View Full Version : Raced a new 5.0


Pages : [1] 2 3

trey1010
01-01-2011, 07:30 PM
Well today on my way to Dallas I ran against a new mustang 5.0. I think it was a special one because I believe it had perhaps a factory body kid and upgraded rims with red centercaps ( looked really good) well he first pulled up beside me
Ad we did a couple quick runs and he got me both of these times by at least a couple cars.
Then we did a few more and he absolutely killed me :(( (. 3-4 cars) my mods are in the sig. What do you all think??

ScreaminRedZ
01-01-2011, 07:47 PM
What sig?

mannyman84
01-01-2011, 07:55 PM
What sig?

Probably has no mods? Idk lol.

Good death. What mods?

raysadude
01-01-2011, 08:12 PM
:wavey: fellow okies,

good death, and i'm agree with the others, what are your mods? if you're stock then the result is expected

trey1010
01-01-2011, 08:53 PM
Sorry my sig disappeared I guess.
99 trans m6. Headers, 3 in exhaust xpipe, ls6 intake, ls7 clutch, lid, p&p tb, tuned (347rwhp,357rwtq)

Mach Boy
01-01-2011, 09:16 PM
Did you start off in a higher gear or what?

assasinator
01-01-2011, 09:21 PM
if he had been all stock you win probably. he was tuned at least IMO.


2011GT's are harder for newbie to drive. the next one you run into you'll kill. driving them is everything. just the way it is. i ran a ws6 and had results like you describe.

trey1010
01-01-2011, 09:41 PM
No I definitely started in the correct gear ! :( yeah I figure he was at least tuned. But I was impressed, wouldn't mind having one someday ;)

mannyman84
01-01-2011, 10:00 PM
No I definitely started in the correct gear ! :( yeah I figure he was at least tuned. But I was impressed, wouldn't mind having one someday ;)

Maybe u gotta drive your car harder. I haven't had a problem with them, but I drive the crap out my car. Mustang wasn't stock either I'll tell u that. A bolt on LS1 would tare it up. And I would mind having one.... Not my style of a car at all.... Never found the mustang attractive IMO

ScreaminRedZ
01-01-2011, 10:06 PM
If the Mustang was stock then I'd think it'd be very close or you would be ahead. I'm guessing he had a couple things done. It doesn't take much with those new GT's. Good death!

Stopsign32v
01-01-2011, 10:13 PM
:bs: LS1 isn't going to lose to a new 5.0

d98gt
01-01-2011, 10:16 PM
Just gives you a reason to buy more mods :)

JayplaySS2
01-01-2011, 11:00 PM
No shame. You guys can debate this for a month but since it's just a random street encounter, you'll never know the mods and anyone who is willing to run that many times on the street is also willing to mod it. :nod:

Juggernaut TA
01-01-2011, 11:44 PM
No shame. You guys can debate this for a month but since it's just a random street encounter, you'll never know the mods and anyone who is willing to run that many times on the street is also willing to mod it. :nod:I agree!:D

kcs02ta
01-02-2011, 12:53 AM
sounds like to me driver error you should've taken him

MACH32V
01-02-2011, 01:23 AM
Sorry my sig disappeared I guess.
99 trans m6. Headers, 3 in exhaust xpipe, ls6 intake, ls7 clutch, lid, p&p tb, tuned (347rwhp,357rwtq)

If the GT was stock, you should have been running right with him with your mods, Hp/Trq and weight advantage (not much..but something).

He must have had some stuff done. Exhaust (Cat-Back and midpipe) and tune puts them above 400rhp.

Don't worry though..you have an LS1 motor. Cam only you will be right there..Heads and cam you will be passing him..shot of NOS on top of that and its "good night".

There is a tough new kid on the block..time to step it up. Just look at it like that. :chug:

I am in the same boat as you... might be time for me to do an Eaton swap. :devil:

MACH32V
01-02-2011, 01:29 AM
BTW..are you running the stock gears? 3.42?

Stopsign32v
01-02-2011, 01:31 AM
sounds like to me driver error you should've taken him

but before in another thread...

I was waiting for the excuses lol. These die hard Ford guys just can't comprehend that a lightly modded LS1 will run with the new 5.0 GT.


:jest:

vette0009
01-02-2011, 01:42 AM
See the I whoupped an okie'z ass that started in the wrong gear Thread
on Stang forums

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/roush/

Stopsign32v
01-02-2011, 01:46 AM
See the I whoupped an okie'z ass that started in the wrong gear Thread
on Stang forums

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/roush/

:gtfo:

1992TsiAWD
01-02-2011, 01:54 AM
Was it a Boss Mustang? Some of those have red rims, and they make 440hp stock.

res0n0xg
01-02-2011, 04:06 AM
Maybe u gotta drive your car harder. I haven't had a problem with them, but I drive the crap out my car. Mustang wasn't stock either I'll tell u that. A bolt on LS1 would tare it up. And I would mind having one.... Not my style of a car at all.... Never found the mustang attractive IMO


Are you joking or do you seriously believe what you're saying? Just because you don't like the car, you can't admit it's simply faster stock for stock?

