This is strictly a hypothetical question, I keep hearing how bad *** the 89 Turbo Trans Am is(especially with mods). I have never seen one here in Canada, basically because none were sold here.I was just wondering what the general consensus would be, would an un modded 2001 Camaro SS beat a stock 89 TTA, what about a modded TTA? Would it wipe the SS or do you think it would be close?

------------------
1990 Iroc convertible,305 tpi,Black with black leather interior,lowered,Taylor 8mm wires,K&N's,gutted airbox

 

Sounds like a race I'd want to see! You realize that GM decided to stop production on those tta's because they were faster then the vette's? I think that because times have changed, and the SS's also claim to run 13's, the camaro might have a tenth on the TTA, but just my opinion. Some people claimed that the TTA's were 12 sec cars, but I think there is more power potential for the SS, so making it faster then the TTA wouldn't be a feat. Also, not too many modded TTA's out there, because they are collector cars. - Randy

 

I have seen one of each run at the 1/4 Real life testing is the true measure in my opinion, not Motor Trend or Road and Track.
The TTA was a more consistant car as for the SS it varied alot. The TTA ran constant 13's were the SS pulled a couple 13's and alot of 14.1's (so sad) The TTA is faster stock than a SS. And yes the TTA is a rare car but if you did mod one it would blow any LS1 away very easily. Put on a bigger turbo, better gating system, exhaust, better PROM, and yor usuall mods and there ya go. By the way both cars were bone stock.

 

Yeah, the TTA would obviously be a more consistant car, because the 3.8L engine is all that's pushing it off the line before the turbo kicks in. The SS was probably inconsistant due to more wheelspin problems. I saw a guy on speedvision scew around with boost, a computer chip, and drag tires on a Grand National, and he got it to run high 11's. There is potential with the TTA, but I would rather butcher up a car that isn't worth so much in stock form. They are both cool cars, but in my college parking lot I wouldn't want to park a TTA, whereas EVERYONE has a 4th gen camaro. Sorry, I've just learned that cars that nobody looks twice at don't get vandalized. TTA's are awesome cars. -Randy

 

Very interesting...

The TTA is a very fast car. With stock boost they run somewhere around 13.5. The car will definetly be more consistant than a 6 speed SS. The boost can be easily adjusted and 12's can be had without lifting a valve cover.

The SS CAN run a very low 13 stock. But it takes a good driver and a good launch. I have seen these cars in the 12's with exhaust and bolt-ons combined with a set of Drag Radials. But when you talk about potential power the SS will kill the TTA. If one had enough money you could put a turbo setup on the LS1 and really fly. But the TTA would probably be much cheaper to modify to run consistant 12's.

If I was choosing between the two cars, I'd get the SS. My buddy has a 98 Z28 that runs 10's. All he has done to the motor is heads/cam/exhaust/nitrous . If I had to bet I'd put my money on the SS, as long as I or someone who knew what they were doing was driving it.

peace

 

the LS1 is a sweet motor, amazing design. I love how GM has stuck w/ the pushrod motor. Low-tech, but they're still kicking everyone elses *** at the track(stock for stock anyway.) I only know one guy with a TTA, and it's BONE stock, 18,348 miles and will stay within 50 miles of that till next year (only driven up a trailor, down a trailor, to the car show floor and back. the very rare parade as well.) back when it had like EXACTLY 18,000 miles he took it to HRP, and it ran a 13.62@98.6, one run, on the original tires, back up on the trailor and to his garage to get washed, waxed, and kissed goodnight. lol. I know a bunch of guys w/ turbo-buicks, Regal T-types, GN, GNX, those bitches will screame like a raped-ape.

A friend of mine runs LOW 11's on motor only in his 99Z(i do believe it diplaces a tad more than 347CI now), he has a small shot that puts him in the mid 10 range on the bottle. He used to run low 11's and all he had then was a raised airbox, 3.73's, a cutout, a cam, and a 175 shot. I like the V8's better personally, but you can bet your @$$ I wouldn't complain about owning a turbo-buick motored ride.

Anthony

------------------
previous ride: 87 Camaro LT
350, A4.Comp Cams 268H, Edelbrock Preformer intake, Hedman Headers and y-pipe, gutted cat, No AIR/smog pump. 14x3" Open element K&N, Q-jet w/ D hanger and DA rods, adjusted AV spring tension and quick can.

