98 z28 vs 98 cobra

**Oceanside78** · 07-23-2012, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by Too Fast

I figured those 4.10s were helping him on the 0-60, not the 30 and up to triple digets. '98 Cobras, after the factory fix, were running 14.0? About the same as a new 2.73 AT LS1 I thought.

I was talking more about his IMRCs. 4.10s don't kill out top end. 4.30s+ do. A 100% stock 96-98 cobra usually runs around a 13.8 and trap a 103. The cars respond great to mods. But, they really take a drivers mod to be quick. You can't take em to redline (7100 rpm) and the junk of a transmission (T45) really takes finess to not miss shifts.

**Too Fast** · 07-25-2012, 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by RagTop

My stock 2.73 AT LS1 with a lid ran a 13.44 on streets as stated earlier. I took it to the track hoping to break 14.0. First pass was a 13.87 and it kept getting quicker on each succive pass as I figured out how to drive it through the traps.

Pretty good. I had a 98 Trans Am with 2.73 and AT, my best in that car was a 13.65 @ 103.3. Usually a couple tenths slower than that @ 100. I've always run Goodyear/Bridgestone summer performance tires, but no ET streets.

**WICKEDLS1** · 07-25-2012, 10:22 AM

13.2 @ 107 In my 01 ss AT all stock other then a muffler that was the best i could get out of it before i got the mod bug

i dont have much experience with the 98 cobras however i have run an 01 numerous times. when i was stock it was a decent race from a 30 usually had about a car on him. he had intake exhaust and a tune.

ran him after the cam and heads swap and lets just say you can measure in air craft carrier lengths

**Oceanside78** · 07-25-2012, 06:43 PM

That's why I want out of ford. It's just too damn expensive to make fast. I feel like I beat up on Hondas and F bodies beat up on me. I've only beat 1 WS6 once and it was close, and I think it was cause he was a shit driver. I do like the handling though. Mine has a lot of suspension done for intentions of auto-x but it just never happened. 90% of what I do is drag race, so I figure I might as well get something quicker.

I will say, if they can afford it, cobras are down right nasty on boost. The stock blocks handle around 550, add that with light weight and decent gears and they down right move out

**Ieatstangs** · 07-25-2012, 07:29 PM

Ls1's are nasty boosted as well but ....u can make anything fast as long as your pockets are deep enough

**Oceanside78** · 07-25-2012, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by Ieatstangs

Ls1's are nasty boosted as well but ....u can make anything fast as long as your pockets are deep enough

True story. What can I expect out of a bolted GTO with 100 shot? That's the plan at least. 5.7 btw, 6.0s are kinda out of my budget

**Ieatstangs** · 07-25-2012, 08:20 PM

I've read different numbers but u can never kno until u get it bolt em on and run it ....why Not get a early ctsv but gto's are heavy but they are so much more comfortable than the fbodys ....I had dreams of a gto but my next car will hopefully be a ctsv .....the looks you'd get from mustangs and some fbodys after u had them their asses in Cadillac sedan would be priceless ....

**Oceanside78** · 07-25-2012, 08:30 PM

Only reason with those is the interior is kinda cheaply and flimsy and the rear ends are junk. My busy has a HCI GTO with a few other mods and it's exactly as fast as I want. Low 12/high 11s, reliable, and sounds mean.

**Too Fast** · 07-26-2012, 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by Oceanside78

I was talking more about his IMRCs. 4.10s don't kill out top end. 4.30s+ do. A 100% stock 96-98 cobra usually runs around a 13.8 and trap a 103. The cars respond great to mods. But, they really take a drivers mod to be quick. You can't take em to redline (7100 rpm) and the junk of a transmission (T45) really takes finess to not miss shifts.

That fast? I don't remember magazines getting those times out of the '98 Cobras, and I dug thru some time slips from when I had my '98, and one was when I ran late 90s Cobra, it wasn't pretty for him. It's faded, 10 years ago on June 10th 2002, but the slip reports say his time was a14.438 @ 99.61, with a 2.33 60 ft. My '98 did a 13.89 @ 100.74, with a 2.12 60 ft. My notes say the Cobra was a 1997 5 speed, and his time was consistent with what magazines were reporting back then.

**WICKEDLS1** · 07-26-2012, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by Ieatstangs

I've read different numbers but u can never kno until u get it bolt em on and run it ....why Not get a early ctsv but gto's are heavy but they are so much more comfortable than the fbodys ....I had dreams of a gto but my next car will hopefully be a ctsv .....the looks you'd get from mustangs and some fbodys after u had them their asses in Cadillac sedan would be priceless ....

The cts-v is nice and luxurious dont get me wrong ive had one but didnt last long and the pizzaz faded and i came back to camaros lol

**Ieatstangs** · 07-26-2012, 09:49 AM

Did u go back to a 4th gen or 5th gen ....why'd you decide to get rid of it

**WICKEDLS1** · 07-26-2012, 09:53 AM

I went back to a 4th gen i hate 5th gen bodystyling and i just didnt like having 4 doors plus they have there quirks and insurance is RIDICULOUS i paid 325/month for full coverage and only paid 280 for the car payment so that was another factor, and it takes more to get them as fast as cammed camaro or ta

the bottom car on my sig is the one i have now that i got rid of the V for

**Ieatstangs** · 07-26-2012, 10:21 AM

Yeah i kinda like the 5th gens there jus so damn heavy lol but I remember when people weren't fans of the ls1 front facia I think it takes time ....how much did your lq motor run you ...did u choose lq over ls1 for the block strength

**WICKEDLS1** · 07-26-2012, 10:26 AM

well its kind of a long story lol i bought the car with a forged lq9 and it blew up a week after i got it. so i had a place in texas build the 370 short block out of my original lq9. plus i plan to spray ALOT on it and opted for an iron block and forged internals over and aluminum for strength and price difference but have to say im in love with getting shitty at 60

**Oceanside78** · 07-26-2012, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by Too Fast

That fast? I don't remember magazines getting those times out of the '98 Cobras, and I dug thru some time slips from when I had my '98, and one was when I ran late 90s Cobra, it wasn't pretty for him. It's faded, 10 years ago on June 10th 2002, but the slip reports say his time was a14.438 @ 99.61, with a 2.33 60 ft. My '98 did a 13.89 @ 100.74, with a 2.12 60 ft. My notes say the Cobra was a 1997 5 speed, and his time was consistent with what magazines were reporting back then.

That's run of the mill, some slower, some quicker. A buddy has an all stock 98 with a short shifter and cuts consistent 13.7s, but I think he has a factory stud, and, it only has about 50k on the clock, so it's still relatively a fresh car

**SuperSSguy** · 07-26-2012, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by Ieatstangs

....why'd you decide to get rid of it

I think grampa wanted it back.,,,

....

**RagTop** · 08-08-2012, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Too Fast

That fast? I don't remember magazines getting those times out of the '98 Cobras, and I dug thru some time slips from when I had my '98, and one was when I ran late 90s Cobra, it wasn't pretty for him. It's faded, 10 years ago on June 10th 2002, but the slip reports say his time was a14.438 @ 99.61, with a 2.33 60 ft. My '98 did a 13.89 @ 100.74, with a 2.12 60 ft. My notes say the Cobra was a 1997 5 speed, and his time was consistent with what magazines were reporting back then.

14.438 @ 99.61? Wow. I've got a 69 Mustang convertible with 302 that's mildly "heated up" with a cam, 4V, GT40P heads, Tri Y headers and Motorsport roller rockers. It's a C4 3 speed auto with a shift improver kit and 3.55 gears. It ran a best 14.301 @ 99.1 at Sacramento Raceway a few years ago. So I'm quicker than a 90's Cobra? Cool!

**az gt eater** · 08-08-2012, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by SuperSSguy

I think grampa wanted it back.,,,

....

Oh, come on, it would be an absolute blast to get your wifes stuck up friends in the back , put on some opera music, and scare the everloving shit out of them on some back highway racing some stupid ass integra. And, the leather makes it easy to clean up.

**Too Fast** · 08-09-2012, 02:16 AM

Originally Posted by RagTop

14.438 @ 99.61? Wow. I've got a 69 Mustang convertible with 302 that's mildly "heated up" with a cam, 4V, GT40P heads, Tri Y headers and Motorsport roller rockers. It's a C4 3 speed auto with a shift improver kit and 3.55 gears. It ran a best 14.301 @ 99.1 at Sacramento Raceway a few years ago. So I'm quicker than a 90's Cobra? Cool!

Sounds like a nice fun car! I have a '68 Le Mans convertible, it has a 400 4 barrel with headers, flowmaster mufflers. But, with the stupid 2 speed AT and 2.52 rear gears, it sounds good but no acceleration. It's like taking off in 3rd then shifting into OD. I can run low out to 93 MPH before I see 5200 on the tach! Damn kids of mine taking all my fun modding money lol. It needs a 3 speed AT and some 3.55s to be in the 14s like you. Any pics of yours in the classic muscle thread? And you probably confuse people when you say something about the 4V, gen Ys would think you refer to a 4 valve head!

**RagTop** · 08-13-2012, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by WICKEDLS1

13.2 @ 107 In my 01 ss AT all stock other then a muffler that was the best i could get out of it before i got the mod bug

Great time! I'm guessing that your SS has the 3.23 gears instead of the 2.73s. That would probably give you the quicker e.t., but the 107 with the lower gears would tend to indicate that you were making a s--- load of power up top as well. My old girl has 135K on the clock now, so I doubt if it could duplicate that time and trap speed today, but it was pretty impressive (to me at least) for a basically stock car.