93 vette numbers
Burning Brakes
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: Miami FL
These are the numbers that the magazines got way back in the day.
300hp/340tq
0-60 @ 5.0/5.4
1/4 @ 13.6-14.1
The '92 was the first year of the new LT1 ( the '70s was LT-1) The '92 has different valve covers and was rated 300hp/330tq, '93 and up was rated 10lbs/ft more tq.
'92-'93 were "batch fire" fuel injection. '94 and up were sequential fuel injection. '93 and up have the composite (plastic) valve covers.
Every year Vette since the LT1 came out had improved in some way, be it brakes, interior upgrade, opti spark improvements etc...
300hp/340tq
0-60 @ 5.0/5.4
1/4 @ 13.6-14.1
The '92 was the first year of the new LT1 ( the '70s was LT-1) The '92 has different valve covers and was rated 300hp/330tq, '93 and up was rated 10lbs/ft more tq.
'92-'93 were "batch fire" fuel injection. '94 and up were sequential fuel injection. '93 and up have the composite (plastic) valve covers.
Every year Vette since the LT1 came out had improved in some way, be it brakes, interior upgrade, opti spark improvements etc...
Last edited by TOO_HOTTVETTE; Sep 29, 2005 at 11:15 PM.
Elite Torch Red Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 57,805
Likes: 23
From: Exit 89 GSP,Lakewood,NJ The Land Of Mojo
Cental/South NJ Events Coordinator
CI 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 Vet
CI-II Burnout & Drag Champ
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07
You can't go by magazine numbers, but then again, my times have always been better than what the magazine showed.
My '93 automatic with the 2.59 rear gears went a best of 13.37@102 mph in complete stock form.
My '93 automatic with the 2.59 rear gears went a best of 13.37@102 mph in complete stock form.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: Miami FL
Originally Posted by Mr Mojo
You can't go by magazine numbers, but then again, my times have always been better than what the magazine showed.
My '93 automatic with the 2.59 rear gears went a best of 13.37@102 mph in complete stock form.
My '93 automatic with the 2.59 rear gears went a best of 13.37@102 mph in complete stock form.
Mojo, I bet if you get 5 stock different LT1 autos, the same day at the same track, the times would vary somewhat. For some folks magazine times are all they have.....BUT..it sure is good to now what these babies can really do with real owners in their real cars
Advanced
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 95
Likes: 1
From: Leominster MA
Originally Posted by Mr Mojo
You can't go by magazine numbers, but then again, my times have always been better than what the magazine showed.
My '93 automatic with the 2.59 rear gears went a best of 13.37@102 mph in complete stock form.
My '93 automatic with the 2.59 rear gears went a best of 13.37@102 mph in complete stock form.
Originally Posted by TOO_HOTTVETTE
BUT..it sure is good to now what these babies can really do with real owners in their real cars
The best thing to do is use the magazines as a rough estimate, but if you really want to know what a car will pull, talk to an owner who knows how to drive their car. My buddy in a '94 Z28 6 speed, pulled constant 13.9's at just under 100 (with one run being at 13.67 @ 101.2ish with Sunoco 110 and a 37 degree night
) Motor Trend and other magazines rated those cars in the mid 14's.Talk to owners, they'll give you the scoop on the best a car can output.
Thread Starter
5th Gear
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Thanks guys. I currently drive a 2000 grand prix gtp. With it being supercharged, I run a 15.2 1/4 mile and 0-60 = 6.2seconds. That will be a noticeable difference with the vette then. Who knows, maybe I could supercharge that vette?
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,556
Likes: 0
From: Jenison MI
Cruise-In VI Veteran
Cruise-In VII Veteran
St. Jude Donor '06
My 93 is slow... 
In stock form I got a best of 14.8 in the 1/4 with 2.59 gears.
Then I put on a set of Corsa's, and 3.73 gears. Ran 13.9
Then I put in a 2800 stall converter, had the tranny rebuilt, trans-go shift kit, 1.6 roller rockers, and EM long tube headers. Ran a best of 13.6 so far.
Then I sprayed 125 hp of N2O and ran a best of 12.48 @ a little over 113 mph.
See -- it's slow... With those mods I should be high 12's without the N2O and mid 11's with it.. But I guess if the car runs 1 sec slow in stock form it will still be 1 sec slow with bolt-ons.
Every car of every year will run different times.
In stock form I got a best of 14.8 in the 1/4 with 2.59 gears.
Then I put on a set of Corsa's, and 3.73 gears. Ran 13.9
Then I put in a 2800 stall converter, had the tranny rebuilt, trans-go shift kit, 1.6 roller rockers, and EM long tube headers. Ran a best of 13.6 so far.
Then I sprayed 125 hp of N2O and ran a best of 12.48 @ a little over 113 mph.
See -- it's slow... With those mods I should be high 12's without the N2O and mid 11's with it.. But I guess if the car runs 1 sec slow in stock form it will still be 1 sec slow with bolt-ons.
Every car of every year will run different times.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
Le Mans Master
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 5,713
Likes: 105
From: Manassas VA
Originally Posted by TOO_HOTTVETTE
let alone go often enough to get the best reaction time and fine tune the car and their skills.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but not this. The reaction time has no effect on the cars recorded time at a track. If you look at a time slip you will see the reaction time is a seperate reading. Now if you are racing it does make a difference but not in comparing car to car. I agree that magizines give you a rough idea of what a car will do, but you dont know the weather, track, etc where it run and these make a big difference.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,471
Likes: 2
From: 1993 Quasar Blue 'vert Scottsdale AZ
Like said, all Corvettes are not created equal. You guys with low E.T.'s seem to be running on the East Coast. Out here, with the lousy D.A., most stock LT1's are lucky to break 14.0.
Elite Torch Red Member
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 57,805
Likes: 23
From: Exit 89 GSP,Lakewood,NJ The Land Of Mojo
Cental/South NJ Events Coordinator
CI 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 Vet
CI-II Burnout & Drag Champ
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07
Originally Posted by Lichen
Like said, all Corvettes are not created equal. You guys with low E.T.'s seem to be running on the East Coast. Out here, with the lousy D.A., most stock LT1's are lucky to break 14.0.
With an automatic, the driver is out of the equation, so me driving five different cars would have no effect.
I put the car in "D"(not "OD") and mash the gas.
Reaction time doesn't affect your ET.
Weather conditions play the biggest part in my times VS those in other states.