Why is my C5 don't spin it's wheels???
Corpse
>
> My old six cylinder chevy has no problem
> spinning it's front wheels. Why can't I do it on my vette? Anybody else
> experience this problem?
>
> Andre
> 99 Z51
It's not a problem, that's what you want!! (traction) Spinning tires is
gratifying, but 100% inefficient...
--
~~~
/ \
)X X(
(_ ^ _)
|||||
\___/ ...CORPSE
Better to reign in Hell
Than serve in Heaven...
Remove **non-spam** from my address when replying
G. Schnauzer
common problem right from the factory.
--
G. Schnauzer
Corpse <**non-spam**cor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:36D770...@ix.netcom.com...
Mike B.
You already got a bunch of replies, so I'll try to say something everyone
else didn't already.
To put it bluntly, the Corvette with the LS1 doesn't have enough torque
available at low RPM to break the rear tires loose from a stop. If you
brake and gas it, it will (as you found out), and if you have a stick, you
can dump the clutch and it will spin the tires also.
The LS1 motor has more power higher up in the RPM range than the LT1, but
less torque down low. That is the reason many people who went from an LT1
(or especially) LT4 find the C5 'feels' slower, even though it posts as good
or better times at the strip.
-Mike
INFINITSYS wrote in message
<19990226205215...@ng-fb1.aol.com>...
>I was experimenting with my new toy today (99 Automatic Z51, active
handling,
>Performance axle...) on an abandoned airplane field. The surface was
freshly
>paved as the local police department does driver training here for the
local
>cops. At some point I wanted to melt some rubber and see how long I could
keep
>the wheels spinning. I stopped, turned off my active handling and traction
>control and floored it. Nothing happened. The wheels hooked up right away
and
>didn't spin. I tried again but still couldn't get the wheels to spin. It
seemed
>that the only way I could spin the wheels is if I had my foot on the brake,
>floor the throttle and release the brakes. I tried putting the car in
>competitive mode. Same thing. Doesn't peel out without riding the brake. Is
>there something wrong with my car? My old six cylinder chevy has no problem
Mike B.
of available traction, available torque at low RPM and amount of throttle
given. I think the fact that the car doesn't spin 'em up when flooring it
in an auto is just how it is - not the car's designed engineering.
-Mike
ULTRALASE wrote in message <7b7mr4$6...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>...
>Are you kidding or what ?? What is the point in spinning your tires,
>besides burning up some very expensive rubber. The car was designed
with
>positraction rear end) so it would have maximum traction with the least
>wheel spin possible. The whole point in getting maximum speed through a
set
>distance ( 1/4 mile for instance ) is limiting the amount of wheel spin
>which wastes the energy that your trying to get to the pavement to move you
>forward . That's the reason before doing a 1/4 mile run, fuel dragsters do
>a wheel spin in water to heat the tires up so they will be more sticky and
>reduce the amount of wheel spin during the launch from the starting line.
I
>don't think you have a problem.
>
>
3DfxCOOL
I think people are being too hard on the guy. He wants to spend $40,000 on
a Corvette and have the ability to burn a little rubber if he feels like it.
Who can blame him?
I was working out some rattles in a parking lot when two kids pulled up on
their bikes. (This was when I had a 94 with the shit axle.) All these kids
wanted, and all they cared about was to see me do a burn out. They begged
and pleaded with me until I gave in. With this car at the time before mods
I had to power brake it and gave them a hell of a smoke cloud. Future Vette
owners? I hope so because when I pulled off they were smiling.
Andre. I am surprised your performance axle will not smoke the tires off.
My 98 when it had the lowly 2.72 base axle would not either. Like you, it
pissed me off and I expected more. So, I stuck in a shift kit, a set of
3.42 gears from a six speed, and a 2900 rpm stall converter. (Not to
mention headers, mufflers, and other bolt on goodies.) I can make rubber
soup now anytime I feel like it at speeds up to 45mph in OD. I know that is
illogical and undesirable but I like my car A LOT more now than before.
If you want to read about these upgrades visit here;
http://www.c5registry.com/Technical/Bart/Driveline.htm
Good luck.
--
Bart A. Lane
fa...@3dfxcool.com
3DfxCOOL / High Quality Computer Cooling Fans
http://www.3dfxcool.com
Corpse <**non-spam**cor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>G. Schnauzer wrote:
>>
>> I can't get my Vette to spin the front wheels either. I think this is a
>> common problem right from the factory.
>>
>> --
>> G. Schnauzer
>
>If your front wheels don't spin, it must go through tires every day!
>Talk about flat spots!!
>
>
>
>--
>
> ~~~
> / \
> )X
Gary - KJ6Q
Ralph wrote in message
<_BLB2.2965$gg1....@newse2.tampabay.rr.com>...
>You "don't think the car was designed to minimize wheelspin?
<LOTS of droning rationalization snipped...>
And to think of all the cars *I* have owned in the past that disgusted
me because THEY couldn't burn rubber!
*I* thought they were just plain gutless, when ACTUALLY, they were
REALLY just extremely well "traction-engineered".
YUP!, My '37 Plymouth was just years ahead of its time...
