my 02ssvs04 cobra

**N20LT4** · 05-21-2008, 11:52 PM

Originally Posted by flash

Im still waiting for an answer.

Let me guess, your still waiting for an answer.

**nathanmoretti!!11** · 05-22-2008, 05:47 AM

o W N E D........lol

**94VortechGT** · 05-22-2008, 05:57 AM

Originally Posted by hutch1999

Bud, comparing a low 13 sec. ls1 to a shit box mid 15 sec. 96 4.6 GT isnt the same as comparing the cobra and ls1.

At least the ls1 and cobra are close in 1/4 mile times. But you picked the single worst v8 mustang in the past 20 years to compare to a 2002 ls1.

You are also forgeting how shitty the driver was in the cobra. Just because he had the horse dosent mean he knew how to use it.

Oh so now there is no comparison? A stock 96 GT will put down about 190ish HP stock. The SS in this race would put down about 320ish. That gives you a difference of 130whp. A Termy with the mods listed will dyno about 450whp. What's the difference between the SS and the Termy? 130whp! Wow imagine that..... That Termy and SS are just as far apart in performance capability as the 96 GT and the SS.

That's the whole point I am making, if it's the other way around and someone says they smoked a LS1 in their turd 4.6 NPI GT then you guys are like "OH NO, NO, NO!!! THAT CAN"T HAPPEN!!!! NOT AGAINST THE MIGHTY LS1!!!!!!!!" But if your 320whp LS1 pulls on a 450whp Cobra from a roll your like "Hell yeah, good kill, LS1 OWNZ YOUZZZ!!!!"

Seriously, enough BS about that video. Get me a real video that is a good 30 seconds in length showing me the entire race and you'll have some evidence I'll eat and then shut my mouth.....

**mogs01gt** · 05-22-2008, 06:21 AM

The dumbass cobra owner probably started off in the wrong gear. I beat up on my buddy's cobra all the time because he cant drive for shit. I only run high 12s..

**hutch1999** · 05-22-2008, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by 94VortechGT

Oh so now there is no comparison? A stock 96 GT will put down about 190ish HP stock. The SS in this race would put down about 320ish. That gives you a difference of 130whp. A Termy with the mods listed will dyno about 450whp. What's the difference between the SS and the Termy? 130whp! Wow imagine that..... That Termy and SS are just as far apart in performance capability as the 96 GT and the SS.

That's the whole point I am making, if it's the other way around and someone says they smoked a LS1 in their turd 4.6 NPI GT then you guys are like "OH NO, NO, NO!!! THAT CAN"T HAPPEN!!!! NOT AGAINST THE MIGHTY LS1!!!!!!!!" But if your 320whp LS1 pulls on a 450whp Cobra from a roll your like "Hell yeah, good kill, LS1 OWNZ YOUZZZ!!!!"

Seriously, enough BS about that video. Get me a real video that is a good 30 seconds in length showing me the entire race and you'll have some evidence I'll eat and then shut my mouth.....

Guy, your still not getting it. Your are comparing dyno numbers not consistantly run times.

Like we said before those 4.6 Gts run mid to low 15s all day long. While stock ls1s run consistantly in the low 13s stock. Thats a difference of over 2 seconds.

Now bolt on cobras run low 12 second 1/4 mile times. Thats a difference of about 1 second.

The 96 GTs are complete and total shit.

But, in my hot rod mag a 96 did win fastest street mustang challenge!!!

It was powered buy a chevy 454 big block with twin turbos...

**94VortechGT** · 05-22-2008, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by hutch1999

Guy, your still not getting it. Your are comparing dyno numbers not consistantly run times.

Like we said before those 4.6 Gts run mid to low 15s all day long. While stock ls1s run consistantly in the low 13s stock. Thats a difference of over 2 seconds.

Now bolt on cobras run low 12 second 1/4 mile times. Thats a difference of about 1 second.

The 96 GTs are complete and total shit.

But, in my hot rod mag a 96 did win fastest street mustang challenge!!!

It was powered buy a chevy 454 big block with twin turbos...

Obviously you don't seem to get it. You not get to the track much? I bolton pulled Cobra will break into the 11's in the 1/4th. Have you ever seen the difference between a low 13 second car compared to a high 11 second car? As you get faster, the gap between cars in just a seconds difference gets a LOT bigger. I don't care if the GT does only run low 15's (High 14's is common stock btw), it still don't change the fact that the power difference is about the same.

**hutch1999** · 05-22-2008, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by 94VortechGT

Obviously you don't seem to get it. You not get to the track much? I bolton pulled Cobra will break into the 11's in the 1/4th.

bolt on ls1s will break in the 12s... but is it more common to see low 13s, yes, just like it is more common to see low 12s in a bolt on cobra.

