When are the Mustang boys going to learn?

**Roastem** · 01-29-2007, 05:40 AM

Hey Angus, that is the trick for making a car really fly. Guys will be quick to shoot down the idea of removing crap we might need out of a car. A/C system is the big one that everybody craps on.

"Oh man, you took off the A/C, what were thinking?"

I was thinking, I never use it, it drains 5 rwhp, and it weighs about 100 lbs. Other than that, its really COOL.

You take about 200 to 300 lbs off a car, and it is like adding a 75 shot of nitrous to it. (guesstimation)

**Angus66** · 01-29-2007, 05:53 AM

Originally Posted by Roastem

C'mon now Angus, 120 mph trap with just bolt-ons? That would indicate you were making at least 400 rwhp with a stock weight Mach1.

Bolt-ons will NEVER put a Mach1 over the 400 rwhp mark.

But, IF you have put that Mach on a serious diet, then I could see it trapping that.

03's that trap around 95-96 through the 1/8 mile are usually putting down 450 rwhp.

Cecil is a track known for producing high MPH, no matter what the make/model car.
My own experiences + those of other drag racers seem to support that fact in general.

FWIW, I ran an 11.46 @ 118.33 MPH about a month later at Atco.

Here's the vid:

Atco 11.46 @ 118.33 MPH

118 MPH is a more realistic indication of the kind of MPH my car can hit at a good track.

My race weight isn't that low yet either - there's still 175 - 250 lbs I could drop if I really wanted to get serious...

**Roastem** · 01-29-2007, 07:07 AM

All you really need is the driver's seat and the steering wheel anyway!

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Roastem

C'mon now Angus, 120 mph trap with just bolt-ons? That would indicate you were making at least 400 rwhp with a stock weight Mach1.

Bolt-ons will NEVER put a Mach1 over the 400 rwhp mark.

But, IF you have put that Mach on a serious diet, then I could see it trapping that.

03's that trap around 95-96 through the 1/8 mile are usually putting down 450 rwhp.

Well if he car is completely gutted with the right gearing and tires. I could see low 11's even if he is only making 330 - 335 hp but also he never said that is what he is making. All Angus did indicate is that is a stock Long block. He could have a crazy set of cams an intake and headers and probably make more than 335 hp also the heads, although stock casting that dont mean that they arent ported/polished (but he did say stock).

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:18 AM

According to Motortrend's Oct '05 issue they tested an '06 Corvette Z06 and ran 11.5 in the 1/4. Now everyone knows and especially Mustang Guys know that MT cant Drive a car for s***. Think back to 2003 - 2004 MT Couldnt get a Cobra to run better than 13 maby really high 12's but MM&FF magazine ran low 12's high 11's without as much as even lowering the tire pressure in the back. So yes (no offence) it is questionalble if Angus has "No Trouble" with new z06's

**Angus66** · 01-29-2007, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by jre99z28

Well if he car is completely gutted with the right gearing and tires. I could see low 11's even if he is only making 330 - 335 hp but also he never said that is what he is making. All Angus did indicate is that is a stock Long block. He could have a crazy set of cams an intake and headers and probably make more than 335 hp also the heads, although stock casting that dont mean that they arent ported/polished (but he did say stock).

My Mach made 335 rwhp & 342 rwtq the last time it was dynoed N/A.

"Stock Long Block" to me means that the engine has never been opened-up for any reason other than to change the oil.

I have stock unported heads, stock cams, stock valves, stock pistons, stock rods, stock crank & stock bore/stroke - my engine has never been apart.

My Mach is also not "completely gutted" or even close to "gutted" - it still retains power windows/locks/tilt/cruise/airbags/carpetting/interior panels/etc.

All of my body panels are also just as they came from Ford - no lightweight hood/trunk/fenders/doors/etc.

Originally Posted by jre99z28

According to Motortrend's Oct '05 issue they tested an '06 Corvette Z06 and ran 11.5 in the 1/4. Now everyone knows and especially Mustang Guys know that MT cant Drive a car for s***. Think back to 2003 - 2004 MT Couldnt get a Cobra to run better than 13 maby really high 12's but MM&FF magazine ran low 12's high 11's without as much as even lowering the tire pressure in the back. So yes (no offence) it is questionalble if Angus has "No Trouble" with new z06's

The absolute quickest stock C6 ZO6 (on stock tires) that I'm aware of went 11.2 in great air with one of the best drivers in the country. I personally have yet to encounter a C6 ZO6 that ran close to that ET.