Gary - KJ6Q
=======================
Any MORE excuses?
INFINITSYS
ULTRALASE
Roy K
news:19990226205215...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
Problem? Sounds like you are getting the traction that the vette is known
for.. There are plenty of 1/4 milers that would love it.. If you want to
bake the tires, (waste $$ and go slower), use the brakes, find some
sand/water to start in, or trade it in for a 6 speed and dump the clutch.
Doesn't the acceleration feel good? When you bake 'em up, you are slower...
Roy K
>Andre
>99 Z51
MMarks1540
energize your manhood.
Matt
Roy K
trying.
Roy
. .
MMarks1540 <mmark...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990226231525...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
Corpse
>
> I can't get my Vette to spin the front wheels either. I think this is a
> common problem right from the factory.
>
> --
> G. Schnauzer
If your front wheels don't spin, it must go through tires every day!
Talk about flat spots!!
--
~~~
/ \
)X X(
Ralph
I hope you don't have a C5, the engineers would probably want to take yours
back.
I'll be honest that I've only driven one C5. When I floored it, the tires
hooked up (with minimized wheelspin), then I literally felt the front of the
car lift as it accelerated.
I agree with "It's a function of available traction, available torque at low
RPM and amount of throttle given" but "how it is" IS the result of the
car's designed engineering.
Mike B. <mi...@mesitech.REMOVE.com> wrote in message
news:6OKB2.331$KY6....@news.shore.net...
>I don't think the car was DESIGNED to minimize wheelspin. It's a function
>of available traction, available torque at low RPM and amount of throttle
>given. I think the fact that the car doesn't spin 'em up when flooring it
>in an auto is just how it is - not the car's designed engineering.
>
>-Mike
>
>
>
>ULTRALASE wrote in message <7b7mr4$6...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>...
>>Are you kidding or what ?? What is the point in spinning your tires,
>>besides burning up some very expensive rubber. The car was designed
3DfxCOOL
Gary!! Aren't you glad you don't know him in real life?
--
Bart A. Lane
fa...@3dfxcool.com
High Quality Computer Cooling Fans
http://www.3dfxcool.com
Gary - KJ6Q wrote in message <7b81fa$n98$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>...
>
>Ralph wrote in message
><_BLB2.2965$gg1....@newse2.tampabay.rr.com>...
>>You "don't think the car was designed to minimize wheelspin?
>
Art
Is the engine broken in? You need at least 3k miles for maximum
torque.
On 27 Feb 1999 01:52:15 GMT, infin...@aol.com (INFINITSYS) wrote:
>I was experimenting with my new toy today (99 Automatic Z51, active handling,
>Performance axle...) on an abandoned airplane field. The surface was freshly
>paved as the local police department does driver training here for the local
>cops. At some point I wanted to melt some rubber and see how long I could keep
>the wheels spinning. I stopped, turned off my active handling and traction
>control and floored it. Nothing happened. The wheels hooked up right away and
>didn't spin. I tried again but still couldn't get the wheels to spin. It seemed
>that the only way I could spin the wheels is if I had my foot on the brake,
>floor the throttle and release the brakes. I tried putting the car in
>competitive mode. Same thing. Doesn't peel out without riding the brake. Is
>there something wrong with my car? My old six cylinder chevy has no problem
>spinning it's front wheels. Why can't I do it on my vette? Anybody else
>experience this problem?
>
>Andre
>99 Z51
Mike B.
Ralph wrote in message <_BLB2.2965$gg1....@newse2.tampabay.rr.com>...
>You "don't think the car was designed to minimize wheelspin?
>
>back.
>
>I'll be honest that I've only driven one C5. When I floored it, the tires
>hooked up (with minimized wheelspin), then I literally felt the front of
the
>car lift as it accelerated.
>
>I agree with "It's a function of available traction, available torque at
low
>RPM and amount of throttle given" but "how it is" IS the result of the
>car's designed engineering.
No, I don't. I don't think there was EVER a meeting at GM where the
engineers said "The C4 has too much wheelspin when floored... how can we
remedy that?". I think the drivetrain team designed a motor that was
'acceptable' to the project leaders - it just happened that it had more
high-rpm power and less low end torque. How much wheelspin one would get
was probably not determined until the motor was dropped into a test mule
car.
-Mike
DanSN
couldn't get >the wheels to spin.
........and you're complaining?
--
DanSN
eMail: DansnATusaDOTnet
ZombyWoof
wrote:
>Hey look everyone!!!! It's yet another insulting, demeaning post from
>Gary!! Aren't you glad you don't know him in real life?
Bart, I filtered Gary a long time ago. His dribble is really
worthless. Please don't follow-up his posts. This will help reduce
the clutter here.
TIA
Zw
"Happiness doesn't come from having things, but from being part of things."
- Chris in the Morning - KBHR Radio - Cicely, Alaska
Steve Merenkov
can spin my tires until the rims start making sparks. You can to if you
follow my advice!
