All This Mach 1 Talk...

[shady milkman]

I disagree.

5-speed 03-04 Mach 1 vs 6-speed 98-02 LS1 is a drivers race, those 32v 4.6's are stout...they respond to mods as well as the LS1 also.

i agree besides the responding well to mods as the ls1...it is proven that the 4.6 32Vs hit a wall without FI ..a bolt on mach1 will not be able to hold a candle to a bolt on ls1.

[TRMach1]

i agree besides the responding well to mods as the ls1...it is proven that the 4.6 32Vs hit a wall without FI ..a bolt on mach1 will not be able to hold a candle to a bolt on ls1.

You need to be real careful making generalized statements like this one, or else define what you mean by "bolt ons." Because all it takes is somebody with enough money, and the urge to spend it, to prove you wrong.

The "wall" you speak of is really more monetary, than mechanical. It's less expensive, and therefore easier, to go the FI route with these motors than it is to try to acheive the same results on all motor.

Were you aware that Roush-Yates Racing developed an 850hp naturally aspirated 4.6L 4V modular motor for Nascar Sprint Cup racing? It wasn't approved, but someone with enough money could buy the developed technology and apply it to their street car. I'm sure it just involves air/fuel delivery, heads, cams, and exhaust components, and they're all "bolt-ons."

[Zinergy]

You need to be real careful making generalized statements like this one, or else define what you mean by "bolt ons." Because all it takes is somebody with enough money, and the urge to spend it, to prove you wrong.

The "wall" you speak of is really more monetary, than mechanical. It's less expensive, and therefore easier, to go the FI route with these motors than it is to try to acheive the same results on all motor.

Were you aware that Roush-Yates Racing developed an 850hp naturally aspirated 4.6L 4V modular motor for Nascar Sprint Cup racing? It wasn't approved, but someone with enough money could buy the developed technology and apply it to their street car. I'm sure it just involves air/fuel delivery, heads, cams, and exhaust components, and they're all "bolt-ons."

Listen we all know what a streetable N/A 4.6 4 valve can do, and its 380-390whp. There is no repalcement for displacement, your runnign what 10-15psi to make 527whp? A 6.6 stroker with 5psi makes a little more than that.

[koda.Z28]

Listen we all know what a streetable N/A 4.6 4 valve can do, and its 380-390whp. There is no repalcement for displacement, your runnign what 10-15psi to make 527whp? A 6.6 stroker with 5psi makes a little more than that.

I think everyone understands that there is no replacement for displacement, but that stock for stock, Mach 1's are as every bit as fast as the Ls1's.

[Zinergy]

I think everyone understands that there is no replacement for displacement, but that stock for stock, Mach 1's are as every bit as fast as the Ls1's.

Yes stock for stock i never said anything different. Ls1s usually trap higher because they do have more power and even a bolt on mach 1 is only a 300-310whp car on the local dyno that stock ls1s dyno 300-310whp on. The mach 1 is geared better with the combo of the 3.55 gears and the way the tranny gearing is which mostly makes up for the pwoer in 1/4mile times but trap number show power and the ls1 f-body will usually out trap a mach.

Stock for stock they are close, but once modding comes into play the mach 1 is lacking. Mod motors are more expensive to mod and get lesser results.

[BLKCLOUD]

First, let me state that I believe the LS1 to be a superior performance motor to the n/a 4.6 4V. Second, GM's A4 is a FAR superior performance transmission than Ford's unit (though reliability under decent power is another issue). With that said....and because "bolt-on" performance was mentione above....

What is the quickest bolt-on M6 LS1 F-body? "Bolt-on" defined as external modifications only (nothing allowed that touches oil), and NO power adders. Gears, headers, weight loss, sticky tires, etc are all generally considered "bolt-on".

We'll compare that to the quickest "bolt-on" M5 4.6 4V Mustangs (96-04).

[MrMasterCraft]

I beleive different. I agree with you, Cloud, as bolt-ons being defined as nothing that touches oil. However, I disagree however with no power adders. I guess what I'm saying is, I'm a guy that likes to see what he can get out of a factory longblock without removing the valve covers. That's "bolt-ons" to me. Bolt-on supercharger, bolt-on turbo, ya know

But like you said, it would be interesting to see what facts and sources anyone can come up with to compare the two. Also, price in parts alone would be nice as well, so we can compare it all. I, myself, am a little intrigued by this....

[koda.Z28]

I beleive different. I agree with you, Cloud, as bolt-ons being defined as nothing that touches oil. However, I disagree however with no power adders. I guess what I'm saying is, I'm a guy that likes to see what he can get out of a factory longblock without removing the valve covers. That's "bolt-ons" to me. Bolt-on supercharger, bolt-on turbo, ya know

But like you said, it would be interesting to see what facts and sources anyone can come up with to compare the two. Also, price in parts alone would be nice as well, so we can compare it all. I, myself, am a little intrigued by this....

bolt on a bottle of NOS while your at it

[big hammer]

I think everyone understands that there is no replacement for displacement, but that stock for stock, Mach 1's are as every bit as fast as the Ls1's.

of course they are that's why there were bone stock mach1's running high 12's @ 109 mph. oh wait there wasnt. maybe that means a mach1 isn't quite as fast as an ls1. uh-oh the internet is gonna be pissed!

[big hammer]

First, let me state that I believe the LS1 to be a superior performance motor to the n/a 4.6 4V. Second, GM's A4 is a FAR superior performance transmission than Ford's unit (though reliability under decent power is another issue). With that said....and because "bolt-on" performance was mentione above....

