Supercharged gt mustang?

[SpecterGT260]

A "bolt-on" GT will run in the 12s with a competent driver, and a few have cracked high 11s (certainly not the norm). Equally-modded, and LS1 will run away from it, but I wouldn't consider it a sure thing. Too many variables.

they have a much stouter rear end than we do and those cars have amazing weight transfer and hook. the guys running down way into the 12s with boltons only are running drag slicks and high rev dumping.
there are a few 2v 4.6 guys running high 12s with boltons only but they have suspension out the ass and pull 1.5 sec 60'

[jrc1122]

I use to have a belltronics - accelerometer (accurate to 2/100th of a second)

My buddy ran a 4.65 0-60 in his 04 Mach 1 (stock) and my other buddy ran a 4.55 in his Evo (stock at the time)

I sold it--- a few years later- I bought another one (when I got the TA) best I have ran is 5.01 0-60mph --- I know it is much to do with the driver and the launch--

I know 0-60 isn't everything-- but I don't know if I have ever heard of a 05+ GT Stang running those times.

[dpinson]

just race him and see

[BLKCLOUD]

I use to have a belltronics - accelerometer (accurate to 2/100th of a second)

My buddy ran a 4.65 0-60 in his 04 Mach 1 (stock) and my other buddy ran a 4.55 in his Evo (stock at the time)

I sold it--- a few years later- I bought another one (when I got the TA) best I have ran is 5.01 0-60mph --- I know it is much to do with the driver and the launch--

I know 0-60 isn't everything-- but I don't know if I have ever heard of a 05+ GT Stang running those times.

How did you measure those 0-60 times?

[N20LT4]

I use to have a belltronics - accelerometer (accurate to 2/100th of a second)

My buddy ran a 4.65 0-60 in his 04 Mach 1 (stock) and my other buddy ran a 4.55 in his Evo (stock at the time)

I sold it--- a few years later- I bought another one (when I got the TA) best I have ran is 5.01 0-60mph --- I know it is much to do with the driver and the launch--

I know 0-60 isn't everything-- but I don't know if I have ever heard of a 05+ GT Stang running those times.

How did you measure those 0-60 times?

I was wondering the same. Those times are definitely not accurate to 2/100th's of a second for a box-stock Mach.

[dpinson]

no way those are good times

[jrc1122]

I use to have a belltronics - accelerometer (accurate to 2/100th of a second)
.

believe what you want-- The manual says it is tested and proved.

My TV has picture in picture-- you can choose not to believe it-- but it does.

My TV is 1080i cabable -- but my crappy cable provider doesn't offer that quality of picture.. Does that mean my TV doesn't have it?

many Magizines got the EVO 8 with those times.. My times are pretty damn close for the LS1---

SO lets get this straight-- the only time it was inaccurate was with the Mach 1--- Man there is alot of mustang haters on this site.

I'm not saying he ran that every time-- we used that a lot-- and he usually got 4.8 - 5.1 -- but he did manage 0-60 in 4.65 once.

My buddy with the EVO ran consistant sub 5s in the 0-60 mph-- best was 4.55-- He usually got 4.65-4.8 or so... (if my memory serves me correctly)

Just like the stock LS1 got a 12.8x 1/4 mile when tested by that mustang magazine-- Doesn't mean it is typical but it can happen.

[N20LT4]

believe what you want-- The manual says it is tested and proved.

My TV has picture in picture-- you can choose not to believe it-- but it does.

My TV is 1080i cabable -- but my crappy cable provider doesn't offer that quality of picture.. Does that mean my TV doesn't have it?

many Magizines got the EVO 8 with those times.. My times are pretty damn close for the LS1---

SO lets get this straight-- the only time it was inaccurate was with the Mach 1--- Man there is alot of mustang haters on this site.

I'm not saying he ran that every time-- we used that a lot-- and he usually got 4.8 - 5.1 -- but he did manage 0-60 in 4.65 once.

My buddy with the EVO ran consistant sub 5s in the 0-60 mph-- best was 4.55-- He usually got 4.65-4.8 or so... (if my memory serves me correctly)

Just like the stock LS1 got a 12.8x 1/4 mile when tested by that mustang magazine-- Doesn't mean it is typical but it can happen.

MM&FF got that stock 12-second run at the drag strip, not with a meter. And while the 5-flat 0-60 run seems about right for a stock T/A M6, I would never believe a stock Mach would get 4.6 seconds to 60 on street tires. No way.

But to each his own.

[jrc1122]

MM&FF got that stock 12-second run at the drag strip, not with a meter. And while the 5-flat 0-60 run seems about right for a stock T/A M6, I would never believe a stock Mach would get 4.6 seconds to 60 on street tires. No way.

But to each his own.

Thanks for helping make my point.. You agree with the LS1 numbers look to be accurate from this piece of equipment, You didn't argue the Evo's numbers, but when the the exact same equipment gave the Mach 1 his time. It is suddenly inaccurate?

You seem to have very selective in your beliefs, or at the very least a bit biased against the Mach 1

AGAIN the 12.8 isn't TYPICAL for our cars--- 4.65 0-60 ISN'T TYPICAL for a Mach 1 (0-60mph)
Track vs accelerometer makes no difference-- because it is tested to be accurate to within a few hundredths of a second.

So which is your argument....??

A. You don't believe me
B. The equipment is inaccurate (unless it is testing my WS6) lol <--That part pretty much makes that argument useless. So one could only conclude that you think I am a liar?

Dude I am not some Stang Nut swinger-- I would take an LS1 powered car over the Mach 1 any day of the week. I am just telling you guys of a story I remember from a few years back.

[N20LT4]

Thanks for helping make my point.. You agree with the LS1 numbers look to be accurate from this piece of equipment, You didn't argue the Evo's numbers, but when the the exact same equipment gave the Mach 1 his time. It is suddenly inaccurate?

You seem to have very selective in your beliefs, or at the very least a bit biased against the Mach 1

AGAIN the 12.8 isn't TYPICAL for our cars--- 4.65 0-60 ISN'T TYPICAL for a Mach 1 (0-60mph)
Track vs accelerometer makes no difference-- because it is tested to be accurate to within a few hundredths of a second.

So which is your argument....??

A. You don't believe me
B. The equipment is inaccurate (unless it is testing my WS6) lol <--That part pretty much makes that argument useless. So one could only conclude that you think I am a liar?

Dude I am not some Stang Nut swinger-- I would take an LS1 powered car over the Mach 1 any day of the week. I am just telling you guys of a story I remember from a few years back.

There is no argument, as in, "I'm not going to waste time arguing with you" over the accuracy of some meter.

Hence the words at the end of my last statement...To each his own...belief.

Have a great day!

[jrc1122]

There is no argument, as in, "I'm not going to waste time arguing with you" over the accuracy of some meter.

Hence the words at the end of my last statement...To each his own...belief.

Have a great day!

I totally agree-- When you have no true case in the argument then why argue. AMEN!

[jrc1122]

after some research (because I no longer have the equipment or the manual)I stand slightly corrected - the equipment is accurate within 50 miliseconds (after programmed)

or .05 ..... Not .02 that I originally stated -- Still very accurate

so assuming it was wrong in his favor instead of 4.65-- He would have ran 4.70 (IF and only if the full range or inaccuracy was totally against him)

But with that being said--- If it was inaccurate by recording him slower than he really was-- He could have very well ran 4.60---

So because we don't know how which way, if any ,it was inaccurate. We will stick with 4.65 0-60mph.