Steve Merenkov, C5R # W0385
98' Coupe 6-Spd, Z51, JL4, RM Racing TwinFlow & Screens, PAT's TSTAT, TT,
MAX MAF, Nology, BERU, AFPR, CAGS, Borla XR-1 Race, LUNATI Cam, CNC Heads,
Nitrous Express, TPIS Headers
Steve's C5 Performance Center
www.c5-corvette.com
Corvette Ultimate Bulletin Board
http://www.c5-corvette.com/bb.htm
New Corvette Mailing List
http://www.c5-corvette.com/maillist.htm
G. Schnauzer <giant...@ibm.net> wrote in message
news:36d7...@news3.us.ibm.net...
>I can't get my Vette to spin the front wheels either. I think this is a
>common problem right from the factory.
>
>--
>G. Schnauzer
>Corpse <**non-spam**cor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>news:36D770...@ix.netcom.com...
JT
advantage of it with an automatic you have to change the gears and stall
speed. Once you get it dialed in where the drivetrain and engine are
working together it is a MUCH better car for leaving stop lights in a hurry.
--
Bart A. Lane
fa...@3dfxcool.com
3DfxCOOL / High Quality Computer Cooling Fans
http://www.3dfxcool.com
Mike B. wrote in message ...
Mike Peters
the active/traction off burns them at will.
Mike 99 Pewter 6sp z51 active coupe
INFINITSYS wrote in message
<19990226205215...@ng-fb1.aol.com>...
>I was experimenting with my new toy today (99 Automatic Z51, active
handling,
>Performance axle...) on an abandoned airplane field. The surface was
freshly
>paved as the local police department does driver training here for the
local
>cops. At some point I wanted to melt some rubber and see how long I could
keep
>the wheels spinning. I stopped, turned off my active handling and traction
>control and floored it. Nothing happened. The wheels hooked up right away
and
>didn't spin. I tried again but still couldn't get the wheels to spin. It
seemed
>that the only way I could spin the wheels is if I had my foot on the brake,
>floor the throttle and release the brakes. I tried putting the car in
>competitive mode. Same thing. Doesn't peel out without riding the brake. Is
>there something wrong with my car? My old six cylinder chevy has no problem
news.globalreach.net
>
> Hey look everyone!!!! It's yet another insulting,
> demeaning post from Gary!!
Insulting? Demeaning? I thought it was quite funny...
I remember a old Chevy Luv pickup I had that was way ahead of its time.
Heck, I couldn't spin the wheels on that thing in wet grass or gravel. But
it made a great "winter driver".
Tony D. Berry
Lafayette, LA
Gary - KJ6Q
news.globalreach.net wrote in message
<36d85...@news.globalreach.net>...
>3DfxCOOL wrote in message
>>
>> Hey look everyone!!!! It's yet another insulting,
>> demeaning post from Gary!!
>
>Insulting? Demeaning? I thought it was quite funny...
WELL, at least someone got it right... But then, good 'ol Bart will
rise at ANY post he figures he can attack - that's why he resides way
down DEEP inside my twit filter...
BUT, when I first got my '85 Z51 vette coupe, it required a firm
application of foot on the loud pedal to get "scratch" - but it DID
lay a respectable track even then... After a few simple mods - chip,
airfoil in the MAF, Borla exhaust, hi-po ignition - you then had to be
real careful to NOT lay rubber with it!
I find it real hard to accept the the new C5 in ANY factory
configuration won't do at LEAST as well as my older stock '85. Shucks,
my new '98 Camaro SS/SLP T-top, with the lower rated LS-1 than the C5
will EFFORTLESSLY boil the hides... thru several gears...
>
>I remember a old Chevy Luv pickup I had that was way ahead of its
time.
>Heck, I couldn't spin the wheels on that thing in wet grass or
gravel. But
>it made a great "winter driver".
>
>Tony D. Berry
>Lafayette, LA
>
>
>>>And to think of all the cars *I* have owned in the past that
disgusted
>>>me because THEY couldn't burn rubber!
>>>
>>>*I* thought they were just plain gutless, when ACTUALLY, they were
>>>REALLY just extremely well "traction-engineered".
>>>
>>>YUP!, My '37 Plymouth was just years ahead of its time...
>>>
>>>Gary - KJ6Q
>>>=======================
>>>Any MORE excuses?
>>>
Gary - KJ6Q
Chuck Tomlinson
>
>I find it real hard to accept the the new C5 in ANY factory
>configuration won't do at LEAST as well as my older stock '85. Shucks,
>my new '98 Camaro SS/SLP T-top, with the lower rated LS-1 than the C5
>will EFFORTLESSLY boil the hides... thru several gears...
On stock tires, the F-cars have less available traction than the C5.
Simple. While it may be fun (I suppose) to "boil the hides", I
suspect that a non-boiling C5 beside you would be easing away from
your stripe-laying '85 C4 and '98 SS. I could be wrong.
Personally, I've always found it amusing that so many people equate
tire smoke with "more power" instead of "less traction".
--
Chuck Tomlinson
'94 Z07/ZF6
Enter your name here
I too am surprised his will not smoke the tires. My bone stock 98 (perf
axle, Z51) with a simple power stand would virtually fry the tires is I
wanted to (OK I gave in to temptation a couple of times) with the traction
control off.
regards,
C5Phil
Romesh Prakashpalan
basically stock (power-wise) TransAm I did a few G-Tech runs on a fairly
deserted street near my office. On my Firehawk SZ50s which would barely lose
traction on most streets, I was spinning into second! I didn't understand
it, to my eyes the road surface looked just like any other, yet almost
anywhere else I wouldn't get more than a chirp when flooring it.
