Me vs Mach 1 with video

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Chris Arnold

John, the larger point is that this statement is ridiculous:

As shown, a bolt-on 96 Cobra can run deep into the 11s. How is that not a match for an LS1 car. I don't know what your LS1 cars are all running, but my best in my '97 vette is 13.2@108, which is at least respectable. I know it'll go quicker. I even think I can get a 13.0, and I may be dreaming but I might even eek into the 12s under perfect conditions on non-DR street tires. Quite to the contrary of Big Hammer's quoted statement above though, with my LS1 I am clearly no match for a good running bolt-on 96 Cobra.

Chris

Are you suprised to find a statement like that when there's one case of a full bolt on 96 Cobra running with full bolt on LS1 times (and still losing mind you)? Clearly this isn't something you see everyday. You're also comparing a full bolt on car to your completely stock car, not exactly a fair compairson. With full bolt ons to your vette I'm pretty sure you should be runng considerably faster than 13.2.

I think the larger point is that there are numerous mustang websites where they can go and brag of killing LS1 and LS2 and LS7s or whatever. Why come here? I don't know about others on this site, but I do not nor would I ever go on another site and talk trash or "defend" my car. I could give a shit less what they think and have the maturity to not do so. Oh and I used to own a Mustang and the thought still never crossed my mind to talk trash to guys here or other car sites.

**Chris Arnold** · 07-02-2008, 07:32 AM

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

I'm very suprised to not see better times w/ manuals since they make more power than autos. I understand they may not be quite as consistent but should still have faster overall times.

Shows what you know about drag racing...

**Chris Arnold** · 07-02-2008, 07:41 AM

Oh, and the statement was not 96 Cobra with bolt-ons vs. LS1 with bolt-ons. It was that a 96 Cobra is no match for an LS1, bolt-ons or not. The phrase after the comma applies to the subject - that's how english works, which is in this case "a 96 Cobra." In other words, he was implying that a 96 Cobra with bolt-ons is no match for an LS1, either. Stop trying to defend it. It was a retarded statement that was blatantly wrong. Besides, it's very possible that an LS1 with bolt-ons could be outrun by a 96 Cobra with bolt-ons as evidenced by the fact that the quickest manual LS1 here is not as quick as the quickest manual 96-98 Cobra referenced.

**mike302** · 07-02-2008, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

Uh, he didn't post the truth and I proved it. 10.6 in an LS1 is greater than 11.3 in a 96 Cobra. I understand that's a difficult concept to grasp.

But that means that a bolt-ons 96 cobra is a able to take a bolt-ons LS1! Buddy!!!

so the 96 cobra is a match

**tigersport14** · 07-02-2008, 08:29 AM

Originally Posted by mike302

But that means that a bolt-ons 96 cobra is a able to take a bolt-ons LS1! Buddy!!!

so the 96 cobra is a match

a 96 cobra has NEVER even came close to touching me, what planet are you living on, all i have is intake on a 98 ls1

**tigersport14** · 07-02-2008, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by mike302

But that means that a bolt-ons 96 cobra is a able to take a bolt-ons LS1! Buddy!!!

so the 96 cobra is a match

you ford guys are ridiculous, SERIOUSLY, a 96 cobra? wtf. you ford guys also say a brand new GT will stay door to door with us,( havent seen that happen either) so a 96 cobra and a new GT are neck and neck? right..

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by Chris Arnold

Oh, and the statement was not 96 Cobra with bolt-ons vs. LS1 with bolt-ons. It was that a 96 Cobra is no match for an LS1, bolt-ons or not. The phrase after the comma applies to the subject - that's how english works, which is in this case "a 96 Cobra." In other words, he was implying that a 96 Cobra with bolt-ons is no match for an LS1, either. Stop trying to defend it. It was a retarded statement that was blatantly wrong. Besides, it's very possible that an LS1 with bolt-ons could be outrun by a 96 Cobra with bolt-ons as evidenced by the fact that the quickest manual LS1 here is not as quick as the quickest manual 96-98 Cobra referenced.

Listen here asshole, I don't care what the statement was. I know you aided in designing the 96 Cobra so his statement was a personal assault on you right? I don't need your arrogant ass giving English lessons. Oh yeah, it is capitalized isn't it? And in general, certainly stock for stock, a 96 Cobra is not a match for an LS1. When you start dumping thousands of dollars and stripping the car out that's a completely different story. As has been stated before, anything can be made fast with enough money.

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Chris Arnold

Shows what you know about drag racing...

No I didn't say it's easier, but is possible to run a quicker time w/ a manual. Tell me how it's not when you're putting more power to the wheels and can launch at a higher rpm?

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by mike302

But that means that a bolt-ons 96 cobra is a able to take a bolt-ons LS1! Buddy!!!

so the 96 cobra is a match

Last time I checked a 10.6 does not equal 11.3.

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by tigersport14

you ford guys are ridiculous, SERIOUSLY, a 96 cobra? wtf. you ford guys also say a brand new GT will stay door to door with us,( havent seen that happen either) so a 96 cobra and a new GT are neck and neck? right..

No according to the Ford guys we should all sell our crappy LS1's and go get 96 Cobras or 05+ GT's so we can actually have a chance to compete with them.

**tigersport14** · 07-02-2008, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

No according to the Ford guys we should all sell our crappy LS1's and go get 96 Cobras or 05+ GT's so we can actually have a chance to compete with them.

oh yea, hell with our vette motors! they suck anyway!........ not.

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by Chris Arnold

Shows what you know about drag racing...

Interesting that the top 2 cars in the cam only are M6's.
http://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187330

**BLKCLOUD** · 07-02-2008, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

I really think there are an abundance of strong running LS1 be it auto or manuals. I don't know that that can be said of 96 Cobras...I'm thinking his is more of an exception rather than the norm. I'm very suprised to not see better times w/ manuals since they make more power than autos. I understand they may not be quite as consistent but should still have faster overall times.

No doubt that there are far, far more quick N/A LS1s than N/A 4.6s. That is a given and cannot be disputed. And "bolt-on" 11 second 4.6s are definately the exception (much, much rarer than "bolt-on" 11 second LS1s). Fortunately, that was not the point I was trying to make.

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

Uh, he didn't post the truth and I proved it. 10.6 in an LS1 is greater than 11.3 in a 96 Cobra. I understand that's a difficult concept to grasp.

My friend....I was comparing manual to manual - I simply made a typo, and instead of going back and editing it, I pointed out my mistake. My original statement stands: With manual transmissions, the quickest B-headed, stock-motored 4.6 (96-98) is quicker than the quickest similarly-modded LS1.

Simple concept.

Originally Posted by Chris Arnold

Shows what you know about drag racing...

Indeed it does.

Got dyno racer?

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

No I didn't say it's easier, but is possible to run a quicker time w/ a manual. Tell me how it's not when you're putting more power to the wheels and can launch at a higher rpm?

Confucius say there's more to getting down the 1/4 mile than peak HP number at rear wheel.

Hey tigersport....you and John are a great pair. Ya'll sure told us! And boy....for having such an all-powerful motor, you guys sure do get defensive.

BTW....be careful linking LS1Tech.com stuff. They have a rule over there....you have to get out of the 12's before you can talk any smack. That disqualifies both of you guys.

But hey....we're not over there, so I guess ya'll will just keep on jabber-jawing.

Have a great day!

**A~NICE~CAR~IS~A~NICE~CAR** · 07-02-2008, 11:21 AM

you guys are all idiots, this discussion is beat to sshitt already.....Mustang this, Camaro that... Every single car is going to be different to some extent, there will always be too many variables when it comes to racing cars from the street, to the strip...

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by BLKCLOUD

No doubt that there are far, far more quick N/A LS1s than N/A 4.6s. That is a given and cannot be disputed. And "bolt-on" 11 second 4.6s are definately the exception (much, much rarer than "bolt-on" 11 second LS1s).

Thanks, I'm glad one of you Ford guys could admit the truth.

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by BLKCLOUD

Hey tigersport....you and John are a great pair. Ya'll sure told us! And boy....for having such an all-powerful motor, you guys sure do get defensive.

I had to chuckle at this. Who is in the wrong forum here. What kind of car do you drive? Hmmm....

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by BLKCLOUD

BTW....be careful linking LS1Tech.com stuff. They have a rule over there....you have to get out of the 12's before you can talk any smack. That disqualifies both of you guys.

Have a great day!

Cool thanks for the advice, anything else you can tell me about my car which you know nothing about?

**BLKCLOUD** · 07-02-2008, 11:45 AM

Selective quoting is a sure sign of a e-whoopin. But anyway....

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

Thanks, I'm glad one of you Ford guys could admit the truth.

Who said I was a "Ford" guy? I've had a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Gen F-body, along with a Corvette, and several other GM cars. I've also had several Mustangs and a few other Fords. My current daily driver is a Mazda, and I have a BMW.

How about you? GM nutswinger thru and thru?

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

I had to chuckle at this. Who is in the wrong forum here. What kind of car do you drive? Hmmm....

A killer Mazda B2300. Trust me - you don't want none of it!

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

Cool thanks for the advice, anything else you can tell me about my car which you know nothing about?

I'm sure there probably is, but regardless, it appears I definately hit that nail on that head. 2.2 60 fts suck, don't they? So I ask you again....as I did previously (perhaps you just conveniently missed it?)....what has your car run?

Thanks.

**Chris Arnold** · 07-02-2008, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Johns00Z28

Interesting that the top 2 cars in the cam only are M6's.
http://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187330

Super! I'm sure you feel that this validates your argument.

Listen, it was fun arguing about Cobras and LS1s but I'm getting bored now, and would rather not switch to this new subject. I can see that this is going to take a few years of ass-whoopings before you realize the truth, and then it'll take the rest of your life to figure out.

Chris

**Johns00Z28** · 07-02-2008, 01:26 PM

Yeah I'm an e-thug just like you apparently but it did seem like a nice way to end this thread, too bad you guy had to continue responding.

Originally Posted by BLKCLOUD

How about you? GM nutswinger thru and thru?

I'm sure there probably is, but regardless, it appears I definately hit that nail on that head. 2.2 60 fts suck, don't they? So I ask you again....as I did previously (perhaps you just conveniently missed it?)....what has your car run?

Thanks.

Uh negative on that. Strange how you can find what my car's 60 foot was stock (still managed 13's though w/ bald tires at mason dixon)yet you somehow couldn't see that I too was a mustang owner...hmm.

Thanks but no thanks. I haven't taken my car to the strip since my modifications so I couldn't say what it would run. I have nothing to prove to you.