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Angus66

My Mach made 335 rwhp & 342 rwtq the last time it was dynoed N/A.

"Stock Long Block" to me means that the engine has never been opened-up for any reason other than to change the oil.

I have stock unported heads, stock cams, stock valves, stock pistons, stock rods, stock crank & stock bore/stroke - my engine has never been apart.

My Mach is also not "completely gutted" or even close to "gutted" - it still retains power windows/locks/tilt/cruise/airbags/carpetting/interior panels/etc.

All of my body panels are also just as they came from Ford - no lightweight hood/trunk/fenders/doors/etc.

HMMM, Interesting...
Check this site out. Dynoperformance.com. Of nineteen 2003 to 2004 Mach 1's tested only one broke the 300hp mark and that was an '04 with 8lbs of boost. He made 384 HP and 375 lb/ft. The next closest one was an '03 that only made 291 HP and 317 lb/ft. You can see more info on these dyno runs by clicking on the "View" button on the right. I am going to assume that all of these motors are "stock long block" considering the numbers. What are you hiding from everyone Angus, you may as well go ahead and tell everyone because not many people are believing you. The only thing that is left is headers (didnt see anyone on that site with headers) and headers usually don't make up 50 some odd HP. I dont doubt your 1/4 mile time b/c like I said before the right gears and tires can do wonders.

**fox1x** · 01-29-2007, 07:17 PM

Here's the vid:

Atco 11.46 @ 118.33 MPH

That was a pretty impressive run. Just curious, what is your exhaust set-up, I thought that sounded pretty mean.

HMMM, Interesting...
Check this site out. Dynoperformance.com. Of nineteen 2003 to 2004 Mach 1's tested only one broke the 300hp mark and that was an '04 with 8lbs of boost. He made 384 HP and 375 lb/ft. The next closest one was an '03 that only made 291 HP and 317 lb/ft. You can see more info on these dyno runs by clicking on the "View" button on the right. I am going to assume that all of these motors are "stock long block" considering the numbers. What are you hiding from everyone Angus, you may as well go ahead and tell everyone because not many people are believing you. The only thing that is left is headers (didnt see anyone on that site with headers) and headers usually don't make up 50 some odd HP. I dont doubt your 1/4 mile time b/c like I said before the right gears and tires can do wonders.

Watch the vid, I think you're forgetting a great mod not mentioned, the DRIVER MOD. The guy obviously knows how to drive a car. Also, that site you posted in all fairness does not encompass EVERY Mach built. That's 19 Mach's out of how many thousands? That link is irrelevant. Just my .02

**whiteghoztt** · 01-29-2007, 07:41 PM

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by fox1x

That link is irrelevant. Just my .02

Your entitled to your opinion too. Since they cant run every car and post data on them all then I will go with the 94.7% of those 19 cars that were naturally asperated with only bolt-ons didnt even make 300 hp.

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by fox1x

Watch the vid, I think you're forgetting a great mod not mentioned, the DRIVER MOD. The guy obviously knows how to drive a car.

I have 302 RWHP and is stock weight and I dont know what it would run in the 1/4 but I know it would not run better than low 13's and John Force couldnt make the car that much faster just because he is a good driver. a couple 10th's maby (which is an eternity in racing) But yall are talking more than a second.

**Angus66** · 01-29-2007, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by jre99z28

HMMM, Interesting...
Check this site out. Dynoperformance.com. Of nineteen 2003 to 2004 Mach 1's tested only one broke the 300hp mark and that was an '04 with 8lbs of boost. He made 384 HP and 375 lb/ft. The next closest one was an '03 that only made 291 HP and 317 lb/ft. You can see more info on these dyno runs by clicking on the "View" button on the right. I am going to assume that all of these motors are "stock long block" considering the numbers. What are you hiding from everyone Angus, you may as well go ahead and tell everyone because not many people are believing you. The only thing that is left is headers (didnt see anyone on that site with headers) and headers usually don't make up 50 some odd HP. I dont doubt your 1/4 mile time b/c like I said before the right gears and tires can do wonders.

I wouldn't exactly call 19 dyno tests (out of 16834 Mach's produced between '03 & '04) a representative sample - that's only .1% of the Machs produced and it's only at one dyno shop in California (a state known for marginal-quality gasoline & you can only get 91 octane).