Real bizzare, yet I have met up with some other road surfaces just like it.
Anyway, I still got a 6.4 0-60 time even when spinning into second on my 95
TransAm :). I believe stock was like 5.8 so I was happy.
Romesh
97 Torch Red
Enter your name here wrote in message
<7b9qkb$l...@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>...
INFINITSYS
The break in is supposed to be 500 miles. I'm also a little concerned about the
engine. I floored it a few times on the first day I got it. And pushed it
around a bit. I know I should've waited till the car is fully broken it but I
couldn't resist. Could this have in any way damaged the engine? The car al
feels a little lazy from dead stop. Although once it gets going it is
incredibly fast. It feels weird though, If I apply the accelerator gently from
dead stop I get a very firm shift at about 15 MPH and 2000 RPM. Is this
supposed to happen. Even if I floor it from dead stop it feels lazy. There is
no neck snapping or anything like that. Maybe there is something wrong with my
car?
Andre
99, Nassau Blue, Z51
Ken King
I push the little button on the dash.
Ken
Kevin E. Hill
Converter, prevents the burnout he desires. I.e. The Torque Converter slips
a bunch until it hooks up, but by then, things are moving nicely, and, it
fails to engage gear shifts firmly enough to chirp or start spinning the
tires.
When he holds the brakes down, the Torque converter hits it's "hook up"
point, and, thus, lays rubber.
-Kevin
3DfxCOOL wrote in message <7b80bd$cmg$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>Corpse, you are always the funniest.
>
>I think people are being too hard on the guy. He wants to spend $40,000 on
>a Corvette and have the ability to burn a little rubber if he feels like
it.
>Who can blame him?
>
>I was working out some rattles in a parking lot when two kids pulled up on
>their bikes. (This was when I had a 94 with the shit axle.) All these
kids
>wanted, and all they cared about was to see me do a burn out. They begged
>and pleaded with me until I gave in. With this car at the time before mods
>I had to power brake it and gave them a hell of a smoke cloud. Future
Vette
>owners? I hope so because when I pulled off they were smiling.
>
>Andre. I am surprised your performance axle will not smoke the tires off.
>My 98 when it had the lowly 2.72 base axle would not either. Like you, it
>pissed me off and I expected more. So, I stuck in a shift kit, a set of
>3.42 gears from a six speed, and a 2900 rpm stall converter. (Not to
>mention headers, mufflers, and other bolt on goodies.) I can make rubber
>soup now anytime I feel like it at speeds up to 45mph in OD. I know that
is
>illogical and undesirable but I like my car A LOT more now than before.
>
>If you want to read about these upgrades visit here;
>
>http://www.c5registry.com/Technical/Bart/Driveline.htm
>
>Good luck.
>
>--
>Bart A. Lane
>fa...@3dfxcool.com
>
>3DfxCOOL / High Quality Computer Cooling Fans
>http://www.3dfxcool.com
>
>Corpse <**non-spam**cor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
><36D77D...@ix.netcom.com>...
>>G. Schnauzer wrote:
>>>
>>> I can't get my Vette to spin the front wheels either. I think this is
a
>>> common problem right from the factory.
>>>
>>> --
>>> G. Schnauzer
>>
>>If your front wheels don't spin, it must go through tires every day!
>>Talk about flat spots!!
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>
>> ~~~
>> / \
>> )X
>
wally2
you are complaining about it.
--
Bob
wally2
spin your wheels and burn up your clutch too.
--
Bob
Ken King wrote in message <36D8AA8F...@ix.netcom.com>...
wally2
--
Bob
MMarks1540 wrote in message
<19990226231525...@ng-fb1.aol.com>...
mrvette
Chuck Tomlinson wrote:
I always thought it was nice to have enuff p ower to overcome the traction
available, and the wider the tires fried, the better I feel.....I suspect
there must be something wrong with the guy's car, unless all C5 are like
that, which I wuld fid disappointing.....just a psychology thing.....GENE
>
>
>
--
___
Memory? Mine was issued 54 years ago, was 2 bit at the time,
and I have two missing vacuum tubes since then....
My ancestors date all the way back to the cave man days...
___________
//~~~~~~~~~~~\\
// ___________ \\
MAKO VETTES /~---~~ /_____\ ~~---~\ CONSUME OLD
/| /_____|/__|__\|_____\ |\ DINOSAURS AT
( \ [__][__] [__][__] / ) A HI RATE OF
| (+============+============+) | SPEED
|\ \\ [__] | [__] // /|
| \~=========================~/ |
|_____| |_____|
Simon Coates
I love the LS1 - good amount of bottom end torque.
Simon (UK)
98 silver/black/black convertible
Kevin E. Hill wrote in message ...
