04 Mach 1 vs 02 ZO6

[Mach1Mustang]

Last weekend me and a friend ran at the drag strip. He ran a 8.230 @ 89.7 mph and i ran a 8.233 @86.3. The last night we rolled off from a 60 roll on the interstate. I knew he was going to win but by how much was the question. We ran to 120 or so and he had me by about a car, maybe a tad more. His car is stock with less than 5k miles. I also got to drive it yesterday, wow, it drives really good.

[Wesman]

Sounds like fun.

What mods do you have?? You must have some decent mods to hang with a Z06.

[BlueByU-SS]

yea mach= no contest for z06.. unless your friend has some serious shifting difficulties.. or you got some serious mods.. id guess gears cam.. n full bolt ons

[Mach1Mustang]

I have full exhaust, 4.10 gears, ud pullies, cai, maf, and a custom tune. I think he still took it easy on me on the street. He said he started in 3rd and never shifted untill the top of 3rd. He is a great driver by the way.

[Spaz]

I have full exhaust, 4.10 gears, ud pullies, cai, maf, and a custom tune. I think he still took it easy on me on the street. He said he started in 3rd and never shifted untill the top of 3rd. He is a great driver by the way.

probably not if he had you by a car... i wonder how i'd fare with my ls6 against ya? different gearing and few lbs more...

[Mach1Mustang]

What do you run in the 1/8 or 1/4? The ZO6 is badass. When i drove it f you didnt have the tc offit would bog third gear because it would be spining!

[breakparts]

MACH 1 MUSTANG HAS 316 RWHP----your buddy wasnt driving correctly,,,and the 02 zo6 is 380 hp....id smoke you with his car

[Spaz]

What do you run in the 1/8 or 1/4? The ZO6 is badass. When i drove it f you didnt have the tc offit would bog third gear because it would be spining!

i haven't run yet... waiting on my new rear... once that is in i'll make a pass with some slicks... i'm hoping for a low 12 second pass... i figure i should be good for high 11's low 12's with the power i'm putting down if i drive decent...

[GottaHaveLS1]

MACH 1 MUSTANG HAS 316 RWHP----your buddy wasnt driving correctly,,,and the 02 zo6 is 380 hp....id smoke you with his car

02 Z06 has 405 hp stock, ur prally thinkin of the 01 Z06. A 4.6 would def need h/c, or some kind of FI to stick with a Z06.

[Mach1Mustang]

ok considering the fact that the zo6 puts down around 350-360 and about the same with tq why is it hard to believe the race. Sure i put down about 40 less hp , but near the same tq, plus i have a stronger rear gear. But if no one believes me then i dont care, just figured i would post about my loss to a zo6. By the way breakparts you can suck my nuts for all i care, it is because of people like you that causes problems.

[tonyjnjz]

wanna run??? i know i dont have a z06 but i think i should be able to keep up :D

[Mach1Mustang]

WOW! Can we really run? I hope you could keep up you have a highly modded car.

[tonyjnjz]

and im HOPING to take down a z06 when i meet up with one....been my goal since i got the car..there bad ass cars...theres a few out there that have run high 11s completely stock....z06vette.com checked out there forum before..the c6 z06 is just rediculous..dunnno if u saw the post on here of one runnning a 10.85 stock on drag rads!!!!

[Mach1Mustang]

yeh those new ones are badass. i saw one put down 478 rwhp with only a catback and a tune. the same car ran a 7.4 @ 99 mph on drag radials.

[cmaross01]

A mach 1 with 4:10s alone is a very stout car! The race sounds right to me!

[Roastem]

02 Z06 has 405 hp stock, ur prally thinkin of the 01 Z06. A 4.6 would def need h/c, or some kind of FI to stick with a Z06.

Heads and cams (4), is highly expensive, a LOT of work, and you might gain 25% HP?

When you could slap a procharger on it for the same money and get 50 to 70% HP?

That is why Ford's upgraded modular intake, cams, and heads never made any money. I had an 01 Cobra, cams were 1600 bucks (yikes), the magnesium FR500 intake was 2500 bucks (yikes^2 power), and the heads were actually reasonable, like 900 a piece. Imagine what the labor charge would be though :faint: This added up would give you a whopping 80 HP at the engine, and a serious dent in the ole walleto. :ar:

Why do that when you could just slap a supercharger on it and be done.

MM & FF tested a procharged Mach1 vs. a stock 03, with 8lbs boost each, and the Mach walked away every time. They even started the Mach in second and the 03 in 1st and the Mach still ate the 03 up.

You guys f*ck around and mess with the right Mach and you will find out first hand.

My geared and bolt-on 01 Cobra would have given quite a few of the F-bods around here all they could handle.

[Mach1Mustang]

tell me about it, i was going to to do heads and cams, but wow was it expensive. You can build a short block cheaper.

[SeVeReDiStOrTiOn]

Most people aren't good drivers in a car that's new to them...if if they're good drivers in general. What was he driving before the Z06?

