my car: '86 buick regal (Grand National clone minus engine...) if there weren't any engines, the GN would be the same weight as my car, if that makes sense, it doesn't have all the heavy trim, large bench seats or etc. w/ '91 305 LB9 - bored .30 over w/ lt1 cam estimated 3700lbs? vs. stock '94 imapala ss w/ lt1. I wonder how it would be, knowing the impala is way heavier i think. i think 4200lbs does the impala have enough power to make up for that weight to kill me?

typical stock LT1 impala ss will run low 15s - high 14s

Smile, you're.....

Make sure you take a pic of the tail lamps for us.

I think the impala would probably win. Would be close though.

Impala.

That is the funniest Reply I've ever seen!

hahaha. the buick is my car, and the impala is my dad. once we finish our cars we will race. Not sure if we will race before he rebuilds his motor 193,000 on his. but if we do, i feel confident i can beat him since my motor is fresh.

Don't under estimate the Impala SS's. They are quite stout for how big they are. I've seen some in stock trim running mid 14's.... There are some out there with intake/exhaust running with or beating LT1 F-bodys.... Basically they are pretty quick for being 4000+ lbs.... They handle pretty decent too. My friend has a 94' Caprice 9C1 with a 2k stall converter/Intake/cat-back exhaust/ and a brand new 4L60e and if you punch it from a stop it will burn the tires off... even if you punch it when your rolling it pulls like a bat out of hell. One hell of a car! I LOVE IT!

My Girlfriend has a 95 Caprice LT1, It will whoop my 88 T/A LB9 by about .20 of a second in the 1/8th

Did she put in a LT1 or is it a L99? 9C1 Caprice?

9C1 police cruser

That doesn't mean anything, a 94'-96' 9C1 can have an LT1 or L99(4.3l V8)... My DD is a 96' L99 and it moves for how big it is..... Holds its own very well.. It kept up with a 5 spd V6 stang one time.... That's not amazing per say but its good for being 4,100 lbs plus with me in it....

the impala ss' are very fast cars for how big they are.
ive seen many videos of people driving at 160 in them
there was a police chase on youtube where the guy is in the desert going steady 165 mph and loosing the chopper.
they are aerodynamic and heavy, perfect for high speed runs.
as for the 1/4 mile, its not their strength, but dont underestimate them.

a buddy of mine has a 96 caprice (like an impala ss but less power) and 95 mph feels like 40 mph its so steady at speed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlUrhnBzkrE

Maybe loosen a few spark plug wires on his car.....

The Impala SS and the Caprice's LT1's are both the exact same. No engine differences.

All LT-1's had dual exhaust, there is a sticker under the hood that will show the displacement and the VIN can be decoded.



All B body LT-1's were identical as far as power including the Buick and Caddy versions. The Impala was simply an apperance package with better wheels and tires compared to the other versions. A base caprice with the right options and decent tires will typicaly be faster than the impy just through weight savings.

Don't forget that the Impala could also have a floor shifter!

i think only the last year

i just did a 5 hour opti tune-up on a 5.7 roadmaster whoooooopty do

good off the start but all done by 4000-4500 rpm

9C1's had better suspension than the Impalas..... Not a hell of a lot better but better.

What do you mean "That dosent mean anything."? I dont recall saying it did. I was asked if the car was a factory 9C1 or if I put the LT1 in it, so..........not really sure what you ment

The 9c1 was a ss in caprice clothes. They have the same suspension but the 9c1 has auxiliary oil and transmission and power steering coolers.

My 96 9c1 is actually hevier than an impala...extra frame bracing,more roof supports,steel plates in the backs of the front seats,an the 9c1 has stiffer spring..thats why they sit so high..everything else is pretty much the same..engine,trans,tuning, no top speed limiter, an shifts into 4th gear and also locks the convertor at wide open throttle..I believe youll have an imp at the line, but he'll outrun you over a long run...Ive seen 148mph in my 9c1..(never again!!)

If I'm not mistaken the Impy and properly optioned Cap's had all the 9C1 heavy duty features like the oil cooler and suspension.

