01 ta vs 08 gt

well last night i got to race against my buddies gt at the track for the first time me o1 ta lid and magnaflow catback him 08 gt coldair intake and flowmaster both cars are automatics after several attemps of not hooking at all and running 15.6s we both finally hooked him 14.3 me 13.9 we deided to go one more time lined up and both hooked perfect result him 14.3 at 95mph again me 13.8 at 101mph the moral of this story is those stang are no joke factory may get them at the track but street my different story i had to catch him every time nice first gear launch on that car but in closing just let me say he has admitted the ls1 is a better motor

Nice kill, I'd like to run a new Stang

I don't know man, a 14.3 is not very impressive esp. seeing that he has a couple mods to begin with. Good kill nonetheless. What is the elevation where you were racing?

i have know idea im in memphis tn

If the track you raced at has a website they probably list it on there.

15.6s? damn but at least you got him

Good kill- I would be completely suprised if the outcome was different.

LS1 much stronger motor than fords 4.6 (NA)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck4345

i have know idea im in memphis tn

---

337ft.....You could hit a 13flat no problem at that alt, if not you have some unknown issues going on.....14.3 is a very slow time and not very impressive imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck4345

well last night i got to race against my buddies gt at the track for the first time me o1 ta lid and magnaflow catback him 08 gt coldair intake and flowmaster both cars are automatics after several attemps of not hooking at all and running 15.6s we both finally hooked him 14.3 me 13.9 we deided to go one more time lined up and both hooked perfect result him 14.3 at 95mph again me 13.8 at 101mph the moral of this story is those stang are no joke factory may get them at the track but street my different story i had to catch him every time nice first gear launch on that car but in closing just let me say he has admitted the ls1 is a better motor

---

Under your username it says car audio god, do you have a large system in you hatch?

i use to compete in car audio before i bought my ta i was world champ no wall 2006 and still install on the side for fun my car is stock right now but if i do anything ill go all sq not spl

I don't race at the track at all.... but i hate the new GT's and pretty much all of them unless they're heavily modded. They look "OK" but it's been 10 years and they're still slower than an ls1. not to mention that i see at least 12 mustangs per day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GottaHaveLS1

I don't race at the track at all.... but i hate the new GT's and pretty much all of them unless they're heavily modded. They look "OK" but it's been 10 years and they're still slower than an ls1. not to mention that i see at least 12 mustangs per day

---

That's because they didn't stop building them like GM stopped building F bodies! Compared to F bodies, they look great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

That's because they didn't stop building them like GM stopped building F bodies! Compared to F bodies, they look great.

---

I think a 1998-2002 WS6 looks much better than that thing they call a S197 GT.

:true: no mustangs looks as agressive as a ta and to see a ta pull throught the tire smoke of a burn out at the track with just the fog lights on makes me tingle in funny places

Mustangs are behind the times, no matter how they look. There's V6's now making 300+hp now while the GT still makes only 300 w/ a V8....kinda lame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

That's because they didn't stop building them like GM stopped building F bodies! Compared to F bodies, they look great.

---

Are you serious?? I'm not saying they look like crap, but i just dont like mustangs especially GT's. One reason why they don't look that great is cuz there are so many of them on the streets. Compared to an LS1 F body, they look worse

i dont like the new body style personally somethnig about that backseat window bothers me but cover that and it looks ok but that being said i am impressed with how it drives and shifts very fast in an auto all in all a nice car compare ride comfort to fbody ford wins but put them on a track ill take a fbody all day for the trill factor

they suck on the street. i've put quite a few car lenghts on a few-man, they get PISSED too

I have yet to see one in person match the magazine's claim of 13.5 seconds in the quarter for an M5, and 13.6 for an A5. Most I see are in the high 13's to low 14's.

ok now we can tell the truth! I won 4 out of 5 times. :denied:
You had wheel spin one time bad and ran a 15.6 other wise 14.0 and 13.9 and losing. you forgot to mention bad .9 .5 reation times. I may have had a slower car by .4ths. but I have better driving skills, wait what kind of skills does it take to drive an auto!:kick:

signed
just don't drop the u-joint

also never said ls1 was better motor!

Interesting!

For the most part a stock LS1 vs. a stock 2008 GT is a driver's race with a slight edge (from my experience) going to the LS1. The transmission and gearing may also help shift the slight advantage in either direction.

That being said, pretty much any run with two cars with less than a second difference in typical quarter mile times is a driver's race.....you can drop a few tenths really quickly with a crappy launch or poor shift.

I guess after the callout, it's time for the guys to post the time slips! HAHA!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midnight02

Interesting!

For the most part a stock LS1 vs. a stock 2008 GT is a driver's race with a slight edge (from my experience) going to the LS1. The transmission and gearing may also help shift the slight advantage in either direction.

That being said, pretty much any run with two cars with less than a second difference in typical quarter mile times is a driver's race.....you can drop a few tenths really quickly with a crappy launch or poor shift.

I guess after the callout, it's time for the guys to post the time slips! HAHA!

---

Less than a SECOND difference? R U Nuts? Your leaving the window wide open with that one buddy. So that means if i'm driving a car that averages 14.0 seconds versus a car that runs 13.1 on normal occasion, it could be considered a drivers race between the two of us? I don't think so. If that's the case than a race between a Mazda RX-8 vs. a stock LS1 is up in the air...

And lastly, any LS1 w/ a good driver behind the wheel should have no problem outperforming a S197 w/ a good driver. The LS1 has more than a slight advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

Less than a SECOND difference? R U Nuts? Your leaving the window wide open with that one buddy. So that means if i'm driving a car that averages 14.0 seconds versus a car that runs 13.1 on normal occasion, it could be considered a drivers race? I don't think so. If that's the case than a race between a Mazda RX-8 vs. a stock LS1 is up in the air...

And lastly, any LS1 w/ a good driver behind the wheel should have no problem outperforming a S197 w/ a good driver. The LS1 has more than a slight advantage.

---

From my experience, a one second advantage can evaporate pretty quickly, especially if the difference in driver skill is exhibited at the launch. Good rule of thumb says that a 4/10th gain on the 60 foot time is typically good for a 6/10th - 7/10th gain in the quarter time....just one example of how a crappy launch will kill a stronger car. That being said, I don't think I'm a GREAT driver, however I do think I'm a good driver and I'd certainly be confident racing another car if I knew I had a full second advantage.

In this particular case, based on what MOST seem to be running, the LS1 likely has a .3 - .5 advantage. With driver skill being equal, that difference is substantial. However, if you cook the tires on the launch and throw up a 2.3 60' time, that advantage disappears pretty quickly. HAHA!