The only prob I see is the highway run...with the Z06's 40rwhp, weight and aerodynamic advantage it should have been a lot farther apart than 1 car length:dunno: So either the guy can't drive, there's something wrong with his motor or someone put a Ls1 in there and sold the Ls6:)

[breakparts]

MACH 1 MUSTANG---KEEP YOUR SEXUAL FANTASIES TO YOUR SELF---:gay: AND A BONE STOCK 03 COBRA WOULD GET BEAT BY A ZO6 EASILY-----SO THE 8PSI ON A MACH PULLING A STOCK 03 COBRA DOSENT IMPRESS ALOT OF US..INCLUDING ME

[breakparts]

mach1 mustang WHAT ARE YOU SAYING ....your rear gear being a 410 makes it weaker....not stronger....so you meant to say your gears are lower....right

[Mach1Mustang]

mach1 mustang WHAT ARE YOU SAYING ....your rear gear being a 410 makes it weaker....not stronger....so you meant to say your gears are lower....right

yes, my rear gear is stronger, meaning it pulls harder adn stronger.
a mach 1 with 8lbs makes more power than an 03 cobra.

[breakparts]

So What Makes Your Gears Stronger---i Have Run 410 's Before And If You Count The Teeth On 410 There Are More Teeth And Less Metal Material-----= Weaker Gears----ive Broke 2 Sets Of 410 's And 1 Set Of 373's...and A Stock 342 Setup Has Lasted The Longest-----??????? I Give You The Fact They Pull Harder...but Think Logically-less Material Means -weaker

[Roastem]

Depends on which brand gear you get. Some are higher quality than others. They are usually twice as expensive.

[Spaz]

ok considering the fact that the zo6 puts down around 350-360 and about the same with tq why is it hard to believe the race.

with out a tune a z06 puts down 360 or so hp with a tune 380 - 395 rwhp...

mine is tuned and i just have a lid and exhaust...

[breakparts]

i never considered paying 500 to 600 dollars for those pro street gears...plus they dont make em for the 7.5 gm 10 bolt.....if we used these gears that were indestructable in our camaros they would still break from all our pinion deflection

[Roastem]

Prolly, a 10 bolt doesn't have the engineering that is needed for high TQ needs. You ever seen a mustang do a GM 10 bolt swap? I think the GT's all came with 8.8 rear diff's, and don't have the power to back it up. Then you have the monster LS1, and you plant a weenie 7.5 inch rear?

Jesus, finally give us an engine that is practically flawless, THEN give us a POS rear end that is more brittle that a Ford manager's career.

[breakparts]

but if gm-created a 12 bolt they would get alot of money, especially if there as cheap as the new gm performance parts coming out lately, they could do it but then moser and strange wouldnt be able to make 2500 dollars off of us f-body guys........

[Roastem]

2500 bones just for a mod that makes your car SLOWER, but more reliable?

I just can't justify dropping that kind of cash for the benefits.

I took mine down the track about 5 times on the 7.5 inch rear, not to mention the street abuse I usually put on her. It is still fine, but I did upgrade to like a $400 set of 4.10's.

If you don't take it to the track on a regular basis, it should be fine. I don't plan on swapping mine out any time soon.

If I make her a track whore, then I will prolly upgrade her p*ssy. :bounce:

[BlueByU-SS]

does a 12 bolt necessarily make an f-body slower? just a little extra weight..

[Pythias]

and im HOPING to take down a z06 when i meet up with one....been my goal since i got the car..there bad ass cars...theres a few out there that have run high 11s completely stock....z06vette.com checked out there forum before..the c6 z06 is just rediculous..dunnno if u saw the post on here of one runnning a 10.85 stock on drag rads!!!!

:ughlaugh:

[Crimson Sin]

does a 12 bolt necessarily make an f-body slower? just a little extra weight..

Any extra weight will slow your car bro, that's why guys pay hundred's of dollars for lightweight parts, aluminum k-members etc etc. Particularly the wheels, I forgot the formula but it has to do with unsprung weight against rotational force etc with some inertia mixed in. I LOVE seeing these guys with 20-22s on their rides pull up along side me and blip the throttle, all I see is 50 pound anchors at each corner of the car, I laugh in their face typically, then spank em
Stuff like a big ass box with 10/12/15's etc in the back and god forbid some giant ass wing etc all that crap makes it SLOWER. Same reason I refuse to get a skirting kit on my SS <more weight> GM went through the effort of plastic panels, aluminum drive train etc to lower weight. They spent that cash for a reason :yup:

[Roastem]

That is exactly why the new Z06 blows the doors off the new Viper, while giving up 5 hp and 55 lb/ft.

200 lb weight advantage: magnesium engine cradle, aluminum frame, etc.

[breakparts]

i pulled all my stereo equipment for this reason...and i never ride with fat beezies!!!!

[preston1980]

does a 12 bolt necessarily make an f-body slower? just a little extra weight..
But it puts the weight in the right spot, right over the rear wheels. Which will help with traction, alot. I say, instead of trying to lighten up your car, just make it have more horsepower. I believe the 12 bolt would be a great mod to do on any F-body car. Now I do agree with not increasing the weight in your car any more than needed. No Fat chicks allowed :hellno: Unless they are a relative, or your wife.:yup: :yup:

Saving weight is a great way to go faster, but sometimes people take it to far, I like my sound system and back seats and spare tire, and alot of other things that people remove to save weight. Especially if its a daily driver car.

[preston1980]

A mach 1 with 4:10s alone is a very stout car! The race sounds right to me!

Me too.
I think people think the Mach 1 is just a GT with with a shaker hood, thats not true, its basically the same motor as the Cobra. They run well, I have ran a few around here. I believe they only weigh 3460 pounds to the Cobras 3660 pounds, They can run a very low 13 sec quarter mile, like 13.2.
0-60 is only 4 tenths behind a SS Camaro or WS6 TA, like 5.5 secs. to a SS or WS6 runs 0-60 in 5.1 sec.

