LT1 automatic, in stock form they both accelerate about the same off the line. The six speed will pull away after the 330' mark, but at the 60' they are identical.
This is with 3.45 gears in the six speed and 2.59 in the automatic.
This is fact, I have the timeslips to prove it. My automatic does 1.95 at the 60' mark and the six speed did it in 1.93.
Now with the 3.45 gears I have in the automatic car, I can turn a 1.67 60' which going by the auto math calculators equals about 0-60 in 2.9 seconds. I'm doing 48 mph at the 60' mark.
My 3.45 provided the best SOTP increase of all the mods that I have done so far. But I would never have guessed that it cut more than 2 tenths off of the 60'. Wow Mojo your car scoots.
My 3.45 provided the best SOTP increase of all the mods that I have done so far. But I would never have guessed that it cut more than 2 tenths off of the 60'. Wow Mojo your car scoots.
Mike
Here are a couple videos for the hell of it.
The first set are of the automatic with the 3.45 gears and a 2800 stall torque converter.
The second set are of the six speed car completely stock.
None of the videos represent the best I've done in these cars, but aren't bad runs considering.