You haven't had a problem make 319rwhp? Maybe with a 2010 GT

SSmokin99
01-02-2011, 04:09 AM
if he had been all stock you win probably. he was tuned at least IMO.


2011GT's are harder for newbie to drive. the next one you run into you'll kill. driving them is everything. just the way it is. i ran a ws6 and had results like you describe.

I see you're a lot more respectful on here than SVTperformance. LOL!

SSmokin99
01-02-2011, 04:11 AM
Are you joking or do you seriously believe what you're saying? Just because you don't like the car, you can't admit it's simply faster stock for stock?

You haven't had a problem make 319rwhp? Maybe with a 2010 GT

I pretty much have to agree. I mean Manny has beaten 2 now, but I'm guessing driver possibly wasn't that great:confused: I guess I don't really know until I run one and one that I hope can drive his ass off.

BOBS99SS
01-02-2011, 05:44 AM
Throw a cam and gears in there and you should tear a 5.0 up,the one I raced I killed by a lot from a 40 roll,and a dig. My mods bolt ons,ms4,m6 with 4.10s,pro stars with a 28 inch tall dr,and some weight cut out of it

BOBS99SS
01-02-2011, 05:52 AM
Don't they make a track package 5.0? Maybe it was one of those,there is a black one that runs around here and that car is so mean looking,my fav ford is still the 03,04 cobras ,but a modded 5.0 is gonna be a really bad ass ride,

trey1010
01-02-2011, 08:30 AM
I think of myself as a pretty good driver. I have had the car for almost 4 years so I've had the time to practice, just was faster than me plain and simple.

BODUKE
01-02-2011, 08:49 AM
I see you're a lot more respectful on here than SVTperformance. LOL!

Yes He is not as cocky now as he was on svt forums,

assasinator
01-02-2011, 09:08 AM
I see you're a lot more respectful on here than SVTperformance. LOL!

well i behave the same there until i got called a liar. but you know who cares. btw i found that ws6 i ran. ill be posting pics and see if he will post his version of the run that could not have happened.

ss1129
01-02-2011, 09:12 AM
but before in another thread...



:jest:

Take your garbage can honda and go home. All you try to do is stir shit up.

Omega Doom
01-02-2011, 10:05 AM
it's all good around here when people post about a kill on LS1tech(a GM based website)and when the kill is regarding a Ford........................*bam* 10,000 Ford members pop up on here chiming in with "driver mod" "your not telling the truth about your combo" "if it was from like a 40-60 roll you would have lost" or "if it was from a dig the Ford would have won" and then pages of this or that go on and on blah blah yadda yadda yadda it's LS1 tech let OP brag a little now to me and maybe it's just me? but if you come on a GM motor based site and brag about your Ford beating the GM your just asking or instigating trouble so you should be fair game for the bashing seeing that you had the balls to do so? just saying so caring on....:punch: :engarde: :secret2:

Stopsign32v
01-02-2011, 11:27 AM
Take your garbage can honda and go home. All you try to do is stir shit up.

Come back and talk shit when you can outrun my wife's car.

mannyman84
01-02-2011, 11:32 AM
Are you joking or do you seriously believe what you're saying? Just because you don't like the car, you can't admit it's simply faster stock for stock?

You haven't had a problem make 319rwhp? Maybe with a 2010 GT

Me not liking the car has nothing to do when I'm running it! It's a cool car but not my type...... I do think that a lower HP car can be a good match with a higher HP car when weight comes into play. And honestly the 2 5.0's I've taken down where being driven pretty good, specially since one was driven by an older gentlemen that I'm sure wasn't a rookie

mannyman84
01-02-2011, 11:34 AM
Come back and talk shit when you can outrun my wife's car.

:lock:

Badguy7
01-02-2011, 12:52 PM
Was it a Boss Mustang? Some of those have red rims, and they make 440hp stock.

The Boss Mustangs arent out yet. The OP more then likely just ran into someone who throw some mods into there's. At a local dealership, there's a new 5.0 coming with a Flowmaster Exhaust system. Throw in a CAI, & Tune with the 3.73's and your probably at the 400hp mark.

ScreaminRedZ
01-02-2011, 01:06 PM
I see that this thread is going to take us to new places...

ss1129
01-02-2011, 01:13 PM
Come back and talk shit when you can outrun my wife's car.

I figured the "teg" was your wifes car. Those are cute, my little sister has one too.

Stopsign32v
01-02-2011, 03:33 PM
I figured the "teg" was your wifes car. Those are cute, my little sister has one too.