They are not quite a Cobra, but way better than a GT. So basically, they are not quite a man from the factory, but far more than a litte boy.:ughlaugh: Now the ZO6 is already a man from the factory. And remember he didnt say he won, just kept up. Im proud of you little brother.

[jbb6811]

seems you doggin himjust hes got a stang. dude sound honest and he even said he thought his freind may have been going easy on him. pm me your # and the next time i visit my cuz in concord i'll see if we can run. i'm stock now but i'm tring to get f-body motorsports to do a head cam for me. you(mach1) know any thing about them?

[Raoul-Duke]

but if gm-created a 12 bolt they would get alot of money, especially if there as cheap as the new gm performance parts coming out lately, they could do it but then moser and strange wouldnt be able to make 2500 dollars off of us f-body guys........

lol, well put analogy:yup:

[Mach1Mustang]

I dont know to much, but i have heard different things, some good some bad. But a heads/ cam swap on the ls1 is very easy. Me and some buddies have done it on a few fbodys.

[djvaly]

Me too.
I think people think the Mach 1 is just a GT with with a shaker hood, thats not true, its basically the same motor as the Cobra. They run well, I have ran a few around here. I believe they only weigh 3460 pounds to the Cobras 3660 pounds, They can run a very low 13 sec quarter mile, like 13.2.
0-60 is only 4 tenths behind a SS Camaro or WS6 TA, like 5.5 secs. to a SS or WS6 runs 0-60 in 5.1 sec.

They are not quite a Cobra, but way better than a GT. So basically, they are not quite a man from the factory, but far more than a litte boy.:ughlaugh: Now the ZO6 is already a man from the factory. And remember he didnt say he won, just kept up. Im proud of you little brother.

Mach 1 is like 30hp flywheel less than LS1. take a Cobra and take away the supercharger, and u have Mach1,.. with regards to Mach1 stock running 13.2s, possible but very slim. We LS1 run low 13s.. like 13.3, 13.4 all day.. Mach 1 I think more like mid and up 13s.. and yeah they're way better than GT.. u got that one right bud... ;) I got a friend who has a 350Z (300hp) 3400lbs and he runs stock 13.6 a lot like Mach1...

[Mach1Mustang]

Mach 1 is like 30hp flywheel less than LS1. take a Cobra and take away the supercharger, and u have Mach1,.. with regards to Mach1 stock running 13.2s, possible but very slim. We LS1 run low 13s.. like 13.3, 13.4 all day.. Mach 1 I think more like mid and up 13s.. and yeah they're way better than GT.. u got that one right bud... ;) I got a friend who has a 350Z (300hp) 3400lbs and he runs stock 13.6 a lot like Mach1...

Sure, the mach has less hp, but i believe it weighs less, plus it has a steeper first and second gear. Accelaration is not a problem with these cars, trust me. Sure my car is modded but i barely lost to the zo6 without any motor work. I was quite happy with the cars prefrormance!

[djvaly]

Sure, the mach has less hp, but i believe it weighs less, plus it has a steeper first and second gear. Accelaration is not a problem with these cars, trust me. Sure my car is modded but i barely lost to the zo6 without any motor work. I was quite happy with the cars prefrormance!

yeah, ur nicely moded.. put a supercharger on it and u hang with the c6 z06..
that be nice ehh? :)

[Mach1Mustang]

yeah, ur nicely moded.. put a supercharger on it and u hang with the c6 z06..
that be nice ehh? :)

Yep, that would be nice. But why do that when a 100 shot could do that?

[mrr23]

because, the bottle only lasts so long.

[Mach1Mustang]

yes, but it last long enough to win!!!

[djvaly]

heh, he said "win".. long term is the goal. ;)

[Angus66]

Last weekend me and a friend ran at the drag strip. He ran a 8.230 @ 89.7 mph and i ran a 8.233 @86.3. The last night we rolled off from a 60 roll on the interstate. I knew he was going to win but by how much was the question. We ran to 120 or so and he had me by about a car, maybe a tad more. His car is stock with less than 5k miles. I also got to drive it yesterday, wow, it drives really good.

Way to represent the Machs! :yup:

Mach 1 is like 30hp flywheel less than LS1.

My Mach dynoed 282 rwhp when it was completely stock, which equates to ~ 330 flywheel hp assuming 15% drivetrain loss.

Sounds like about the same hp to me.

take a Cobra and take away the supercharger, and u have Mach1,..

Not even close.

The only major things shared between the two engines are:

Heads
Camshafts
Forged Steel Crakshaft

Pretty much everything else is different.

with regards to Mach1 stock running 13.2s, possible but very slim. We LS1 run low 13s.. like 13.3, 13.4 all day.. Mach 1 I think more like mid and up 13s...

I ran a 13.4 @ 104 mph my 1st-time out completely stock with a poor 2.19 60' time.

Many stock Mach's have ran faster/quicker & a small amount have run high 12's with great drivers & track conditions.

Sounds like the same ET's as the fastest LS1 F-Bodies to me.

yeah they're way better than GT..

At least you got ONE thing right... :hahano:

yeah, ur nicely moded.. put a supercharger on it and u hang with the c6 z06..
that be nice ehh? :)

Who needs a supercharger? ;)

I've raced about a 1/2-dozen ZO6's at the track & haven't lost to any of them... :D

[T/A Barracus]

Way to represent the Machs! :yup:



My Mach dynoed 282 rwhp when it was completely stock, which equates to ~ 330 flywheel hp assuming 15% drivetrain loss.

Sounds like about the same hp to me.



That may be true with 98 to 2000 LS1's, but 01 & 02 LS1's dyno much more than 282. I dyno'd 319 RWHP and 333 RWTQ.

Truth is a stock Mach vs stock LS1 is a drivers race, w/ maybe a slight advantage going to an 01 - 02 LS1, but not much. Despite the HP difference of the LS1 the Machs run nearly just as well.

[Pythias]

That may be true with 98 to 2000 LS1's, but 01 & 02 LS1's dyno much more than 282. I dyno'd 319 RWHP and 333 RWTQ.

Truth is a stock Mach vs stock LS1 is a drivers race, w/ maybe a slight advantage going to an 01 - 02 LS1, but not much. Despite the HP difference of the LS1 the Machs run nearly just as well.

Wat was different in 01/02???

[djvaly]

Mach1 is less impressive than LS1 in every aspect, looks, track, performance..

yep the stock 01-02 LS1 will easily do 13.2-13.1 at track all day.. even high 12's but that's rare.. your Mach1 stock will pull at best 13.4.. they have 40 less hp and 15lb-ft less than stock 98-99 LS1, and we do 13.3-13.4 all day..
so don't worry about what the other Mach1 people tell you, it is physically imposible to have less power and torque and have better times, unless u get sticky tires, stall etc.. but we are talking bone stock here. so get your facts right bud...

stock per stock at flywheel:
Mach1: 305hp @ 5800 rpm
320lb-ft @ 4000rpm

LS1 TA (98-00)
340hp@5200
335lb-ft @ 4000

LS1 TA (01-02)
355hp@5200
340lb-ft@4000

car weight: 3450-3500lbs on both, so no factor there

[Pythias]

Why is that though? What differences were there in 01/02 to do that? And was it only those years? What aboutb 00?

[djvaly]

Wat was different in 01/02???
LS6 intake manifold gives them 10rwhp, and a few other minor changes..
they do 300rwhp easy. 98-99 do 290rwhp.. GM underrated LS1 engines,, so
don't be fooled by 310hp claim, it's actually 345-350 flywheel.

[T/A Barracus]

Wat was different in 01/02???

The 01 & 02's had the LS6 intake & clutch. I do believe they also had a bit more of an aggressive cam.

[Angus66]

Mach1 is less impressive than LS1 in every aspect, looks, track, performance..

yep the stock 01-02 LS1 will easily do 13.2-13.1 at track all day.. even high 12's but that's rare.. your Mach1 stock will pull at best 13.4.. they have 40 less hp and 15lb-ft less than stock 98-99 LS1, and we do 13.3-13.4 all day..
so don't worry about what the other Mach1 people tell you, it is physically imposible to have less power and torque and have better times, unless u get sticky tires, stall etc.. but we are talking bone stock here. so get your facts right bud...

stock per stock at flywheel:
Mach1: 305hp @ 5800 rpm
320lb-ft @ 4000rpm

LS1 TA (98-00)
340hp@5200
335lb-ft @ 4000

LS1 TA (01-02)
355hp@5200
340lb-ft@4000

car weight: 3450-3500lbs on both, so no factor there

You need to get your facts right. :yup:

The '03 & '04 Machs were under-rated @ 305/320 ('03) and 310/320 ('04), since they have dynoed as high as 295 rwhp/315 rwtq completely stock.

Mine dynoed 281.6 rwhp/305.6 rwtq as-delivered from the factory. Factor in 15% driveline loss & you get 331.29 crank hp & 359.53 rwtq. That's quite a bit higher than 305/320 isn't it? :ughlaugh:

13.4 - 13.5 is an average time for a stock Mach 1 - many have run 13.0 - 13.1 in factory trim & a few have run 12.8's - 12.9's bone-stock - just like the fastest LS1 F-Bodies.

Achieving those kind of times with slightly less rwhp/rwtq is a result of the Machs transmission gearing (manual-trans Machs have a 3.38 1st gear) and a more aggressive 3.55 rear gear.

Just for the record, it is very possible to have less rwhp/rwtq & run better times than another more powerful car.

My Mach is living proof of that - it runs mid/lower 11's and has a LOT less rwhp/rwtq than you'd think. It's still on the stock long-block too BTW with NO POWER-ADDER needed to run that fast/quick.

But that's physically impossible, right??? :squint:

[djvaly]

hmm. that's not what I see at the track, stock Mach1 does 13.4 at best..
you still haven't learned anything... get the facts right.
there could be monster Mach1 from factory inching low 13's and high 12's.
haven't seen one yet, it also depends on altitude and weather factors..
your claim may happen but it is not the consistent numbers...

[tonyjnjz]

ive NEVER ever heard that that engine dynos high......actually ive heard that it dynos LOW on the 01s and before so svt looked into it.,.what kind of dyno did u have it dynoed on??? .....now the 03-04 cobras?? thats a diff story..ive heard everywhere of those dynoing high.....just so u know im not just saying this to bash mustangs.....ive also raced an 01 cobra in my 99 stock 6 speed from about a 70 rolll on up......he got far in my rearview from about 130 on......had him by about 3 cars at that point..guess they run out of steam up top

[Hot Black Trans-Am]

03/04 Mach is much better than a 01 Cobra.

[djvaly]

ive NEVER ever heard that that engine dynos high......actually ive heard that it dynos LOW on the 01s and before so svt looked into it.,.what kind of dyno did u have it dynoed on??? .....now the 03-04 cobras?? thats a diff story..ive heard everywhere of those dynoing high.....just so u know im not just saying this to bash mustangs.....ive also raced an 01 cobra in my 99 stock 6 speed from about a 70 rolll on up......he got far in my rearview from about 130 on......had him by about 3 cars at that point..guess they run out of steam up top

+1 I am not bashing anybody, there's some mosters stock LS1 out there doing 12.9 stock,, never seen one either and never seen Mach1 do less than 13.4 and I go to the track here in Ennis TX quite a lot..

[tonyjnjz]

aparently im missinformed hot black trasam......how is the 03-04 mach engine diff from the 01 cobra engine??? i thought it was basicly the same ...4.6 4v putting down 300/320........specs the same...???? explain

[Angus66]

hmm. that's not what I see at the track, stock Mach1 does 13.4 at best..
you still haven't learned anything... get the facts right.
there could be monster Mach1 from factory inching low 13's and high 12's.
haven't seen one yet, it also depends on altitude and weather factors..
your claim may happen but it is not the consistent numbers...

So the small number of stock Mach's you've seen run at the track represent the entire spectrum of what they can run?

WOW - how could anyone argue with that?

FWIW - I've never seen any stock LS1 F-Body run under a 13.6 in the 1/4.

But just because I haven't seen it personally doesn't mean I'm so close-minded that I can't accept that it can & does happen.

You're not arguing your point from a position of knowledge or "Facts" BTW - just limited personal experience & opinion.

I however, maintain & update the "Official" 1/4-mile ET list on the biggest Mach 1 site on the internet (The Mach 1 Registry), so I've seen & validated more Mach 1/4-mile timeslips (both stock & modded) than you'll likely ever see in your lifetime.

[tonyjnjz]

u didnt answer my question????

[Angus66]

how is the 03-04 mach engine diff from the 01 cobra engine??? i thought it was basicly the same ...4.6 4v putting down 300/320........specs the same...???? explain

The '03/'04 Mach has different (improved) heads, cams & higher compression compared to a '99 or '01 4V Cobra does.
(All '03/'04 4V's had the same improved heads/cams BTW - Cobras, Navigators, Aviators, Marauders, Etc...)

This was how my '01 compared to my '03 when they both were stock:

http://home.kc.rr.com/kchof/01%204v%20vs%2003%204v.jpg

[tonyjnjz]

http://www.dynoperformance.com/dyno_search.php?pageNum_r1=2&make_1=ford&totalRows_r1=318&order=model%7Cdesc
this is the link off your site ..the mach1 club ......shows 270-274 for completely stock mach 1s......that equals 310-315 at the flywheel when corrected at 15 percent.....

[tonyjnjz]

oh and heres where i got the link from http://www.mach1registry.com/FAQ.htm#who
ahhhhhh and thanks for the info on the improvments between 01 and 03.....i never would of guesssed since they rated them nearly the same..dam car companys.....the 01s were OVERRATED..and your 03 is obviously slightly underrated

[djvaly]

ur dyno may be generous. I agree 270-275 I have seen as more accurate readings..hey u may have one of those monster Mach1.. maybe we are all right, but I'm not really speaking of ur car in particular, I speak of the Mach1 masses.. I have seen a lot of Mach1 stock times.. it is not a fixed number on the 1/4 since they're a lot of variables involved. but the best I've seen was a Mach1 2004 13.4,, take it or leave it bud. I spoke with the guy after and he was stock, he got it a few months previous and did not want to change it yet since he would forfeit his warranty.
his et. was 0.8ish so he had a good launch..
fyi. I have a friend who has a c6, and he does 12.9-12.8 on the track regularily, u realize what ur saying ur 100hp less and 300lbs heavier Mach1 does 12.9's ..yeah right..
also, I have 342rwhp. guess what I'm doing 12.7 at the track as best time, 12.8-12.9 on regular basis.. I dought ur Mach1 stock has 340rwhp stock.. think about it guy..

[Hot Black Trans-Am]

aparently im missinformed hot black trasam......how is the 03-04 mach engine diff from the 01 cobra engine??? i thought it was basicly the same ...4.6 4v putting down 300/320........specs the same...???? explain

Angus66 stated it already. Just driving them both you can tell they are different. I've raced both and the Mach hung alot closer than the 01 Cobra did.

[djvaly]

that's a true statement, same here I was stock, Nov '05 and took on a Mach1.. had no idea if he's stock or what so I was whata hell.. let me run it,
we did 30 roll to 120ish I was up by a car and a half length.

[Pythias]

u didnt answer my question????

Your question was already answered around 6 posts up.... go read.

[preston1980]

The original post is about a ZO6 vs a Mach 1.

But tha fact of the matter is a 03/04 Mach 1 vs a 01/02 F-body is a drivers race, they are matched pretty close, with the F-body having a slight horsepower advantage, very slight, also the Mach 1 haveing the rear end gear advantage 3.55's vs 3.42's, but the F- body has a 6 speed tranny vs a 5speed, so the transmission advantage goes to the F-body. Weight wise, the advantage goes to the Mach 1, slightly (less than 80 pounds). All in all they both run low to mid 13's consistantly per all the magazines Ive read.

The race would go to who ever got better traction and better shifting.
That is my opinion.

[djvaly]

The original post is about a ZO6 vs a Mach 1.

But tha fact of the matter is a 03/04 Mach 1 vs a 01/02 F-body is a drivers race, they are matched pretty close, with the F-body having a slight horsepower advantage, very slight, also the Mach 1 haveing the rear end gear advantage 3.55's vs 3.42's, but the F- body has a 6 speed tranny vs a 5speed, so the transmission advantage goes to the F-body. Weight wise, the advantage goes to the Mach 1, slightly (less than 80 pounds). All in all they both run low to mid 13's consistantly per all the magazines Ive read.