ZombyWoof
wrote:
>I always thought it was nice to have enuff p ower to overcome the traction
>available, and the wider the tires fried, the better I feel.....I suspect
>there must be something wrong with the guy's car, unless all C5 are like
>that, which I wuld fid disappointing.....just a psychology thing.....GENE
>
Damn Gene, how much you had to drink tonight? :)
Corpse
>
> Yeah but there is nothing like that big cloud of sweet smelling burnt rubber to
> energize your manhood.
>
> Matt
I get that during sex (the burnt rubber, not the energized manhood)...
:0
--
~~~
/ \
)X X(
Art
car takes off like a rocket at only half throttle. I can go 0-70 in
just seconds. I do have a few mods like modified MAF, RM racing
intake-no big deal, however. I have been very careful to break-in the
engine: varied speeds, did not take it up on the freeway until 500
miles and changed the oil. I don't expect to hit WOT until 3k miles.
Every 500 miles I feel more power and firmer shifts. In my other cars
I noticed the same thing. It wasn't until 3k miles that everything
was seated. I believe Jim Crone experienced the same thing.
On 27 Feb 1999 22:45:12 GMT, infin...@aol.com (INFINITSYS) wrote:
>The car has about 800 miles on it.
>The break in is supposed to be 500 miles. I'm also a little concerned about the
>engine. I floored it a few times on the first day I got it. And pushed it
>around a bit. I know I should've waited till the car is fully broken it but I
>couldn't resist. Could this have in any way damaged the engine? The car al
>feels a little lazy from dead stop. Although once it gets going it is
>incredibly fast. It feels weird though, If I apply the accelerator gently from
>dead stop I get a very firm shift at about 15 MPH and 2000 RPM. Is this
>supposed to happen. Even if I floor it from dead stop it feels lazy. There is
>no neck snapping or anything like that. Maybe there is something wrong with my
>car?
>
3DfxCOOL
What year is your car anyway? That is a damn fine time you posted. 6
speed? Are those the only three mods you made? Very impressive.
--
Bart A. Lane
fa...@3dfxcool.com
High Quality Computer Cooling Fans
http://www.3dfxcool.com
Kris wrote in message <36da07df...@news.giganews.com>...
>On Sat, 27 Feb 1999 10:15:17 -0800, "Steve Merenkov"
><steve_m...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>>If you want to be able to spin those tires take a look at some of my Mods.
I
>>can spin my tires until the rims start making sparks. You can to if you
>>follow my advice!
>>
>>Steve Merenkov, C5R # W0385
>>98' Coupe 6-Spd, Z51, JL4, RM Racing TwinFlow & Screens, PAT's TSTAT, TT,
>>MAX MAF, Nology, BERU, AFPR, CAGS, Borla XR-1 Race, LUNATI Cam, CNC
Heads,
>>Nitrous Express, TPIS Headers
>>Steve's C5 Performance Center
>>www.c5-corvette.com
>>Corvette Ultimate Bulletin Board
>>http://www.c5-corvette.com/bb.htm
>>New Corvette Mailing List
>>http://www.c5-corvette.com/maillist.htm
>>
>I did not know that simply setting CNC Heads and a Lunati cam on the
>shelf actually made the car faster. I think I will get several of
>each.
>
>Kris
>12.73 @ 111
>B&B, Modified Stock Air Box, Ported MAF
Kris
Shane Bennett
an automatic with 2.73 gears. Help I need some traction.
Roy K wrote in message ...
>INFINITSYS <infin...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:19990226205215...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
>>I was experimenting with my new toy today (99 Automatic Z51, active
>handling,
>>Performance axle...) on an abandoned airplane field. The surface was
>freshly
>>paved as the local police department does driver training here for the
>local
>>cops. At some point I wanted to melt some rubber and see how long I could
>keep
>>the wheels spinning. I stopped, turned off my active handling and traction
>>control and floored it. Nothing happened. The wheels hooked up right away
>and
>>didn't spin. I tried again but still couldn't get the wheels to spin. It
>seemed
>>that the only way I could spin the wheels is if I had my foot on the
brake,
>>floor the throttle and release the brakes. I tried putting the car in
>>competitive mode. Same thing. Doesn't peel out without riding the brake.
Is
>>there something wrong with my car? My old six cylinder chevy has no
problem
>>spinning it's front wheels. Why can't I do it on my vette? Anybody else
>>experience this problem?
>>
>
>for.. There are plenty of 1/4 milers that would love it.. If you want to
>bake the tires, (waste $$ and go slower), use the brakes, find some
>sand/water to start in, or trade it in for a 6 speed and dump the clutch.
>Doesn't the acceleration feel good? When you bake 'em up, you are slower...
>
>Roy K
>
>
>
>>Andre
>>99 Z51
>
>
Kris
wrote:
>Ouch Kris.
>
>What year is your car anyway? That is a damn fine time you posted. 6
>speed? Are those the only three mods you made? Very impressive.
Thanks! It is a '98 6 spd.
I had the PAT wallet tricker but removed it because it did NOTHINIG,
even in 100 deg heat. I prefer to have real temp data in my AutoTap
logs as well.
I had an adjustable fuel pressure regulator, but I took it off before
taking it in for service many months ago and never bothered to put it
back on. It is a waste until I do something that causes a significant
deviation in the fuel trim numbers. The computer seems to quickly
"learn out" any adjustment.
I tried the HPP III. It resulted in roughly the same ETs but at a
loss of about 1-2 MPH. Significant knock as well. One run had 6-9
degrees of knock retard through the entire run, others had only a
little. I put in 2 gallons of 110 octane, knock gone, but no
improvement in performance.
I tried to reprogram the computer to stock with the HPP and it
DESTROYED the stock program. The car would not run! The HPP III is
currently at the factory getting the correct factory program
installed. The car currently only runs with the HPP program. The fan
and tire size adjustments are nice though.
I think the real gains were from my somewhat unique air box mods and
my equally different MAF port work. Stock, last summer (90+ deg.
heat) it was mostly 13.3 at 108-109.
There was another '98 at the track this weekend. His best was 12.6 on
BFG drag radials and 11.4 @125 on the bottle! Holy shit...
Kris
M. Jones
Chuck Tomlinson wrote in message <7b9n2n$a...@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>...
Enter your name here
This will probably get me laughed out of town. But, do you know what the
term "Power Stand" is (honest I am serious)?
regards,
C5Phil
INFINITSYS
INFINITSYS
Dagon7
>From: "Enter your name here" <pmo...@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: 3/4/99 5:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <7blvrg$i...@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
>
>Andre,
>
> This will probably get me laughed out of town. But, do you know what the
>term "Power Stand" is (honest I am serious)?
>
>regards,
>C5Phil
>
I've never heard of that term. But I do imagine its the same thing as "power
braking"
If you have a auto then keep your foot glued on the brakes then apply throttle
untill your tires just start to brake loose. Then when you want to go, let go
of the brake and stab the gas.
Ryan
' 89 IROC-Z
Enter your name here
It would be most difficult to expand on Dagon7's description (power
braking, power standing, torque stand off, stall lock, etc.). Imagine if
you were in a stick and you let the clutch out slowly at idle then fully
depressed the throttle. You would not see much action by the rear tires
then. That is why you hear (read) 6-speed guys using the term "dump the
clutch". Doing what Dagon7 explains is about as close as you can get to
that with an auto. Of course, to get the best acceleration rate one must
not burn them too much in either case. You should be able turn your tires
until the tranny shifts into second, with your 3.15s using Dagon7's method.
regards,
C5Phil
90roadster
it would die out............
Ice Cube
up! Get an older car!
90roadster <90roa...@dlhoward.com> wrote in message
<36e06449....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
Andre Giffard
followed by the car spinning completely out of control with bits of burning
smoking chunks of rubber landing on the hood. I have never driven nor even
ridden in a C5 however there has got to be something seriously wrong. Tell
me they have some kind of BS anti-wheel spin feature that some newer cars
have that apply the brakes to the wheel starting to spin. Who the hell
would want something as lame boring and stupid as that, seems like it would
remove all the fun from driving.
-Andre
INFINITSYS wrote in message
<19990305194208...@ng-ca1.aol.com>...
>Why is it idiotic. I thought there was something wrong with my car. Seeing
all
>these magazines doing a smoky burnouts on the C5s. Just wanted to ask other
>owners if their automatics 3.15s spin their wheels of the line without
brake
>torquing. I still think there is something wrong with my car. It seems
somewhat
>underpowered. Of the line acceleration ain't that good. There is none of
that
>throw you back feeling that I love so much and expect of a $42,000 sports
car.
INFINITSYS
90roadster
Doesn't ANYBODY care about grammar? Didn't you READ the subject line
before? It said "Why is my C5 don't spin it's wheels??" I guess I
should at least give the originator credit for using the apostrophe
correctly in the contraction "it's". I'm not an anal grammar nut, I
just got sick of the subject line. So I kept the stupid thread going,
which in my view of this subject is counterproductive.
jIM
Joe Truchsess
> On 6 Mar 1999 00:42:08 GMT, infin...@aol.com (INFINITSYS) wrote:
>
> >Why is it idiotic.
<snip>
> >
> >>I got sick of looking at that idiotic subject line. I kept thinking
> >>it would die out............
> >
> >
> Doesn't ANYBODY care about grammar? Didn't you READ the subject line
> before? It said "Why is my C5 don't spin it's wheels??" I guess I
> should at least give the originator credit for using the apostrophe
> correctly in the contraction "it's".
No, please don't give the originator credit for anything other than being
illiterate. The contraction "it's" is NOT appropriate, since the originator was
trying to indicate that the wheels belong to the car, i.e. he wanted the possesive
"its", not the contraction for "it is".
INFINITSYS
Damn People. I thought this newsgroups read alt.autos.corvette, we are supposed
to be talking about vettes here not grammar. The way I look at it, If people
understood what the thread meant why pick on grammar?
By the way I know that the more traction the better but that's not why I
posted. I posted because I thought there was something wrong with my car. I
still feel that the engine is not putting out all the power it should. Cause if
it did, it would easily turn those tires loose. I'm waiting to get my G-tech
pro to measure the 1/4 mile, 0-60 and horsepower.
Andre
99 Nassau Blue, Z51, HUD, etc...
Mike B.