**camarojunky74** · 05-22-2008, 07:27 AM

Originally Posted by mogs01gt

The dumbass cobra owner probably started off in the wrong gear. I beat up on my buddy's cobra all the time because he cant drive for shit. I only run high 12s..

lol... wait wait wait, your telling me that instead of starting in 1st, he started in 2nd or 3rd,

wow. i can assure you he started in 1st and it was a clean race with no missing of any gears

**94VortechGT** · 05-22-2008, 07:34 AM

Originally Posted by hutch1999

bolt on ls1s will break in the 12s... but is it more common to see low 13s, yes, just like it is more common to see low 12s in a bolt on cobra.

You missed the point I was getting at. Go to the track, watch a low 13 second car race a low 12 second car, then watch a low 13 second car race a high 14 second car, get back to me once you do.

**camarojunky74** · 05-22-2008, 07:56 AM

seriously can we stop arguing about something so small and pointless.

i agree with hutch, its a lot harder for a cobra to run down a high 12 sec car after it fucked up the start,then a camaro to run down a 15 sec pig who's trap speed barely creep into the 90mph range,

there is a big differance. also i would also say that the camaro would be a more consistent street car due to it not having irs.

***Ed Blown Vert*** · 05-22-2008, 08:00 AM

Since I have almost 700 rwhp, I guess I should win most every race.

But I know that's not the case. Driver error can change the outcome.

*watching the thread*

**94VortechGT** · 05-22-2008, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by camarojunky74

seriously can we stop arguing about something so small and pointless.

i agree with hutch, its a lot harder for a cobra to run down a high 12 sec car after it fucked up the start,then a camaro to run down a 15 sec pig who's trap speed barely creep into the 90mph range,

there is a big differance. also i would also say that the camaro would be a more consistent street car due to it not having irs.

you can go to the track with hutch and get back to me too.

**flash** · 05-22-2008, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by N20LT4

Let me guess, your still waiting for an answer.

So I guess it is safe to ASSume that you are not going to answer my question.You talk about us ford guys calling bs (which I never have)and when I call you on it you ignore it.

By the way OP good kill.

**hutch1999** · 05-22-2008, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by 94VortechGT

You missed the point I was getting at. Go to the track, watch a low 13 second car race a low 12 second car, then watch a low 13 second car race a high 14 second car, get back to me once you do.

Friend, you need to look at you own statement. The difference between a low 12 second car and a low 13 second car is 1 second.

Your comparing a low 13 sec car to a high high 14 sec car. Which is considerably more than 1 second. Its actually closer to 2 secs difference than it is to 1 sec.

Its all good, we all know how shitty the mid to late 90s mustangs are. I fell bad for whoever gets a mid 90s mustang. Big let down from the foxbodys.

**02silverz28** · 05-22-2008, 08:27 AM

lol I can beat mid 90's mustangs with my 84 z28.

**94VortechGT** · 05-22-2008, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by hutch1999

Friend, you need to look at you own statement. The difference between a low 12 second car and a low 13 second car is 1 second.

Your comparing a low 13 sec car to a high high 14 sec car. Which is considerably more than 1 second. Its actually closer to 2 secs difference than it is to 1 sec.

Its all good, we all know how shitty the mid to late 90s mustangs are. I fell bad for whoever gets a mid 90s mustang. Big let down from the foxbodys.

.......that just shows how much track experience you have. I now know I am arguing with a bunch of kids. I won't further explain since you won't understand anyway.

Funny, last time I checked the engine in my car is the same 5.0 in the fox. You want to line the cars up sometime, I'll show you how shitty they are.

**hutch1999** · 05-22-2008, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by 94VortechGT

.......that just shows how much track experience you have. I now know I am arguing with a bunch of kids. I won't further explain since you won't understand anyway.

Funny, last time I checked the engine in my car is the same 5.0 in the fox. You want to line the cars up sometime, I'll show you how shitty they are.

About the track times, its just general math bud.

I was refering to the 1996 GT 4.6 you were talking about. No need to get defensive about your 5.0, we give respect to the 5.0 motors on this site.

**chuckie669** · 05-22-2008, 08:57 AM

Good kill OP...

**N20LT4** · 05-22-2008, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by 94VortechGT

You missed the point I was getting at. Go to the track, watch a low 13 second car race a low 12 second car, then watch a low 13 second car race a high 14 second car, get back to me once you do.

Dude, your really not making a valid point in this here discussion. Atleast not a point that me, or anyone else for that matter can see. It's best to quit now before you dig yourself even deeper.

Originally Posted by 94VortechGT

Funny, last time I checked the engine in my car is the same 5.0 in the fox. You want to line the cars up sometime, I'll show you how shitty they are.

And for the record, the engine in your car has some differences when compared to the 89-93 MAF 5.0's; the Intake Manifold being one of them

- Jay

**Insert** · 05-22-2008, 09:14 AM

i dont see where the debate is going. if we look at the video the camaro wins. so i dont see why so many people are trying to pick apart the story (length of hte video??). we see the end of the race, the cobra may have been ahead, the camaro might not have led hte whole way, but eh camaro finishes first.
if we look at numbers and specs only, then hell, the cobra should have won. but it didnt. and thats what counts.

nice kill. it takes balls throwing up a kill story against a stang. they all come out and cry.