Current ride: 1992 Camaro RS, K&N, Flowmaster, 305, T5, Black, T-tops, 84k miles.

 

Anyone ever dyno a stock TTA?

 

stock fdr stock a SS would probably be quicker but less consistent. I've seen bone stock SS's run 13.1's. The TTA's run 13.4-13.6's with STOCK BOOST settings. I simply turn of a rod and bye bye SS. It takes MINIMAL mods to get a TTA into the 11's. Example, my buddy has a TTA #850, chip race gas springs, K&N slicks and a transbrake, with a shot torque converter he pulled an 11.95@113 with a 1.62 60' time, didn't lift the valve covers didn't touch the intake..the potential of the LC2 is FREAKIN AMAZING!. Thats why i plan on swapping on in come spring time

I'm not bashing the LS1 at all, thats another bad *** motor, 12's with basically little BS mods is no joke either

------------------
*89 Trans Am GTA
*Moderator at www.transamgta.com

To hell with the GM vs Ford war. We must unite, as brothers to fight the plague that is overtaking the world...RICE

Tony

 

the funny thing is GM rated the TTA at like 250 or 260 HP(i forget exactly) but i've heard people getting up to 301 HP on a stock TTA, stock factory settings...

 

I believe I can speak on this with knowledge.

The TTA ran LOW 13's and Ive seen MORE than 1 run high 12's FACTORY STOCK, I have video to prove this.

The SS is NOT easier to mod than the TTA.Nor less expensive.

The TTA will run more consistent and faster with fewer mods.

PAS, the company who built the TTA's dyno'd 10 cars, the LOWEST car was 301 RWHP!!!!

In fact see the "2Kills in 1 night"post I made just a few days ago.

I bought my TTA last May, I paid 10.5K for a car with 49K original miles on it and some mods already done. (bigger turbo,inj, aftermarket intercooler,fuel pump, AFPR, and so on.

While I like the SS alot, I think the TTA is stealthier, very few people even know what they are.Or they remember the early turbo TA's and think it wont be fast.

Any more questions just ask.

I owned 3 GN prior to the TTA, and many other performance cars.

L8R




------------------
1989 20th Anniv Turbo Trans Am
minor bolt on upgrades
12.79 @ 110 on REAL radials and street trim.

 

I wouldn't say you can really compare the cars given it's N/A vs forced induction... all the guy in the TTA has to do is up the boost every time the guy in the SS made a mod... in factory form I'd say that the TTA has the SS unless there is a GOOD driver in the SS.

 

Thats what alot of NA guys say, typical response, but when you consider that the TTA is usuing only 6 cyl and 231 cu in. that argument is weak.

 

I've heard that those TTAs are dogs.

------------------
1987 IROC-Z L98 3.23 Pretty much stock. Free mods(screens, airbox,160 stat,fans always on) B&M Megashifter, Cervini ram air hood 14.5@95mph

 

Spend a few large on a supercharger for the LS1...goodbye TTA

 

HAHHA, yea well spend a few large on a TTA and GOODBYE SUPERCHARGED LS1....... Your forgetting the base to start with.



------------------
1989 20th Anniv Turbo Trans Am
minor bolt on upgrades
12.79 @ 110 on REAL radials and street trim.

 

Just a dumb newbie question, but is 89 the only year TTA's were made?

 

Yes.

 

Well actually NO. There were TA's in 1980/81 that were turbo, but they sucked big time.
The 89 is powered by slightly different version of the GN motor.



------------------
1989 20th Anniv Turbo Trans Am
minor bolt on upgrades
12.79 @ 110 on REAL radials and street trim.

 

either that statement is FULL of sarcasm or the person u heard that from is a COMPLETE MORON!

 

Mine bone stock went 13.55 and with a chip and k&n filter, turning up the boost, I ran 12.42 @111. All this cost me about $200. There is a guy in Cali that drove his TTA to the track about 130 miles, ran a couple of 9.7's and drove home, still getting almost 20 mpg's. Can that SS do that?

Pete

 

COme on Pete,

That guy had a stage motor!!! With the money he had in that the SS could proabbly run 9's, they are getting the LS1's really fast and maintaining them as daily drivers.


LOADED87IROC, is my buddy, he s just being sarcastic cause I havent given him a ride in it yet!!

L8R



------------------
1989 20th Anniv Turbo Trans Am
minor bolt on upgrades
12.79 @ 110 on REAL radials and street trim.

 

Go to stangnet.com, then MIDWEST section, look for the post on "2kills in 1 night" and read away, this guy was serious.

 

i might just register there to add my 2 cents...someone drives one bad TTA and they are ALL dogs? PLEASE, typical morons that don't know **** yet open their mouths..

 

A freind of mine has 2 TTAs and they are filthy fast with basic dirt cheap mods. They are easy 13 second cars with a competent driver, Another freind of mine bought a TTA And never could break 14.0 (it was completely stock) but his 60 foots aways sucked and he never spooled it up at the line. There is another guy here locally that with strictly bolt ons ran low 11s high 10s with a TTA, he eventually tore up the motor so its no longer stock (and yes it is very BA now!!)
Perry

 

see thats the problem, a lot of people don't know how to drive them....no doubt i'm sure there are a few TTA's that have been abused and have tired engines, but that doesn't MEAN every TTA is like that...like i said above(i think) a buddy of mine spent $800 on his(#850) and pulled a 11.95@113 not bad if u ask me...

 

At a stop light say 0-60 --- TTA
1/4 with identical 60's --- SS
Top End, (If I'm not mistaken LS1's have a top speed gov. of 160 mph ?) --- TTA
JMO
-
As long as they both smoke Cobra's, I could care less.

89' TTA #1416

[This message has been edited by 1BADDAM (edited December 05, 2001).]

 

well the bottom line is that both cars are totally bad. they both will blow anything off the road. the TTA is cheaper to mod(for now at least) the SS sounds better(i like V8 sound) both cars have an incredible potential. both can be 9 sec cars without sacraficing much drivability. i like the looks of the TTA better, but i like 6speed trannys of the 4ht gen cars. so it is a toss up.

 

take it from me, those turbo trans ams are definitely bad ****! i was absolutely creamated by one yesterday! and my car is by no means a slouch

------------------
1976 mustang
4 cylinder 4 speed
2.3 liter
looking for a camaro!

 

ok, hy-po-ny. i want to know, what your car does in the 1/4 mile. if you cant do that, do a 0-60 time for me, cuz i wanna know. how fast is that thing really? i was gonna totally flame ya, but that is not very productive. so i am givin you the benefit of the doubt here, tell us what that thing runs and then we will decide weather it is a slouch or not.

[This message has been edited by 1MeanZ (edited December 05, 2001).]

 

we all have to start somewhere. id venture to guess that i do 0-60 in about 12, maybe 13 seconds. yeah haha very funny laugh it off. im putting the 351 in it soon and no cody its not from a truck up in the trees.

------------------
1976 mustang
4 cylinder 4 speed
simpson racing seat belts
aluminum 13" racing wheels
limo tint

 

Hey, I was just a the drag strip like a month a go and I was talkin to a guy with a brand new Camaro SS. It was all stock with street tires. The first run he got a real low 13. Second run he got a high 12.
Id give it to the SS.

 

I'm kinda surprised everybody's putting the SS in the 13s . I rode in my friend's 98 Z28 (6 spd) last night. He has barely any mods - just a homemade ram-air setup feeding from the air dam for the radiator, gutted MAF screens, and no muffler. Yet he ran a 12.95 @ 106mph at the strip (I saw the timeslip) the last time he was there. This beast is by no means slow... factory sleeper I guess. It has enough power to break those Kumho ECSTA's loose in 3rd gear. BTW, this kid knows how to shift. I have never seen anyone slam the gears like that. In fact, he got that thing to grind going into 4th. But anyway, back to the point, I'd give the SS more credit. I'm sure it'll run a lot faster than 13s. Granted wheelspin is a problem with these cars, but if this guy's Z is running high 12s with basically no mods, the SS should manage at least as good a time given the 15 extra horses it comes with out of the box.

------------------
'88 IROC 305 TPI
Freshly converted to 5 speed
Gutted airboxes
180 degree T-stat
Advanced base TPS voltage
Relocated IAT sensor
Momo steering wheel (gotta luv it)
Ram-air setup coming soon
Flowmaster muffler (puke)
Taylor SpiroPro wires
Accel cap and rotor
Ported plenum
Throttle body bypass
Kills: '94 Z28, Olds Aurora V8, bunch of Mustangs, T-birds, ricers, and others who assumed a 13 year-old car would be too slow.

[This message has been edited by 88irocz28 (edited December 13, 2001).]