No the "teg" is the gets great gas mileage car. And soon it will also be the wax your ass car. :nod:

sujomatt
01-02-2011, 07:02 PM
No the "teg" is the gets great gas mileage car. And soon it will also be the wax your ass car. :nod:

:angel::chug: .... :punch: :engarde:

ss1129
01-02-2011, 07:30 PM
No the "teg" is the gets great gas mileage car. And soon it will also be the wax your ass car. :nod:

LOL in the end its still a teenage girl car.

BOBS99SS
01-02-2011, 07:46 PM
Omega I totally agree with you 100 %

Irunelevens
01-02-2011, 08:30 PM
When it comes to factual information, it shouldn't matter what website you're on. Anyway, good loss OP and thanks for posting the story up. Like others have said, it was probably either tune-only, or tune/CAI. Few more mods should get you ready for next time :thumb:

Stopsign32v
01-02-2011, 09:21 PM
LOL in the end its still a teenage girl car.

How so?

sliderSS
01-02-2011, 09:45 PM
like they mentioned earlier the new 5.0 doesn't need much to get over 400.a buddy has one ran he at the track he beat me by 3 hundredths of a second he made a 12.7 and i got 13 flat. all he had done was tune and cai

It'llrun
01-03-2011, 02:33 AM
I'm not surprised about the loss and wouldn't have been about a win either. At least you had the nerve to tell about it. ;) It was probably modified or had a really good driver, or both, considering your set up. :nod:

Don't they make a track package 5.0?Nope. Well, not unless it's a Shelby GT350 anyway. If it's one of those, I don't know of they do or don't... I do know, anyone driving a stock vehicle short of a ZO6 might wanna steer clear of that model. If ya can't run at least 11's, that one is probably going to eat your lunch and slam the box in your face. :nod:

it's all good around here when people post about a kill on LS1tech(a GM based website)and when the kill is regarding a Ford........................*bam* 10,000 Ford members pop up on here chiming in with "driver mod" "your not telling the truth about your combo" "if it was from like a 40-60 roll you would have lost" or "if it was from a dig the Ford would have won" and then pages of this or that go on and on blah blah yadda yadda yadda it's LS1 tech let OP brag a little now to me and maybe it's just me? but if you come on a GM motor based site and brag about your Ford beating the GM your just asking or instigating trouble so you should be fair game for the bashing seeing that you had the balls to do so? just saying so caring on....:punch: :engarde: :secret2:I'm wondering... Did you even SEE the 1st post? Here's the :secret2: you seem to have missed... He was telling us he lost against the Mustang. In this case, apparently it IS just you... :emb:

like they mentioned earlier the new 5.0 doesn't need much to get over 400.a buddy has one ran he at the track he beat me by 3 hundredths of a second he made a 12.7 and i got 13 flat. all he had done was tune and caiThat's three tenths, not 3 hundredths. Big difference on the drag strip.

Omega Doom
01-03-2011, 09:23 AM
I'm wondering... Did you even SEE the 1st post? Here's the :secret2: you seem to have missed... He was telling us he lost against the Mustang. In this case, apparently it IS just you... :emb:




ummm did you see what kind of car the OP drives in HIS post? sir it is you who missed everything whoooooooosh right over the old noggen there huh bud?:bang:

MauriSSio
01-03-2011, 12:07 PM
I'm wondering... Did you even SEE the 1st post? Here's the :secret2: you seem to have missed... He was telling us he lost against the Mustang. In this case, apparently it IS just you... :emb:




ummm did you see what kind of car the OP drives in HIS post? sir it is you who missed everything whoooooooosh right over the old noggen there huh bud?:bang:

why are you so surprised he lossed? 347rwhp vs 370rwhp (stock) with 100lbs difference. If it was lightly modded it would have been 400+rwhp vs 347rwhp. Just give him credit for hanging in there, the new 5.0 is a beast when driven properly :chug:

It'llrun
01-03-2011, 12:16 PM
I'm wondering... Did you even SEE the 1st post? Here's the :secret2: you seem to have missed... He was telling us he lost against the Mustang. In this case, apparently it IS just you... :emb:

ummm did you see what kind of car the OP drives in HIS post? sir it is you who missed everything whoooooooosh right over the old noggen there huh bud?:bang:Learn to quote. It's helpful and easy.

As for what the OP drives, in my best Ray Stevens "Streak" voice... Uhh, yeah, uhdid... Sorry my sig disappeared I guess.
99 trans m6. Headers, 3 in exhaust xpipe, ls6 intake, ls7 clutch, lid, p&p tb, tuned (347rwhp,357rwtq) Pay attention please. :eyes:

OBVIOUSLY you made a mistake... Move along, smartly for a change. It's easier than banging your head on the wall... :D

It'llrun
01-03-2011, 12:19 PM
why are you so surprised he lossed? 347rwhp vs 370rwhp (stock) with 100lbs difference. If it was lightly modded it would have been 400+rwhp vs 347rwhp. Just give him credit for hanging in there, the new 5.0 is a beast when driven properly :chug:Evidently, he didn't REALIZE the T/A lost, for starters... So there's no surprise involved with it, I'm convinced already. Maybe he'll BE surprised now!!! :lol:

Aside from that, he's just here to cry. We may as well let it be from here on out. He'll get over it someday. :nod:

thunderstruck507
01-03-2011, 02:09 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if it was a stock 3.73 gear car. I'm not bullshitting when I said they can fucking RUN with a good driver.

If someone in a 5.0 has their shifts down 100% it would be a damn tough race for a partial bolt on ls1 car and absolute destruction for a stock one.

I could only get 2.5-3 cars on my little brother's car (3.55 gears) from a low roll. It seemed to be an issue of who got traction first. On our dig race I spun bad and got behind and once I got traction I stopped his pull but could not pull back unless he had a slow shift.

My car is heavy and being an auto not a great roll racer, but I was still impressed.

916 BREDWNR
01-03-2011, 02:11 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if it was a stock 3.73 gear car. I'm not bullshitting when I said they can fucking RUN with a good driver.

If someone in a 5.0 has their shifts down 100% it would be a damn tough race for a partial bolt on ls1 car and absolute destruction for a stock one.

I could only get 2.5-3 cars on my little brother's car (3.55 gears) from a low roll. It seemed to be an issue of who got traction first. On our dig race I spun bad and got behind and once I got traction I stopped his pull but could not pull back unless he had a slow shift.

My car is heavy and being an auto not a great roll racer, but I was still impressed.

Bingo!

thunderstruck507
01-03-2011, 02:46 PM
Bingo!

While it accounts for some of it, I am within 120# of a heavier optioned stock fbody weight wise. My car full street trim weighed 3820#s with a full tank and all my crap in the car.

Buddy in an 01 trans am (non ws6) rolled across the scales right before me to the tune of 3800# with his g/f in the car.

So figure him at 3680-3690# without her. Scales might have been calibrated a tad on the heavy side (we casually rolled through a Highland Dairy truck station). :angel:

The rolls were low enough I could get a first gear downshift BTW.

Omega Doom
01-03-2011, 03:14 PM
why are you so surprised he lossed? 347rwhp vs 370rwhp (stock) with 100lbs difference. If it was lightly modded it would have been 400+rwhp vs 347rwhp. Just give him credit for hanging in there, the new 5.0 is a beast when driven properly :chug:where did I ever say I was suprised? :confused:

Omega Doom
01-03-2011, 03:16 PM
Evidently, he didn't REALIZE the T/A lost, for starters... So there's no surprise involved with it, I'm convinced already. Maybe he'll BE surprised now!!! :lol:

Aside from that, he's just here to cry. We may as well let it be from here on out. He'll get over it someday. :nod:oh good lord how old are you kid?... 15-16? It has nothing to do with other then you waterheads coming on here with BS trying to just to be heard:sack:

MauriSSio
01-03-2011, 03:26 PM
where did I ever say I was suprised? :confused:

you sure give off that impression on your other post where you babble on a random tangent about mustang owners which had nothing to do with the race.

it's all good around here when people post about a kill on LS1tech(a GM based website)and when the kill is regarding a Ford........................*bam* 10,000 Ford members pop up on here chiming in with "driver mod" "your not telling the truth about your combo" "if it was from like a 40-60 roll you would have lost" or "if it was from a dig the Ford would have won" and then pages of this or that go on and on blah blah yadda yadda yadda it's LS1 tech let OP brag a little now to me and maybe it's just me? but if you come on a GM motor based site and brag about your Ford beating the GM your just asking or instigating trouble so you should be fair game for the bashing seeing that you had the balls to do so? just saying so caring on....:punch: :engarde: :secret2:

916 BREDWNR
01-03-2011, 03:37 PM
While it accounts for some of it, I am within 120# of a heavier optioned stock fbody weight wise. My car full street trim weighed 3820#s with a full tank and all my crap in the car.

Buddy in an 01 trans am (non ws6) rolled across the scales right before me to the tune of 3800# with his g/f in the car.

So figure him at 3680-3690# without her. Scales might have been calibrated a tad on the heavy side (we casually rolled through a Highland Dairy truck station). :angel:

The rolls were low enough I could get a first gear downshift BTW.

I keep forgetting how portly 4th gen F-bodies can be. My old Formula was a basic option car (cloth, hardtop) and weighed something like 3600 with me in it. I just thought your Chevelle should have done better with your mods especially from a dig, but street tires + stall is not good for traction I know.

thunderstruck507
01-03-2011, 04:59 PM
I keep forgetting how portly 4th gen F-bodies can be. My old Formula was a basic option car (cloth, hardtop) and weighed something like 3600 with me in it. I just thought your Chevelle should have done better with your mods especially from a dig, but street tires + stall is not good for traction I know.

Yeah, cold day and sand on the road no less (deserted area in Mexico doesn't get much traffic). He spun too, just not as bad.

