Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 346

01 ta vs 08 gt

This is a discussion on 01 ta vs 08 gt within the Kill Stories forums, part of the Racing Forums category; Originally Posted by 99 Kobra They did recall ALL '99 Cobras. They replaced the intake manifold, exhaust and reflashed the ...

  1. #41
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by 99 Kobra View Post
    They did recall ALL '99 Cobras. They replaced the intake manifold, exhaust and reflashed the computer. Mine went fron 255 rwhp to 275 rwhp. It was a great car for 95,000 miles until I sold it. It was great for open track. With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.
    20rwhp from from intake and full exhaust is not very good. My Crystal White '98 Cobra had a Vortech B-Trim with injectors, X-pipe and gears. Pretty strong car up top atleast.

  2. #42
    Speed Racer 99 Kobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    209

    White
    '04 Mustang Cobra

    Quote Originally Posted by N20LT4 View Post
    20rwhp from from intake and full exhaust is not very good. My Crystal White '98 Cobra had a Vortech B-Trim with injectors, X-pipe and gears. Pretty strong car up top atleast.
    It was just the mufflers, not full exhaust. The '99s were advertised to have 320 at the crank. My 275 at the rear wheels was about 323 at the crank. These weren't aftermarket upgrades, they were stock equipment that was supposed to yield 320 hp. The '96-'98 Cobras look good in white. I had a black '96 Cobra. I wanted white. but couldn't find one.
    '01 BMW 330ci: Race it in a modified class in BMW CCA Club Racing and NASA endurance races.
    '04 Lincoln LS V8 Sport: Stock.
    '04 Mustang Cobra coupe (white/gray): Modified.

  3. #43
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by 99 Kobra View Post
    It was just the mufflers, not full exhaust. The '99s were advertised to have 320 at the crank. My 275 at the rear wheels was about 323 at the crank. These weren't aftermarket upgrades, they were stock equipment that was supposed to yield 320 hp. The '96-'98 Cobras look good in white. I had a black '96 Cobra. I wanted white. but couldn't find one.
    Quote Originally Posted by 99 Kobra View Post
    With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.
    ???

  4. #44
    Senior Member jrc1122's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    1,053

    Liquid Red
    2009 Pontiac G8 GT

    Quote Originally Posted by 99 Kobra View Post
    They did recall ALL '99 Cobras. They replaced the intake manifold, exhaust and reflashed the computer. Mine went fron 255 rwhp to 275 rwhp. It was a great car for 95,000 miles until I sold it. It was great for open track. With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.
    275hp isn't bad-- that is only about 25 hp less to the wheels than a stock LS1.

    I have nothing against the Cobra-- I am just saying that I prefer my LS1.

  5. #45
    Bolt-On Pimp ImpalaSSpeed96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    360

    Black
    01 Camaro SS

    Why mustangs are still compared to Fbods I don't know. Like the magazines say, Mustangs will still out sell the Camaro and the Camaro will still outperform it in every aspect. Thats just the way it is. The Mustang GT's are not being produced to compete w/ the Camaro, new or old. If Ford wanted to they could. As evidenced by the Mach 1.
    96 Imp SS- 12.74@103, 1.74 60' out of fuel

    06 AWD TB SS- 12.58@106, 1.76 60'

    01 Camaro SS- Totaled

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    rochester,ny
    Age
    39
    Posts
    2,667

    pewter
    2001 z28 lingenfelter 383

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHaveLS1 View Post
    I don't race at the track at all.... but i hate the new GT's and pretty much all of them unless they're heavily modded. They look "OK" but it's been 10 years and they're still slower than an ls1. not to mention that i see at least 12 mustangs per day
    the look of the 05+ saleen mustang is pure sex..car is gorgous .....overpriced but still fuckin beautiful car

  7. #47
    Senior Member jrc1122's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    1,053

    Liquid Red
    2009 Pontiac G8 GT

    Quote Originally Posted by ImpalaSSpeed96 View Post
    Why mustangs are still compared to Fbods I don't know. Like the magazines say, Mustangs will still out sell the Camaro and the Camaro will still outperform it in every aspect. Thats just the way it is. The Mustang GT's are not being produced to compete w/ the Camaro, new or old. If Ford wanted to they could. As evidenced by the Mach 1.

    From my understanding the Mustang GT and the Fbody were fairly close in performance until the LT1 came along. The gap began to grow.. Then the LS1 came and widened the gap significantly.

    Ford knew it could build a 14 second pony car and still make sales because of the rich heritage of the name. To the non-car enthusiast, the GT is a monster of power and more than they will ever need. But for performance geared buyers and "bang for the buck" type car seekers, A low 13 second car is MUCH more appealing.
    Now with the 05+ GT they finally broke the Mustang GT into the 13s. But they could care less about competing with the dead Fbody-- they just realize that S2K and 350Z and other cars are getting dangerously close to out performing them on the drag strip. Not to mention cars like the 2 door Altima and family sedan Maxima, and the Mazda 6 Speed are about to put them to shame. And they do in fact still build a pony car, Not a family sedan, or econo-box.

    So I agree Mustangs aren't currently built to compete with the Fbody - but they were back in the day.

  8. #48
    vroomvroom BLUCAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    19
    00 Z28 & 84ish Mustang

    Quote Originally Posted by jrc1122 View Post
    From my understanding the Mustang GT and the Fbody were fairly close in performance until the LT1 came along. The gap began to grow.. Then the LS1 came and widened the gap significantly.
    I agree with almost everything you've said except that. If you compare an 80's 5.0 to a 350 TPI, yeah, they're kind of close in performance. Most of the 3rd gens you run across aren't 350TPI though, they're 305's, which a 5.0 would beat just about as bad as an LT1 would beat an SN95 5.0. I can't think of any model year in recent history where the Camaro and Mustang where very evenly matched in performance.

  9. #49
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by BLUCAS View Post
    I agree with almost everything you've said except that. If you compare an 80's 5.0 to a 350 TPI, yeah, they're kind of close in performance. Most of the 3rd gens you run across aren't 350TPI though, they're 305's, which a 5.0 would beat just about as bad as an LT1 would beat an SN95 5.0. I can't think of any model year in recent history where the Camaro and Mustang where very evenly matched in performance.
    True there were more 305 TPI's on the road but the 5.7L T/A & IROC-Z's still existed, and they were every bit of a match for a 5.0 Mustang. Both cars were very close in performance despite the F-body being limited to an automatic. Here is just one article that shows proof that the L98's were right there with the competition.

    http://www.gtasourcepage.com/87GTAHPPTest.html

  10. #50
    Internet Police
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    350

    Black
    2003 Mustang Cobra

    Quote Originally Posted by BLUCAS View Post
    I agree with almost everything you've said except that. If you compare an 80's 5.0 to a 350 TPI, yeah, they're kind of close in performance. Most of the 3rd gens you run across aren't 350TPI though, they're 305's, which a 5.0 would beat just about as bad as an LT1 would beat an SN95 5.0. I can't think of any model year in recent history where the Camaro and Mustang where very evenly matched in performance.
    the 96-97 cobra matched up fine vs. the LT1.

    12.718 @ 117.47

  11. #51
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by TrickStang37 View Post
    the 96-97 cobra matched up fine vs. the LT1.
    Ehh...your forgetting the '96-'97 Camaro SS. Cobra couldn't keep up.

  12. #52
    Senior Member jrc1122's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    1,053

    Liquid Red
    2009 Pontiac G8 GT

    I was speaking strictly about GT.

    anyone who knows LS1s or LT1s etc. knows that the SS/ WS6 didn't give an advantage at the drag strip.

    So please don't try to say Mach 1 = SS/ WS6- or Cobra = SS/WS6

    Mach 1 / Cobra = different engine (more valves).

    This dicussion (at least my part of it) is solely about Mustang GTs.

  13. #53
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by jrc1122 View Post

    anyone who knows LS1s or LT1s etc. knows that the SS/ WS6 didn't give an advantage at the drag strip.
    That applied only to the LS1 cars. The LT1 SS and WS6 ram-air systems were much more effective and did show up at the track. The ram-air models were solid 13-second cars with traps around the 101-105 range depending.

  14. #54
    Senior Member jrc1122's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    1,053

    Liquid Red
    2009 Pontiac G8 GT

    Quote Originally Posted by N20LT4 View Post
    That applied only to the LS1 cars. The LT1 SS and WS6 ram-air systems were much more effective and did show up at the track. The ram-air models were solid 13-second cars with traps around the 101-105 range depending.
    cool-- I didn't realize that--

  15. #55
    Bolt-On Pimp ImpalaSSpeed96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ND
    Posts
    360

    Black
    01 Camaro SS

    Yes, sorry fellas, I should clarify. Once the LT1 hit the scene, the competition was over. Until the LT1 came along, the GT did rule the roost.