The race would go to who ever got better traction and better shifting.
That is my opinion.

+1, f-body has 3.23 or 2.73 gears depending on year.. the mostly used is 3.23.. i'm doing 3.73 next week. ;). :flex:

[preston1980]

+1, f-body has 3.23 or 2.73 gears depending on year.. the mostly used is 3.23.. i'm doing 3.73 next week. ;). :flex:

you must have an auto. then. most 6 speed cars have 3.42's.

[djvaly]

nope A4 or M6 it don't matter,, it's based on year I think..TA and Camaros have 2.73 or 3.23 gear stock depending on the year.. not sure about the vettes. probably 3.23 as well.. that's why I'm doing 3.73 upgrade and tq converter as well. yah! :flex:

[Mach1Mustang]

I really hate closed minded "car people". I respect the members on this board who know what they are talking about. Some of you dont even know much about your own car, much less mine! I only have 316 rwhp and i run low 8s all day long in the 1/8 and last time i was at the 1/4 i ran 12.8s all night! If i had 342 rwhp i would run low 12s. Damn, i have less hp than you yet i run just as fast. I really think that disproves your theroy!

[preston1980]

nope A4 or M6 it don't matter,, it's based on year I think..TA and Camaros have 2.73 or 3.23 gear stock depending on the year.. not sure about the vettes. probably 3.23 as well.. that's why I'm doing 3.73 upgrade and tq converter as well. yah! :flex:
Actually the 1993- 1995 had the option on the auto and m6, but 96-02 m6 V8 cars were all 3.42's, the auto's those years were either 2.73 or 3.23.

[Mach1Mustang]

Actually the 1993- 1995 had the option on the auto and m6, but 96-02 m6 V8 cars were all 3.42's, the auto's those years were either 2.73 or 3.23.

You sir are correct. Dont you love it when someone tries to tell you about your car when they dont know their own!

[djvaly]

nope there's no 3.42 avail to us... never heard of that gear being offered to us,

[djvaly]

I really hate closed minded "car people". I respect the members on this board who know what they are talking about. Some of you dont even know much about your own car, much less mine! I only have 316 rwhp and i run low 8s all day long in the 1/8 and last time i was at the 1/4 i ran 12.8s all night! If i had 342 rwhp i would run low 12s. Damn, i have less hp than you yet i run just as fast. I really think that disproves your theroy!

good for u if you run this time, I wouldn't jump the horse to say "close minded". go back to ur own board and check the time slips on the stock mach1.. mid 13s is what u have, if u run 12.8 is because u are moded. etc.. and nope there's no 3.42 gears that I heard of for us.
just talking to other people with ls1 u either have 2.73 or 3.23. people that call other people narrow minded or close minded are actually the ones that end up being closed minded. if you have a technical argument make it other wise don't take this on the personal level since we don't know each other that way. your stock Mach1 at best will do 13.4 as I see it. I'm happy for you if you pulled better time, but that's not what I've seen as consistent times.

[djvaly]

You sir are correct. Dont you love it when someone tries to tell you about your car when they dont know their own!
For TAs 98-02, there's 2 options 2.73 or 3.23 gears.. u can upgrade to 3.42 but there's not much difference.. most people upgrade to 3.73 for A4 and 4.10 for M6. send me the link to where you found the 3.42 gear used in TAs and I stand corrected, but to this date I only heard of those 2 options for us.
greetings. :denied:

[Angus66]

http://www.dynoperformance.com/dyno_search.php?pageNum_r1=2&make_1=ford&totalRows_r1=318&order=model%7Cdesc
this is the link off your site ..the mach1 club ......shows 270-274 for completely stock mach 1s......that equals 310-315 at the flywheel when corrected at 15 percent.....

The link & info you posted only represents (3) stock Mach 1's @ (1) particular dyno shop.

The (3) Mach's listed only represent .003% of the 9652 Machs produced in 2003 as well.

Also, this info was used when the cars were brand-new & dyno info was extremely scarce - many other stock Mach's have been dynoed since the (3) listed on that site.

For caculating flywheel/crank hp or tq, you need to divide the rwhp or rwtq by the theoretical % remaining after driveline losses.

Example:

85 rwhp divided by .85 (% remaining after 15% driveline loss) = 100 crank hp.

Now take the 270 rwhp divided by .85 = 317.64 crank hp.

Take the 274 rwhp example, divide by .85 = 322.35 crank hp.
(12 - 17 crank hp higher than the factory rating of 305 hp)

Let's look at torque, which is more important than hp in getting a relatively heavy stock car moving:

The low-end Mach dynoed 286.8 rwtq. Divide that by .85 = 337.4 crank torque.

The other Mach dynoed 291.7 rwtq. Divide that by .85 = 343.17 crank torque.
(17 - 23 more crank torque than the factory-rated 320 tq)

My Mach dynoed 281.8 rwhp. Divide by .85 = 331.29 crank hp.
My 305.6 rwtq divided by .85 = 359.53 crank torque.
(26 more crank hp & 39+ more crank torque than the factory-rated 320 tq)

My Mach isn't even close to the strongest stock Mach dynoed either - numerous Machs have dynoed 290+ rwhp, with the upper-end being around 295 rwhp.

