Yeah, the first couple runs were relatively close. Maybe one and a half to two. But then again I don't think either of us have working horns. So I was waiting for you to go and let you take the jump for all of them. I was letting off soon as my shift light came on in 4th, only grabbed fifth once and it dropped me pretty low, in the upper 3,000 RPM range. Now once this thing gets rolling in 4th, grab 5th, upper 120s and 130s come up decently quick.

But for the amount of money you have in your car, it runs real good. I've spent $5,200+ on the Mustang since we ran them in February, and have almost everything I need to reliably run up to 450 crank horsepower, between the 6 speed swap, buying the Vortech, new exhaust, SVT Focus fuel pump, new tires all around, etc. So I wouldn't really complain about $400 in mods making an L98 decently quick. That's actually great since I'm spending $369 on my intercooler kit alone.

No offense taken. I know they weren't quick stock, but you have to remember it was in 1999 when they were first upped to 260 horsepower stock. Back then, that was pretty decent. But then again, who races stock cars, right? Right now I'm running what's in my sig, when me and ninetyone ran them in February it was a little different.

Back then I had old tires, still had the crappy Flowmasters, had the stock TR-3650 5 speed with a clutch that was damn near worn down to the rivets, stock heavy driveshaft, and an annoying B&M shifter. Done quite a bit of upgrading since.

T56 6 speed swap, billet keys, new carbon synchros, completely gone through 4K miles before I bought the swap. Plus a Fidanza flywheel, Centerforce DFX that grips good enough to chirp them going into 4th, 03-04 Cobra aluminum driveshaft, Steeda Tri Ax shifter, finally got rid of the crappy Flowmasters for Borla Stingers.. Then I picked up my Vortech V1 S-trim in May. Have yet to install that though.

It's my daily driver for now, so I'm going to throw a big 4" core intercooler on there and run the stock 3.6" pulley to keep them IATs down, and eventually hope to run 12.5 or better. It's got a good enough driver behind it to do so. Only thing really hurting me is the wheel/tire combo. 18x9 up front, 18x10 out back. I believe the wheels are 32LBS, tires are 27LBS, so slinging around 236 pounds doesn't help matters.

 

Never said honda invented it I said

Honda just happen to do it in mass production in 1989 So yea Alpha was the first to use it in mass production and nissan used it in some of their 300ZXs. No one seems to be giving them crap for it.

Variable vale timing has been around almost a century in one form or another I am just asking why people insult it so much. I would love to have a small block that can rev to 6500 easy with a great idle, low end and never falls flat on its face in the upper RPMs.

Hell even my solara sucks at after 5500 rpm the single cam profile is just not as good. Look at a similar sized motor with VTEC VVTI ect and you will find it pulls just as hard from 1000-5500 and much harder at 5500 to 6500.

 

Always remember that we build our cars based on our RPM. Yes, the VTEC may pull harder up top, but that is completely irrelevant to a car that won't even see that RPM. The L98 may not breath as well up top because of it's limitation, but it doesn't have to. When building a torque motor we focus our attention on gearing (both tranny and out back in the rear), stall (if auto), tire size, in conjunction with just how much torque the engine is making. This is what gives us our MPH, not to mention our rate of acceleration. However, put a set of 32 valve heads on that L98, as well as a Holley Stealth Ram, and all bets are off....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRKTRLD2h8k

 

Well of course the engine manufacture would have to design the engine to match the variable cam system. I am not talking about adding it to an old engine I am just wondering why people are insulting a good technology.

 

Lol but seriously, I agree. A while ago (I think early 2009) when I was still completely up in the air about what car I wanted next, I was considering a 4th gen Civic SI. They're kind of weak at 160 HP, but then again that's at 8K in a 2,600 pound car. Considered an S2000 before I bought the Mustang in November 2010. 237 horsepower in a 2,800 pound car would be even more awesome.

I joke around about VTEC, but I like them. In this day in age, it doesn't matter what you start out with. No one races 100% stock cars. Even the guys on 'Vette forums who have the C5 Z06 and C6 Z06 fast list going on, all of them at least go to drag radials, exhausts, intake, tune, etc. There's an S2000 that's relatively famous on Youtube that makes 700 RWHP and I believe 400+ RWTQ on a stock engine. Just a bolt on turbo kit and open downpipe. There are imports out there that could beat every single member's car on this forum, and there are other domestic cars that could beat them. Just takes money..