I do know that while all 94-96 road masters had the LT-1 you had to order the towing package to get the oil cooler and HD brake and suspension bits.

Theres a nice 2 tone silver on grey classic driven by an old man localy that I want badly. It has the dual exhaust and is nearly mint

Even an L99 car would be a nice catch for the right price, any 1 piece rms 305 crank, rod and piston assembly will drop straight in and make for a 305ci ltx or an LT-1 swap is dead simple if you have a parts car to pick from.

I think the 305 option would atleast match the stock B body LT1 for power and still offer good MPG and acceptable torque for a road car.

Nice thing is that its A LOT cheaper and A LOT easier to find a B-Body LT1 setup than an F-body setup or a vette setup....

And the iron heads flow a bit better than the alloy ones so with a cam and flash you can make significantly more power than you would with the F/Y body motors.

they flow better???
where do they flow better?????
who's flowbench??????
they dont flow better than the lt4!!!!!!

I said LT-1.

Look it up, depending on the bench they seem to flow between 10 and 20 cfm better at certain points.

tried looking ...found nothing #'s wise
you know the link???

i only mentioned lt4 for shits and giggles cause i have fastburns and they were loosely designed after them......and i like em

personally id take the aluminums due to the ease of porting and extra compression for a street vehicle

Alum heads can't take as much compression as Iron head , sure stock they probably have better compression but get into high hp and i'll take my iron heads.... The iron heads do flow a Little better, idk where i saw that but i have seen it numerous times....

[quote=v10viper04;4147589]Alum heads can't take as much compression as Iron head ,





you are gonna have to explain that comment!

In the context of a B body I wouldnt bother swapping the alloy heads even for the weight advantage as the difference is the proverbial drop in the bucket for a 4500 +- lb car. I also wouldnt swap the alloy's for iron just for the marginal flow improvement.

It's really just an academic observation, and it's good to know that a B body donor isnt any less capable or desirable than the F/Y body motors if say you were swapping one into a 3rd gen. With the same cam total output would be very close for any factory LT-1 motor.

If there is to be any swapping at all it would be to an LT-4 head/IM combo. Even with the tall ports the right cam can make them work very well in a heavy car.


There are some who claim that alluminum heads and an iron block are less capable of holding boost or N2O than an all iron motor but again the difference is more academic than anything.

Whatever you have dont go swapping parts to avoid an issue that may not ever effect you, there are many many alloy headed LT's running boost with no issues.

have to stay this pic makes me laugh everytime i see it!

[quote=squeeezer;4147918]
Aluminum is A LOT less dense than Iron and an aluminum head will warp a lot easier than an iron head under high boost... the heat will ruin them... sure you can run them but i personally would rather run an iron head for added safety..

iron heads for the top fuelers from now on!!!!!!!!!!

i cant read this post anymore
i wana keep my sanity
but ill show as many people as i know for a good laugh

They use specially made cylinder heads they don't run stock chevy alum heads....
Just another immature new member..... Seriously go read a book dude....

we obviosly got off track here!!!!!!!
i understand the diff. between iron v.s. alum. heads
ALL THINGS BEING THE SAME THE IRON WINS!!!!!and this is NOT 100% of the time
yeah i read hot rod magazines too

my arguement ORIGINALLY is this
1. id rather port alum. heads
2.if i can run alum. heads and 1 more pt. of compression (or bigger cam) on a street motor with pump gas
3.any motorsport with big# h.p. has aluminum heads......including top fuellers (were not talking design...material)

why do you think aftermarket/manufactures so many aluminum heads vs iron????

and the comment:aluminum heads cant take as much compression ....really got me going

now explain this to an immature member please!!!!!!
without reading your hot rod magazines!!!

Compression creates a lot of heat, and aluminum heads will warp under such conditions.... Bottom line... Iron heads will resist much more.... that's my argument..

More compression = heat. Aluminum disapates heat BETTER than cast iron. At a higher compression ratio with a cast iron head will cause a spark knock (Engine will sound like a diesil) because the heat held in the heads will ignite the fuel before the plug fires. You can play with timing and possibly get rid of this for every day driving, but if you run it hard that way............ it'll more than likly give birth. Predetonation will ultamately destroy your pistons. If you dont believe this........ask my 71 Suburban with the piston in the oil pan and the cracked cylinder.........

And how exactly dose that matter? Unless you remove the heads and re-instal them without checking for run out you will never have an issue.

And on top of that alloy heads will not warp excessively under normal use. Yes they can warp more than iron heads when over heated but except for some especialy bad designs warping isnt an issue.


Hell I've over heated my all alloy Mazda V6 several times and it runs like a top to this day. Just a few weeks ago I discovered I had driven it a couple hundred miles with next to no coolant in the thing.

I dont exactly look forward to the potential warpage when I do the head swap soon but the build allready includes significant decking to heads and block.

I have overheated many vehicles and never had a problem either.... not a determining factor... Basically all i'm saying is an iron head will hold up better.... Better resistance to warping, regardless that it holds heat more... if you have a good cooling system you don't have to worry about that...

Good thing he used that little crazy guy at the end of the post, now we can all quit guessing............

I frankly dont see any reason to chose either over the other in this case for the reasons allready stated.

Besides even if (and thats still a big IF) the alloy heads warp more the late model iron heads from the 70's on are infamous for cracking.

If an alloy head is shown to be warped when removed then you simply fix it. It will have never caused you any grief while installed and since it's just good practice to plane any head when R&Ring it you cant even complain about the expense.

However if you have a cracked iron head you may have suffered several issues that lead to you having to remove the head and usualy replacing it.


The simple truth is there are no clear cut advantages between the two. Iron is shown to produce slightly more power when the rest of the setup is identical, thats likely because it DOSE hold in more heat.

Conversely alloy heads can cause the motor to "appear" to run hotter because they DO conduct more head away from the chamber, and directly into the coolant and oil.

Alloy heads are great because they are light and easy to work with but if you're installing them because they are "knock resistant" you are barking up the wrong tree. You want as much heat to be retained in the chamber as possible to get every last HP out.

Proper chamber design is the only acceptable way to control knock in todays world. If your iron heads are causing pre-ignition then you should look at the root cause not a band aid solution that will give up power if it dose anything at all.


If I could buy a set of alloy heads for my T/A that cost about what my Vortecs cost ($40 complete) and have a chamber thats atleast as good I'd buy them in a heart beat but they dont exist.

I could get Alloy L98's for a couple hundred but they are no better than my stockers. And all the "affordable" aftermarket castings I see are atleast a grand and use inferior chambers. The superior potential of a Vortec chamber is more than able to make up for the 40-50 pound weight penalty.

Heat does not make Horse power..............not in anyway

Im not going to argue with you about it, I have done my home work and have a healthy understanding of the physics behind internal combustion so do your self a favor and educate your self.

Specificaly look up the concept of low surface area to volume ratios and the practical aplications to internal combustion engines. It's the basis for EVERY modern advanced chamber design and one of it's main advantages is the ability to retain more heat in the combustion space for improved eficency and power.

do you have any expierience in hands on/testing or do you just regurgitate what you read in hot rod magazines?????

Right back at ya bud.... You have no room to talk....

thats the difference between us
i dont spout of a bunch of juvenile b.s.
i question it and u can be a defensive as you want dont matter to me but you shouldnt make comments like"uluminum heads cant take as much compression as iron heads" there are impressionable minds out there getting the wrong idea
you made 1 valid point so far (about iron heads making power with heat retention)but its not a 100% science you would know this if you ran/dynoed more than 1 iron headed engine (yes im assuming this from your lack of exrierience at least im honest........my bad but i dont know any other explanation)

where do you go racin????? if you do
id like to meet you if possible

not in some tough guy way

im good for shootin the ****
sometimes a battle is worth fighting and this is one we obviosly will agree to dissagree

incidentially i luv vortec and vortec type heads the only set i had to resurface was a set of iron vortec that never saw truck duty (purchased new with 3000 miles) they were warped due to a thin deck surface not the material they were made from
currently on 1 of my cars i run gmpp aluminum fastburns