Just my $.02

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midnight02

From my experience, a one second advantage can evaporate pretty quickly, especially if the difference in driver skill is exhibited at the launch. Good rule of thumb says that a 4/10th gain on the 60 foot time is typically good for a 6/10th - 7/10th gain in the quarter time....just one example of how a crappy launch will kill a stronger car. That being said, I don't think I'm a GREAT driver, however I do think I'm a good driver and I'd certainly be confident racing another car if I knew I had a full second advantage.

In this particular case, based on what MOST seem to be running, the LS1 likely has a .3 - .5 advantage. With driver skill being equal, that difference is substantial. However, if you cook the tires on the launch and throw up a 2.3 60' time, that advantage disappears pretty quickly. HAHA!

Just my $.02

---

I do understand what your saying. Bad driver error can definitely change the outcome of a race. But if a driver gives up a full second advantage to his opponent then he is just a really really bad driver - assuming everything on his car is working right.

in the defense of both of us the rain had just stopped and track officials ran the driers. traction was not the best at all and the humidity was very high.

time slips the 08 mustang is on the left and 01 ta on the right
remember mustang won 4 ta won 1.

second race ( most looked like this )

R/T .162 .785
60 2.223 2.187
330 6.103 6.040
1/8 9.262 9.110
MPH 78.31 81.48
1000 11.972 11.730
1/4 14.307 13.957
MPH 95.71 101.25

left 1st .2733



last race

R/T .135 .339
60 2.238 2.249
330 6.144 6.022
1/8 9.322 9.044
MPH 77.88 82.35
1000 12.040 11.640
1/4 14.373 13.850
MPH 95.88 101.98

right 1st .3192

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

I think a 1998-2002 WS6 looks much better than that thing they call a S197 GT.

---

Well, Ford is selling more of "that thing" than GM ever sold of the Camaro/Firebird combined.

Drivers skill aside, I see the Mustang losing by about 5-6mph on both runs and that's considerable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

Well, Ford is selling more of "that thing" than GM ever sold of the Camaro/Firebird combined.

---

Yeah I was one of those people who bought a mustang and compared to my Z28 it was a horrible decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

Well, Ford is selling more of "that thing" than GM ever sold of the Camaro/Firebird combined.

---

When did we get into car sales? I thought we were talking about which one looked better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

When did we get into car sales? I thought we were talking about which one looked better.

---

Well, the huge sales numbers indicate to me that the public likes the way the current Mustang looks. Hell, if the GT500 weighed 3,300 lbs. or less and had an IRS, I would buy one when the greedy dealer markups stop, which they will as Ford keeps building more GT500's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

Well, the huge sales numbers indicate to me that the public likes the way the current Mustang looks. Hell, if the GT500 weighed 3,300 lbs. or less and had an IRS, I would buy one when the greedy dealer markups stop, which they will as Ford keeps building more GT500's.

---

Come on, let's be honest. If the F-body didn't atleast have the slightest appeal to you you wouldn't be here ;)

driving skills aside the ta is a quicker car ill admit i got outdriven 4 out 5 times but 1/4 mile times showed plan as day the ta is faster mustang boy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

Come on, let's be honest. If the F-body didn't atleast have the slightest appeal to you you wouldn't be here ;)

---

I like Pony cars with V8's. I have always liked Ford's better than GM. The only GM product I have owned was a '68 GTO. I instruct at BMW CCA driving schools where the students drive their own cars with an instructor. I have driven a student C5 Z06 and a student C6 Z06 at Buttonwillow Raceway. I think the Z06 is the best bang for the buck in the world, but I haven't driven a Ford GT.

I remember back in 2000/ 2001 time frame - when i was test driving tons of Mustang GTs, Trans Ams, WS6s, Z28s and SS's.
The sales guy at the Ford dealership trying to sell me on the fact that more people are buying the mustang. like that was a selling point.. That was a horrible tactic on his behalf. Because I don't want to be a lemming and have what everyone else has. Not to mention one was a mid 14s car and the other was a low 13 second car.

Muscle Car vs-- sporty car. I also remember the Nissan Maxima having about the same power as the GT in the early 2000s-- that was enough for me to not buy it.

now 8 years later-- and they still have fully closed the gap on an extinct TA??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrc1122

I remember back in 2000/ 2001 time frame - when i was test driving tons of Mustang GTs, Trans Ams, WS6s, Z28s and SS's.
The sales guy at the Ford dealership trying to sell me on the fact that more people are buying the mustang. like that was a selling point.. That was a horrible tactic on his behalf. Because I don't want to be a lemming and have what everyone else has. Not to mention one was a mid 14s car and the other was a low 13 second car.

Muscle Car vs-- sporty car. I also remember the Nissan Maxima having about the same power as the GT in the early 2000s-- that was enough for me to not buy it.

now 8 years later-- and they still have fully closed the gap on an extinct TA??

---

Why didn't you look at a Cobra?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

I like Pony cars with V8's. I have always liked Ford's better than GM. The only GM product I have owned was a '68 GTO. I instruct at BMW CCA driving schools where the students drive their own cars with an instructor. I have driven a student C5 Z06 and a student C6 Z06 at Buttonwillow Raceway. I think the Z06 is the best bang for the buck in the world, but I haven't driven a Ford GT.

---

No doubt Ford GT's are very fast, but overpriced at that. I still don't know where the $150,000 price tag comes in at.

From the slips it looks like we can confirm a few things:

1. Traction was definitely limited given the 60' times.
2. The Trans Am had ET's roughly 0.4 seconds faster with a 5+ mph higher trap speed.
3. The Mustang driver had a better reaction time and consequently won the race to the finish line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris26blaster

in the defense of both of us the rain had just stopped and track officials ran the driers. traction was not the best at all and the humidity was very high.

time slips the 08 mustang is on the left and 01 ta on the right
remember mustang won 4 ta won 1.

second race ( most looked like this )

R/T .162 .785
60 2.223 2.187
330 6.103 6.040
1/8 9.262 9.110
MPH 78.31 81.48
1000 11.972 11.730
1/4 14.307 13.957
MPH 95.71 101.25

left 1st .2733



last race

R/T .135 .339
60 2.238 2.249
330 6.144 6.022
1/8 9.322 9.044
MPH 77.88 82.35
1000 12.040 11.640
1/4 14.373 13.850
MPH 95.88 101.98

right 1st .3192

---

that is some weak trap speed for both cars but worse for the stang.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

Why didn't you look at a Cobra?

---

Because from what I remember-- the 99 cobra was horrible overrated involving recalls, and unhappy customers and in 2000 they didn't even have it, and in 2001 they came back and I didn't trust ford, Not to mention, I thought the LS1 would have no problem hanging, if not beating a Cobra. (No FI at that time). And I was pretty much right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrc1122

Because from what I remember-- the 99 cobra was horrible overrated involving recalls, and unhappy customers and in 2000 they didn't even have it, and in 2001 they came back and I didn't trust ford, Not to mention, I thought the LS1 would have no problem hanging, if not beating a Cobra. (No FI at that time). And I was pretty much right.