I predict that your G-Tech will show your performance times are right on par
with what they should be. I predict around a 5.1-5.4 0-60 time. The best
times I've seen are about 4.8 0-60 for a 6-speed.
You don't think it's as fast as the numbers show because of the lack of low
end torque. Your car is probably pulling hard higher in the rev range.
Let me know how your G-Tech numbers look. Where in the USA are you located?
-Mike
INFINITSYS wrote in message <19990308002509...@ng31.aol.com>...
INFINITSYS
When you say lack of low end torque, Do you mean to say horsepower? Because the
LS1 has just about the flattest torque curve of any production engine. It
produces close to 300 LB-ft at 1200 RPM.
For the past few days I have been pushing my car a lot. I went to an abandoned
airport today and did some runs again. It feels slower than it should. Lately I
have been pushing the car around a lot, Flooring it on daily basis, not form
the start though. But today I at the airport I tried it from stand still. I
can't get those tires loose without brake torquing. If I hold the brakes and
floor it then release the brakes I can spin the wheels for about 30 feet.
My car also is becoming a rattle can. Everything seems to go loose now. I even
have the steering wheel rattle. The passenger door rattles like crazy. I
believe the fuel tanks rattle too now. I can't stand these rattles and squeaks.
Part of the reason I bought this new vette is because it is supposed to be so
solid and rattle free. Maybe the New York roads and the Z51 took their toll on
the car. But only after 1000 miles? My Z51 suspension is very soft on the
highway though. It is almost hard to believe. I've never drove any other car
that was this forgiving yet still handled like it does. Although I frequently
exceed the traction limits and feel the active handling kick in.
I don't know. Maybe I'm too fast for the car.
Andre
99 Nassau Blue, Z51, HUD...
Mikey
>I'm the originator of this post.
>Damn People. I thought this newsgroups read alt.autos.corvette, we are supposed
>to be talking about vettes here not grammar. The way I look at it, If people
>understood what the thread meant why pick on grammar?
>
>By the way I know that the more traction the better but that's not why I
>posted. I posted because I thought there was something wrong with my car. I
>still feel that the engine is not putting out all the power it should. Cause if
>it did, it would easily turn those tires loose. I'm waiting to get my G-tech
>pro to measure the 1/4 mile, 0-60 and horsepower.
>
>Andre
>99 Nassau Blue, Z51, HUD, etc...
People are picking on you because they think you are putting their
car down. A powerful car should be able to smoke the wheels It's a
given The C5 in my experiences does not smoke the tires I've driven
2 98 autos and i have a friend that has a 6 speed he says he cant
lay rubber even with ASR off
I have a 96 LT1 I baby it and take good care of it, It has 12k
miles and looks brand new but once in a while I smoke up the street,
I don't know why i do it It just feels good!! I do compete in
Bracket racing where traction is important and I put on BFG drag
radials for the traction , I'm even thinking of putting in gears so
i can smoke em while i'm moving why would i want to lose my
traction? IT FEELS GOOD and if i couldn't spin my wheels in a vette
i'd get rid of it and get a car that could. by the way my 96 is stock
except for Power Effects cat-back Exhaust, K&N filter and Hypertech
power programmer.... oh i also have the performance axle
like my shirt says - Smoke Em If You Got Em
Mikey
black/black 96 LT1
Mike B.
INFINITSYS wrote in message <19990308023106...@ng30.aol.com>...
>Mike, I'm from Brooklyn, NY.
>When you say lack of low end torque, Do you mean to say horsepower? Because
the
>LS1 has just about the flattest torque curve of any production engine. It
>produces close to 300 LB-ft at 1200 RPM.
Well, considering torque is what you feel, I really meant torque. I've
never actually done an RPM to RPM comparison between an LS1 and LT1, but I
do know that when I had my '95, I looked at (and drove) a few LS1 Vettes. I
drove 4 automatics, 3 with the performance axle, one without. 2 were
coupes, 2 were ragtops. The fastest was a coupe with almost no options and
the G92 (perf. axle). However, with only me in the car, it had a hard time
spinning the wheels - it would when the road was a little gritty, but not on
smooth pavement. My '95 auto would roast the tires if I floored it from a
standstill. It may be a function of the torque converter on the auto, or it
may be a torque thing (I think it's a torque thing - because many people
I've talked to have complained of the lower torque of the LS1 down low
compared to the LT1). The LS1 powered Vette just does not provide the
kick-in-the-ass off the line movement that the LT1/Auto/G92 did.
>For the past few days I have been pushing my car a lot. I went to an
abandoned
>airport today and did some runs again. It feels slower than it should.
Lately I
>have been pushing the car around a lot, Flooring it on daily basis, not
form
>the start though. But today I at the airport I tried it from stand still. I
>can't get those tires loose without brake torquing. If I hold the brakes
and
>floor it then release the brakes I can spin the wheels for about 30 feet.
Have you ever tried flooring it when you first start driving in the morning?
After you let the coolant temp come up a bit and after the oil is flowing
nicely, I noticed my Vette was significantly faster. The cold tires,
combined with an engine that it not too 'hot', combined with the added
horsepower of cold air made my car a tire-smoking machine.
