90 454SS vs 94 Lightning - TrucksTV

[Chevy1500z71]

Originally Posted by rdinmv

a 454 ss and a 351w lightning? lets compare apples to apples....a 460 lightning would be a better comparison.

I'm a ford guy but also have chevy's and like my chevy's too (my duramax eats powerstrokes), the lightning was much more even with 100 less cubes, just like if you compared a 5.7 impala ss to a 4.6 maurauder, Sorry to say but Ford had the better idea, the lightning handled way better as well, now if you look at current tech, GM rocks in the engine dept but the 2nd gen lighning has yet to be beat as far as factory offerings.

as far as factory offerings, id think a trailblazer ss will beat a 2nd gen lightening

the reason the lightening is a 351 is becasue thats all that ford offered, chevy came out with the 454 first and ford tryes to compete with the 351. it seems like ford has always had less cubes, as far back as the muscle car days, they just never gave you as much cubes as the competitors, and maybe its just me but the first gen lightening is so far from sporty looking, just my opinion tho.

as far as suspension, id say gms standard ifs was light years ahead of fords extremely simple twin i beam... but iv never driven either, so i cant talk...

and you guys are right about the how slow gms new truck feel from all that torque management, when i drive my moms trailblazer ss its almost disappointing how unresponsive it is, dont get me wrong, its a very badass truck, but that torque management really kills it. if you smack the gas real quick from idle, it has like a 2 second delay lol, a tune REALLY wakes nbs trucks up...

[dimerunner88]

Originally Posted by rdinmv

a 454 ss and a 351w lightning? lets compare apples to apples....a 460 lightning would be a better comparison.

I'm a ford guy but also have chevy's and like my chevy's too (my duramax eats powerstrokes), the lightning was much more even with 100 less cubes, just like if you compared a 5.7 impala ss to a 4.6 maurauder, Sorry to say but Ford had the better idea, the lightning handled way better as well, now if you look at current tech, GM rocks in the engine dept but the 2nd gen lighning has yet to be beat as far as factory offerings.

how about the GMC syclone/typhoon,and ram srt/10? last i checked they beat the lightning easily.

[91_bowtie]

Originally Posted by dimerunner88

how about the GMC syclone/typhoon,and ram srt/10? last i checked they beat the lightning easily.

yup. the syclone was quicker.

my tbss went 13.9 @ 99.7mph with nothing but TM removed.

[xx_ED_xx]

lighting has yet to be beat. I guess you havent driven an srt-10

[xx_ED_xx]

Oh and wait what does the srt-10 say on its production stickers
Fastest production truck.

[5.7L JWL]

I'd rather have quicker than faster. I'm going out on a limb here but I think a ticket for gettin' side ways laying drag is cheaper than say going 120-150 on the freeway. Just my .02

P.S. I wish they would just finish the damn trucks. Are we going to get 2 new shows and a re-run this next 3 wks.

[91_bowtie]

That was always the big argument between the sy/ty guys and the gen 2 L's... The sy was quicker and the L was faster. It's pretty tough to compete with brake boosting an awd truck.

[1BadAction]

Originally Posted by Chevy1500z71

as far as factory offerings, id think a trailblazer ss will beat a 2nd gen lightening

bone stock 2wd on a 60 degree day... maybe. if its hot out, forget about it. They heat kills these trucks. Not to mention, I don't think I have EVER met a L guy that wasn't modded.

Chevy grows some stones and releases the LSA(or LS9, better yet) in a short bed short cab truck, then we'll have something that owns the 2nd gen lightnings. Until then they pretty much have us covered.

[YenkoST]

My friends stock TB SS went 13.65 in the 1/4 and with headers, tune, catback, e-fans, and CAI....its flirting with 12's.

[fiream400]

Originally Posted by xx_ED_xx

Oh and wait what does the srt-10 say on its production stickers
Fastest production truck.

it might be the fastest production truck, on the right day with the perfect temp, on a prepared surface with a professional driver. In short, it's got the power, but NO traction.

[fiream400]

The drag race is on today

[SimpleGreen]

Losers are running on the 1/8 mile right now

The 454SS appears to be kicking the Lightnings ass on the slalom.

It also outstopped the Lightning by a good amount.

Edit:

Well, it was lame overall. The Lightning was faster in the 1/8. The 454SS outhandled and outstopped the Lightning with a clear lead. Couldnt do donuts worth a damn though due to its lack of a locker/limited slip.

Overall though, I think the drivers should have switched trucks and done all the tests over. Who knows. Maybe the Chevy boy knows how to drive the curves and the Ford guy knows how to go in a straight line.

[Pauly]

Originally Posted by fiream400

it might be the fastest production truck, on the right day with the perfect temp, on a prepared surface with a professional driver. In short, it's got the power, but NO traction.

It is the fatsest truck, no matter what kind of traction it has. Fastest means, highest top speed.
SRT10 Ram 154.587 mph
SVT Lightning 147.54 mph

I would rather have a quick truck than a fast truck. I really have no need for any speed in excess of what I can accelerate to in the 1/4 mile. I prefer the feeling of acceleration.


here are some SVT Lighning 1/4 mile times.
13.520@104.41 *with spare tire*
13.63@104.44 2.2 60 ft same as above
13.50@103.46 2.1 60 ft *no spare tire next 3 runs
13.61@104.94 2.2 60ft
13.72@104.10 2.3 60ft
Stock on radials.

SRT10's are running 1.9's-2.0's bone stock on radials.

I get some 2.0 60ft times with a 2.007 best with my old Vortec 350 with all season radials. I think its cool that my truck feels just as quick and sometimes quicker than the fastest stock trucks in the world.
Too bad that after the 60 ft, that both of those trucks simply walk away. At least for now.

BTW, I once ran a Ford Lightning, and I ran a 14.8 to his 14.1. I thought that they were way quicker than that.

peace
PAuly

[fiream400]

dude, you know what I meant.

[gmc406]

Originally Posted by Pauly

here are some SVT Lighning 1/4 mile times.
13.520@104.41 *with spare tire*
13.63@104.44 2.2 60 ft same as above
13.50@103.46 2.1 60 ft *no spare tire next 3 runs
13.61@104.94 2.2 60ft
13.72@104.10 2.3 60ft
Stock on radials.

SRT10's are running 1.9's-2.0's bone stock on radials.

I get some 2.0 60ft times with a 2.007 best with my old Vortec 350 with all season radials. I think its cool that my truck feels just as quick and sometimes quicker than the fastest stock trucks in the world.
Too bad that after the 60 ft, that both of those trucks simply walk away. At least for now.

BTW, I once ran a Ford Lightning, and I ran a 14.8 to his 14.1. I thought that they were way quicker than that.

peace
PAuly

That's interesting. My friend has a 03 Ford lightning. His best time in stock form was a 14.2. Magazines claim ~13.8. I haven't seen a stock one run what they're supose to. The same for the SRT-10. Here's why, second post down. This guy builds engines for Hot Rod Magazine regularly, and he knows his stuff.

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic...t=gps&start=30

This could be the case.

[fiream400]

Also, for as much power as they have I don't see how 150s is the top speed unless they have a limiter or something. I've seen a lowered 91 2wd sport run 148 with nothing more than a chip. It probably had a few mph left in it but he ran out of room. Before I get flamed for street racing, this was done on an old runway before the new owners turned it into a parking lot.

It was the white truck in my gallery by the way

[Red94Chev]

I watched the head-to-head episode. No surprise the Ford was going to win the 1/8 mile race after the dyno tuning episode. The 454SS is still pretty slow. 1/8- to 1/4-mile ET estimates (http://www.eldemoniorojo.com/calculator.htm) place it in the low 15's. Might touch high 14's since I'm sure the 60' times are slow due to the stock torque converter. The Ford, on the other hand, would have broke into the 13's in the 1/4. Would have been closer if Ryan used a higher stall torque converter, IMO.

What I was surprised to see was the heavy 454SS have much better handling and braking performance than the Ford. Especially since the results were the other way around when they tested the trucks prior to the performance upgrades. This is even more impressive given the added centrifical weight of the 20" wheels/tires. It would have been useful if they gave before and after test numbers for all the tests, but I suspect that the braking numbers may now be worse for the Lightning. Locked up front brakes are always bad news. Didn't this truck come with anti-lock brakes?

The Ford had more body roll than expected and front plow syndrome when braking. As Kevin mentioned, stiffer front coils would have helped considerably. Interesting how he mentioned the Ford guys on the forums warned him of that.

Overall, I thought this was a cool series and it gave me some ideas for easy brake upgrades. I think both trucks are still not dialed in. Handling/braking issues for the Ford and power/rear end issues for the Chevy. At this point, the things I think the 454SS needs are:
1. better exhaust with duals all the way back,
2. A higher stall torque converter with that camshaft,
3. Increase the engine compression. The camshaft and the low engine compression are a major mismatch.
4. Fix the power falloff after 5000 RPM. MSD boxes have an issue with misfiring right at 5000 RPM.
5. better tuning/datalogging than just A:F ratios. I'm sure they did ignition tuning, but they could have commented on the timing during the dyno tuning episode. Proper ignition tuning may wake this big block up. Going with the DIY apporach, Edelbrock new ProFlo2 is much better for tuning than the handheld calibration module (http://www.edelbrock.com/automotive_...f2_chart.shtml). Don't know if there is a datalogging feature, but this would be extremely helpful. Would also be nice to know if the computer does fuel trims, but I assume so.

Personally, I'd upgrade the stock computer with the EBL and the MPFI add-on and tune it myself in TunerProRT. At least then, you can datalog all sensors. I also would have chosen a less agressive camshaft for a heavy truck application to work with the compression ratio of this engine.

[Pauly]

Originally Posted by fiream400

Also, for as much power as they have I don't see how 150s is the top speed unless they have a limiter or something. I've seen a lowered 91 2wd sport run 148 with nothing more than a chip. It probably had a few mph left in it but he ran out of room. Before I get flamed for street racing, this was done on an old runway before the new owners turned it into a parking lot.

It was the white truck in my gallery by the way

BS on the 148 in a chipped stock truck. How was the speed measured?
It takes MUCHO power to push a truck thats shaped like a brick to push through the air.

peace
PAuly

[GreaseDog]

i'm pretty sure that both of those tools on the show are there just for show. anybody can adjust a set of Cal Tracs and drop some tire pressure and get those trucks to hook.

and the SS did have a limited slip in it, they said it needed a locker.

[fiream400]

Originally Posted by Pauly

BS on the 148 in a chipped stock truck. How was the speed measured?
It takes MUCHO power to push a truck thats shaped like a brick to push through the air.

peace
PAuly

I figured you would, the speed was measured by a cop with a radar gun, they were letting us play on the runway to try to cut down on street racing. We talked him into letting us do a top speed run using the entry way to the runway. That truck won many races that it shouldn't have. It was bone stock with 40k miles owned by old people when we got it. The current owner has it up over 300 thousand miles on the stock motor and it still runs great. Maybe it was just a little better from the factory I can't explain it.