---

They did recall ALL '99 Cobras. They replaced the intake manifold, exhaust and reflashed the computer. Mine went fron 255 rwhp to 275 rwhp. It was a great car for 95,000 miles until I sold it. It was great for open track. With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

They did recall ALL '99 Cobras. They replaced the intake manifold, exhaust and reflashed the computer. Mine went fron 255 rwhp to 275 rwhp. It was a great car for 95,000 miles until I sold it. It was great for open track. With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.

---

20rwhp from from intake and full exhaust is not very good. My Crystal White '98 Cobra had a Vortech B-Trim with injectors, X-pipe and gears. Pretty strong car up top atleast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

20rwhp from from intake and full exhaust is not very good. My Crystal White '98 Cobra had a Vortech B-Trim with injectors, X-pipe and gears. Pretty strong car up top atleast.

---

It was just the mufflers, not full exhaust. The '99s were advertised to have 320 at the crank. My 275 at the rear wheels was about 323 at the crank. These weren't aftermarket upgrades, they were stock equipment that was supposed to yield 320 hp. The '96-'98 Cobras look good in white. I had a black '96 Cobra. I wanted white. but couldn't find one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

It was just the mufflers, not full exhaust. The '99s were advertised to have 320 at the crank. My 275 at the rear wheels was about 323 at the crank. These weren't aftermarket upgrades, they were stock equipment that was supposed to yield 320 hp. The '96-'98 Cobras look good in white. I had a black '96 Cobra. I wanted white. but couldn't find one.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.

---

???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

They did recall ALL '99 Cobras. They replaced the intake manifold, exhaust and reflashed the computer. Mine went fron 255 rwhp to 275 rwhp. It was a great car for 95,000 miles until I sold it. It was great for open track. With a K & N and JBA headers it went from 275 rwhp to 295 rwhp.

---

275hp isn't bad-- that is only about 25 hp less to the wheels than a stock LS1.

I have nothing against the Cobra-- I am just saying that I prefer my LS1.

Why mustangs are still compared to Fbods I don't know. Like the magazines say, Mustangs will still out sell the Camaro and the Camaro will still outperform it in every aspect. Thats just the way it is. The Mustang GT's are not being produced to compete w/ the Camaro, new or old. If Ford wanted to they could. As evidenced by the Mach 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GottaHaveLS1

I don't race at the track at all.... but i hate the new GT's and pretty much all of them unless they're heavily modded. They look "OK" but it's been 10 years and they're still slower than an ls1. not to mention that i see at least 12 mustangs per day

---

the look of the 05+ saleen mustang is pure sex..car is gorgous .....overpriced but still fuckin beautiful car

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImpalaSSpeed96

Why mustangs are still compared to Fbods I don't know. Like the magazines say, Mustangs will still out sell the Camaro and the Camaro will still outperform it in every aspect. Thats just the way it is. The Mustang GT's are not being produced to compete w/ the Camaro, new or old. If Ford wanted to they could. As evidenced by the Mach 1.

---

From my understanding the Mustang GT and the Fbody were fairly close in performance until the LT1 came along. The gap began to grow.. Then the LS1 came and widened the gap significantly.

Ford knew it could build a 14 second pony car and still make sales because of the rich heritage of the name. To the non-car enthusiast, the GT is a monster of power and more than they will ever need. But for performance geared buyers and "bang for the buck" type car seekers, A low 13 second car is MUCH more appealing.
Now with the 05+ GT they finally broke the Mustang GT into the 13s. But they could care less about competing with the dead Fbody-- they just realize that S2K and 350Z and other cars are getting dangerously close to out performing them on the drag strip. Not to mention cars like the 2 door Altima and family sedan Maxima, and the Mazda 6 Speed are about to put them to shame. And they do in fact still build a pony car, Not a family sedan, or econo-box.

So I agree Mustangs aren't currently built to compete with the Fbody - but they were back in the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrc1122

From my understanding the Mustang GT and the Fbody were fairly close in performance until the LT1 came along. The gap began to grow.. Then the LS1 came and widened the gap significantly.

---

I agree with almost everything you've said except that. If you compare an 80's 5.0 to a 350 TPI, yeah, they're kind of close in performance. Most of the 3rd gens you run across aren't 350TPI though, they're 305's, which a 5.0 would beat just about as bad as an LT1 would beat an SN95 5.0. I can't think of any model year in recent history where the Camaro and Mustang where very evenly matched in performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUCAS

I agree with almost everything you've said except that. If you compare an 80's 5.0 to a 350 TPI, yeah, they're kind of close in performance. Most of the 3rd gens you run across aren't 350TPI though, they're 305's, which a 5.0 would beat just about as bad as an LT1 would beat an SN95 5.0. I can't think of any model year in recent history where the Camaro and Mustang where very evenly matched in performance.

---

True there were more 305 TPI's on the road but the 5.7L T/A & IROC-Z's still existed, and they were every bit of a match for a 5.0 Mustang. Both cars were very close in performance despite the F-body being limited to an automatic. Here is just one article that shows proof that the L98's were right there with the competition.

http://www.gtasourcepage.com/87GTAHPPTest.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUCAS

I agree with almost everything you've said except that. If you compare an 80's 5.0 to a 350 TPI, yeah, they're kind of close in performance. Most of the 3rd gens you run across aren't 350TPI though, they're 305's, which a 5.0 would beat just about as bad as an LT1 would beat an SN95 5.0. I can't think of any model year in recent history where the Camaro and Mustang where very evenly matched in performance.

---

the 96-97 cobra matched up fine vs. the LT1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrickStang37

the 96-97 cobra matched up fine vs. the LT1.

---

Ehh...your forgetting the '96-'97 Camaro SS. Cobra couldn't keep up.

I was speaking strictly about GT.

anyone who knows LS1s or LT1s etc. knows that the SS/ WS6 didn't give an advantage at the drag strip.

So please don't try to say Mach 1 = SS/ WS6- or Cobra = SS/WS6

Mach 1 / Cobra = different engine (more valves).

This dicussion (at least my part of it) is solely about Mustang GTs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrc1122

anyone who knows LS1s or LT1s etc. knows that the SS/ WS6 didn't give an advantage at the drag strip.

---

That applied only to the LS1 cars. The LT1 SS and WS6 ram-air systems were much more effective and did show up at the track. The ram-air models were solid 13-second cars with traps around the 101-105 range depending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

That applied only to the LS1 cars. The LT1 SS and WS6 ram-air systems were much more effective and did show up at the track. The ram-air models were solid 13-second cars with traps around the 101-105 range depending.

