1985 Corvette Performance Specs
05-17-2005, 10:44 PM
#21
Drifting
Member Since: Feb 2004
Location: Santa Maria CA
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i guess we could rant all day about this but everyones got their views and experiences.
over here in cali where i run i've never been to a track day where the DA is near 1000+ its always 2000+ or worse and for LACR the DA is always 4000+ and the smog air kills it. i CAN see where a high 13 is possible with a manual and good DA calculations for the 85-91 TPI's.
i guess everyone over in cali is a bad driver because alot of stock TPI vettes at the track don't break 13's, ONLY WITH mods they do.
over here in cali where i run i've never been to a track day where the DA is near 1000+ its always 2000+ or worse and for LACR the DA is always 4000+ and the smog air kills it. i CAN see where a high 13 is possible with a manual and good DA calculations for the 85-91 TPI's.
i guess everyone over in cali is a bad driver because alot of stock TPI vettes at the track don't break 13's, ONLY WITH mods they do.
05-17-2005, 11:04 PM
#22
I owned an 85 Mustang GT that I bought new. I sold it in 89 to buy my Corvette. I ran both cars at the strip on several different occasions in bone stock condition. My Mustang ran mostly 14.8's at 92-93 mph. I had one run of 14.35 @ 96 that I could never repeat. My Corvette would run 14.0 - 14.1's @ 98, with a best of 13.96@99.55. Both cars are sticks.
I never raced a Vette at the track when I had my Stang, but I did get in a few spur of the moment "contests of speed". I could stay right with a Corvette from a roll, but they would jump me from a light because of the better traction.
The January 1985 Car and Driver listed the Mustang at 6.4 for 0-60 and 14.9@91 in the 1/4. The December 1984 Car and Driver tested two 85 Corvettes, a Z51 stick and a base suspension automatic. They got 6.0 / 14.5@95 for the stick, and 5.7 / 14.1@97 for the automatic. That seems about right, since the base suspension transfers weight much better than the Z51. The September 1988 Car and Driver tested an 88 Z51 (identical to my '89 except for 4+3 vs. 6 speed) and got 6.0 / 14.2@98. The times that C&D got were very similar to what my cars would actually run.
I never raced a Vette at the track when I had my Stang, but I did get in a few spur of the moment "contests of speed". I could stay right with a Corvette from a roll, but they would jump me from a light because of the better traction.
The January 1985 Car and Driver listed the Mustang at 6.4 for 0-60 and 14.9@91 in the 1/4. The December 1984 Car and Driver tested two 85 Corvettes, a Z51 stick and a base suspension automatic. They got 6.0 / 14.5@95 for the stick, and 5.7 / 14.1@97 for the automatic. That seems about right, since the base suspension transfers weight much better than the Z51. The September 1988 Car and Driver tested an 88 Z51 (identical to my '89 except for 4+3 vs. 6 speed) and got 6.0 / 14.2@98. The times that C&D got were very similar to what my cars would actually run.
Last edited by Z51L9889; 05-17-2005 at 11:23 PM.
05-17-2005, 11:27 PM
#23
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
Originally Posted by vader86
Maybe its something with the California air, but my car would run a 14.1 with no modifications at all. I dont know why it is you all think we can only run mid 14s.
I don't doubt a good driver in good air can run low 14s. I guess you didn't read my post. If somebody quotes another Car and Driver test I'm gonna puke.
05-17-2005, 11:56 PM
#24
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
Originally Posted by SHINOBI-X
i guess everyone over in cali is a bad driver because alot of stock TPI vettes at the track don't break 13's, ONLY WITH mods they do.
What is there?
Sacramento
Infineon
Pomona (no street legal drags)
Famoso (test n tune only, last I checked)
Cal Speedway (get 3 runs in 5 hours, once per month)
LACR (****ty palmdale air)
Carlsbad (closed)
05-18-2005, 12:10 AM
#25
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: altered state
Posts: 81,242
Received 3,043 Likes
on
2,602 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
You'd think with all the rods out here we would have a half decent one ..
To the thread starter-Didn't mean to get off topic. Excuse me
To the thread starter-Didn't mean to get off topic. Excuse me
05-18-2005, 04:22 AM
#26
Originally Posted by cuisinartvette
Check the archives for stock times. Mine's an A4, btw. My above quote referred to stock as stock, meaning no headers, gears, converters, etc. They simply did not run 13's off the showroom floor. Yes, there are guys here who have stock longblocks who have cracked 13...After mods.
