Hope this doesn't start another never-ending thread. Many of you have asked me how my 4.9 compares to my V-8 Archie SBC over the past couple of years. I've said I like them both, but there really isn't any comparison. Well, for Christmas, my wife gave me an Escort G-Timer - really cool - does 0-60 times, 1/4 mile times, horsepower, and a bunch more. So today I took the G-Timer out for a test run with the two cars out by the baseball stadium in Vierra. Here are the results on the 4.9 and the SBC. Like I thought, the 4.9 compares pretty good with a stock 5.0 Mustang. I made 2 quarter mile runs and 4 additional 0-60 runs with the 4.9. According to the G-Timer, my 0-60 times aren't as good as I thought. I actually thought they might be comparable to the SBC, but there seems to be a pretty good lag (dead spot) between 50 and 60mph - well over a second. My low 0-60 time was 6.30 and High was 6.93 using various amounts of throttle and brake on launch. The two quarter mile runs were 15.30 @ 87.7 and 15.28 at 87.9. The two quarter mile runs had the worst 0-60 times. So I figure if I put all the good times together, it will run around 15.0 sec @ ~90 mph. This is a 4T60E car (2.73), no mods, stock size 15" wheels, regular air pressure, on a nice sunny low wind day in Florida (75 degrees). Now for the "Animal" results. I made only two runs - both the full quarter mile. I left the line hard, but did not dump the clutch on either run, I am running 17" Yokohama A520s, normal air pressure, Getrag 5 spd. This car is powered by a modified ZZ3 345+hp SBC (roller rockers, Sanderson Headers, MSD ignition, & custom Inglese Holley Carb. The two quarter mile times were 12.06 @ 111 and 11.97 @115 mph. 0-60 times for these runs were 5.26 and 5.21 respectively. 0-50 times in the 4.9 were comparable to the 0-60 times in the SBC. Hopefully that answers the comparison mail. I still think everyone needs one of each in their garage. Both are a lot of fun! Rockcrawl is making me a chip for the 4.9. so I'll have to to a comparison to the stock 4.9 chip after I install his custom chip. I'm also going to figure out how to work the horsepower part of the G-Timer so I can compare horsepower before and after the new chip.

------------------

Tom Corey
Melbourne, FL
87 Green T-Top GT 5Spd SBC ZZ3 V8
88 Yellow T-Top GT, 4.9L Caddy, 4T60E

neat...how much hp do 4.9's put out?

------------------
FieroGt3 Website! Check it out.

quote Originally posted by Tom Corey: Hope this doesn't start another never-ending thread..... This is a 4T60E car (2.73), no mods, stock size 15" wheels,..... I am running 17" Yokohama A520s, normal air pressure, Getrag 5 spd. This car is powered by a modified ZZ3 345+hp SBC (roller rockers, Sanderson Headers, MSD ignition, & custom Inglese Holley Carb..... Hopefully that answers the comparison mail.

So you are compairing a 200 hp stock automatic 4.9 (probably running in limp mode, IMO, based on what you have said before about your car) to a modified ZZ3 345+ sbc standard transmission, Ok

Pete

------------------

Tom,
Don't expect too much improvement from the new chip. It will correct some minor problems and change the things we talked about, but it's not going to magicly add 20 hp. And it's not going to fix the major problem you have, whatever it is. If my 4.9 car turned those times I think I'd take it back and ask for a refund

Hmm, comparable 0-60/0-50 times is cool and a little unexpected. Go Caddy torque monster. I must say the Caddy did better than I expected. For someone who just wants V8 power you could be easily sold on either with results like that.

Yeah, I thought 4.9's ran high 13's all day long...

------------------
'87 Fiero GT: Northstar, Getrag, TGP wheels, rear sway bar, rod end links, bushings, etc.
'90 Pontiac 6000 SE AWD: Leaking ABS unit fixed, load levelling rear suspension fixed, still slow

Hey Tom glad to see your comparison and your observation based on your GTech runs with both cars and it is mighty interesting.
After looking at the results your 4.9 car is "very slow" but then again it is a unfair comparison seeing that the SBC is a modified engine where as the caddy is bone stock and it looks like it is not running at the full potential especially with your 0-60 times and your 1/4 mile times.I am not debating which is better or faster but your comparison is without merit based on the respective engines it is like putting apples against oranges to get the same taste.
Get a stock SBC and a stock Caddy 4.9 that is good for comparison where you could make a judgement call then or put the SBC up against a modified 4.9 and I am not disrespecting you but just or insulting your intellect but my opinion.

------------------
Tuners of the Quickest 4.9
12.51@118 mph

4.5 (RSR)Hi Perf. Caddi-V8
In place and running.

Tom, no offense but aren't you the one that said your 4.9 is not running right and you are having problems getting it serviced because it's in a Fiero? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to get the 4.9 properly serviced then do the comparison?

BTW the heavly modified SBC is still slower than Fiero X's heavly modified 3800SC which I think would be a closer comparison of the three.

[This message has been edited by Mastermind (edited 01-04-2004).]

Thanks for the info.

As they say..

"The proof is in the 'puddin."

-Jeff

Great info. Lets hope you get that 4.9 running at 13's.

------------------

Tom, thanks for the info, my experience says that cars in real life are not as fast as their owners think but your SBC is pretty impessive.

One question: I would like to know your thoughts on the way the cars handle? Is the 4.9 really qicker thru the turns?

Thanks,
John

quote Originally posted by PBJ: So you are compairing a 200 hp stock automatic 4.9 (probably running in limp mode, IMO, based on what you have said before about your car) to a modified ZZ3 345+ sbc standard transmission, Ok Pete

Gawd! Here we go again! Yes, I'm comparing my two cars. People keep asking and I keep saying there is no comparison, so here's the figures I have. I'm not complaining about my 4.9, nor bragging about my SBC. I have driven the 4.9 18,000 miles in 18 months and it has been a great daily driver/trip car - really nice around town. Neither is for sale or will be in the near future. And I hope you are right and my 4.9 is actually in the "limp mode". But that remains to be seen. I like it anyway. They are not two cars that should be compared IMHO. MINE have totally different purposes and I think each succeeds. I think it will be fun to see what improvements I get tn the 4.9 with a new chip, however I am not expecting miracles. I'm not real fond of the 4T60E for the kind of driving I do (not so much where I go as much as the way I drive). The 4T60E does not have enough back pressure for me for driving curves (e.g. RFTH), but it is a great highway cruiser - however, I have never gotten the fantastic gas mileage - in ANY of my cars with a 4T60E - I get about 18-19 around town and about 22-23 on the highway - same as I got on my two 3800s with the 4T60E - of course Frank Martin or some of the RFTH crew will probably tell you that I don't exactly drive an average 70 mph either, I have fun. Anyway, this particular tranny seems to "stick" a little off the line, kind of like the torque converter sticks or doesn't really fully engage - don't know how else to describe it. It really seemed to not jump off the line today like it usually does.
Anyway, these are just my figures from a fun project for the day.

just a thought but i saw a comparison for the gtech's and most of the time they were up to 2 second s off of the actual time. this was compared to a drag strip for the 1/4 and i dont remember what they did for the 0-60. JUST MY $.02

------------------
'86 Fiero GT


www.KylesFiero.tk

quote Originally posted by Master Tuner Akimoto: Get a stock SBC and a stock Caddy 4.9 that is good for comparison where you could make a judgement call then or put the SBC up against a modified 4.9 and I am not disrespecting you but just or insulting your intellect but my opinion.