What is the quickest bolt-on M6 LS1 F-body? "Bolt-on" defined as external modifications only (nothing allowed that touches oil), and NO power adders. Gears, headers, weight loss, sticky tires, etc are all generally considered "bolt-on".

We'll compare that to the quickest "bolt-on" M5 4.6 4V Mustangs (96-04).

i believe there were several guys in the 10's with "bolt on" fbodys

[Badass WS6]

Let me just point out this thread was in no way intended to be the starting point for an LS1 vs Mach 1 internet war.

I just thought I would share a recent "kill" I had in the "kill stories" section of "LS1.com". It just so happens that, that night, the car I raced and beat happened to be a Mach 1. Yes, I'm posotive their are Mach 1's out there that are faster than my car, I'm not denying that. Hell, I'm sure 3/4 of the cars that you people own on this site are faster than my LS1 and I don't care. That's just fine with me, I'm happy with my car. It gets me from point A to point B relatively quick and does so being a nice looking Camaro.

Although, if I had more money to throw away, IE, on my car, I would probally be happier!

[shady milkman]

anytime 4.6s are talked about in this forum..this happens so dont worry about it

[BLKCLOUD]

Yes it does.

Nobody gonna go look that up?

And hammer....you are correct - but everyone of them is a stab-n-steer car. Ford's A4 totally sucked for performance, so I conceded that, and left it to manuals for a more relevant and even comparison.

Anybody? Maybe my new bestest buddy (ooblacktransamii2) can set us all straight?

[dragonchick]

i had a little encounter with a mach 1, i'm guessing 2003 model. we both were headed to the bristol dragstrip for the thursday night street fights. we got stopped at a red light so we figured we'd have a little fun b4 the track, light turns green, i'm gone, and he's in my rearview mirror. so me thinks the mach 1's are a little slow, unless he was just a sucky driver, lol

[MrMasterCraft]

of course they are that's why there were bone stock mach1's running high 12's @ 109 mph. oh wait there wasnt. maybe that means a mach1 isn't quite as fast as an ls1. uh-oh the internet is gonna be pissed!

Revvin' Evan Smith (MM&FF) got a red LS1 6 speed camaro to go 12.97 on a hot humid summer day at Englishtown. I beleive the best time he was able to get out of the 01 Cobra was a 13.2x. So a gear swap w/ stickies and a good driver won't get the equally equipped mach 1 into the 12s? After-all, you're not changing spark, air, or fuel delivery on the engine to gain HP, so it's still "stock"

On another note, in my previous 6 speed I ran a white Mach1 w/ exhaust, and a 150 shot along with a few other bolt-ons (or so he claimed along with gear). I ran him twice down I-95. I only had mac mid-lengths, LM, and a Lid. We ran from a 25mph roll all the way up to 90, and I had about 4 cars on him. I knew something went wrong, and he said he missed 3rd. So we take the next exit and loop around to come back down I-95 in the opposite direction. So I figured ok, it's my time to take it like a man. We ran from a dead stop (his call but I knew he'd blow the tires off of it, and he said he was going to spray this time, when he hits 2nd). So he honks, we're off, I get good traction, and by the time I hit 2nd, there's probably 1/2 car between us. I hit 3rd and I'm SLIGHTLY edging him more and more, and then he stops my pull with about a car between us. As soon as I hit 4th, he starts creeping back up on me. We're doing about 110-115 before we shut it down and he was on my bumper. In the end, he claims I'm hiding a bottle and I've got more done to the ole' LS1.

All I'm saying about this, is the driver can make all the difference in the world between two closely matched cars, and the Mach 1 is not far from the 12s. A mach 1 on the juice w/ gear and bolt-ons vs. a hardly touched LS1, and the LS1 takes it to the Ford?? Doesn't happen unless the guy in the Mach just can't drive. Goes both ways!

[BLKCLOUD]

Still nobody taking me up on my question....wonder why?

Revvin' Evan Smith (MM&FF) got a red LS1 6 speed camaro to go 12.97 on a hot humid summer day at Englishtown.

Correct. And he ran a 12.8 with a 98 Z28 - though in much better air.

I beleive the best time he was able to get out of the 01 Cobra was a 13.2x.

Honestly, I don't remember him getting anywhere near that.

So a gear swap w/ stickies and a good driver won't get the equally equipped mach 1 into the 12s? After-all, you're not changing spark, air, or fuel delivery on the engine to gain HP, so it's still "stock"

Mach 1's are somewhat quicker than 01 Cobras, all things being equal. They make about the same power, but the Mach (with better heads and different cams) has a broader power band, is a bit lighter, has better gearing, and does not have to deal with the IRS.

...All I'm saying about this, is the driver can make all the difference in the world between two closely matched cars...

True words.

[MrMasterCraft]

I could've swore it was a 13.2, but if it wasn't, it couldn't have been far off. It was a yellow one that they did the article on, and a red SS that they had as the mule from chevy. I'll have to dig for the magazine, I've got it lying around somewhere.

Machs have 3.55s and the cobras have the 3.27s right?

[BLKCLOUD]

Nah, both came from the factory with 3.55s.

[TRMach1]

Nah, both came from the factory with 3.55s.

Bob, I think he was refering to the '01 Cobras having 3.27 gears, which would be true.

[BLKCLOUD]

Oh, yes then - both 99 & 01 Cobras had 3.27s.