One dyno sheet I've got saved:

Stock rwhp = 291.2 divided by .85 = 342.58 crank hp.
Stock rwtq = 313.6 divided by .85 = 368.94 crank torque.
(37 more crank hp & just shy of 50 additonal crank torque over the factory rating)

Even the lower-end of the rwhp/rwtq dyno range illustrates the fact that the Machs were under-rated (especially when looking at torque) from the factory by Ford.

[Angus66]

ur dyno may be generous. I agree 270-275 I have seen as more accurate readings..hey u may have one of those monster Mach1.. maybe we are all right, but I'm not really speaking of ur car in particular, I speak of the Mach1 masses.. I have seen a lot of Mach1 stock times.. it is not a fixed number on the 1/4 since they're a lot of variables involved. but the best I've seen was a Mach1 2004 13.4,, take it or leave it bud.

I'll leave it thanks.

I've personally seen enough stock Machs run faster/quicker than that in less-than-ideal conditions to know that they're capable of more from the factory.


fyi. I have a friend who has a c6, and he does 12.9-12.8 on the track regularily, u realize what ur saying ur 100hp less and 300lbs heavier Mach1 does 12.9's ..yeah right..
also, I have 342rwhp. guess what I'm doing 12.7 at the track as best time, 12.8-12.9 on regular basis.. I dought ur Mach1 stock has 340rwhp stock.. think about it guy..

My Mach currently has 335 rwhp & runs 11.3's - 11.4's in the 1/4 (no power-adder) - how do you explain that then?

RWHP - while certainly nice to have in abundance - isn't the sole factor that
determines what ET or MPH any car will run.

Powerband characteristics, driveline efficiency, transmission & rear-end gearing, weight, suspension, weight-transfer, track prep & weather conditions all play a BIG role when trying to achieve the fastest/quickest 1/4-mile run.

[Angus66]

For TAs 98-02, there's 2 options 2.73 or 3.23 gears.. u can upgrade to 3.42 but there's not much difference.. most people upgrade to 3.73 for A4 and 4.10 for M6. send me the link to where you found the 3.42 gear used in TAs and I stand corrected, but to this date I only heard of those 2 options for us.

Link#1 (http://www.fantasycars.com/derek/cars/2001firebirdramair.html)

Link#2 (http://www.transamworld.com/2002-firebird-specifications.php)

Link#3 (http://www.classyauto.com/v/used/Pontiac+Trans+Am/30th+Anniversary+Convertible/38134)

Link#4 (http://www.engine-power.com/pontiac/firebird_ws6.html)

[djvaly]

Link#1 (http://www.fantasycars.com/derek/cars/2001firebirdramair.html)

Link#2 (http://www.transamworld.com/2002-firebird-specifications.php)

Link#3 (http://www.classyauto.com/v/used/Pontiac+Trans+Am/30th+Anniversary+Convertible/38134)

Link#4 (http://www.engine-power.com/pontiac/firebird_ws6.html)

hmmm 3.42 gears on stock M6, I guess they do have those. interesting, all the people I've talked to claimed 3.23 or 2.73.. perhaps A4 folks.. I do drive an A4 and definetly have 3.23.. that I know.
thanks for the links.

[djvaly]

I'll leave it thanks.

I've personally seen enough stock Machs run faster/quicker than that in less-than-ideal conditions to know that they're capable of more from the factory.



My Mach currently has 335 rwhp & runs 11.3's - 11.4's in the 1/4 (no power-adder) - how do you explain that then?

RWHP - while ceratainly nice to have in abundance - isn't the sole factor that
determines what ET or MPH any car will run.

Powerband characteristics, driveline efficiency, transmission & rear-end gearing, weight, suspension, weight-transfer, track prep & weather conditions all play a BIG role when trying to achieve the fastest/quickest 1/4-mile run.

a C6 Z06 will do 11.4 in 1/4 and it's got 415rwhp with 300 lbs less than Mach1.. did you use sticky tires or anything to shave off time? it is really interesting u can get that kind of time.. your friend Mach1Mustang claims at best 12.8 with 315rwhp. come on now folks. have you raced a c6 Z06 u should pretty much side by side.. also not to mention your bigger brother Cobras 03/04 have 350rwhp and they pull 12.8-12.7 at the track all day..

[preston1980]

a C6 Z06 will do 11.4 in 1/4 and it's got 415rwhp with 300 lbs less than Mach1.. did you use sticky tires or anything to shave off time? it is really interesting u can get that kind of time.. your friend Mach1Mustang claims at best 12.8 with 315rwhp. come on now folks. have you raced a c6 Z06 u should pretty much side by side.. also not to mention your bigger brother Cobras 03/04 have 350rwhp and they pull 12.8-12.7 at the track all day..

This post is about the 02 ZO6, which is alot less of a car than the 06 model.
And actually, the new ZO6 has more like 435 rear wheel horse. And remember the Mach 1 in quetion is NOT stock, the story sounds right on to me. Also the Mach 1 weighs 250 ponds less than the 03 Cobras.

[preston1980]

hmmm 3.42 gears on stock M6, I guess they do have those. interesting, all the people I've talked to claimed 3.23 or 2.73.. perhaps A4 folks.. I do drive an A4 and definetly have 3.23.. that I know.
thanks for the links.

Tell your friends to look at the white sticker on the inside of the driver door, it has a bunch 3 digit of codes on it. the factory code for the rear end gears all start with GU. Look for GU2 for 2.73 gears, look for GU5 for 3.23 gears, and look for GU6 for 3.42 gears. Or I can save you time, if its a 6-speed and 96-02 its got a 3.42 rear end. If its a 93-95 anda 6 speed, its got a 3.23 gears probally, but possible to have others. If its an auto, its either got 2.73 or 3.23.
You can tell alot from those codes, you would be surprised. It an easy way to see if a car is a real WS6, just look for the code WS6, you can spot a clone that way. just some f.y.i. for ya. Ive had 4 of the cars myself.

[Angus66]

a C6 Z06 will do 11.4 in 1/4 and it's got 415rwhp with 300 lbs less than Mach1..

Although I don't know the spec weights of all the ZO6's of each year, I do know that not one single factory ZO6 weighs 300 lbs less than my Mach w/driver.

My current race weight is between 3150 - 3190 lbs w/driver depending on how much gas I gas to run in the tank.

It's more likely that my Mach weighs less with me in it than most ZO6's weigh without driver.

did you use sticky tires or anything to shave off time? it is really interesting u can get that kind of time..

Of course I did - 26" X 15" Mickey Thompson ET Drags actually.

your friend Mach1Mustang claims at best 12.8 with 315rwhp.

Tha just shows you that rwhp isn't the only factor involved in running a certain.
Sure it's important, but isn't the "End-All-Be-All" of racing.

come on now folks. have you raced a c6 Z06 u should pretty much side by side.. also not to mention your bigger brother Cobras 03/04 have 350rwhp and they pull 12.8-12.7 at the track all day..

Yes, I've beat both of those cars at the track - even modded '03/'04 Cobras & ZO6's on numerous occasions.
(Videos of some of those races are available if you want me to post them)

With that said, I certainly don't think my Mach is "All that" - I've gotten my ass handed to me more than once as well.

My point BTW (in case you missed it the 1st 3 or 4 times I made it) was that you shouldn't assume that because Car "X" doesn't have "Y" amount of rwhp doesn't mean it can't be fast/quick... :yup:

[djvaly]

nobody is arguing that rwhp is everything. but stock for stock torque vs. rwhp balance is everything.. u can drive a huge truck with lots of torque but low rwhp, or some race car with so so torque and plenty rwhp. and they both do poorly at the track...
that's the whole point of stalling a car to get the torque multiplier kicking. so a good balance is needed between power and tq, and for the record I never said hp is everything.. but assuming u have stock tires, stock engine.. u know factory stock, Mach1 would not stand a chance going 12's on 1/4.. at least I did not see it yet and been going for the last 2 yrs at the track. we can all sit here and claim times but seeing is believing it.
btw. your Mach1 '03 is at 3450lbs and C6 Z06 is at 3150.. so it is 300lbs without driver. so u probably did some weight reduction which is not considered stock. my point is about stock vs. stock car, not necesarily the engine, so it is all about rwhp and torque in the context I outlined, because when u get into modding, yep.. there's many variables.
so we are on the same page I think.

here's the true weight:
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_Exterior.aspx?year=2003&make=Ford&model=Mustang&trimid=-1

and yes, to get back to the thread subject, it is a nice kill, anything can be killed having the proper mods, throw enough money at the car and u will do lots of kills :)

[tonyjnjz]

angus those dynos of mach stangs i posted a link to on the last page was from YOUUUUUUUUR link u gave me jackass.....u were trying to prove what they put down so i clicked on YOUR link and thats what i found........just go play somwhere else....typical ford fuy

[Pythias]

nope there's no 3.42 avail to us... never heard of that gear being offered to us,

Because you never heard of it means it doesn't exist? Sorry man, but I have just begun to learn about LS1's and that was one of the first things I learned, the available optional gear ratio's. You stand corrected.

[Pythias]

angus those dynos of mach stangs i posted a link to on the last page was from YOUUUUUUUUR link u gave me jackass.....u were trying to prove what they put down so i clicked on YOUR link and thats what i found........just go play somwhere else....typical ford fuy

And you're a retard, now go play in traffic and let the big boys talk.... typical idiot.

[tonyjnjz]

haha ty boy..now go ask mommy for some more milk..dont respond to me again till u move out of moms house

[tonyjnjz]

and funny...i wasnt even asking u anything?? u just jumped right in on me

[djvaly]

Because you never heard of it means it doesn't exist? Sorry man, but I have just begun to learn about LS1's and that was one of the first things I learned, the available optional gear ratio's. You stand corrected.

no biggie, I said it doesn't exist as far as I know. or that I never heard of it.
on my door I got a GU5 as specs for 3.23, other people claimed GU2.. so never heard of 3.42 gears usage, that's all. that's why I asked for proof.. At least I was cocky to say I know everything, so I did say this is what I saw or heard of but if he knows something I don't to bring some proof.
nothing wrong with it.. we all are here to learn something every now and then. debate is good.. ;)

[joezee]

wow...very um,....entertaining....other than the couple of "experts" in this thread, everyone with real world experience knows a stock mach 1 runs the SAME as a stock ls1.................really.......at the track .........on the street.........up hill ...........down hill...........lets see what else......thats all, please resume arguing.

[djvaly]

this thread is starting to get personal and finger pointing type. so leave your "internet" muscles somewhere else and be open minded and learn something from one another.. the Ford people usually are not any different than the ricers coming to LS1 claiming numbers without timeslips, and causing arguments on personal level. this is a nice forum, if u come in here, u understand to bring proof of what u are talking about.. and yes we can all learn a thing or two, sometimes you never heard of a tech spec so you ask for a fellow memeber to show u some proof, it is how we learn from one another..

[mrr23]

time to end this.