Tires were slick in the middle, no shit or exaggeration. I spun, lifted to about 1/4 still spinning and jacked around trying to get it to hook...by the time I stopped spinning he was 2 cars or a little more out. He had 1 slightly slow shift so I got 1/2 car back.

On drag radials it would have been a murder from a dig. But that's just bench racing...we will run again once he heals from his motorcycle accident.

Hard to shift with a broken shoulder, collar bone, ribs, etc.

916 BREDWNR
01-03-2011, 05:54 PM
Yeah, cold day and sand on the road no less (deserted area in Mexico doesn't get much traffic). He spun too, just not as bad.

Tires were slick in the middle, no shit or exaggeration. I spun, lifted to about 1/4 still spinning and jacked around trying to get it to hook...by the time I stopped spinning he was 2 cars or a little more out. He had 1 slightly slow shift so I got 1/2 car back.

On drag radials it would have been a murder from a dig. But that's just bench racing...we will run again once he heals from his motorcycle accident.

Hard to shift with a broken shoulder, collar bone, ribs, etc.

Ouch! WTF! Are you cage fighting or something? lol

trey1010
01-03-2011, 06:21 PM
I am just surprised how quick this car was. I felt like I never had a chance. Really wanting a cam now! Lol or even spray! I haven't lost in a long time ( haven't raced in a long time) and it does not feel good :(

LT/LS Guy
01-03-2011, 06:25 PM
I am just surprised how quick this car was. I felt like I never had a chance. Really wanting a cam now! Lol or even spray! I haven't lost in a long time ( haven't raced in a long time) and it does not feel good :(

They are not to be underestimated that's for sure.

MACH32V
01-03-2011, 06:30 PM
I am just surprised how quick this car was. I felt like I never had a chance. Really wanting a cam now! Lol or even spray! I haven't lost in a long time ( haven't raced in a long time) and it does not feel good :(

Just like I stated before...there is a new kid on the block now.. and he is one tough MF'er.
I know getting beat leaves a bad taste in your mouth..we have all been through it. Just part of the game.
Use this bad feeling to give you the incentive to save up and mod you car. The LSX platform has TONS of aftermarket stuff to make that thing a monster...
Just go do it, man!

Nice LS2 block 408ci with Trick Flow Head, Cam and FAST intake with BG TB....No bolt-on 5.0 is going to touch you.

ponygt65
01-03-2011, 06:40 PM
Me not liking the car has nothing to do when I'm running it! It's a cool car but not my type...... I do think that a lower HP car can be a good match with a higher HP car when weight comes into play. And honestly the 2 5.0's I've taken down where being driven pretty good, specially since one was driven by an older gentlemen that I'm sure wasn't a rookieI see you're still up to your old :sack: huggin'.

please...in the most sensible way possible, explain how you know for fact those cars were driven by people who are capable....especially the one because he was 'an older gentleman'. I'd love to hear this.

Come back and talk shit when you can outrun my wife's car.makes you wonder if he could handle a lil bolt on geared m1

They are not to be underestimated that's for sure.:chug: A GM guy that's not a fanboi. :D

assasinator
01-03-2011, 07:26 PM
if I was going to make things even, it would be a LS2 with L92's, valves and springs. nice cam(not big), ls3 intake, bolt ons. rev the hell out of it. the ls2 is a great equalizer IMO.

LT/LS Guy
01-03-2011, 07:40 PM
if I was going to make things even, it would be a LS2 with L92's, valves and springs. nice cam(not big), ls3 intake, bolt ons. rev the hell out of it. the ls2 is a great equalizer IMO.

Yeah LS2's are nice with the standard 4" bore. LS1's can go far too...on the stock aluminum block. A re-sleeved LS1 will go way past 400-inches, Just look at MTI's old 455ci LS1 package. A ported Fast 102 or Victor EFI, ETP 245-265cc LS1 heads, BIG solid roller cam with all the supporting mods and a great tune you could be at/over 550rwhp N/A. Of course a setup like that cost BIG $$$. lol

marc97taws6
01-03-2011, 07:52 PM
Yeah LS2's are nice with the standard 4" bore. LS1's can go far too...on the stock aluminum block. A re-sleeved LS1 will go way past 400-inches, Just look at MTI's old 455ci LS1 package. A ported Fast 102 or Victor EFI, ETP 245-265cc LS1 heads, BIG solid roller cam with all the supporting mods and a great tune you could be at/over 550rwhp N/A. Of course a setup like that cost BIG $$$. lol
I've always wanted to do the L92 swap on a LS2 Vette. Guess I'll have the chance to here in the future. Or just throw some boost on the LS2 ;)

The new 5.0's are no joke. If I wasn't so set on a Corvette and I was buying today, I'd get a new 5.0. Sadly in Iowa winters, I don't really have the choice realistically for both

Bdubbs
01-03-2011, 08:08 PM
Good death OP, I've yet to run into a new 5.0, hoping this coming up summer I'll have my chance.

LT/LS Guy
01-03-2011, 08:23 PM
I've always wanted to do the L92 swap on a LS2 Vette. Guess I'll have the chance to here in the future. Or just throw some boost on the LS2 ;)

x2 on a boosted LS2! :D

ss1129
01-03-2011, 09:26 PM
I see you're still up to your old :sack: huggin'.

please...in the most sensible way possible, explain how you know for fact those cars were driven by people who are capable....especially the one because he was 'an older gentleman'. I'd love to hear this.

makes you wonder if he could handle a lil bolt on geared m1

:chug: A GM guy that's not a fanboi. :D

I'm just running a slow bolt on sprayed auto 5th Gen. Surely I couldn't take a Bolt on mach1. lol.

thunderstruck507
01-04-2011, 10:38 AM
Ouch! WTF! Are you cage fighting or something? lol

Not me, my little brother.

He had a motorcycle wreck the week before Christmas. Very lucky to be alive...also had several fractured vertebrae in his neck.

He's doing well though...little shit can still drive the mustang shifting with 1 arm haha. But that's why we didn't get to do the rematches I promised here in our race thread.

He got new mufflers and resonator delete, I put on fresh street tires. Should have been good races.

ponygt65
01-04-2011, 10:45 AM
I'm just running a slow bolt on sprayed auto 5th Gen. Surely I couldn't take a Bolt on mach1. lol.

So you admit to needing spray. :engarde:

Mach Boy
01-04-2011, 11:48 AM
So you admit to needing spray. :engarde:

:punch:

Redfire 03
01-04-2011, 02:32 PM
Just like I stated before...there is a new kid on the block now.. and he is one tough MF'er.
I know getting beat leaves a bad taste in your mouth..we have all been through it. Just part of the game.
Use this bad feeling to give you the incentive to save up and mod you car. The LSX platform has TONS of aftermarket stuff to make that thing a monster...
Just go do it, man!

Nice LS2 block 408ci with Trick Flow Head, Cam and FAST intake with BG TB....No bolt-on 5.0 is going to touch you.

They'll have to "bolt-on" some nitrous to have a chance at that. ;)

ss1129
01-04-2011, 03:05 PM
So you admit to needing spray. :engarde:
To beat a bolt on mach1? Lololol. If you think so. Hey that other clown lives near me. Maybe he wants to run?

Mach Boy
01-04-2011, 03:14 PM
To beat a bolt on mach1? Lololol. If you think so. Hey that other clown lives near me. Maybe he wants to run?

I'm game once it warms up.

Ke^in
01-04-2011, 03:25 PM
:bs: LS1 isn't going to lose to a new 5.0
:lol:

ss1129
01-04-2011, 03:26 PM
I'm game once it warms up.

Any word on gateway or MAR opening next year?

Mach Boy
01-04-2011, 03:29 PM
Gateway I believe is a no go. And I haven't heard any new info on MAR getting zoning approval.

assasinator
01-04-2011, 03:59 PM
They'll have to "bolt-on" some nitrous to have a chance at that. ;)

or bolt on a KAASE big block and laugh.

m_liel
01-04-2011, 04:07 PM
or bolt on a KAASE big block and laugh.

Are you serious :confused:

You would spend $25,000 on a new motor just to outrun a 408 H/C FAST LS1?

Irunelevens
01-04-2011, 04:30 PM
Not me, my little brother.

He had a motorcycle wreck the week before Christmas. Very lucky to be alive...also had several fractured vertebrae in his neck.

He's doing well though...little shit can still drive the mustang shifting with 1 arm haha. But that's why we didn't get to do the rematches I promised here in our race thread.

He got new mufflers and resonator delete, I put on fresh street tires. Should have been good races.

Damn, fractured neck vertebrae and no traction halo? :confused:

assasinator
01-04-2011, 05:45 PM
Are you serious :confused:

You would spend $25,000 on a new motor just to outrun a 408 H/C FAST LS1?

ernie in my clarksville car club. he wastes all kind of money with one setup, then another. he likes to brag that HIS 2v can kill me 4v turbo with ease... well it can. with ease. he has it in a 2000 mustang GT. its not a street car really. full tubs, full cage. i cant remember the cubes but its well over 500. 572 i think. havent talked to him in a while. he does sacrifice his lifestyle at the house for his cars. his wife is a saint.

m_liel
01-04-2011, 05:57 PM
ernie in my clarksville car club. he wastes all kind of money with one setup, then another. he likes to brag that HIS 2v can kill me 4v turbo with ease... well it can. with ease. he has it in a 2000 mustang GT. its not a street car really. full tubs, full cage. i cant remember the cubes but its well over 500. 572 i think. havent talked to him in a while. he does sacrifice his lifestyle at the house for his cars. his wife is a saint.

Ernie is a lucky guy! My wife would never let me spend that kind of money on a motor. Sad huh. :(

BTW they make a 820ci GM "HEMI" motor too.

assasinator
01-04-2011, 06:01 PM
Ernie is a lucky guy! My wife would never let me spend that kind of money on a motor. Sad huh. :(

BTW they make a 820ci GM "HEMI" motor too.

i wouldnt do that to my family. but its just him. he totes the kids in his 01 lightning.

m_liel
01-04-2011, 06:04 PM
i wouldnt do that to my family. but its just him. he totes the kids in his 01 lightning.

Well hey if he's ballin' like that then all power to him.

It'llrun
01-04-2011, 09:45 PM
oh good lord how old are you kid?... 15-16? It has nothing to do with other then you waterheads coming on here with BS trying to just to be heard:sack:15... Even the likes of you knows better than to actually think that. Take a moment to note my ability(or lack thereof) to get the words out... It shouldn't take more than a few seconds to realize I'm no youngster. If it does, it's probably a youngster trying to figure it out. Had she survived, my daughter would've been 25... if that's any indication.

The point you missed was simple... It wasn't about "waterheads" at all, as the OP told his story. I don't recall anyone offering up excuses as to why the Mustang "would've" won... Clearly, though you're evidently not big enough to admit it, you completely missed what happened before you went on your childish rant. :nod: Apparently you just cannot stand Mustangs/Fords for whatever reason and you're being aggressive here. Whatever...

Omega Doom
01-04-2011, 09:56 PM
15... Even the likes of you knows better than to actually think that. Take a moment to note my ability(or lack thereof) to get the words out... It shouldn't take more than a few seconds to realize I'm no youngster. If it does, it's probably a youngster trying to figure it out. Had she survived, my daughter would've been 25... if that's any indication.

The point you missed was simple... It wasn't about "waterheads" at all, as the OP told his story. I don't recall anyone offering up excuses as to why the Mustang "would've" won... Clearly, though you're evidently not big enough to admit it, you completely missed what happened before you went on your childish rant. :nod: Apparently you just cannot stand Mustangs/Fords for whatever reason and you're being aggressive here. Whatever...LOL dude come on paragraghs of you just rambling on and on just like yep a teenage kid! nowhere in all of your mumbo jumbo have you made any sense whatsoever:confused: I made a post you tried to be "cute" with really stupid remark that made no sense and it goes on and on. I'm done made my point first go round, so I'll let you take from here on out bro?:rolleyes:

MauriSSio
01-04-2011, 10:26 PM
Ernie is a lucky guy! My wife would never let me spend that kind of money on a motor. Sad huh. :(

BTW they make a 820ci GM "HEMI" motor too.

Big block fords are not expensivE. any run of the mill cheapo junkyard 385 series block (429 or 460) can be stroked out to at least 557ci, some more. Stroker kits are plentiful and affordable as well since they use BBC sized rods.

It'llrun
01-05-2011, 12:07 AM
LOL dude come on paragraghs of you just rambling on and on just like yep a teenage kid! nowhere in all of your mumbo jumbo have you made any sense whatsoever:confused: I made a post you tried to be "cute" with really stupid remark that made no sense and it goes on and on. I'm done made my point first go round, so I'll let you take from here on out bro?:rolleyes:I bet you really are confused... Just look at your skills with the keyboard... :eyes: The only "point" you made... is intop of your head. :emb:

YOU need to grow up, sport. Mentally, not physically.

The post you made included you nearly CRYING over people doing something they WEREN'T doing... You failed to properly read or comprehend the 1st post and you THOUGHT you were reading about a Mustang losing against an F-body and Ford people offering excuses, which wasn't the case.... Then, since you're a hater, you went on a rant about people making excuses for the Mustang, CLEARLY not having even realized it won the races in question. Get a clue. You could have simply admitted to having made a massive error and moved on, but NO... You're way to big'aboy for that... :eyes:

I recommend you go ahead and move on... This isn't little league and clearly, that's where you belong.

Btw, don't complain about the paragraphs... That's called GRAMMAR and you'll find(at some point- if you ever pick up a book) they're normal for our language. Unlike your nonsensical rants, nobody has to wonder what I meant to say. Least of which, ME! Can't understand what I mean? Go review post #31 and decipher it yourself... AFTER 8hrs of sleep and ZERO cans of Schlitz! :gtfo:

It'llrun
01-05-2011, 12:08 AM
Big block fords are not expensivE. any run of the mill cheapo junkyard 385 series block (429 or 460) can be stroked out to at least 557ci, some more. Stroker kits are plentiful and affordable as well since they use BBC sized rods.Pffft... They're ALL expensive! :D

Mach Boy
01-05-2011, 02:43 AM
I recommend you go ahead and move on... This isn't little league and clearly, that's where you belong.


Yeah this is the Major Leagues of Internet Thuggery. You gotta be the best to be here. We don't accept any puny wimps here, only the best.