Bone stock with zero mods I ran 15.09@89-With a few free mods, a little intake massaging and a good exhaust from manifolds back, I dropped 2/10ths and gained almost 4 mph. Granted, this was at LACR, 2700 ft. A good friend of mine runs exactly the same times back to back...Within 1/100th of a second, matter of fact. At Bakersfield. (800 ft I believe) he went 14.3, same exact mods, btw.
If these testers ran their cars at sea level claiming 14.6 or so, figure a 20-30 hp gain with mods, you have the number-About 2-3 tenths quicker than stock. Archives point the 89 6 spd. at 15 sec...fwiw
Bone stock with zero mods I ran 15.09@89-With a few free mods, a little intake massaging and a good exhaust from manifolds back, I dropped 2/10ths and gained almost 4 mph. Granted, this was at LACR, 2700 ft. A good friend of mine runs exactly the same times back to back...Within 1/100th of a second, matter of fact. At Bakersfield. (800 ft I believe) he went 14.3, same exact mods, btw.
If these testers ran their cars at sea level claiming 14.6 or so, figure a 20-30 hp gain with mods, you have the number-About 2-3 tenths quicker than stock. Archives point the 89 6 spd. at 15 sec...fwiw
Sorry man, but your car was a red motor then. 89 MPH? my 91 Olds Calais HO QUAD 4 did better then that! I have seen too many stock-stock L-98 A4's that run mid 14's to low 14's all day to believe then run high 14's to low 15's. I guess you had a slow one.
Last edited by 88BlackZ-51; 05-18-2005 at 04:24 AM.
05-18-2005, 04:27 AM
#27
Originally Posted by cuisinartvette
What I originally posted were the stock times these magazines claimed back in the day vs. what they are running now.
Yes, the air at LACR is thin: everone runs a little slow there.
What got me, and I knew this was going to happen, is when I mention guys claiming low to mid 13's being stock(no mods). That, i don't believe. That's LS1 territory. Low 14's, high 13's in the right conditions obviously is possible: Time slips say it all.
88 black Z51-You don't know what's going on with the thread, because you may have passed over the words low to mid 13's and stock.
Last I checked, my head is still attached. It needs my body for transportation.
Yes, the air at LACR is thin: everone runs a little slow there.
What got me, and I knew this was going to happen, is when I mention guys claiming low to mid 13's being stock(no mods). That, i don't believe. That's LS1 territory. Low 14's, high 13's in the right conditions obviously is possible: Time slips say it all.
88 black Z51-You don't know what's going on with the thread, because you may have passed over the words low to mid 13's and stock.
Last I checked, my head is still attached. It needs my body for transportation.
Ha! Ha! It's all in good fun, but still your 89 MPH traps are really low.
05-18-2005, 04:30 AM
#28
Originally Posted by CentralCoaster
I don't doubt a good driver in good air can run low 14s. I guess you didn't read my post. If somebody quotes another Car and Driver test I'm gonna puke.
yes because they are obviously wrong.
i am just as big of a vette fan as you are probably, but that 89 mph trap speed is around 168-185 chp. the car should have more then that, don't u agree?
Last edited by 88BlackZ-51; 05-18-2005 at 04:39 AM.
05-18-2005, 04:33 AM
#29
Team Owner
Member Since: Dec 2000
Location: SE NY
Posts: 90,675
Likes: 0
Received 300 Likes
on
274 Posts
Cruise-In II Veteran
When I first brought my '88 from Phoenix to NY I ran it in late July, 2000 bone stock (paper air filter) at Raceway Park and it pulled:
14.25sec@94mph, in 82deg F, 40%RH, 28.99 baro, which is
14.04sec@95.3mph, normalized for weather
with a stock A4 and 2.59s on GY Eagles.
I'm not sure what that DA calculates to but obviously weather is sooo important to our TPI cars. My power only 219chp, off from the normalized figure of 228chp.
I believe Vic'89 bone stock was running high 13s at the same strip with his A4 '89 and 3.07 gears. Admittedly he has a stong car as he's now running mid 12s with stock heads & cam and modified TPI intake.
14.25sec@94mph, in 82deg F, 40%RH, 28.99 baro, which is
14.04sec@95.3mph, normalized for weather
with a stock A4 and 2.59s on GY Eagles.
I'm not sure what that DA calculates to but obviously weather is sooo important to our TPI cars. My power only 219chp, off from the normalized figure of 228chp.
I believe Vic'89 bone stock was running high 13s at the same strip with his A4 '89 and 3.07 gears. Admittedly he has a stong car as he's now running mid 12s with stock heads & cam and modified TPI intake.
Last edited by 65Z01; 05-18-2005 at 05:51 AM.
05-18-2005, 09:51 AM
#30
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: altered state
Posts: 81,242
Received 3,043 Likes
on
2,602 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
88black-Those runs were made at 2700 feet. Thin desert air. Believe me, everything runs slow up there. Its a major feat for any street car to crack 100 mph there. I might add my coolant temp was around 238 if I remember correctly. Bad wheelspin-2.24 60'
05-18-2005, 10:56 AM
#32
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
Let's all look our numbers up in a magazine, then we'll know who stands where. When we buy parts, we can just deduct the ET from the magazine times based on the hp gain the catalog lists.
I dunno why we waste our time at the track when Car and Driver already knows what our cars run.
I dunno why we waste our time at the track when Car and Driver already knows what our cars run.
05-18-2005, 11:03 AM
#33
Instructor
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Salt Lake City UT
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my buddy has got a 92 5.0 with pullys, headers, 3.73, cold air, and a shift kit and the best hes gotten is a 14.5 once, the other times its from 14.7-14.9. i smoked his *** with my stock 91 TPI and ran a 13.9@100.1. dont get me wrong, those ford 5.0 motors are bad ***, i'm just saying its going to take alot of mods and some money to hang with the later model TPIs and LT1 etc.... In general mustangs will never beat vettes out of the factory
05-18-2005, 11:13 AM
#34
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: altered state
Posts: 81,242
Received 3,043 Likes
on
2,602 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
This is my last respomse to this thread. Converting chp to track times or mph is a crock. One of these magazines recently had "05 Mustang GT goes 13.8"plastered all over the front cover. Of course they tweaked it a bit. Those people are in business to sell product, magazines and make money. What are those, 300chp? Lets say I have 200chp...Last time I ran at LACR, there was a guy flogging a brand new one. His best? 14.9 Lots of variables. The only way to know for sure is to track your car.
05-18-2005, 11:47 AM
#35
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2000
Location: The Top of Utah
Posts: 17,298
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes
on
22 Posts
Originally Posted by CentralCoaster
As for cuisinart's 89 mph trap speeds... Well, 88black is obviously a flatlander. This thread is done.
Originally Posted by cuisinartvette
Bone stock with zero mods I ran 15.09@89.
RACE ON!!!
05-18-2005, 12:47 PM
#36
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: Boston, Dallas, Detroit, SoCal, back to Boston MA
Posts: 30,607
Received 239 Likes
on
167 Posts
Originally Posted by CFI-EFI
The NHRA altitude correction factors make that a 14.60 @ 92 mph at sea level. Does that help put things into perspective?
RACE ON!!!
RACE ON!!!
All magazine runs are altitude corrected, they never publish the raw numbers.
05-18-2005, 03:27 PM
#37
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Apr 2003
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
A good friend of mine has a 90 Gt vert. Granted, thats fuel injected and not carbureated. I always just figured he'd be faster than my bone stock 84 Crossfire.
He took it to the track a couple weeks ago (and he's a fairly good driver) and his best time was a 15.1. Now I want to take my Vette down and run him. I think it may come down to a drivers race with both our cars in stock form.
He took it to the track a couple weeks ago (and he's a fairly good driver) and his best time was a 15.1. Now I want to take my Vette down and run him. I think it may come down to a drivers race with both our cars in stock form.
05-18-2005, 05:01 PM
#38
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2000
Location: The Top of Utah
Posts: 17,298
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes
on
22 Posts
Originally Posted by Saisling
A good friend of mine has a 90 Gt vert. Granted, thats fuel injected and not carbureated. I always just figured he'd be faster than my bone stock 84 Crossfire.
He took it to the track a couple weeks ago (and he's a fairly good driver) and his best time was a 15.1. Now I want to take my Vette down and run him. I think it may come down to a drivers race with both our cars in stock form.
He took it to the track a couple weeks ago (and he's a fairly good driver) and his best time was a 15.1. Now I want to take my Vette down and run him. I think it may come down to a drivers race with both our cars in stock form.
RACE ON!!!
05-18-2005, 07:17 PM
#39
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Aug 2002
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,428
Received 420 Likes
on
234 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05-'06,'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-'20-'21-'22-'23
Originally Posted by Z51L9889
My Corvette would run 14.0 - 14.1's @ 98, with a best of 13.96@99.55.
oowed down Thats when my car had about 140k on her and was bone stock.
05-18-2005, 10:04 PM
#40
Originally Posted by CentralCoaster
As for cuisinart's 89 mph trap speeds... Well, 88black is obviously a flatlander. This thread is done.
is a flatliner a good thing or a bad thing? maybe its because i live in ontario, but i am not sure if that was an insult or not.....