---

cool-- I didn't realize that--

Yes, sorry fellas, I should clarify. Once the LT1 hit the scene, the competition was over. Until the LT1 came along, the GT did rule the roost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImpalaSSpeed96

Yes, sorry fellas, I should clarify. Once the LT1 hit the scene, the competition was over. Until the LT1 came along, the GT did rule the roost.

---

Not to argue with you, but that is not necessarily true. There are road tests of 5.7L TPI F-bodies running just as quick in stock form as the foxbody 5.0's. Just check the link I provided above.

- Jay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris26blaster

ok now we can tell the truth! I won 4 out of 5 times. :denied:
You had wheel spin one time bad and ran a 15.6 other wise 14.0 and 13.9 and losing. you forgot to mention bad .9 .5 reation times. I may have had a slower car by .4ths. but I have better driving skills, wait what kind of skills does it take to drive an auto!:kick:

signed
just don't drop the u-joint

also never said ls1 was better motor!

---

:Popcorn:

I wasn't here to see it but i'm pretty damn sure the F body has been more powerful than the mustang GT for every year they were both produced (and for the past six years as well)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

Not to argue with you, but that is not necessarily true. There are road tests of 5.7L TPI F-bodies running just as quick in stock form as the foxbody 5.0's. Just check the link I provided above.

- Jay

---

I can vouch for that,,,,I just recently sold my 88 Iroc L98,,,,was a mint 50,000 mile car.
I ran this car bone stock and easily ran 14.60's at 94 mph,,,,with an auto and 2.77 gears (ausie 9 bolt.) Stock GT's of the same vintage when they were new ran high 14's as well. I remember like yesterday when these cars first started hitting the streets, I ran a ton of those things.

I did a couple of simple things to the car,,,,,shorty headers and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator,,,,bumped fuel pressure to 48 lbs. (where it ran the best) and the car ran consistent 13.90's spinning at 99 mph, with crappy 2.1 and 2.2 60 foot times.

It had more potential,,,but the darn thing was already going faster than my wifes bone stock 97 6 speed LT1 :shrug: and it took very little to get it there.
I would have loved to try more rear gear in the car, but someone made me a stupid offer and I let it go,,,,I miss that car.

Just to add for comparison,,,as I already mentioned it was a tad quicker than my wifes current LT1 6-speed,,,,,It was damn near running with my bone stock 02 SS camaro as well,,,an automatic car with 3.23 gears,,,,and it's best time when stock was only a 13.70 at 102 mph. When you think about it the tuned port L98 cars weren't too far off the pace,,,,at least mine wasn't :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firebirdjones

I can vouch for that,,,,I just recently sold my 88 Iroc L98,,,,was a mint 50,000 mile car.
I ran this car bone stock and easily ran 14.60's at 94 mph,,,,with an auto and 2.77 gears (ausie 9 bolt.) Stock GT's of the same vintage when they were new ran high 14's as well. I remember like yesterday when these cars first started hitting the streets, I ran a ton of those things.

I did a couple of simple things to the car,,,,,shorty headers and an adjustable fuel pressure regulator,,,,bumped fuel pressure to 48 lbs. (where it ran the best) and the car ran consistent 13.90's spinning at 99 mph, with crappy 2.1 and 2.2 60 foot times.

It had more potential,,,but the darn thing was already going faster than my wifes bone stock 97 6 speed LT1 :shrug: and it took very little to get it there.
I would have loved to try more rear gear in the car, but someone made me a stupid offer and I let it go,,,,I miss that car.

Just to add for comparison,,,as I already mentioned it was a tad quicker than my wifes current LT1 6-speed,,,,,It was damn near running with my bone stock 02 SS camaro as well,,,an automatic car with 3.23 gears,,,,and it's best time when stock was only a 13.70 at 102 mph. When you think about it the tuned port L98 cars weren't too far off the pace,,,,at least mine wasn't :)

---

Agreed. By all means they were definitely capable of keeping up with the 87-92 5.0 Mustangs. I don't know where guys got the idea from that they don't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

Agreed. By all means they were definitely capable of keeping up with the 87-92 5.0 Mustangs. I don't know where guys got the idea from that they don't?

---

i think it was because they were fairly rare, and alot of 5.0 boys never even got the chance to run one. the vast majority of 3rd gens out there are 305's, which suck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big hammer

i think it was because they were fairly rare, and alot of 5.0 boys never even got the chance to run one. the vast majority of 3rd gens out there are 305's, which suck.

---

Yeah, the 305 cars were cheaper + made up about 75% of the production.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

Agreed. By all means they were definitely capable of keeping up with the 87-92 5.0 Mustangs. I don't know where guys got the idea from that they don't?

---

Me neither. Not sure where the rumors started or how they got such a reputation,,,guess you had to be there to experience first hand. Most of the people here are too young to even remember that stuff when it was new. Comparing how one may run today as apposed to how they ran when new is not apples to oranges anyway,,,,unless you find an unmolested low mileage example like I had ;) But those 3rd gens are extremely hard to find in that condition if not impossible now. Shucks even the 4th gens are becoming hard to find unmolested.

For mine to run damn near what my stock LS1 runs,,,and doing very little to it to get it there,,,,says something about the potential of those cars. Give credit where credit is due,,,,if it weren't for those cars the 4th gens wouldn't be here...:)

Since I have gotten used to the smaller displacement of my car...I can provide you guys with a few times with a near stock car (I do have the off-road x pipe and a 93 octane tune) but other than that...it is a heavy stock Mustang GT (weight is 3720 lbs with me sitting in it). As proof, I do have a link.
http://www.dragtimes.com/Ford-Mustan...lip-14974.html

The last few runs are
R/T 60ft 330ft 1/8 MPH 1000ft 1/4 MPH
.095 2.069 5.683 8.695 82.39 11.277 13.457 103.63
.290 2.026 5.664 8.658 82.47 11.240 13.420 103.77
.091 2.086 5.742 8.738 82.49 11.317 13.496 103.75
.106 2.064 5.697 8.683 82.52 11.252 13.421 104.04
.331 2.037 5.697 8.693 82.51 11.271 13.447 103.89

All are at Beech Bend raceway in Kentucky.

Track conditions play an important part in your times as evidence in the following times at Union Hill raceway in Tennessee.


R/t 60 ft 330ft 594ft 1/8 MPH

.3320 1.9652 5.6342 8.1108 8.6630 81.50
.4849 1.9582 5.5102 7.9899 8.5439 81.23

The driver, conditions (weather and track) all play an important part in the outcome of a race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big hammer

i think it was because they were fairly rare, and alot of 5.0 boys never even got the chance to run one. the vast majority of 3rd gens out there are 305's, which suck.

---

I assume you mean the 305 TBI. As far as I can remember reading articles the 305 TPI with the G80/G92 options wasn't that far away from the 350 TPI's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swisscheese

I assume you mean the 305 TBI. As far as I can remember reading articles the 305 TPI with the G80/G92 options wasn't that far away from the 350 TPI's

---

That very well could be....those options you mention give the car the optional 3.23 or 3.27 gears if memory serves (depending on rearend manufacture,,,gm verses aussie)
305 TPI's with the gears weren't bad performers back in the day, and the 5 speed was available with the 305 as well. A friend of mine bought the 305 TPI new in 1986 and loaded it with everything, that car cracked the high 14's back then, not bad for a little motor. It was spunky on the street and would give some GT's fits.

Keeping in mind the TPI setup was originally designed for the 305 ci engine anyway, and they ran exceptionally well with it. When the 350's came out later on,,,,rather than redesign the TPI setup for a larger motor, it was cheaper for GM to just slap the TPI on the 350 as is,,,,,as a result the runner size was a little small etc....but it worked well enough for the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firebirdjones

That very well could be....those options you mention give the car the optional 3.23 or 3.27 gears if memory serves (depending on rearend manufacture,,,gm verses aussie)
305 TPI's with the gears weren't bad performers back in the day, and the 5 speed was available with the 305 as well. A friend of mine bought the 305 TPI new in 1986 and loaded it with everything, that car cracked the high 14's back then, not bad for a little motor. It was spunky on the street and would give some GT's fits.

Keeping in mind the TPI setup was originally designed for the 305 ci engine anyway, and they ran exceptionally well with it. When the 350's came out later on,,,,rather than redesign the TPI setup for a larger motor, it was cheaper for GM to just slap the TPI on the 350 as is,,,,,as a result the runner size was a little small etc....but it worked well enough for the time.

---

yeah i just sold mine in jan. this year '87 iroc-z 88,000 documented miles, 305 tpi, unmolested, i have to say it was a quick little car for a 305, just not a good platform to build off of.

I had an 88 Formula WS6 with the 305 TPI and 700r4 (stock). Low end torque was killer in it. It was amazing squeeling the tires and leaving black marks from burnouts. Also it embarassed quite a few 350s carbed and TBI camaros and firebirds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2-bowties&abird

yeah i just sold mine in jan. this year '87 iroc-z 88,000 documented miles, 305 tpi, unmolested, i have to say it was a quick little car for a 305, just not a good platform to build off of.

---

I don't understand the platform comment. They are literally the same chassis design as a 4th gen, they are all good platforms to start with.

There are a ton of 3rd gens turned into race cars at the track,,,,not only are they good platforms,,,but they are cheap to buy,,,,which makes them even more tempting to racers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Firebirdjones

I don't understand the platform comment. They are literally the same chassis design as a 4th gen, they are all good platforms to start with.

There are a ton of 3rd gens turned into race cars at the track,,,,not only are they good platforms,,,but they are cheap to buy,,,,which makes them even more tempting to racers.

---

well what i meant was mainly a 305 is not a good motor to mod, along with all other things i would have had to do such as tranny, rear, sub frame connectors etc. by the time i would have done all that to that iroc i would have probably spent just as much as i have invested in my ws6, not to mention there was absolutely nothing wrong with the 305 and would have been a shame to pull that motor taking away from the originality of the car.

now it may have been a different story if it was a POS with 150,000+ miles on it. it was just in to good of shape to go hacking on. not to say i'm hacking on my ws6, but you really dont have to do a whole lot to an ls1 to make it alot faster such as pulling motors.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/100_0017.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...d/100_0026.jpg

Those times are definately off but anyone who has ever raced at Memphis motorsports park will tell ya humidity kills times down here, and unless there was a major race beforehand track prep sucks. Hell I dyno'd the GTO a couple weeks ago and the humity reading then was 56%. Today I know it is much higher so if anyone ran there tonight the times would probably be several tenths off of what it should be.

As far as the new stangs go I have seen one run 13.5 at like 98/99ish for a 5 speed but it was on a night with decent air. I still couldn't hook that night and ran a 13.3 @ 107 with an Air compressor in the well for traction still only managed a 2.10 60'. High 13's, low 14's for stock(ish)LS1's in Memphis is fairly common except after major races and decent air quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GottaHaveLS1

I don't race at the track at all.... but i hate the new GT's and pretty much all of them unless they're heavily modded. They look "OK" but it's been 10 years and they're still slower than an ls1. not to mention that i see at least 12 mustangs per day

---

Aint that the truth brother.:yup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2-bowties&abird

well what i meant was mainly a 305 is not a good motor to mod, along with all other things i would have had to do such as tranny, rear, sub frame connectors etc. by the time i would have done all that to that iroc i would have probably spent just as much as i have invested in my ws6, not to mention there was absolutely nothing wrong with the 305 and would have been a shame to pull that motor taking away from the originality of the car.

now it may have been a different story if it was a POS with 150,000+ miles on it. it was just in to good of shape to go hacking on. not to say i'm hacking on my ws6, but you really dont have to do a whole lot to an ls1 to make it alot faster such as pulling motors.

---

I understand completely. My Iroc was an L-98 car (350 TPI) and was very low miles, unrestored much like you described. Only 50,000 miles when I sold the car last year. I did a couple of very simple bolt on's (shorty headers and fuel pressure regulator) and had the car running 13.90's at 99 mph on street rubber, with 2.77 gears :ughlaugh: I was reluctant to do much more with the car for reasons you described, car was just too nice to hack on.

But I agree, there are ton of them cheap with well over 100,000 miles,,,,great for race car projects. Thats my line of thinking which is why I got a little lost with the comment you made :)

a guy i work with said his neighbor just bought one for his wife for their anniversary. he said it was some kind of limited edition that he paid 100,000 for and it had 400hp and that i might have a little competition. i told him the sad thing was he paid all that money for that mustang and thats about all i might have "a little competition". i also mentioned like gottahave said that it's pathetic that it has taken 10 years for ford to almost catch up to the f-body, and what did he think would happen next year when the new camaro hits the street. it makes me sick when people say "i dont know you think you can keep up with one of those new mustang gt's"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2-bowties&abird

a guy i work with said his neighbor just bought one for his wife for their anniversary. he said it was some kind of limited edition that he paid 100,000 for and it had 400hp and that i might have a little competition. i told him the sad thing was he paid all that money for that mustang and thats about all i might have "a little competition". i also mentioned like gottahave said that it's pathetic that it has taken 10 years for ford to almost catch up to the f-body, and what did he think would happen next year when the new camaro hits the street. it makes me sick when people say "i dont know you think you can keep up with one of those new mustang gt's"

---

lol!

Mustangs aint shit. When you compare apples and apples, the Camaro always has and always will come out on top. People compare the Cobra to a T/A or SS. What the hell?!? Isn't really fair to compare a FI car that doesn't even have a equal competitor to a NA car. Sad thing is it can at least hold its own against a Cobra...A fair comparison would be a GT and a SS or Z28 even, in which the Mustang would get RAPED no matter what. I'm sure had GM had a FI car the Cobra wouldn't even be competition.

Everyone has their opinion...but, last Saturday night at Beech Bend, I raced a 1999 Z-28 with after market headers and 4:10 gears with my Roush Stage 1 with just off-road X pipes and a 93 octane tune and I ran a 13.49 with 3.55 gears and he couldn't get his below a 14.0. Both cars ran street tires and both cars were running slow in 94 degree temps, very high humidity (90 something percent) and the barometer pressure was at 30.14 inches. That killed both our times. They had 6 Corvettes (1 Z06) running that night and the regular Corvettes were in the 13.98-14.21's. The Z06 ran a 13.1 late in the evening. But for a small N/A engine (281 cubic inches) I think the Mustang GT is a stout (although heavy (mine weighs 3720 lbs with me sitting in it and a 1/2 tank of gas)) car and very good at embarrassing Z-28's and SS's. The 03-04 Terminator Cobra was designed to equal (not exceed) the performance of the stock 'vette and did so very well. Ford doesn't try to compete with the F-bodies. They never did. They never had to. Mustangs keep outselling all the F-bodies and Corvettes put together. Car makers are in the buisness of making money, competition is a sideline to sales. But while the Z-28 guy and I were talking, we watched a Shelby GT-500 run a 12.1. Now I'm sure he swapped pullies on the blower (about a 10 minute change including a retune) but what would you have to do to an F-body to run that kind of a time? I am not knocking the F-bodies. They are fantastic cars. I'd love to have one. But as of right now...their are no new ones to be had. I wanted a new car that I could build upon and their was only one choice. The new Camaro is going to be alot heavier (current est. is about 3800-3900 lbs (but we will wait and see)). That is alot more weight than you guys have now. Although it is lighter than the new Challenger at 4100 + lbs (I used to own 2 of them. A 1970 and a 1973). So say what you want about the Mustangs...I think Ford did them right for a change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedRoushOne

Everyone has their opinion...but, last Saturday night at Beech Bend, I raced a 1999 Z-28 with after market headers and 4:10 gears with my Roush Stage 1 with just off-road X pipes and a 93 octane tune and I ran a 13.49 with 3.55 gears and he couldn't get his below a 14.0. Both cars ran street tires and both cars were running slow in 94 degree temps, very high humidity (90 something percent) and the barometer pressure was at 30.14 inches. That killed both our times. They had 6 Corvettes (1 Z06) running that night and the regular Corvettes were in the 13.98-14.21's. The Z06 ran a 13.1 late in the evening. But for a small N/A engine (281 cubic inches) I think the Mustang GT is a stout (although heavy (mine weighs 3720 lbs with me sitting in it and a 1/2 tank of gas)) car and very good at embarrassing Z-28's and SS's. The 03-04 Terminator Cobra was designed to equal (not exceed) the performance of the stock 'vette and did so very well. Ford doesn't try to compete with the F-bodies. They never did. They never had to. Mustangs keep outselling all the F-bodies and Corvettes put together. Car makers are in the buisness of making money, competition is a sideline to sales. But while the Z-28 guy and I were talking, we watched a Shelby GT-500 run a 12.1. Now I'm sure he swapped pullies on the blower (about a 10 minute change including a retune) but what would you have to do to an F-body to run that kind of a time? I am not knocking the F-bodies. They are fantastic cars. I'd love to have one. But as of right now...their are no new ones to be had. I wanted a new car that I could build upon and their was only one choice. The new Camaro is going to be alot heavier (current est. is about 3800-3900 lbs (but we will wait and see)). That is alot more weight than you guys have now. Although it is lighter than the new Challenger at 4100 + lbs (I used to own 2 of them. A 1970 and a 1973). So say what you want about the Mustangs...I think Ford did them right for a change.

---

I don't know if I would call the 281 4-valve "stout", and I definitely wouldn't call it good at embarrassing the Z28 and SS. That's just flat out sh*t shooting out of your mouth. Nowhere near stout, considering the fact that a built N/A 4.6 cost a hideous amount of money to build a potent bottom-end/heads+cams setup and it will never come close to what a N/A LSx is capable of. In N/A form a 4.6L is pretty much garbage. A stock S197 GT does not put out the power nor torque of an LS1 F-bod, and is NOT identical in quarter-mile times. A stock LS1 car embarrasing a bolt-on GT is a more realistic scenario. The only way a GT is going to embarrass an LS1 is if it's got mods, period. Stock for stock, there not even close. Come on now, even you know that much.

As far as the Cobra equalling the Corvette, be more specific and say "base" Corvette, because it wasn't touching the Z06 - so get that right.

An what does it take to run 12.1 in an F-body? Are you kidding me? That's not sh*t. My old '93 LT1 wen't 12.2@109 w/ full bolt-ons and weight reduction w/ 106,xxx on the original bottom-end. And that's an LT1. I've seen bolt-on LS1 cars in the 11's. We don't need no freakin' supercharger. You've got "cam-only" LS1's running low 10's. Us enthusiasts are referring to performance, not sales. We as the buyers benifit nothing from what revenue Ford or GM makes upon vehicle sales. Were the ones putting money in their pocket, so I never understood why someone would wan't to ride the nuts of these corporate buisnesses and preach about how much money they make - when they're not seeing a dime. Do your homework next time before posting some garbage like that. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedRoushOne

Everyone has their opinion...but, last Saturday night at Beech Bend, I raced a 1999 Z-28 with after market headers and 4:10 gears with my Roush Stage 1 with just off-road X pipes and a 93 octane tune and I ran a 13.49 with 3.55 gears and he couldn't get his below a 14.0. Both cars ran street tires and both cars were running slow in 94 degree temps, very high humidity (90 something percent) and the barometer pressure was at 30.14 inches. That killed both our times. They had 6 Corvettes (1 Z06) running that night and the regular Corvettes were in the 13.98-14.21's. The Z06 ran a 13.1 late in the evening. But for a small N/A engine (281 cubic inches) I think the Mustang GT is a stout (although heavy (mine weighs 3720 lbs with me sitting in it and a 1/2 tank of gas)) car and very good at embarrassing Z-28's and SS's. The 03-04 Terminator Cobra was designed to equal (not exceed) the performance of the stock 'vette and did so very well. Ford doesn't try to compete with the F-bodies. They never did. They never had to. Mustangs keep outselling all the F-bodies and Corvettes put together. Car makers are in the buisness of making money, competition is a sideline to sales. But while the Z-28 guy and I were talking, we watched a Shelby GT-500 run a 12.1. Now I'm sure he swapped pullies on the blower (about a 10 minute change including a retune) but what would you have to do to an F-body to run that kind of a time? I am not knocking the F-bodies. They are fantastic cars. I'd love to have one. But as of right now...their are no new ones to be had. I wanted a new car that I could build upon and their was only one choice. The new Camaro is going to be alot heavier (current est. is about 3800-3900 lbs (but we will wait and see)). That is alot more weight than you guys have now. Although it is lighter than the new Challenger at 4100 + lbs (I used to own 2 of them. A 1970 and a 1973). So say what you want about the Mustangs...I think Ford did them right for a change.

---

i wouldnt even waste my gas racing u........just another rustang troll making shit up

The 281 gives away 65 cubic inches to your LS1. Take a cylinder and a half away from your car and see what kind of power you make.

Yup, the 4 - valve does cost alot to hop up in the cam department and heads. You go out and buy 4 cams and see what it cost you. But since I'm a 3 Valve...I only have to buy 2. Any aluminum heads are expensive...not just Fords.


The only way a GT is going to embarrass an LS1 is if it's got mods, period. Stock for stock, there not even close. Come on now, even you know that much. http://www.exoticcarsite.com/0-60-qu...mile-times.htm <- check this out.

As far as the Cobra equalling the Corvette, be more specific and say "base" Corvette, because it wasn't touching the Z06 - so get that right. I was referring to the "base" Corvette. Ford put out the GT to deal with the Z06 and the ZR1. But since I own neither, it doesn't matter to me.

You've got "cam-only" LS1's running low 10's Now...who is talking garbage?

My old '93 LT1 wen't 12.2@109 w/ full bolt-ons and weight reduction w/ 106,xxx on the original bottom-end. I have a friend who did that to a Fox body and got rid of the fuel injection and runs 10.3's with just twisted flow heads, cam, rear end gears, and of course, the intake manifold and carb. I wouldn't drive it on the steets and I really can't ride in it (only 1 seat).

We as the buyers benifit nothing from what revenue Ford or GM makes upon vehicle sales. The more cars they sell, the more the after market makes parts for. We do benefit alot from car sales. Look at the parts for SUV's and trucks verses something like the Mini Coopers. If they didn't sell the car, no after market competition and very little performance parts. Also, if the car does not sell...they quit making it. No one knows this better than you guys.
I did't get on here to bash F-bodies. I wouldn't have joined this site if I didn't like F-Bodies. At the very least...if I wanted to bash you guys...I would have disguised myself. We have some very fine F-bodies around here and some of them are the quickest in the country, and alot of them are my closest friends. I like all American made pony cars and I work in the automotive field (my company makes the Corvette frames and it's one of the best frames out there, I'll brag about that all day long). I live about 40 miles away from the Corvette Capital of the world (Bowling Green Kentucky). But for someone to bash Mustangs when they do not know what they are talking about...
As for the guy who wouldn't waste his gas racing me....fantastic! Beat up on the imports. That's what I try to do.

14.3! That's P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C. My old LT1 will kick its ass. If you want performance don't waste your time with a Ford.

http://eatourbrains.com/EoB/wp-conte...7/05/troll.jpg

you guys enough. mustangs are slow but they're great cars.....





































for ladies.

^^^ LOL Mustang GT owners are in denial, Cobra owners have some sense though but nothing tops those GT owners lol

i refuse to race my buddies 96 cobra till he gets drag radials. i dont want any excuses when i rape that car. and i dont have drag radials.

I found absolutely nothing in your response worth noting, except for this comment you made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedRoushOne

You've got "cam-only" LS1's running low 10's Now...who is talking garbage?

---

Now I shall school you once again...click below

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187330

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedRoushOne

The 281 gives away 65 cubic inches to your LS1. Take a cylinder and a half away from your car and see what kind of power you make.

Yup, the 4 - valve does cost alot to hop up in the cam department and heads. You go out and buy 4 cams and see what it cost you. But since I'm a 3 Valve...I only have to buy 2. Any aluminum heads are expensive...not just Fords.


The only way a GT is going to embarrass an LS1 is if it's got mods, period. Stock for stock, there not even close. Come on now, even you know that much. http://www.exoticcarsite.com/0-60-qu...mile-times.htm <- check this out.

As far as the Cobra equalling the Corvette, be more specific and say "base" Corvette, because it wasn't touching the Z06 - so get that right. I was referring to the "base" Corvette. Ford put out the GT to deal with the Z06 and the ZR1. But since I own neither, it doesn't matter to me.

You've got "cam-only" LS1's running low 10's Now...who is talking garbage?

My old '93 LT1 wen't 12.2@109 w/ full bolt-ons and weight reduction w/ 106,xxx on the original bottom-end. I have a friend who did that to a Fox body and got rid of the fuel injection and runs 10.3's with just twisted flow heads, cam, rear end gears, and of course, the intake manifold and carb. I wouldn't drive it on the steets and I really can't ride in it (only 1 seat).

We as the buyers benifit nothing from what revenue Ford or GM makes upon vehicle sales. The more cars they sell, the more the after market makes parts for. We do benefit alot from car sales. Look at the parts for SUV's and trucks verses something like the Mini Coopers. If they didn't sell the car, no after market competition and very little performance parts. Also, if the car does not sell...they quit making it. No one knows this better than you guys.
I did't get on here to bash F-bodies. I wouldn't have joined this site if I didn't like F-Bodies. At the very least...if I wanted to bash you guys...I would have disguised myself. We have some very fine F-bodies around here and some of them are the quickest in the country, and alot of them are my closest friends. I like all American made pony cars and I work in the automotive field (my company makes the Corvette frames and it's one of the best frames out there, I'll brag about that all day long). I live about 40 miles away from the Corvette Capital of the world (Bowling Green Kentucky). But for someone to bash Mustangs when they do not know what they are talking about...
As for the guy who wouldn't waste his gas racing me....fantastic! Beat up on the imports. That's what I try to do.

---

Don't know where you get your info from, not sure I care really.. I don't go to the Ford Forums an post how I whipped the living shit out of a brand new supercharged GT/CS with Temp plates on it with my 8 year old 93k mile F-Body... Hell I ran down one of these on Sr-18 three weeks ago http://www.landmarkford.com/exotic-n...eHistory=true# Took me til about 150 plus.. and perhaps he just backed out of it. But for 65-70k I would have thought it would have disappeared over the horizon on my ole rattle trap :flex:
If, and I repeat if you play nice, lot's more here will respond to you civilly, we have some great members with Stangs. Most of us respect a fast car... Don't much care for sh*t talking tho. And some of these boys have been around long enough to sniff it it fast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

I don't know if I would call the 281 4-valve "stout", and I definitely wouldn't call it good at embarrassing the Z28 and SS. That's just flat out sh*t shooting out of your mouth. Nowhere near stout, considering the fact that a built N/A 4.6 cost a hideous amount of money to build a potent bottom-end/heads+cams setup and it will never come close to what a N/A LSx is capable of. In N/A form a 4.6L is pretty much garbage. A stock S197 GT does not put out the power nor torque of an LS1 F-bod, and is NOT identical in quarter-mile times. A stock LS1 car embarrasing a bolt-on GT is a more realistic scenario. The only way a GT is going to embarrass an LS1 is if it's got mods, period. Stock for stock, there not even close. Come on now, even you know that much.

As far as the Cobra equalling the Corvette, be more specific and say "base" Corvette, because it wasn't touching the Z06 - so get that right.

An what does it take to run 12.1 in an F-body? Are you kidding me? That's not sh*t. My old '93 LT1 wen't 12.2@109 w/ full bolt-ons and weight reduction w/ 106,xxx on the original bottom-end. And that's an LT1. I've seen bolt-on LS1 cars in the 11's. We don't need no freakin' supercharger. You've got "cam-only" LS1's running low 10's. Us enthusiasts are referring to performance, not sales. We as the buyers benifit nothing from what revenue Ford or GM makes upon vehicle sales. Were the ones putting money in their pocket, so I never understood why someone would wan't to ride the nuts of these corporate buisnesses and preach about how much money they make - when they're not seeing a dime. Do your homework next time before posting some garbage like that. Thank you.

---

amen brother amen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

I found absolutely nothing in your response worth noting, except for this comment you made.



Now I shall school you once again...click below

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187330

---

School yourself.....Look at the back tires...Drag Radials....no F-bodies came with drag radials

ls1s are superior to mustangs.. no matter what blah blah blah... mustangs have smaller engines and IF they had bigger engines they would be faster... BUT THEY DONT.. yes they have supercharged mustangs... but then supercharged stock for stock they are just hardly annihilating ls1s.. hell the newest top dog mustang is what 10 years newere than fbodys and its running 6tenths faster and outrapping it by what 6-7 mph.. sad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squee

Mustangs aint shit. When you compare apples and apples, the Camaro always has and always will come out on top. People compare the Cobra to a T/A or SS. What the hell?!? Isn't really fair to compare a FI car that doesn't even have a equal competitor to a NA car. Sad thing is it can at least hold its own against a Cobra...A fair comparison would be a GT and a SS or Z28 even, in which the Mustang would get RAPED no matter what. I'm sure had GM had a FI car the Cobra wouldn't even be competition.

---

I somewhat disagree... The Mach 1 w/ a good driver is a great race for a LS1 car, so very few just know how to drive them. I saw a dude in a Mach 1(stock) go 13.1 at 106. I saw him again in his new 05 Goat. First run ever he went 13.1 at 107, by the end of the night he was running 12.9s at 108, M6 car. Dude could drive pretty darn good.

I think as far as the Chevy FI vs Ford FI debate, not sure. I would think the extra cubes would come into play but isn't the Termy a S/C Mach 1 motor?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedRoushOne

School yourself.....Look at the back tires...Drag Radials....no F-bodies came with drag radials

---

Actually, is this true? I thought they made a Roller T/A w/ no air, no radio, built to race and came w/ DR's. It was a limited production car. One of my buddies had one. I don't remember the full details on the car though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImpalaSSpeed96

I somewhat disagree... The Mach 1 w/ a good driver is a great race for a LS1 car, so very few just know how to drive them. I saw a dude in a Mach 1(stock) go 13.1 at 106. I saw him again in his new 05 Goat. First run ever he went 13.1 at 107, by the end of the night he was running 12.9s at 108, M6 car. Dude could drive pretty darn good.

I think as far as the Chevy FI vs Ford FI debate, not sure. I would think the extra cubes would come into play but isn't the Termy a S/C Mach 1 motor?

---

Gotta say I agree with the Mach's being stout car's... And they sound great too. Test drove a couple, M5 car's. If it wasn't for the interior trim issues and seat feeling sorta weird. I would be in one now. Don't take that for not loving my SS, but those cars were pretty freaking nice.

Mustang owners make me laugh.

:spit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImpalaSSpeed96

I somewhat disagree... The Mach 1 w/ a good driver is a great race for a LS1 car, so very few just know how to drive them. I saw a dude in a Mach 1(stock) go 13.1 at 106. I saw him again in his new 05 Goat. First run ever he went 13.1 at 107, by the end of the night he was running 12.9s at 108, M6 car. Dude could drive pretty darn good.

I think as far as the Chevy FI vs Ford FI debate, not sure. I would think the extra cubes would come into play but isn't the Termy a S/C Mach 1 motor?

---

'03/'04 Mach 1's are impressive no doubt, but I would still put my money on the LS1 car w/ equal drivers, basing my opinion off of what I have seen between the two over the years.

The Mach 1 is basically identical to the '03/'04 Cobra motor, except for a few differences, such as the automatic-trans equipped Mach's came w/ a cast-crankshaft versus a forged piece for the M5 cars.

The heads and cams of the 03/04 Mach and the 03/04 Cobra are the same. Everything else is different, including the block, pistons, rods, & intake.

The Mach is a good run for an LS1 F-body, but I too would give the edge to the LS1, everything else being equal (and it seldom is).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLKCLOUD

The Mach is a good run for an LS1 F-body, but I too would give the edge to the LS1, everything else being equal (and it seldom is).

---

So very true Cloud. In several cases I have come across Mustang owners who told me their cars were stock when they were heavily modded. Of course they never beat me, but it proves what a bunch of dreamers they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Black R/A

So very true Cloud. In several cases I have come across Mustang owners who told me their cars were stock when they were heavily modded. Of course they never beat me, but it proves what a bunch of dreamers they are.

---

Mine's stock I swear! :kick:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N20LT4

I have yet to see one in person match the magazine's claim of 13.5 seconds in the quarter for an M5, and 13.6 for an A5. Most I see are in the high 13's to low 14's.

---

There are ALOT of below average Stang drivers. You see so many of them, but the majority can't drive. There are plenty mid 13 second M5's. I"ve seen a couple 13.2 timeslips as the fastest, usually the 06's, which was the best year. The 08+ added weight and came only with optional 3.55's.