Here's my dyno graph from my Mach when it was 100% stock (paper air filter/stock exhaust/stock tune/etc):

(The lower line was my 2001 Cobra for comparison)

Just for fun, I dynoed it again after adding a drop-in K&N air filter and Mobil 1 oil:

After adding a cold-air kit, complete exhaust and a dyno tune, rwhp was up to 327.
I then added a ported intake manifold & hit 334.5 rwhp:

I'll also add that the last dyno run was made with 4.30 gears in the rear.

More aggessive gears can & do rob about 5 - 7 rwhp compared to more "Mileage-Friendly" 3.27's or 3.55's.

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by jre99z28

HMMM, Interesting...
Check this site out. Dynoperformance.com. Of nineteen 2003 to 2004 Mach 1's tested only one broke the 300hp mark and that was an '04 with 8lbs of boost. He made 384 HP and 375 lb/ft. The next closest one was an '03 that only made 291 HP and 317 lb/ft. You can see more info on these dyno runs by clicking on the "View" button on the right. I am going to assume that all of these motors are "stock long block" considering the numbers. What are you hiding from everyone Angus, you may as well go ahead and tell everyone because not many people are believing you. The only thing that is left is headers (didnt see anyone on that site with headers) and headers usually don't make up 50 some odd HP. I dont doubt your 1/4 mile time b/c like I said before the right gears and tires can do wonders.

Angus read the post again. I never said that you couldnt be making 335. But I did say I doubt that you make 335 with a completely stock motor.

**fox1x** · 01-29-2007, 08:13 PM

Your entitled to your opinion too

With all due respect, I don't think it's much of an opinion I stated there. As such goes, you cannot possibly believe that even a small testing portion (like you offered) is in any way relevant to a general population sample.

And I definitly see your point. A famous quote I like is "Believe nothing of what you hear, and half of what you see." (Ben Franklin or Mark Twain, I can never remember which.) Anyhow, I used to be a Chevy fan, then I drifted to Ford for awhile, now I've drifted back to where I can honestly say I love a good fast Chevy or Ford; I just don't care. (* Oh yeah, Dodge sucks*) Hey, if the guy says he drives an 11 second Mach, has a video, and doesn't seem like a major ass in his posts; why give him shit?

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:15 PM

OK, The truth finally comes out... Ported intake manifold. I thought you said...

Originally Posted by Angus66

"Stock Long Block" to me means that the engine has never been opened-up for any reason other than to change the oil.

I have stock unported heads, stock cams, stock valves, stock pistons, stock rods, stock crank & stock bore/stroke - my engine has never been apart.

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by fox1x

With all due respect, I don't think it's much of an opinion I stated there. As such goes, you cannot possibly believe that even a small testing portion (like you offered) is in any way relevant to a general population sample.

Well I am gonna have to take a dump here in a little while, so I will get the other 16815 dyno results to you when I am done...

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:23 PM

Fox1x read this post again please... I never questioned his 1/4

Originally Posted by jre99z28

HMMM, Interesting...
Check this site out. Dynoperformance.com. Of nineteen 2003 to 2004 Mach 1's tested only one broke the 300hp mark and that was an '04 with 8lbs of boost. He made 384 HP and 375 lb/ft. The next closest one was an '03 that only made 291 HP and 317 lb/ft. You can see more info on these dyno runs by clicking on the "View" button on the right. I am going to assume that all of these motors are "stock long block" considering the numbers. What are you hiding from everyone Angus, you may as well go ahead and tell everyone because not many people are believing you. The only thing that is left is headers (didnt see anyone on that site with headers) and headers usually don't make up 50 some odd HP. I dont doubt your 1/4 mile time b/c like I said before the right gears and tires can do wonders.

**fox1x** · 01-29-2007, 08:28 PM

Well I am gonna have to take a dump here in a little while, so I will get the other 16815 dyno results to you when I am done...

Actually, I expected that response from you. I in no way ever resorted to an aggressive adversarial response to you. Where's the logic in any of your responses to my posts? It does seem however you have a well developed sense of sarcasm. Well, since most of your reply's have, in essence, been masked contradictions with no basis, I'll leave it at this.

**jre99z28** · 01-29-2007, 08:30 PM

...OK

**fox1x** · 01-29-2007, 08:33 PM

Fox1x read this post again please... I never questioned his 1/4

Fair to say; .. but that wasn't my primary goal in writing that post. And I never directly said you doubted his 1/4. My goal in that statment was to address the irrelevance of the 19 Machs dynoed.