What exaclcty is a stock SBC? The motor has more variations than I care to think about. A stock SBC can be an LS6, or a 305, or an LT4, there really is no such thing as a stock small block ckevy. Everyone asks for comparacents between these 2 different swap, someone comes along, it makes gods V8 appear slow, and there for, its wrong. "Its not a stock small block". The fact is, the 4.9 doesnt do 0-60 in the low 5's, or run 13's all day, as ive heard it said many times. The only 4.9 ive seen run with my own eyes ran a 15.2. Which seems to be the same as this one thats in question. There are obviously going to be others out there running better times. BUt they are not stock. Now im sure mastermind will chime in with his cost theory, and his 5.0 that costs 3 grand, or is it 5 grand? A lot of money for the numbers that it puts out. I think a better comparing set of motors is a 3.4dohc and a 4.9. They both dont have the same rev limit, or number of cylinders, but they seem to run the same numbers. Just MHO. Ill be flamed though.

I think he means by "stock" as it came from GM without massaging the internals with aftermarket parts.

quote Originally posted by Mr. Pat: The fact is, the 4.9 doesnt do 0-60 in the low 5's, or run 13's all day, as ive heard it said many times. The only 4.9 ive seen run with my own eyes ran a 15.2. Which seems to be the same as this one thats in question. There are obviously going to be others out there running better times. BUt they are not stock. Just MHO. Ill be flamed though.

My stock 4.9 ran 14.6 through the 4T60E and it seems about the same time someone else ran with theirs.
I think a 4.9 running 15.2 is a little slow, but from reading the text, it seems he may have some running issues.

Gene

------------------

Guys,

It doesn't really make any difference. Tom was just out playing. People had asked him for numbers on HIS cars so he was nice enough to provide them. Pretty considerate of him. HE says the 4.9 doesn't feel just quite "right". That happens all the time. he built two different cars for two different purposes and he has some fun with them. Good for him. You pays your money and makes your choices.

Thanks for the numbers, Tom.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Mastermind: I think he means by "stock" as it came from GM without massaging the internals with aftermarket parts.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: Guys, It doesn't really make any difference. Tom was just out playing. People had asked him for numbers on HIS cars so he was nice enough to provide them. Pretty considerate of him. HE says the 4.9 doesn't feel just quite "right". That happens all the time. he built two different cars for two different purposes and he has some fun with them. Good for him. You pays your money and makes your choices. Thanks for the numbers, Tom. John Stricker

So it makes no difference that he is comparing a poor running 4.9 against a worked SBC? Never mentioning that the 4.9 is not running properly, what kind of logic is that?

How can one make an informed judgement with flawed/omitted data? Bottom line, of course in makes a difference, to state otherwise is ignoring the obvious.

I think the 0-60 times for the ZZ3 should be much lower than 5. whatever. It should be more along the lines of a mid 4 or something. Just a 5. doesn't seem right. Anyone else have the same idea or no?

------------------

Maroon 1987 GT 5 spd: 2.8L
Ferrari Red 1988 Formula 5 spd: 3800 Series II Supercharged In & Running.....
Need any parts? Got 2 parts cars:
86GT 4spd
87 Coupe 4cyl

My Website: http://www.members.cox.net/rare88/

Thanks Tom,

It's so rare on here that anybody puts up any attempts at real numbers so it's good to see yours.

Yes the 4.9 is stock, no the small block isn't "stock" (whatever that means, excellent post Mr. Pat). Is this a true scientific experiment with all variables the same but one? No, it's just two cars that Tom owns. He took the time to measure some numbers and give them to us.

Give him some credit for that. Don't jump down his throat about it. If you think the 4.9 isn't running right I'm sure he'd love help getting it up to its full power potential.

------------------
Doug Chase
Chase Race
Custom roll cage and exhaust fabrication

quote Originally posted by Mastermind: BTW the heavly modified SBC is still slower than Fiero X's heavly modified 3800SC which I think would be a closer comparison of the three.

We'll see soon enough...

Rob D.

Thanks for the results Tom.

------------------

The Dirty Rat
Chopped, dropped and just plain NASTY!
383 Stroker MPFI with N2O
2.5" Drop
11" Brakes
17" Revolutions
RCC Coilover Suspension
Updated June 29 '03 www.dirtyratracing.org

[This message has been edited by chester (edited 01-05-2004).]

Tom

Thanks for running. Thanks for the numbers. And thanks for the comments.

Please ignore the 'sharpshooters'!