 

Them Arao 32 valve heads are very neat. I'd hate to know how much they cost, but I'd love to have a set. Imagine a 32 valve 632 big block......

 

Come on now, your essentially on a Chevy website, what do you expect....

I don't think anybody is really insulting the technology, per se, they're just expressing their nationalism. When it comes to the variable valve setup though, the Corvette ZR1 (LT5) pioneered it, so nobody should be knocking any of this technology. Some of us have a need for it, and some of us don't, it's as simple as that, but any technology can give us the performance that we want when we build around it the right way....

 

No one is insulting the technology. It's actually a great idea. We are making fun of the typical ***** type driver who thinks vtec is everything.

 

Uh uh, nothing wrong with buying at lower cost. The turbo kits i saw used a Garret T3/T4. As long as there are no leaks,who cares?

 

Wow, didn't notice you had a T56 installed. Thats pretty damn cool! Don't see many of that style mustang thats really "built" around here, just lots of bolt on ones. Thing should fly with the supercharger too.

Theres a local guy that has a 2000 Roush mustang. He's owned it since around 01-02. Blew the original motor soon after with a supercharger, so he actually built the bottom end when there weren't even any parts available yet. He had a shop take rods and custom grind them so they worked, as well as the crank and pistons. I guess he has quite a bit of custom one-off work into it. It has a kenne bell on it now and puts down 540 RWHP. Pretty cool seeing as how it's still running today. I'd love to run him when my TA is done lol. He said he would, but that he's not expecting much since his is a convert with leather, etc....basically a street car, not a race car.

 

Kind of like how you think sbc's are everything.

 

not bad for the gains u get

 

i was unaware that a post count determines a person's worth/ knowledge. yours seem to be full of hot air,close minded responses, and claims. Additionally you apparently dont know how to operate a forum, there is a multi quote button, highly useful, highly suggest it.

i too thought like you, American is the best, V8s are the only options, but then i got my permit and opened my mind. I still prefer both but can appreciate a vehicle if its done well and fast. i know numerous imports that would make it seem like you're standing still. go on ls1tech and lurk on the street racing and kills, you will see numerous fast imports. All you are doing is continuing the tainted image that third gens have.

 

Since when did the LT5 have variable Valve Timing?

On top of that, The LT5 was introduced in 1990.

VTEC as used by Honda was introduced in 1983.

Variable Valve Timing was around by 1983, multi valve per cylinder was around many years (actually decades) before the LT5, Distributerless ignition was not new, GM had been using it for years on economy production cars and performance for years already, all aluminum engines were not new, so the LT5 pioneered nothing. That being said, the LT5 is the only V8 that I would ever consider owning as an engine to swap into something.

 

It did, but you might refer to it as a "variation" of an early variable valve timing setup, using it's second ignition key to activate the second set of 8 injectors and intake valves....

The first prototype was in 1985/86 out of which 20 were produced....

 

Post count also indicates a larger e-peen as well.

He never did respond what it meant that I had many more posts than him, either.

He's grabbing at straws to prove he knows more, when he doesn't. He's also brought up, that he was into turbocharging in 1996, and stood beside a Nissan Z-car like he owned it....

 

Uhh, what?

 

Act like a moderator for crying out loud will you. Would you like a response...?

 

Okay, I'll give you that response anyway. Being that you don't even own a third gen, lemme help you understand the characteristics of a ZR1 vehicle that I have OWNED in the past. The LT5 uses it's own version of variable valve timing. There is a "power" key located below the radio, and this activates the second set of injectors and valves. This is why the LT5 was capable of having incredible torque as early as 1000-RPM, with an RPM limit of upwards of 7500-RPM. Mind you, it wasn't as perfected by today's standards, it was more mechanical, but it worked and got the job done....

As for the ZR1 prototypes....;

"Late in 1994, a good friend and I discovered some Corvettes in a junkyard in Norfolk, England. On closer inspection, I was taken aback to see that among them was a yellow, narrow-bodied Vette complete with a Phase 1 LT5 engine. It was an early prototype Corvette ZR-1 that had been developed in the UK by Lotus for GM in 1985-86. Although badly damaged, the chassis was intact, and most of the engine and transmission components were in place despite having been attacked by sledgehammers and a backhoe.

Extensive research within Lotus UK confirmed that this car was in fact a unique find--a survivor of 20 "mule" cars that had been shipped over from the US in 1985 to be used by the Lotus/GM development team to test the durability and performance of each phase of the LT5 engine. The cars were scrapped in 1988 when the development team moved to using the wide-bodied Corvettes, which were then being produced at Bowling Green"....

http://www.vetteweb.com/features/vem...t5_engine.html

 

Subies and Evos can do curves like no ones business, awd is pretty undeniable in that area, soooooo much grip! and those sti's are getting similar times to stock third gen z28s.
Don't call me a big subaru fan, i mean they're kinda fun, but i mean credit where credit is due.
Source: my bro's got a 02 wrx and a 83 z28, and the times are pretty similar, which is pretty impressive for an old $1500 z28 350, to beat a $7000 wrx 2.0 turbo boxer, but the subie had no wheel spin, so that is credit to the platform, and the 21st century tech, but i'd much rather watch a slow camaro (hypothetically) than a billion dollar rice burner. Now, pit a '11 camaro vs a '11 wrx and the story is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

 

lol i have a hemi jeep cherokee that will burn almost all the rice,o-60 = 7 secs flat,and it weighs 5500lbs,fully loaded with 4x4.its new had to break it in right =]

 

Fairly sure it opened the extra 8 fuel injectors and the extra 8 intake runners (16 total) in the intake manifold and did nothing with the valves.

Cam timing did increase but not variable valve timing

 

DING DING DING!!! We have a winner.

The cams didn't change timing at all, from using that switch. It simply enabled the extra 8 injectors and allowed the secondary port throttle valves to open.

http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/...0/002/article/

I don't see what my not owning a third gen has to do with anything. It doesn't mean that I can't find correct information about the LT5, or any other engine or vehicle on the planet.

I guess I'm not allowed to be entertained by the funny things people, say, eh?

 

Pretty sure an STi and especially an EVO will far outhandle a 3rd gen stock for stock...

And your bro's car is not stock since no 83 Z28 ever came with a 350. If it was the stock engine, it wouldn't even be close to the subie I'm sure.

 

Winner? Please tell me you are kidding? The "butterfly" valves on the INTAKE side are controlled and limit the usage of the second set of injectors. As I said, it was an EARLY form of, or "variation", of variable valve timing, but you chose to act like a complete child about it. Everyone in the ZR1 circuit refers to the system as such....

 

It's not variable valve timing, if the valves are not affected by it.

What is so hard to understand about that?

 

true true, my bad, what i meant was it was a stock 350, (out of his van lol)
lol thats what i was saying: haha iwas with im once and he was wippin around corners in his wrx, and i was thinking "any second now he gonna break loose... any second now...,"

 

weren't there 350 CFi cars?

 

I think that was 'Vette only.

I haven't seen mention of 5.7L/350 crossfire in an F-body, nor can find anything now that says that.

 

You do realize what the word variation expresses, do you not? The system was an early form of what today's variable valve timing does today. GM's Northstar's that followed used variable valve timing, and although the LT5's method was a bit more crude, they both essentially did the exact same thing, albeit the Northstar was way more linear about it....

 

i did own a zx turbo and was playing with boost then,why is that so hard to understand? if you want a list of mods done to my 350tpi,i can send you another pm.

 

car guys are car guys, we all want 59838398.876 horsepower.

 

ahh i see, i remembered seeing a crossfire vette, the guy living about five houses up has a ton of vettes lol i wish i had his money

 

plus infinite mileage, i was gonna put in the pi symbol but theres no way to make it

 

I'm perfectly happy with a 500-600HP DD.

 

You obviously don't understand what the term "variable valve timing" actually means.

Variable valve timing changes the timing of the valves in relation to the crankshaft.

In more words....

As the cam or valvetrain switch to different lobes, the valves open and/or close at a different time in relation to crankshaft timing.

Opening a secondary set of valves in the intake is nothing like this. The LT5 used a secondary set of valves, better called butterflies in the intake manifold. Essentially opening a second butterfly on a throttle body would be the same effect. All it means is that more air flow can move through the intake and into the head, where the fixed timing cams and valves allowed this extra air to enter the cylinder. This is not in any stretch of the imagination anything like variable valve timing.

