They do hate C4s
http://ls1tech.com/forums/chevrolet-...ile-times.html
Last edited by ch@0s; Jul 11, 2013 at 10:34 PM.

The key is simply produce more power than the other guy, know your car and be able to drive it. I've seen ZR-1 C6's run high 12's and trap well in the 130's. I've seen LT1's run 9's and trap in the 130's.
C4 Corvettes get a bad rap because of the poor quality and engineering in the 80's and 90's but with a little attention to detail those problems can be over come. 6000k for a 92 and 2k in mods and that car can bust into the 11's A4 or M6. That is nothing to sneeze at. I've been beaten several times at the track by LSX cars but I've also put 10+ lengths on a few. I had a guy in a F-body wait for me in the staging lanes because he thought I was an easy kill. Open headers cowl hood 6speed. After the run he was in our pit area nosing around trying to figure out what I was running LOL
All about how you build them and some times it's good to be the underdog.

The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Best 1/4 in Z28 was 13.5 @ 104 MPH
Best in LT4 was 13.5 @ 108 MPH (tires spun through 1st and 2nd)
Let's see how many of those 4th Gen cars are around in 10-15 years. The C4's have survived, my is 28 years old, I don't think the Z28's and T/A's will. I see few late 80's F-Bodies for example and at one time, Long Island was full of them. I wouldn't trade my C4 for a 4th Gen F-Body or any F-Body, except maybe for a 77-81 T/A SE
First, I question that an LS1 TA is faster than a LT1 'Vette. It would be a drivers race, IMO. EDIT: posts above showing LS1/Fbod times confirm my assertion here.
Second, the chassis of the F-body has nothing over the 'Vette. Engine in hanging out over the front wheels, massive front overhang, SRA, heavier, and still not rigid.
Third, the interior quality/fit and finish of the F-body is atrocious. It's not good in a C4, but it is way, WAY worse in the 4th gen.
The only way in which the late 4th gen is abetter car is in the quality of the engine.
Last edited by Tom400CFI; Jul 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM.
$$$ = speed enough on that.

the C4 takes a hit. Face it, the C4s are old technology, and I own two of them.
I look at a car for its potential. When the only limit is the thickness of your wallet when it comes to speed I don't really look at an engine. As a platform the c4 embarrasses the fbody .. I am referring to 4th gens but the 5th gens are tanks not cars anyways.
My ss was nice and I miss the car but its good enough to be a winter vehicle for me. My 93 embarrasses it in every way. Looks , handling , brakes, comfort, speed the list goes on.
C4 is old tech...but guess what? 4th Gen IS TOO!! It's a barely modified 3rd gen which was introduced in 1982 -before the C4. Same floorpan, same rear, same rear suspension, same firewall, seats, auto trans, etc. Upgrades -if you could call them that) are limited to; body panels, brakes, manual trans's (which still aren't as good as a ZF at that time), engine, front k-member, and front suspension.
Now...Those improvements do not sum total, = a better can than the C4. I'm sorry, but that is wrong. Claiming that a 4th gen is "newer tech" is likewise...wrong.
Tech asside, the 4th gen is a cheap car. it's not meant to be better than a C4 and it isn't.
My skin is thick enough to own a C4 and enjoy it. Maybe yours needs to be thick enough so you can admit when you've posted an error.













You guys row your own boat.... 