"those who can, do; those who can't ...."

Thanks for the comparision. I know that the comparisions are not perfect but it is better than nothing. Congrats on the pair.

IIRC, Tom's motor is hardly a Heavily worked over SBC. Its a stock(read:you can go buy it at your dealer) zz3(now called zz4) with roller rockers.

Thank you for the comparision.

Tom,
what rockers did you put on your zz3? Are the full fulcrum rollers, or just roller tips? 1.5(2) or 1.6 ratio? What clutch are you running? Did you do any other performance enhancements when you pulled your motor last?

------------------
SSFiero@Aol.com Support Mental Health, or I'll Kill Ya!!
Yellow Formula Signature

• 88 Yellow FORMULA
  
• Black 88 formula
  
• My Shower Cam

wow, im kinda new to this forum, however not new to forums in general. Some people need to relax around here. This was a great post on comparing his two cars, he never tried to prove the merits of either car, and simply used his new toy to get some numbers for you guys. Many here have made good points, while others seem to focus too much on the differences between engine conditions. Lets keep in mind here he is not road and track or motor trend, this is not a straight up fiero supercar shoot out, it was for fun.

If I am out of line, feel free to PM me and set me straight. Im off to find a flywheel for my 4.9. Have a great day everyone.

People whining about it not being a fair comparison?

What's "fair?" He has 2 cars. He has done different stuff to them and showed you how they compare. Of course different setups of either engine would be slower or faster. Just take the info for what it is - a comparison of 2 individual cars. Neither one is representative of ALL SBC's or ALL 4.9's.

Perhaps a bone stock 350 against a bone stock 4.9? Well, in that case, which 350 would you choose? It's going to be an apples and oranges comparison no matter what.

Geez. Way to make people not want to share info. And you wonder why most V8 owners don't want to post times? It's precisely because of this attitude.

Let me set the record straight. I APPLAUD TOM FOR HIS EFFORTS to compare HIS TWO Fieros. However, I think is fair to say that most reading this thread assume HIS TWO FIEROS are both running properly for this comparison. Totally unaware of the following.

Originally posted by Tom Corey:
I guess i'm a little late checking in on this subject, but I've been doing a brake conversion and haven't looked at the forum much in the last few weeks. I own both a 4.9 88 GT and a SBC V-8 Archie conversion in an 87 GT. I have said this before and I will say it once again: You cannot compare the two, they are completely different animals. However, here's my two cents and some reasons why: I would recommend you try one of each first. If you can only afford one, I would recommend you do the SBC first, because if you don't you'll eventually want one. But one of the most compelling reasons to go with the SBC conversion is Archie himself. Now I bought my V-8 Archie from someone else and ended up redoing it. Although the SBC had been in the car for 9 years and 25,000 miles I redid it not not because it needed it, but because I wanted to. Archie has never hesitated to help me with any question or problem I've had (reinstalling the engine)and believe me he knows what he is doing with a Fiero and the SBC, the brake conversion, etc. He has never steered me wrong, never tried to talk me into anything and never tried to sell me any thing. As a result when I need a clutch or any part for my SBC, I go to Archie - it's cheaper in the long run. Now on the other hand, I have found it EXTREMELY difficult to get service on my 4.9. And that is not necessarily the fault of anyone, it is just the way it is. It is similar to the 3800 conversion (had one of those, too) in that you almost have to carry a wiring diagram and a service manual supplement to get something fixed. So a key lesson to be learned is always be sure you fully understand the technical aspects of the conversion you choose, because at some time it will probably be you who has to tell a mechanic how to fix it. Now my 4.9 has been very reliable, it's very quick, it's quiet, I get 19-20 mpg in town and 22-23 on the highway using premium fuel (it still doesn't run on regular or mid grade - I probably need to swap out the computer but haven't had time). But I still prefer the raw G pulling power of my modified ZZ3 (pushing 400 hp) for pure unadulterated fun. AND I can take it to virtually any mechanic in the country for repairs when I'm on the road. So my opinion still remains the same: You cannot compare the two, they are like apples and oranges like a Ricer and a Corvette (both are fast, but what do you like). But in the final analysis, it is really great to have Archie there to answer any question or help you with any problem you might have with your SBC. And no, I don't really know Archie, I've met him at Daytona long enough to say Hello and I've talked to him on the phone and via this forum. So enjoy whatever you choose and choose what suits you and your needs.