 

I like imports just fine,just don't care for the ***** reputation most of them carry. They just don't sound good modified. Now, i look at cost factor. Imports cost more ,cost more to modify, don't give that much of a payback for your mods and break easier than American muscle. That is a fact. Howcome you don't see too many Hondas and other foreign cars modified out there like you used to? Because the guys are blowing them up. They don't last unless they are done right and i mean the block internals need beefing up. Cars like your Supras and 300zx 's can handle it,but these little Hondas really cant and that is a fact. Convoy25,don't worry about the way i post,i am an IT Technician and if i wanted to go through the effort to look for the correct multi-quote button i would.LOL

 

Your so called "facts" are just conjecture.

 

I honestly had enough of your nonsense. What does "variable valve timing" do? What is the point of cam indexing alteration? What is it's purpose? Hmm, could it be one was for low speed operation and the other for high speed operation? But wait, what would be the point of that? Hmm, could it be perhaps to generate power throughout the RPM band, not to mention have a more direct control over emissions? Hmm, isn't that essentially what the LT5 power key does? Your understanding of the word "variation" is flawed, as is your understanding of the LT5 engine in general. It was most certainly an early form of valve timing, and the engines themselves were most certainly created during the 85/86 production year, and NOT in 1990. You have no idea what you are talking about, stick to Datsun's and $59 mask's....

 

An sti pulls a .91g on the skidpad,a Camaro Iroc pulls a .93g Which one hanled better.LOL

 

god i hope this lines up lol
.......................................................................................................................................its right here bro
....................................................................................................................................................ll
....................................................................................................................................................V

eh kinda works now lol

 

Yeah, he is on a Thirdgen site with a picture of a freakin 1970's Datsun on there.

 

No, that is not what variable valve timing about.

Variable valve timing about changing the indexing of cam in relation to the cranckshaft, while the engine is running. Opening an extra set of butterflys does not in anyway achieve this.

Changing the indexing, or timing of the cam in relation to the crankshaft can produce a broader torque curve, since you can get the benefits of advancing at cam at low engine RPM AND retarding the cam at high RPM.

Here is a simplfied diagram that I found to show the effects:


Stop and think about what more opening of a throttle body does, that is the effect that the secondary butterflies on the LT5 do, they just allow more air to pass through the intake manifold, it in no way whatsoever changes anything to do with cam or valve timing, and does not in the slightest have any similar effects. Basically, the LT5 has selectable throttle body size. The system is closer to what the 4.3 CPI had in 1995, that is known as a variable intake runner. The Ford SHO (actually a Yamaha engine), is closer related to what the LT5 has, but the SHO actually changes runner length, not just amount of open runners.

Variable valve or cam timing can be used for emmisions, but that is more of a side benefit, that the secondary butterflies of the LT5 simply can do.

While there may have been prototypes in 1985, I said "introduced" in 1990, meaning that's when they were released to market. You first said that the LT5 was an innovative engine, when it was not, EVERYTHING about the LT5 had been used and even mass produced before the LT5 was even thought of.

My understanding of the word "variation is just fine, you should check your understanding: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/variation

 

LOL.

 

horsepower sells cars torque wins races.

 

i love the graph you showed six shooter, it says alot about this thread "Straight up advanced retarded" i think for choosing to even post in it we all are, whose with me?, lets leave it for dead again

 

Awesome!!

 

i'm still all for abandoning the thread to die, anyone else with me?

 

The first area I bolded is not a fact whatsoever. You want to play facts? Whats a 3rd gens T5 transmission rated at? Whats a 3rd gens flimsy 10 bolt rear rated at? What HP level will the crap stock 3rd gen driveshaft twist at? You wouldn't know these things because your car doesn't make enough power. I could list you a ton of import cars that have a way beefier drivetrain from the factory than a third gen.

And you...an IT tech? LOL, maybe in a previous life or dream you had.

I'm going to have to agree with six shooter. Real variable cam timing actually will electronically change the position of the camshaft, or kick on a second camshaft to raise the powerband of a particular motor. Valves that open in the intake manifold are not really VVT, but instead they are known as charge plates, or something along those lines. They close to add low end torque but open up to add power in upper RPM's. It's 2 very different concepts.

Yea....an IROC may have done that back in 88 when they were new. You honestly think it'll do that now? And STI's will actually do around a .93 as well. The evo X will do .99g bone stock. Get your car on a track with a few evos and STI's and see which handles better. Until then, don't make assumptions.

 

hey now that isn't fair, the scuby is how many years newer and awd to boot, while the iroc is how old, probably could use alot of "freshening up" and i imagine will have fairly worn not that grippy tires