Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 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 N20LT4 Agreed. By all means they were definitely capable of keeping up with the 87-92 5.0 Mustangs. ...

  1. #61
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by N20LT4 View Post
    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?
    i think it was because they were fairly rare, and alot of 5.0 boys never even got the chance to run one. the vast majority of 3rd gens out there are 305's, which suck.

  2. #62
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    i think it was because they were fairly rare, and alot of 5.0 boys never even got the chance to run one. the vast majority of 3rd gens out there are 305's, which suck.
    Yeah, the 305 cars were cheaper + made up about 75% of the production.

  3. #63
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by N20LT4 View Post
    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?
    Me neither. Not sure where the rumors started or how they got such a reputation,,,guess you had to be there to experience first hand. Most of the people here are too young to even remember that stuff when it was new. Comparing how one may run today as apposed to how they ran when new is not apples to oranges anyway,,,,unless you find an unmolested low mileage example like I had But those 3rd gens are extremely hard to find in that condition if not impossible now. Shucks even the 4th gens are becoming hard to find unmolested.

    For mine to run damn near what my stock LS1 runs,,,and doing very little to it to get it there,,,,says something about the potential of those cars. Give credit where credit is due,,,,if it weren't for those cars the 4th gens wouldn't be here...

  4. #64
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hopkinsville
    Posts
    14

    Yup...I drive a stang....

    Since I have gotten used to the smaller displacement of my car...I can provide you guys with a few times with a near stock car (I do have the off-road x pipe and a 93 octane tune) but other than that...it is a heavy stock Mustang GT (weight is 3720 lbs with me sitting in it). As proof, I do have a link.
    http://www.dragtimes.com/Ford-Mustan...lip-14974.html

    The last few runs are
    R/T 60ft 330ft 1/8 MPH 1000ft 1/4 MPH
    .095 2.069 5.683 8.695 82.39 11.277 13.457 103.63
    .290 2.026 5.664 8.658 82.47 11.240 13.420 103.77
    .091 2.086 5.742 8.738 82.49 11.317 13.496 103.75
    .106 2.064 5.697 8.683 82.52 11.252 13.421 104.04
    .331 2.037 5.697 8.693 82.51 11.271 13.447 103.89

    All are at Beech Bend raceway in Kentucky.

    Track conditions play an important part in your times as evidence in the following times at Union Hill raceway in Tennessee.


    R/t 60 ft 330ft 594ft 1/8 MPH

    .3320 1.9652 5.6342 8.1108 8.6630 81.50
    .4849 1.9582 5.5102 7.9899 8.5439 81.23

    The driver, conditions (weather and track) all play an important part in the outcome of a race.

  5. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    somewhere over the pond
    Posts
    148

    black / black
    '91 Z28 / '10 SS

    Quote Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
    i think it was because they were fairly rare, and alot of 5.0 boys never even got the chance to run one. the vast majority of 3rd gens out there are 305's, which suck.
    I assume you mean the 305 TBI. As far as I can remember reading articles the 305 TPI with the G80/G92 options wasn't that far away from the 350 TPI's

  6. #66
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by swisscheese View Post
    I assume you mean the 305 TBI. As far as I can remember reading articles the 305 TPI with the G80/G92 options wasn't that far away from the 350 TPI's
    That very well could be....those options you mention give the car the optional 3.23 or 3.27 gears if memory serves (depending on rearend manufacture,,,gm verses aussie)
    305 TPI's with the gears weren't bad performers back in the day, and the 5 speed was available with the 305 as well. A friend of mine bought the 305 TPI new in 1986 and loaded it with everything, that car cracked the high 14's back then, not bad for a little motor. It was spunky on the street and would give some GT's fits.

    Keeping in mind the TPI setup was originally designed for the 305 ci engine anyway, and they ran exceptionally well with it. When the 350's came out later on,,,,rather than redesign the TPI setup for a larger motor, it was cheaper for GM to just slap the TPI on the 350 as is,,,,,as a result the runner size was a little small etc....but it worked well enough for the time.

  7. #67
    Member 2-bowties&abird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lancaster,va.
    Age
    38
    Posts
    505

    cam/lt headers
    blue 2000 ws6 m6

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    That very well could be....those options you mention give the car the optional 3.23 or 3.27 gears if memory serves (depending on rearend manufacture,,,gm verses aussie)
    305 TPI's with the gears weren't bad performers back in the day, and the 5 speed was available with the 305 as well. A friend of mine bought the 305 TPI new in 1986 and loaded it with everything, that car cracked the high 14's back then, not bad for a little motor. It was spunky on the street and would give some GT's fits.

    Keeping in mind the TPI setup was originally designed for the 305 ci engine anyway, and they ran exceptionally well with it. When the 350's came out later on,,,,rather than redesign the TPI setup for a larger motor, it was cheaper for GM to just slap the TPI on the 350 as is,,,,,as a result the runner size was a little small etc....but it worked well enough for the time.
    yeah i just sold mine in jan. this year '87 iroc-z 88,000 documented miles, 305 tpi, unmolested, i have to say it was a quick little car for a 305, just not a good platform to build off of.

  8. #68
    Knight of Chaos xzaero0's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Age
    37
    Posts
    468

    Black
    2000 Trans Am

    I had an 88 Formula WS6 with the 305 TPI and 700r4 (stock). Low end torque was killer in it. It was amazing squeeling the tires and leaving black marks from burnouts. Also it embarassed quite a few 350s carbed and TBI camaros and firebirds.

  9. #69
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by 2-bowties&abird View Post
    yeah i just sold mine in jan. this year '87 iroc-z 88,000 documented miles, 305 tpi, unmolested, i have to say it was a quick little car for a 305, just not a good platform to build off of.
    I don't understand the platform comment. They are literally the same chassis design as a 4th gen, they are all good platforms to start with.

    There are a ton of 3rd gens turned into race cars at the track,,,,not only are they good platforms,,,but they are cheap to buy,,,,which makes them even more tempting to racers.

  10. #70
    Member 2-bowties&abird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lancaster,va.
    Age
    38
    Posts
    505

    cam/lt headers
    blue 2000 ws6 m6

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I don't understand the platform comment. They are literally the same chassis design as a 4th gen, they are all good platforms to start with.

    There are a ton of 3rd gens turned into race cars at the track,,,,not only are they good platforms,,,but they are cheap to buy,,,,which makes them even more tempting to racers.
    well what i meant was mainly a 305 is not a good motor to mod, along with all other things i would have had to do such as tranny, rear, sub frame connectors etc. by the time i would have done all that to that iroc i would have probably spent just as much as i have invested in my ws6, not to mention there was absolutely nothing wrong with the 305 and would have been a shame to pull that motor taking away from the originality of the car.

    now it may have been a different story if it was a POS with 150,000+ miles on it. it was just in to good of shape to go hacking on. not to say i'm hacking on my ws6, but you really dont have to do a whole lot to an ls1 to make it alot faster such as pulling motors.

  11. #71
    Member 2-bowties&abird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lancaster,va.
    Age
    38
    Posts
    505

    cam/lt headers
    blue 2000 ws6 m6



  12. #72
    Senior Member slims00ls1z28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    1,212

    2005 GTO M6 Black
    2000 Z28 A4 Red

    Those times are definately off but anyone who has ever raced at Memphis motorsports park will tell ya humidity kills times down here, and unless there was a major race beforehand track prep sucks. Hell I dyno'd the GTO a couple weeks ago and the humity reading then was 56%. Today I know it is much higher so if anyone ran there tonight the times would probably be several tenths off of what it should be.

    As far as the new stangs go I have seen one run 13.5 at like 98/99ish for a 5 speed but it was on a night with decent air. I still couldn't hook that night and ran a 13.3 @ 107 with an Air compressor in the well for traction still only managed a 2.10 60'. High 13's, low 14's for stock(ish)LS1's in Memphis is fairly common except after major races and decent air quality.

  13. #73
    Knight of Chaos Rhinoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Age
    35
    Posts
    52

    Metallic Black
    2006 Pontiac GTO

    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
    Aint that the truth brother.

  14. #74
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by 2-bowties&abird View Post
    well what i meant was mainly a 305 is not a good motor to mod, along with all other things i would have had to do such as tranny, rear, sub frame connectors etc. by the time i would have done all that to that iroc i would have probably spent just as much as i have invested in my ws6, not to mention there was absolutely nothing wrong with the 305 and would have been a shame to pull that motor taking away from the originality of the car.

    now it may have been a different story if it was a POS with 150,000+ miles on it. it was just in to good of shape to go hacking on. not to say i'm hacking on my ws6, but you really dont have to do a whole lot to an ls1 to make it alot faster such as pulling motors.

    I understand completely. My Iroc was an L-98 car (350 TPI) and was very low miles, unrestored much like you described. Only 50,000 miles when I sold the car last year. I did a couple of very simple bolt on's (shorty headers and fuel pressure regulator) and had the car running 13.90's at 99 mph on street rubber, with 2.77 gears I was reluctant to do much more with the car for reasons you described, car was just too nice to hack on.

    But I agree, there are ton of them cheap with well over 100,000 miles,,,,great for race car projects. Thats my line of thinking which is why I got a little lost with the comment you made

  15. #75
    Member 2-bowties&abird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lancaster,va.
    Age
    38
    Posts
    505

    cam/lt headers
    blue 2000 ws6 m6

    a guy i work with said his neighbor just bought one for his wife for their anniversary. he said it was some kind of limited edition that he paid 100,000 for and it had 400hp and that i might have a little competition. i told him the sad thing was he paid all that money for that mustang and thats about all i might have "a little competition". i also mentioned like gottahave said that it's pathetic that it has taken 10 years for ford to almost catch up to the f-body, and what did he think would happen next year when the new camaro hits the street. it makes me sick when people say "i dont know you think you can keep up with one of those new mustang gt's"

  16. #76
    Senior Member big hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    manitoba, canada
    Posts
    1,731

    silver
    2002 ws6

    Quote Originally Posted by 2-bowties&abird View Post
    a guy i work with said his neighbor just bought one for his wife for their anniversary. he said it was some kind of limited edition that he paid 100,000 for and it had 400hp and that i might have a little competition. i told him the sad thing was he paid all that money for that mustang and thats about all i might have "a little competition". i also mentioned like gottahave said that it's pathetic that it has taken 10 years for ford to almost catch up to the f-body, and what did he think would happen next year when the new camaro hits the street. it makes me sick when people say "i dont know you think you can keep up with one of those new mustang gt's"
    lol!

  17. #77
    Member squee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Baton Rouge
    Age
    27
    Posts
    952

    Navy Blue Metallic
    2000 SS M6

    Mustangs aint shit. When you compare apples and apples, the Camaro always has and always will come out on top. People compare the Cobra to a T/A or SS. What the hell?!? Isn't really fair to compare a FI car that doesn't even have a equal competitor to a NA car. Sad thing is it can at least hold its own against a Cobra...A fair comparison would be a GT and a SS or Z28 even, in which the Mustang would get RAPED no matter what. I'm sure had GM had a FI car the Cobra wouldn't even be competition.

  18. #78
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Hopkinsville
    Posts
    14
    Everyone has their opinion...but, last Saturday night at Beech Bend, I raced a 1999 Z-28 with after market headers and 4:10 gears with my Roush Stage 1 with just off-road X pipes and a 93 octane tune and I ran a 13.49 with 3.55 gears and he couldn't get his below a 14.0. Both cars ran street tires and both cars were running slow in 94 degree temps, very high humidity (90 something percent) and the barometer pressure was at 30.14 inches. That killed both our times. They had 6 Corvettes (1 Z06) running that night and the regular Corvettes were in the 13.98-14.21's. The Z06 ran a 13.1 late in the evening. But for a small N/A engine (281 cubic inches) I think the Mustang GT is a stout (although heavy (mine weighs 3720 lbs with me sitting in it and a 1/2 tank of gas)) car and very good at embarrassing Z-28's and SS's. The 03-04 Terminator Cobra was designed to equal (not exceed) the performance of the stock 'vette and did so very well. Ford doesn't try to compete with the F-bodies. They never did. They never had to. Mustangs keep outselling all the F-bodies and Corvettes put together. Car makers are in the buisness of making money, competition is a sideline to sales. But while the Z-28 guy and I were talking, we watched a Shelby GT-500 run a 12.1. Now I'm sure he swapped pullies on the blower (about a 10 minute change including a retune) but what would you have to do to an F-body to run that kind of a time? I am not knocking the F-bodies. They are fantastic cars. I'd love to have one. But as of right now...their are no new ones to be had. I wanted a new car that I could build upon and their was only one choice. The new Camaro is going to be alot heavier (current est. is about 3800-3900 lbs (but we will wait and see)). That is alot more weight than you guys have now. Although it is lighter than the new Challenger at 4100 + lbs (I used to own 2 of them. A 1970 and a 1973). So say what you want about the Mustangs...I think Ford did them right for a change.

  19. #79
    LTX N20LT4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    2,006
    10's N/A

    Quote Originally Posted by RedRoushOne View Post
    Everyone has their opinion...but, last Saturday night at Beech Bend, I raced a 1999 Z-28 with after market headers and 4:10 gears with my Roush Stage 1 with just off-road X pipes and a 93 octane tune and I ran a 13.49 with 3.55 gears and he couldn't get his below a 14.0. Both cars ran street tires and both cars were running slow in 94 degree temps, very high humidity (90 something percent) and the barometer pressure was at 30.14 inches. That killed both our times. They had 6 Corvettes (1 Z06) running that night and the regular Corvettes were in the 13.98-14.21's. The Z06 ran a 13.1 late in the evening. But for a small N/A engine (281 cubic inches) I think the Mustang GT is a stout (although heavy (mine weighs 3720 lbs with me sitting in it and a 1/2 tank of gas)) car and very good at embarrassing Z-28's and SS's. The 03-04 Terminator Cobra was designed to equal (not exceed) the performance of the stock 'vette and did so very well. Ford doesn't try to compete with the F-bodies. They never did. They never had to. Mustangs keep outselling all the F-bodies and Corvettes put together. Car makers are in the buisness of making money, competition is a sideline to sales. But while the Z-28 guy and I were talking, we watched a Shelby GT-500 run a 12.1. Now I'm sure he swapped pullies on the blower (about a 10 minute change including a retune) but what would you have to do to an F-body to run that kind of a time? I am not knocking the F-bodies. They are fantastic cars. I'd love to have one. But as of right now...their are no new ones to be had. I wanted a new car that I could build upon and their was only one choice. The new Camaro is going to be alot heavier (current est. is about 3800-3900 lbs (but we will wait and see)). That is alot more weight than you guys have now. Although it is lighter than the new Challenger at 4100 + lbs (I used to own 2 of them. A 1970 and a 1973). So say what you want about the Mustangs...I think Ford did them right for a change.
    I don't know if I would call the 281 4-valve "stout", and I definitely wouldn't call it good at embarrassing the Z28 and SS. That's just flat out sh*t shooting out of your mouth. Nowhere near stout, considering the fact that a built N/A 4.6 cost a hideous amount of money to build a potent bottom-end/heads+cams setup and it will never come close to what a N/A LSx is capable of. In N/A form a 4.6L is pretty much garbage. A stock S197 GT does not put out the power nor torque of an LS1 F-bod, and is NOT identical in quarter-mile times. A stock LS1 car embarrasing a bolt-on GT is a more realistic scenario. The only way a GT is going to embarrass an LS1 is if it's got mods, period. Stock for stock, there not even close. Come on now, even you know that much.

    As far as the Cobra equalling the Corvette, be more specific and say "base" Corvette, because it wasn't touching the Z06 - so get that right.

    An what does it take to run 12.1 in an F-body? Are you kidding me? That's not sh*t. My old '93 LT1 wen't 12.2@109 w/ full bolt-ons and weight reduction w/ 106,xxx on the original bottom-end. And that's an LT1. I've seen bolt-on LS1 cars in the 11's. We don't need no freakin' supercharger. You've got "cam-only" LS1's running low 10's. Us enthusiasts are referring to performance, not sales. We as the buyers benifit nothing from what revenue Ford or GM makes upon vehicle sales. Were the ones putting money in their pocket, so I never understood why someone would wan't to ride the nuts of these corporate buisnesses and preach about how much money they make - when they're not seeing a dime. Do your homework next time before posting some garbage like that. Thank you.

  20. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    rochester,ny
    Age
    39
    Posts
    2,667

    pewter
    2001 z28 lingenfelter 383

    Quote Originally Posted by RedRoushOne View Post
    Everyone has their opinion...but, last Saturday night at Beech Bend, I raced a 1999 Z-28 with after market headers and 4:10 gears with my Roush Stage 1 with just off-road X pipes and a 93 octane tune and I ran a 13.49 with 3.55 gears and he couldn't get his below a 14.0. Both cars ran street tires and both cars were running slow in 94 degree temps, very high humidity (90 something percent) and the barometer pressure was at 30.14 inches. That killed both our times. They had 6 Corvettes (1 Z06) running that night and the regular Corvettes were in the 13.98-14.21's. The Z06 ran a 13.1 late in the evening. But for a small N/A engine (281 cubic inches) I think the Mustang GT is a stout (although heavy (mine weighs 3720 lbs with me sitting in it and a 1/2 tank of gas)) car and very good at embarrassing Z-28's and SS's. The 03-04 Terminator Cobra was designed to equal (not exceed) the performance of the stock 'vette and did so very well. Ford doesn't try to compete with the F-bodies. They never did. They never had to. Mustangs keep outselling all the F-bodies and Corvettes put together. Car makers are in the buisness of making money, competition is a sideline to sales. But while the Z-28 guy and I were talking, we watched a Shelby GT-500 run a 12.1. Now I'm sure he swapped pullies on the blower (about a 10 minute change including a retune) but what would you have to do to an F-body to run that kind of a time? I am not knocking the F-bodies. They are fantastic cars. I'd love to have one. But as of right now...their are no new ones to be had. I wanted a new car that I could build upon and their was only one choice. The new Camaro is going to be alot heavier (current est. is about 3800-3900 lbs (but we will wait and see)). That is alot more weight than you guys have now. Although it is lighter than the new Challenger at 4100 + lbs (I used to own 2 of them. A 1970 and a 1973). So say what you want about the Mustangs...I think Ford did them right for a change.

    i wouldnt even waste my gas racing u........just another rustang troll making shit up
    Last edited by tonyjnjz; 06-14-2008 at 01:10 AM.

Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst 12345678 ... 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
  •