I am simply pointing out his results are misleading because his 4.9 is not running properly. That's my only point, I have no quarrel with Tom for doing the comparison. I simply wanted everyone to also know those facts.

BTW This is the thread that Tom made those comments.

www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/042371.html

I dont see anywhere that his 4.9 isnt running properly. He thinks he might need a new comp because he cant run on anything besideds premium. But it doesnt say anywhere that it bogs on take off, or the tranny slips. If ive missed something, please show me. Seems like he has a perfeclty running 4.9. He just said he has trouble getting work done on it when it does need it. Not that he has trouble getting it fixed, because he needs it. I think if he had a different tranny thats geared a little higher, he would have better numbers.(I think I read it was 2. something, needs to be 3.33 or something) I think with the right tranny, and if the motor could breath a little better, it would be a screeming little car. Not that it isnt now, they do go like snot. But it is a limited swap, only so far it can go. But with time, it will only get better.

I suggest others read the thread and draw their own conclusions.

www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/042371.html

See the thing that is really slowing you down in the 4.9 in the auto because my dads runs a 13.9 with crappy launches with a 5 spd Getrag but this was a kool post thanks for the info

J Sokol

Thanks for the info Tom, good job. Wish I had two V-8's in my driveway. Have a Great Day All Thanks Gary

quote Originally posted by stevenrossi: Great info. Lets hope you get that 4.9 running at 13's.

Steve...

What kind of 1/4 and 0-60 times are YOU running with your 4.9L ???

------------------
New Name.... New Attitude....
AKA. SmoothGT....

Custom Built SHAVED~WIDEBODY~GT!!

quote The fact is, the 4.9 doesnt do 0-60 in the low 5's, or run 13's all day, as ive heard it said many times. The only 4.9 ive seen run with my own eyes ran a 15.2. Which seems to be the same as this one thats in question. There are obviously going to be others out there running better times. BUt they are not stock. I think if he had a different tranny thats geared a little higher, he would have better numbers.

My '86 GT with a stock 4.9 and 2.73 4T60E runs 13s. Bruce's '87 coupe with stock 4.9 and 2.73 4T60E runs 13s. These are both completely stock engines/trans taken directly from Cadillacs and put into Fieros without any performance mods. That is the plain truth and that's also why I said Tom's car has a problem. It's practicly an identical car to mine but runs a full 1.5 seconds slower. I know I'll get pounded into the ground for saying this, but the performance of Tom's 4.9 car is not a good example of what a stock 4.9 is capable of, though it seems to be on par the other 4.9 swaps from the same litter. I'm digging my own grave here so I won't say anymore.

The Chevy will always be a better engine, I don't think anyone will argue that. There will always be a chevy powered Fiero that can beat even the best of the 4.9s. It doesn't really matter. It's nice to see Tom post numbers, it's just disapointing to see his 4.9 running so slow when I know it can do better.

i cant wait for Julia's engine to go so i can do a 4.9 swap
------------------
Buddy - there are two "G"s in my name
Ling = 84SE-350-N2O-Poly-Mr.Mike seats-Sequential turn signals-short shifter
Julia C = 85GT stock (mostly)
KCFOG
got a broken stud?
car doesn't crank over?

nismo contact

NISMO contact
Steve.Christiansen@nissan-usa.com
310-771-5042

[This message has been edited by buddycraigg (edited 02-02-2004).]

Lets all calm down and take a step back and examine Tom's findings. With engine differences aside, the method in which Tom tested his two cars is not flawless. This reminds me of the time when someone came up to the local hang-out and claimed that their bone stock 91 Camaro RS 305 TBI ran an 11.7 in the 1/4 according to their G-tech. Turns out the G-tech fell on the floor during his "test run" and that is why he got a "fast" number. Now I know this has nothing to do with Tom's test (at least I hope not) but there is a lesson to be learned here.

My experience with these "G-force testers" is that they tend to be pretty accurate at the track, probably due to the level 1/4 mile racetrack and the consistant launching pad. However, I have found that the suspension and road conditions play a very big part in how accurate a measuring device like this can be, especially if you are trying to test one of these on your typical city street. Furthermore, these devices are most accurate if you are testing the same vehicle with just different mods. In Tom's case, he is testing two totally different Fieros, with different powertrains, and different weight distributions. Therefore, I would have to warn some of you not to put too much stock into the results of these tests. While the results he got from his G-device might be close, the only way to know for sure to take the vehicle(s) to a 1/4 mile dragstrip that uses professional timing equipment. Other than doing that, your typical G-device is about as accurate as a stopwatch and watching the odometer while you are driving.

For reference, I remember there being a magazine article not too long ago that addressed this issue. If I remember correctly, the article said that the G-tech was within about 0.3sec when used on the dragstrip but could be more than a second off when used on the street. The accuracy of these testers is also dependant on how hard the transmission shifts/is shifted and the stiffness of the suspension, and how well the car hooks, as well as how smooth the road is, etc..

------------------
power corrupts. absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Custom GM Chip Burning | Fiero Engine Conversions | Turbocharging | dtcc.cz28.com

[This message has been edited by Darth Fiero (edited 01-05-2004).]

quote What kind of 1/4 and 0-60 times are YOU running with your 4.9L ???

I've only done 3 runs on a G-Tech - the newest model. I ran high 13's all day - for the money spent to do the conversion, i'm as happy as heck. Im not willing to spend another $4000 to shave off just 2 seconds.

------------------

[This message has been edited by stevenrossi (edited 01-05-2004).]

quote Originally posted by Mastermind: So it makes no difference that he is comparing a poor running 4.9 against a worked SBC? Never mentioning that the 4.9 is not running properly, what kind of logic is that? How can one make an informed judgement with flawed/omitted data? Bottom line, of course in makes a difference, to state otherwise is ignoring the obvious.

I take issue with the "poor running 4.9". I NEVER said it runs poor - it pings a little because I run it on the edge on TPS setting and timing to get top performance. It's an out of the crate new engine. When I take the ping out, I don't like the performance - so I run a little octane booster. I don't own anything that "runs poor". Ask Ed Parks, Frank Martin, or anyone that has seen any of my Fieros. I just gave you some numbers on my two cars, both of which run pretty darn good. I am NOT disappointed with the way my 4.9 runs. But I am curious to see if Rockcrawl's chip will improve performance, particularly the way it dies with the fairly big rpm drop when it shifts around 50 mph. And how hard I tried to rev it up and hold it with the brake did make significant differences in the 0-60 mph times. A lot of you guys seem to think I'm trying to dis the 4.9, but that is not true. I enjoy it. I'll be really happy if I find out it really runs in the 13's and even happier if that ends up meaning the SBC is actually running 11s!! Woo hoo!! And by the way, this was my first time EVER to use my G-Timer. It's a brand new Christmas toy - perhaps I will get better at using it. I think I had a pretty level road really straight, not much crown, etc. All that said, the G-Timer is made by Escort (this isn't an ad either) and my manual says "Your Performance Computer was developed and tested extensively, both at drag strips and using our VBOX professional vehicle testing equipment, the ultra precise data acquisiton system used by auto makers BMW, Honda, and AMG Mercedes: race teams Ford Racing, Roush Industries, Chip Ganassi Racing, and Renault F1; tire manufacturers Michelin, Bridgestone, Goodyear and Kumho; and car testers at Car and Driver and Automobile Magazine." So although I'm not yet expert at using it, I think I feel fairly confident in the data it provides. For you 4.9 owners, if it will help, maybe my 4.9 is jsut a dog. Whatever, I still like it.

[This message has been edited by Tom Corey (edited 01-05-2004).]