Notices
C4 Tech/Performance L98 Corvette and LT1 Corvette Technical Info, Internal Engine, External Engine

Stock LT1 Dyno results....

 
Old 07-08-2019, 03:27 PM
  #41  
Tom400CFI
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Tom400CFI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Park City Utah
Posts: 14,603
Received 719 Likes on 624 Posts
Default

Stout numbers^ That looks like a FUN package, to me.
Tom400CFI is offline  
Old 07-08-2019, 04:27 PM
  #42  
856SPEED
CF Senior Member
 
856SPEED's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: O'Fallon Missouri
Posts: 2,554
Received 69 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Tom400CFI View Post
Stout numbers^ That looks like a FUN package, to me.

It was cool and fun....but in 2001 when I bought it, the LT1 cars were still selling at solid numbers , well above L98 cars as the 96 models were only 5 years old! The LT1 was just a better platform to start making power with in my estimation. I think the c4 evolved over time for the better..just my opinion. I think your 92 was not only a better performer but a better car in general than my 85.
856SPEED is online now  
Old 07-08-2019, 10:16 PM
  #43  
MatthewMiller
CF Senior Member
 
MatthewMiller's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2015
Location: St. Charles MO
Posts: 2,324
Received 335 Likes on 286 Posts
Default

That L98 posted pretty strong numbers, I'd say. But you can definitely see the resonance hump at 3k in the torque curve. Give me the LT flat "curve" any day.
MatthewMiller is offline  
Old 07-08-2019, 11:32 PM
  #44  
richsanto
Junior Member
 
Member Since: Jul 2018
Posts: 33
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Question on the LT1 torque curve, where it starts to drop off past 4500 rpms or so....is this due to one major restriction (for example, heads starting to run out of flow, or getting above the cam operating range), or is it several items all starting to take effect? It always intrigued me how darn flat the LT1 torque curve is, and then all of a sudden, it starts to drop off, where if you could just stretch it out another 500 rpm, you'd put another 30 hp or so on the motor, without having to spin it up past 6000.
richsanto is offline  
Old 07-08-2019, 11:46 PM
  #45  
Tom400CFI
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Tom400CFI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Park City Utah
Posts: 14,603
Received 719 Likes on 624 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by richsanto View Post
Question on the LT1 torque curve, where it starts to drop off past 4500 rpms or so....is this due to one major restriction (for example, heads starting to run out of flow, or getting above the cam operating range), or is it several items all starting to take effect? It always intrigued me how darn flat the LT1 torque curve is, and then all of a sudden, it starts to drop off
I don't think there is a single big restriction. I feel that the cam and heads both "fade" at about the same time. More cam (like a hot cam) and you'd get a good bump in top end. Or GREAT heads...you'd get a good bump in top end (probably elsewhere, too).


Originally Posted by richsanto View Post
if you could just stretch it out another 500 rpm, you'd put another 30 hp or so on the motor, without having to spin it up past 6000.
Yep. Then you'd have and LT4, which is a very mild cam & heads LT1.
Tom400CFI is offline  
Old 07-08-2019, 11:51 PM
  #46  
Tom400CFI
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Tom400CFI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Park City Utah
Posts: 14,603
Received 719 Likes on 624 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MatthewMiller View Post
That L98 posted pretty strong numbers, I'd say. But you can definitely see the resonance hump at 3k in the torque curve. Give me the LT flat "curve" any day.
I totally agree. The LT1 is way better. Much more "driveable" motor, IMO.


One of my greatest interests in this was the comparison of the LT1 and the TORK MONSTER L98's low end torque. As you can see in the graph, after the initial "hit, where the operator slammed on the gas, the L98 -even with exhaust and intake mods, still doesn't match the LT1's low end tq.

I'm sure I'll reference this thread in the future when people whip out the "L98 low end tork monster" claims.
Tom400CFI is offline  
Old 07-10-2019, 06:31 AM
  #47  
FelixP
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2016
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 118
Received 27 Likes on 23 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 856SPEED View Post
It was cool and fun....but in 2001 when I bought it, the LT1 cars were still selling at solid numbers , well above L98 cars as the 96 models were only 5 years old! The LT1 was just a better platform to start making power with in my estimation. I think the c4 evolved over time for the better..just my opinion. I think your 92 was not only a better performer but a better car in general than my 85.

Did you do anything else to it apart from fit the MR for those numbers?
FelixP is offline  
Old 07-10-2019, 11:50 AM
  #48  
93 ragtop
CF Senior Member
 
93 ragtop's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2000
Location: Manassas VA
Posts: 5,363
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Tom, I have owned a 86 and 2-93's. This is just my opinion.
They both came with 2.59 and 3.07 gears.....
The L98 was much better suited for these gears, especially the 3.07..... IMO with the low rpm torque, and the low redline, that was a pretty good gear for the L98
My 93 came with a 2.59 and I swapped it for a 3.54. Made a world of difference in the car. With nothing done other then the 3.54 gears, it would run a qtr in. 13.17 sec. and trap at 105.xx all on factory wheels, mich. pilot tires. etc. To add to this, it was in July-August heat when I took it to the track.
The L98 would not come close to that under the same track conditions.....
My point is, with proper gears, the LT1 makes alot more power then the L98. Its just with stock gears, in a qtr. mile its harder to see.
93 ragtop is offline  
Old 07-10-2019, 08:14 PM
  #49  
856SPEED
CF Senior Member
 
856SPEED's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: O'Fallon Missouri
Posts: 2,554
Received 69 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FelixP View Post
Did you do anything else to it apart from fit the MR for those numbers?
Just a couple things....rebuilt, balanced and blueprinted .030 overbore...AFR heads, ZZ9 roller cam, long tubes.....ZF6 transmission with 3.73 gears....it ran head to head with my buddies 04 Commerative ZO6 on the street....had a short throw shifter and it would just surprise the **** out of people.....I ran the hell out of it for 17 years, so the newer **** just was just over the top...horse power levels are going crazy now....had no idea where things were going back in 2002. The car on the left was an 18 Mustang running skinnies and slicks....put the *** whipping on me..

Last edited by 856SPEED; 07-10-2019 at 08:18 PM.
856SPEED is online now  
Old 07-11-2019, 12:11 AM
  #50  
Tom400CFI
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Tom400CFI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Park City Utah
Posts: 14,603
Received 719 Likes on 624 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 93 ragtop View Post
Tom, I have owned a 86 and 2-93's. This is just my opinion.
They both came with 2.59 and 3.07 gears.....
The L98 was much better suited for these gears, especially the 3.07..... IMO with the low rpm torque, and the low redline, that was a pretty good gear for the L98
My 93 came with a 2.59 and I swapped it for a 3.54. Made a world of difference in the car. With nothing done other then the 3.54 gears, it would run a qtr in. 13.17 sec. and trap at 105.xx all on factory wheels, mich. pilot tires. etc. To add to this, it was in July-August heat when I took it to the track.
The L98 would not come close to that under the same track conditions.....
My point is, with proper gears, the LT1 makes alot more power then the L98. Its just with stock gears, in a qtr. mile its harder to see.
Oh, I hear you...and totally agree. My '92 has 3.45 gear and 6 speed. I'm able to run 13.70's in our rarified air here in UT. It's a runner, for sure. No comparison, L98 to LT1. I wanted to post in the same thread, to easily compare LOW end tq...since you so frequently hear people extolling the low end tq of the L98.
Tom400CFI is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 12:27 AM
  #51  
856SPEED
CF Senior Member
 
856SPEED's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: O'Fallon Missouri
Posts: 2,554
Received 69 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Tom400CFI View Post
Oh, I hear you...and totally agree. My '92 has 3.45 gear and 6 speed. I'm able to run 13.70's in our rarified air here in UT. It's a runner, for sure. No comparison, L98 to LT1. I wanted to post in the same thread, to easily compare LOW end tq...since you so frequently hear people extolling the low end tq of the L98.


I had both; the TPI intake and the miniram (similar in design as the LT1 intake). As you can see in my miniram graph up in the previous post, I was around 340 foot pounds at the tire at 2,500 RPM with a miniram. I would call that "decent" low end grunt with a miniram.

The TPI intake does two things; look pretty and choke a 350 cube engine.
856SPEED is online now  
Old 07-11-2019, 01:04 AM
  #52  
Tom400CFI
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Tom400CFI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Park City Utah
Posts: 14,603
Received 719 Likes on 624 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 856SPEED View Post
The TPI intake does two things; look pretty and choke a 350 cube engine.
Totally. I don't want to take it off the 'Vette Kart, 'cause it's "front and center"...and it looks fantastic. But it sucks, performance wise. It don't work.
Tom400CFI is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 01:14 AM
  #53  
84 4+3
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Aug 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,051
Received 327 Likes on 253 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Tom400CFI View Post
Totally. I don't want to take it off the 'Vette Kart, 'cause it's "front and center"...and it looks fantastic. But it sucks, performance wise. It don't work.
But I need my low end Tork to drive in snow!
84 4+3 is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 07:56 AM
  #54  
FelixP
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2016
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 118
Received 27 Likes on 23 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 856SPEED View Post
Just a couple things....rebuilt, balanced and blueprinted .030 overbore...AFR heads, ZZ9 roller cam, long tubes.....ZF6 transmission with 3.73 gears....it ran head to head with my buddies 04 Commerative ZO6 on the street....had a short throw shifter and it would just surprise the **** out of people.....I ran the hell out of it for 17 years, so the newer **** just was just over the top...horse power levels are going crazy now....had no idea where things were going back in 2002. The car on the left was an 18 Mustang running skinnies and slicks....put the *** whipping on me..
Sounds like a great combo! I'll likely do something similar since the rest of my 89 ZF6 is well sorted, just the engine to go! Did you ever run just the miniram?
FelixP is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 07:58 AM
  #55  
MatthewMiller
CF Senior Member
 
MatthewMiller's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2015
Location: St. Charles MO
Posts: 2,324
Received 335 Likes on 286 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 84 4+3 View Post
But I need my low end Tork to drive in snow!
Don't you do it!
MatthewMiller is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 08:14 AM
  #56  
84 4+3
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Aug 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,051
Received 327 Likes on 253 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MatthewMiller View Post
Don't you do it!
It's okay. Three times in a week causes it.
84 4+3 is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:04 AM
  #57  
drcook
CF Senior Member
 
drcook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2016
Location: N.E. Ohio OH
Posts: 2,258
Received 305 Likes on 275 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 84 4+3 View Post
It's okay. Three times in a week causes it.
We will track you down and wash your mouth out with Sani Flush.

Now we all have to go out back and burn some chicken bones to keep the evil troll away.

Last edited by drcook; 07-11-2019 at 09:05 AM.
drcook is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:43 AM
  #58  
84 4+3
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Aug 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,051
Received 327 Likes on 253 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by drcook View Post
We will track you down and wash your mouth out with Sani Flush.

Now we all have to go out back and burn some chicken bones to keep the evil troll away.
Listen, Tom started it last week okay?
84 4+3 is offline  
Old 07-11-2019, 09:59 AM
  #59  
856SPEED
CF Senior Member
 
856SPEED's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: O'Fallon Missouri
Posts: 2,554
Received 69 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FelixP View Post
Sounds like a great combo! I'll likely do something similar since the rest of my 89 ZF6 is well sorted, just the engine to go! Did you ever run just the miniram?

Hijacking Tomís thread so sorry!

But no...complete build at once..the whole car was torn down. Put the Edelbrock hi flow runners and base to top it off originally and was disappointed from the start. I couldnít understand the cost or benefit of the shorter runner intake. It dynoed at 296 rwhp with the Edelbrock.....ran low 13ís....went to miniram and dropped .5 second in the quarter and picked up around 50rwhp...everything else equal. Back to Tomís point the LT1 and miniram intakes for L98 can make great torque at low RPM on a 350 cubic inch engine. Even better on higher cubes!!
856SPEED is online now  
Old 07-11-2019, 01:14 PM
  #60  
JoeNova
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Sep 2016
Location: Ohio
Posts: 297
Received 37 Likes on 30 Posts
Default

Comparison data. My favorite type!

Nice work.
JoeNova is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Stock LT1 Dyno results....


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: