Mustang GT vs. Z28

[speedracer95v6]

Mustangs are nice and have more comfortable interiors...

that said, my friends 97 LT1 z28 6 spd ran a spinning 13.8 at the track with catback exhaust....the 02-04 mustang gt's (all 5 speeds) that go to the track with us only post a fastest of 13.9 with intake, exhaust, pulleys, and sticky tires.

both equal drivers on the fastest cars, but barely anything done to the camaro.

[camaro_speedemon]

Originally posted by 1998silverbird:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mighty Thor:
Mustangs is loaded with aftermarket stuff. Probably 5 times more than F-cars. Just look at the different companies, catalogs, and such.

Thats because they start out a second slower then a stock LS1 F-body!! All you need is a Heads and cam LS1 and unless you build your 4.6 to handle 15-20lbs of boost you will have no chance against an all motor Heads and cam LS1.. </font>[/QUOTE]No one is arguing the fact that a stock LS1 is faster than a stock GT.

Do you even know what your talking about? I know someone who ran a 14.6 with an LS1, that doesn't mean they all do. 4.10 gears and exhaust will put a GT right with a stock LS1.


Or you can do gears and swap the SOHC heads with the DOHC cobra/mach 1 heads and a cam and be running mid-high 12's all day long.

But arguing like this is just retarded. "if you did this this and this, you'd smoke the mustang" or "if I did this this and this, i'd smoke an LS1"

They're both fast cars, they both can be modded to be equally fast. All in all, it just comes down to preference. To say one is 'better' then the other, is just stupid, because they aren't. LS1's respond well to NA mods. The modular fords respond better to FI mods. I personally like the way my mustang drives more then my fbody did, but thats my personal opinion.

And btw, the ford pistons are probably smaller because it's only a 4.6L compared to the LS1's 5.7L.

And to answer your question, an exhaust GT will put about 250 to the ground, but please remember the stangs are a few hundred pounds lighter then the fbodys ;)

Edit: BTW, the general consensus seems to be that intakes are a waste of money on stangs, they only add 1-2 RWHP.

Edit 2: Also, catbacks don't do much for the stangs either, all the gains are made by headers and crossover pipes. So saying a catback stang only runs xx.xx isnt exactly fair. You wont see gains with a catback and a CAI like you would with an Fbody with same mods. I want to say that exhaust and intake only net maybe 10HP combined(going off memory here) if you don't run an H or X pipe. With just the crossover pipe and nothing else, your looking at ~18RWHP gain.

[ November 17, 2005, 03:31 AM: Message edited by: camaro_speedemon ]

[ellik]

^ try looking into the JLT cold air setup. They seem to have a really good rep from everyone that uses their setup. Supposed to show much better gains than say a Mac CAI

http://www.jlttruecoldair.com/

[FunkZ]

Hey Ellik, at Maple Grove the other week my first run was against a newer Cobra. He ran a 12.9 to my 15.6 (LOL) I talked to him after the run, he said that was his first time ever at a track.

Is that a normal time for that car? Cause that just seems really fast.

[ellik]

if it was a '99/'01 Cobra, he must have done some work to it. they normally run 13.5ish stock and dyno somewhere around 280-290.

if it was an '03/'04 Cobra, 12.9 is right in the ballpark. They are '03/'04 guys running 12.5 w/ just and intake. they dyno around 360ish stock.

Did he say if it was stock?

[ November 17, 2005, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: ellik ]

[FunkZ]

I didn't ask him, and he didn't say. I got the impression though that it was. It was fairly quiet and there were no obvious modifications.

[vanbibber]

Originally posted by ellik:
if it was a '99/'01 Cobra, he must have done some work to it. they normally run 13.5ish stock and dyno somewhere around 280-290.

they range from 13.7-14.2s around here. ive seen probably 20 of them run no better than 13.9. ive had them cut me off in the lanes just so they dont have to ran neck and neck with a slow old lt1

[ellik]

there was some problem with the '99's from what I understand, and they did run slower. There was a recall on them and when the repairs were made, they should match the '01's. To the best of my knowledge, my '01 *should* run mid 13's. track closed last weekend. Hopefully I'll get a decent set of tires and run it in the spring to let you know.

[KBeezy]

HA, your friends car did THAT little horsepower with those mods? what the **** is wrong with THAT car?

Theres a 2004 GT, yes - 2v SOHC 4.6 - with simply a CAI, mid-pipe w/ cats, and a Borla exhaust that put down 248rwhp. Just those with a short throw shifter, nothing else done to the car..


Sounds like your buddy has a ****box of a car - you sure its not a 3.8? hahahaha. And by the way, your other guy with a stroker 5.0 mod motor should be near the high 300rwhp range - but once again, sounds like people in your area don't know how to build ****. A simple 331 stroker in a SBF will put it at 400rwhp with proper heads. Hell, and thats a budget build with a REAL small cam. Heads, Cam, Intake will put a 302 at 400rwhp no problem with bolt-ons and walk all over LS1s because of the weight factor (Fox body anyways)...


You, my friend, have no idea what you are talking about with Mustangs. It's all in the tune [img]smile.gif[/img]

[1998silverbird]

Originally posted by camaro_speedemon:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 1998silverbird:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mighty Thor:
Mustangs is loaded with aftermarket stuff. Probably 5 times more than F-cars. Just look at the different companies, catalogs, and such.

Thats because they start out a second slower then a stock LS1 F-body!! All you need is a Heads and cam LS1 and unless you build your 4.6 to handle 15-20lbs of boost you will have no chance against an all motor Heads and cam LS1.. </font>[/QUOTE]No one is arguing the fact that a stock LS1 is faster than a stock GT.

Do you even know what your talking about? I know someone who ran a 14.6 with an LS1, that doesn't mean they all do. 4.10 gears and exhaust will put a GT right with a stock LS1.


Or you can do gears and swap the SOHC heads with the DOHC cobra/mach 1 heads and a cam and be running mid-high 12's all day long.

But arguing like this is just retarded. "if you did this this and this, you'd smoke the mustang" or "if I did this this and this, i'd smoke an LS1"

They're both fast cars, they both can be modded to be equally fast. All in all, it just comes down to preference. To say one is 'better' then the other, is just stupid, because they aren't. LS1's respond well to NA mods. The modular fords respond better to FI mods. I personally like the way my mustang drives more then my fbody did, but thats my personal opinion.

And btw, the ford pistons are probably smaller because it's only a 4.6L compared to the LS1's 5.7L.

And to answer your question, an exhaust GT will put about 250 to the ground, but please remember the stangs are a few hundred pounds lighter then the fbodys ;)

Edit: BTW, the general consensus seems to be that intakes are a waste of money on stangs, they only add 1-2 RWHP.

Edit 2: Also, catbacks don't do much for the stangs either, all the gains are made by headers and crossover pipes. So saying a catback stang only runs xx.xx isnt exactly fair. You wont see gains with a catback and a CAI like you would with an Fbody with same mods. I want to say that exhaust and intake only net maybe 10HP combined(going off memory here) if you don't run an H or X pipe. With just the crossover pipe and nothing else, your looking at ~18RWHP gain. </font>[/QUOTE]What are you talking about I know someone who ran a 15.8 in a 2001 GT!! whats your point??

So a 2002 Gt will put down 250 rwhp with a exhaust... well lets do some math.. 260hp stock with a 15% drivetrain loss will give a stock GT 221rwhp.. Put a catback, and prochamber on it and say it gains 18hp from it, which it wont, it would only dyno 239rwhp..

How much does a 2001 GT weigh in at?? My roomates weighed 3360 when it wasnt gutted.. My other buddies 2001 Z28 weighs in at a wopping 3384.. Thats with everything in it.. My roomates mustang dynoed 240ish with all the bolt ons, and my buddies Z dynoed 325 stock!! I dont think 44lbs will matter much in this race!!

I didnt compare a 4.6 piston and rod to a LS1.. I compared a 4.6 rod and piston to a 3.8 GM.. The stock 4.6 sohc pistons and rods are $hitty!!

I like mustangs and when built right with the right combo they haul a$$.. But they are slow with bolt ons compared to GM V8's with bolt ons.. You can say we have more displacement or whatever you want.. I am sorry but I like having a V8 that makes alot of power on motor.. [img]graemlins/rock.gif[/img]

[ellik]

N/A is not the route to go with a mod. motor. The mustang guys will admit that. Strap on a procharger or vortec and its a different story though. $4k w/ 9psi shouldnt kill the motor and still get you well into the 400+RWHP range.

However, even with the 4v, I'll be the first to say I'd rather it had a GM engine

[ November 18, 2005, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: ellik ]

[KBeezy]

ROOOOFFFFLLLL - You are kidding me. 90% of the V6s on here tip the scales at more than 3300lbs. You are smoking some SERIOUS crack here buddy.

[1998silverbird]

Originally posted by ellik:
N/A is not the route to go with a mod. motor. The mustang guys will admit that. Strap on a procharger or vortec and its a different story though. $4k w/ 9psi shouldnt kill the motor and still get you well into the 400+RWHP range.

However, even with the 4v, I'll be the first to say I'd rather it had a GM engine

It will kill the motor.. There are 2 main shops hear in Virginia Beach.. MAS, and Steen Racing.. each one of them have about 10 mustangs with mod motors out front with blown engines.. all were stock motors with S trims, or Novi 2000's..Ford didnt make the 2v 4.6 a strong bottom end.. It can handle 350rwhp safely.. Ubove that I wouldnt push it.. If you want to make 400 plus hp and not have to worry about the motor breaking then get a built short block.. Ask anyone who took apart a 96-04 2v motor and see what they think about the bottom end.. My stock V6 firebird lasted 2years on nitrous with 65 bottles threw it, my roomates 01 GT lasted 6 months with nitrous with 4 bottles threw it..

[1998silverbird]

Originally posted by KBeezy:
ROOOOFFFFLLLL - You are kidding me. 90% of the V6s on here tip the scales at more than 3300lbs. You are smoking some SERIOUS crack here buddy.

my 98 firebird with a V6, t-tops, T5, power windows, doorlocks, none leather, none monsoon, 16inch wheels tipped the scales at 3340..

My buddies 01 Z28.. LS1, T56, Non power options, No T-tops, No monsoon, No leather, 16 inch wheels tipped the scales at 3384...

My roomates 01 Mustang GT.. 4.6, T45, power windows and locks, Non leather, 17inch wheels.. 3360

How much heavier do you think a all aluminum motor V8 is compared to a All cast iron V6?? I bet the LS1 and the 3.8 weigh ruffly the same.. My LS1 heads both weigh the same if not real close to one of my V6's heads.. My LS1 intake is plastic unlike my 3.8 intake which was 2 piece cast Iron. The trannies heavier between the T5, T56.. Auto's weigh the same.. The rear ends are the same on V8's and V6's.. The interior is the same..

[redline360]

Just drive both and buy what u like. Like others have stated stick to the 99+ or 94,95 stangs. AS far mustangs being more comfortable....hell no, dunno what people r thinking. Mustangs are deff easier to drive daily(doesnt feel like your riding on the ground).