>My car also is becoming a rattle can. Everything seems to go loose now. I
even
>have the steering wheel rattle. The passenger door rattles like crazy. I
>believe the fuel tanks rattle too now. I can't stand these rattles and
squeaks.
>Part of the reason I bought this new vette is because it is supposed to be
so
>solid and rattle free. Maybe the New York roads and the Z51 took their toll
on
>the car. But only after 1000 miles? My Z51 suspension is very soft on the
>highway though. It is almost hard to believe. I've never drove any other
car
>that was this forgiving yet still handled like it does. Although I
frequently
>exceed the traction limits and feel the active handling kick in.
I don't actually own a C5, so I can't comment on their long term build
quality, but lots of cars end up with rattles - but what you describe sounds
too much for a 1000 mile car. Maybe the dealer can fix it?
>I don't know. Maybe I'm too fast for the car.
>
Very possible. I owned a '88 Vette, then a '95. When I was looking at
C5's, I liked them, but I didn't feel the 'soul' that my C4 had.. I dunno
what it was. I guess I liked all the things in the c4 that they took out
for the c5... I test drove a Viper GTS and found that it had in abundance
whatever I felt was missing from the C5, so I bought it. If you were
closer, I'd offer to take you for a spin (I am in Boston) or let you borrow
my G-Tech and see how you do.
Well, if you are up this way ever, gimme a shout. I hope things work out Ok
with your Vette. You will probably find that taking your car to the dealer
and saying "It appears to lack power" won't get you very far unless it is
REALLY lacking power - like down 150hp or so, I never had any luck with my
'88 when I took it in for the lack of power. It had a LOT of mods to it,
and was only as quick as my friend's '92 LT1. The dealer said "seems plenty
quick to me". When I had a friend vette specialist look at it, he
discovered the timing was off by (I think) 17 degrees!!! After he fixed it,
my car was... umm.. QUITE a bit faster (picked up almost 2 seconds in the
1/4)
-Mike
Steve Judd
roast the tires without even trying. I would guess its a combination of the
3.15 RE and low stall on the stock TC that conspire against easy breakouts.
I haven't tried lighting up my tires because I want to get 3000 miles or so
on the driveline to make sure all the moving bits are well run in before I
start thrashing it. So far the launch performance even at part throttle
is pretty impressive, wheelspin or not.
--
-s
99 triple-black rag, Auto/3.15, Z51, JL4, HUD, Mag wheels, etc. etc.
Mike B. <mi...@mesitech.REMOVE.com> wrote in message
news:gM%E2.727$I51....@news.shore.net...
anon
Corvette with a 6-speed transmission." I did, and it's all I can do to
*not* spin the tires at every opportunity!
There may be a correlation between this tendancy and my nearby post
regarding early tire wear.
Dave
F Bodies
my speed for the first 500 miles to 95 mph. Made quick takeoffs from a dead
stop, but not WOT. Hit passing gera plenty of times from 60 to 80 or 90 mph @
WOT. I have the auto w/3.15 and can break the tires loose at part throttle.
And can even break them loose with the TCS on. Now have 25,000 miles on C5
with best time of 13.3 @103.57mph. Going to ATCO soon................Tom
J.J.Jinkelheimerschmidt
<j...@pragmaticdesigns.com> wrote:
>90roadster wrote:
>
>> On 6 Mar 1999 00:42:08 GMT, infin...@aol.com (INFINITSYS) wrote:
>>
>> >Why is it idiotic.
>
><snip>
>
>> >
>> >>I got sick of looking at that idiotic subject line. I kept thinking
>> >>it would die out............
>> >
>> >
>> Doesn't ANYBODY care about grammar? Didn't you READ the subject line
>> before? It said "Why is my C5 don't spin it's wheels??" I guess I
>> should at least give the originator credit for using the apostrophe
>> correctly in the contraction "it's".
>
>No, please don't give the originator credit for anything other than being
>illiterate. The contraction "it's" is NOT appropriate, since the originator was
>trying to indicate that the wheels belong to the car, i.e. he wanted the possesive
>"its", not the contraction for "it is".
>
>> I'm not an anal grammar nut, I
>> just got sick of the subject line. So I kept the stupid thread going,
>> which in my view of this subject is counterproductive.
>>
>> jIM
>
>
I'm so glad that glaring grammatical errors and misspellings are
vexxing to others besides myself. I get dressed down from time to
time when I point out mistakes of this kind. I was not an 'A' student
in English class. Furthermore, I don't think I make a boor of myself
in this matter; however, the ability to express oneself is
dramatically enhanced when the proper spelling and grammar are used.
J.J.Jinkelheimerschmidt
Justin Harrison
--Justin
----------
In article <36eff680...@news.epix.net>, non...@cannottell.nope
Corpse
>
> You spelled "vexxing" incorrectly. The correct spelling is v-e-x-i-n-g.
>
> --Justin
he he he
--
~~~
/ \
)X X(
(_ ^ _)
|||||
\___/ ...CORPSE
Better to reign in Hell
Than serve in Heaven...
Remove **non-spam** from my address when replying