  16. #56
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by ImpalaSSpeed96 View Post
    Yes, sorry fellas, I should clarify. Once the LT1 hit the scene, the competition was over. Until the LT1 came along, the GT did rule the roost.
    Not to argue with you, but that is not necessarily true. There are road tests of 5.7L TPI F-bodies running just as quick in stock form as the foxbody 5.0's. Just check the link I provided above.

    - Jay

  17. #57
    Ebaaaaaaaaa Speedy_Gonzales's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    11,019

    Black
    2014 Camaro 1LS

    Quote Originally Posted by chris26blaster View Post
    ok now we can tell the truth! I won 4 out of 5 times.
    You had wheel spin one time bad and ran a 15.6 other wise 14.0 and 13.9 and losing. you forgot to mention bad .9 .5 reation times. I may have had a slower car by .4ths. but I have better driving skills, wait what kind of skills does it take to drive an auto!

    signed
    just don't drop the u-joint

    also never said ls1 was better motor!

  18. #58
    Rice Hungry GottaHaveLS1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Connecticut
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,316

    Black
    1999 Trans Am M6

    I wasn't here to see it but i'm pretty damn sure the F body has been more powerful than the mustang GT for every year they were both produced (and for the past six years as well)

  19. #59
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by N20LT4 View Post
    Not to argue with you, but that is not necessarily true. There are road tests of 5.7L TPI F-bodies running just as quick in stock form as the foxbody 5.0's. Just check the link I provided above.

    - Jay
    I can vouch for that,,,,I just recently sold my 88 Iroc L98,,,,was a mint 50,000 mile car.
    I ran this car bone stock and easily ran 14.60's at 94 mph,,,,with an auto and 2.77 gears (ausie 9 bolt.) Stock GT's of the same vintage when they were new ran high 14's as well. I remember like yesterday when these cars first started hitting the streets, I ran a ton of those things.

    I did a couple of simple things to the car,,,,,shorty headers and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator,,,,bumped fuel pressure to 48 lbs. (where it ran the best) and the car ran consistent 13.90's spinning at 99 mph, with crappy 2.1 and 2.2 60 foot times.

    It had more potential,,,but the darn thing was already going faster than my wifes bone stock 97 6 speed LT1 and it took very little to get it there.
    I would have loved to try more rear gear in the car, but someone made me a stupid offer and I let it go,,,,I miss that car.

    Just to add for comparison,,,as I already mentioned it was a tad quicker than my wifes current LT1 6-speed,,,,,It was damn near running with my bone stock 02 SS camaro as well,,,an automatic car with 3.23 gears,,,,and it's best time when stock was only a 13.70 at 102 mph. When you think about it the tuned port L98 cars weren't too far off the pace,,,,at least mine wasn't
    Last edited by Firebirdjones; 05-21-2008 at 06:05 AM.

  20. #60
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I can vouch for that,,,,I just recently sold my 88 Iroc L98,,,,was a mint 50,000 mile car.
    I ran this car bone stock and easily ran 14.60's at 94 mph,,,,with an auto and 2.77 gears (ausie 9 bolt.) Stock GT's of the same vintage when they were new ran high 14's as well. I remember like yesterday when these cars first started hitting the streets, I ran a ton of those things.

    I did a couple of simple things to the car,,,,,shorty headers and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator,,,,bumped fuel pressure to 48 lbs. (where it ran the best) and the car ran consistent 13.90's spinning at 99 mph, with crappy 2.1 and 2.2 60 foot times.

    It had more potential,,,but the darn thing was already going faster than my wifes bone stock 97 6 speed LT1 and it took very little to get it there.
    I would have loved to try more rear gear in the car, but someone made me a stupid offer and I let it go,,,,I miss that car.

    Just to add for comparison,,,as I already mentioned it was a tad quicker than my wifes current LT1 6-speed,,,,,It was damn near running with my bone stock 02 SS camaro as well,,,an automatic car with 3.23 gears,,,,and it's best time when stock was only a 13.70 at 102 mph. When you think about it the tuned port L98 cars weren't too far off the pace,,,,at least mine wasn't
    Agreed. By all means they were definitely capable of keeping up with the 87-92 5.0 Mustangs. I don't know where guys got the idea from that they don't?

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •