After driving a frend's 99 Corvette last summer, I knew I had to have a Vette as my next car. So I've been doing a lot of research.

Based on my budget, I will be looking at getting a C4. A newer one. Likely 94-96. I know I want a manual for sure. I'm finding a hard time locating some performance stats so I figured I'd ask the people on the forum.

Bone stock, what does a C4 (with LT1 + 6 speed) do in the 1/4 mile and 0-60?

Will there be a noticeable drop in performance with a C4 compared to a C5? The C5 auto I drove was really fast (for me at least).

Are there any issues that C4's are notorious for and I should look out for when making a purchase?

 

Try to get a 96 with the LT4. All 1996 models that are manuals have the LT4 engine. Basically a reengineered LT1 with better head, intake, cam, etc. Rated at 330hp vs the LT1's 300

LT4 6 speed will be about dead even, maybe a tad faster than a C5 automatic.

Here are some approx stats for bone stock assuming its a 6speed. This is what I could guess as off the top of my head.

LT4:

0-60 in 4.8 secs roughly
13.3-13.5 in the quartermile

(LT4s are comparable to a C5 in terms of acceleration)

LT1:
0-60 in 5.1 secs roughly
13.5-13.7 in the quartermile

C4 corvettes are noisey, squeaky, rattle a lot. It's a more dated chassis from the 80s. The frame flexes more than a C5 or C6.

Honestly, the C5 is a better car in almost every aspect, but the C4 feels more like a sports car. Whereas the C5 is a lot more accomodating, roomy, and comfortable on the inside, the C4 is more like a fighterjet cockpit. The dash on later models "wrapes around you"

NEVER, NEVER get an LT1/4 engine wet. If the distributor (optispark)gets wet, it could be ruined. It's an expensive part and a PITA to replace. This can make it a pain cleaning the engine bay.

Just look for the normal things you'd look for in a car. Get a carfax report. Maybe another poster can post the C4 buyer's guide link. It was a good VERY detailed webpage of things to look for when test driving a C4. I am not sure what the url is.


I'll tell you what most on the board will tell you, get the newest model you can afford. If you can afford a C5, try to get a C5.

 

Thanks for the info.
I've actually considered a 96 with manual tranny, to opt for the LT4 engine, but they are comparable in price to C5's. If I was gonna pay that kind of cash I'd just get the C5.

So the C4 is a lot noisier eh?
I wish I'd have a chance to drive the C4 to get a better comparison against the C5.

 

Hey KC,

Where are you? If you are close to me I would be happy to give you a direct comparison between a C4 and a C5.

I have a 86' and a 99'. I bought the 99' new and it is a garage queen (26,xxx miles in 10 years). The 86' was bought in 2004 and I bought it to fix up...and it has made me a much better mechanic.

Both cars are fun, but as mentioned, GM started with a clean sheet of paper with the C5 and it shows in every aspect of the car.

I personally think that the 96' LT-4 is under rated in horsepower so it wouldn't make the 97' LS1 motor look bad. The acceleration times are equal or better for the LT-4, so I find it's ratings to be "suspicious" at least.

I will second the thought about getting the newest car you can afford and also getting a C5 if you can. The later C4's are better than the early C4's, but from working on both cars, it is easy to see that the engineers got to "design everything in" on the C5 where as the C4 is much more of a "bolt this onto what we have got and make it work" design.

 

The chassis of the C4 was entirely new. The "80's" chassis was originally designed for the '63, and that layout was updated and used through the '82 model year (the last C3). The only thing carried over for the first C4 in '84 was the TB engine and transmission. The C5 brought two important changes: a new transaxle layout (and the accompanying torque tube) and the first hydro-formed frame. Saying that the C4 chassis is similar to the '80s Corvettes is a bit of a stretch.

 

Sent PM

 

Welcome to the forum..

 

Entirely new in the early 80s so he is correct. And yes, the C4 chassis was entirely different that the 82.

The C4 does ride harsher than the C5 but I drove mine 1,800 miles fo Colorado and back with no problem and enjoyed the ride.

 

I was just making a general comment about the frame. The C4 was designed in the early 1980s. Its chassis and frame is very dated compared to a C5.

Yea, since there are many, many, many more C5's than there are LT4's, finding a LT4 at a price significantly less than a C5 might be hard. LT4 was around for 1 year only and only in a manual. Only about 1 in 4Corvettes is a stick.

Oh, other things you might want to know.

A Corvette will not get you a girlfriend. Hope you already know that..hahaha. Biggest myth out there.

 

If you can get a nice 96 you can get a decent c5 instead now LOL

 

Wow thanks, I wish I was in your area but I'm all the way in Southern Ontario, Canada, so that ain't happenin.

I've heard from quite a few people that the LT4 is a very under-rated motor, when I am ready to buy I will look out for one. However, it would probably be in line with the C5 price-wise.

If I had the $, I would definitely pick a C5 over the C4 just based on what I have been hearing. But the ways its lookin', the C5 will be out of my price range. They go for around $21,000 around here(and thats wacky, colourful Canuck money). I could get into a C4 for around $15,000 or less.

 

If you want a C5, buy a C5, don't settle for the inferior C4. The C4 rides more like a sports car, the C5 more like a modern sports car. I prefer the old school model T transverse springs, oh yeah.

 

I can concur with not getting the OptiSpark (or as I like to call it OptiCrap) wet. I am currenty on my 4th OptiSpark on my Trans Am, granted it does have 189,xxx miles on it.

 

Damn. Seems like the optispark is quite an issue...
Does this pertain to the LT1's only and not the LS1's?

 

Yes, the Opti spark is specific to the LT1, and it is not on the LS series engines.

The Optispark is basically a distributor, but they moved it to the front of the engine next to the water pump. It is the weak point of the LT1, just as the 4 piece intake design (prone to vacuum leaks as the car ages) and insufficient exhaust headers are the weak point of the L98.

As I mentioned in my other post, GM had to add fuel injection to the original engine block casting, so they came up with lots of work arounds to make it happen. The redesign that created LS series engines allowed them to incorporate all the "work around solutions" of the L98 and LT1 into the block of the LS series. This included things like Crankshaft position location system, cam shaft position location system, EGR system, etc. In addition, GM took what they learned about airflow and efficiency and put it in as well. The L98 and LT1 are both good engines, but you really can see the work arounds GM had to do to make them.

 

well you could get an l98 and change the intake, and have as much power and more torque

 

Really??? Well, I suppose thats also an option. Would changing the intake on the L98 really put it at par with the LT1 though?

TBH I'd like to have something a little newer. I think I am still leaning more towards the LT1 at this point. Unless I find a ridiculous deal on a C5.