Ke^in
01-05-2011, 04:50 AM
nowhere in all of your mumbo jumbo have you made any sense whatsoever:confused:

I understood it fine. *shrug*

MauriSSio
01-05-2011, 08:46 AM
Pffft... They're ALL expensive! :D

ha!! maybe to drive!!

oddwraith
01-05-2011, 10:40 AM
ha!! maybe to drive!! :jest:

LT/LS Guy
01-05-2011, 11:26 AM
Big block fords are not expensivE. any run of the mill cheapo junkyard 385 series block (429 or 460) can be stroked out to at least 557ci, some more. Stroker kits are plentiful and affordable as well since they use BBC sized rods.

Were talking John Kaase here. Not your ordinary BBF engine. lol Their cheapest (600ci Sportsman) will run you $25k! Of course you could build a "competitive" BBF motor for much cheaper.

MauriSSio
01-05-2011, 12:11 PM
Were talking John Kaase here. Not your ordinary BBF engine. lol Their cheapest (600ci Sportsman) will run you $25k! Of course you could build a "competitive" BBF motor for much cheaper.

assassinator mentioned 5xxci BBF so i figured he didnt actually mean that hiss friend has a KAASE big block. His Hemi heads are rediculous!

rpturbo
01-05-2011, 04:07 PM
Hey Mach Boy, just wondering if your name is Dave? Did you live in O'Fallon? If so I know of you through your old neighbor Chris. Was wondering what happened to you if it's you.

assasinator
01-05-2011, 04:12 PM
assassinator mentioned 5xxci BBF so i figured he didnt actually mean that hiss friend has a KAASE big block. His Hemi heads are rediculous!

yeah ernie is using kaase heads. he showed me all of the stuff before it was together. i dont know how much he spent, or PRECISELY which parts he bought, but they were serious stuff. ill try to get ahold of him and see what they were or get him to post it.

EDIT: not prostock, but sportsman heads. http://www.jonkaaseracingengines.com/products/cylinder-heads/custom-ford-6049-c-460-heads/82-custom-ford-6049-c-460-heads.html

mike c.
01-05-2011, 04:32 PM
Get more mods.

It'llrun
01-05-2011, 06:17 PM
yeah ernie is using kaase heads. he showed me all of the stuff before it was together. i dont know how much he spent, or PRECISELY which parts he bought, but they were serious stuff. ill try to get ahold of him and see what they were or get him to post it.

EDIT: not prostock, but sportsman heads. http://www.jonkaaseracingengines.com/products/cylinder-heads/custom-ford-6049-c-460-heads/82-custom-ford-6049-c-460-heads.html

Just $6,800 per set, plus tax then the actual building of the rest of the engine... CHUMP CHANGE! :D As I recall, I've got around 11K into my entire engine. :emb:

Mach Boy
01-05-2011, 06:47 PM
Hey Mach Boy, just wondering if your name is Dave? Did you live in O'Fallon? If so I know of you through your old neighbor Chris. Was wondering what happened to you if it's you.

No to all of the above.

Arc00TA
01-05-2011, 07:14 PM
Good run OP. Sounds about right, I lost by 2-3 to a stock 5.0 in my bolt on formula which was on the light side (3620 with me and gas). Definitely a car that will challenge a lot of the f-body guys to up the game a little.

Demon 383
01-05-2011, 07:35 PM
To the LS1 guys, I don't see what the fuss is about???

Do you guys see the numbers the new EPS lobes are putting out Cam-only? 243 heads can be had for dirt cheap too nowadays ya know. That + supporting mods will turn a bolt-on LS1 into a low 11-second car easy. That's the good thing about the old LS1, the aftermarket is super-cheap and readily available. Just saw a guy roll through the dyno with a stock-bottom 346, EPS 22x and some home-ported 243's lay down 46xrwhp. Just spend a little dough and you can stay in the game no prob.

On the flipside those 2011 GT's are some sweet lookin' rides. :D

- Demon

oddwraith
01-06-2011, 09:29 AM
^^^This.

Ke^in
01-06-2011, 09:42 AM
When it comes to mostly stock to slight bolt-on 5.0s I agree.

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 09:52 AM
When it comes to mostly stock to slight bolt-on 5.0s I agree.

Up early with the B.S. again I see. :eyes:

Full Bolt-on 2011 GT will get WALKED with that setup. They don't run low 11's with full bolt-ons. :judge:

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 09:57 AM
Just $6,800 per set, plus tax then the actual building of the rest of the engine... CHUMP CHANGE! :D As I recall, I've got around 11K into my entire engine. :emb:

those are the "C-Heads" im not sure what kind of power will be had with those on a 5xxci engine but i imagine somewhere areound 1000hp n/a. even his $4100 hemi heads are good for about 850+hp on a street big block and those themselves are some serious heads. More "realistic" heads would be the $2500 P-51 which should put out a solid 750-800hp n/a out of the box on a 514-557stroker

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 10:06 AM
To the LS1 guys, I don't see what the fuss is about???

Do you guys see the numbers the new EPS lobes are putting out Cam-only? 243 heads can be had for dirt cheap too nowadays ya know. That + supporting mods will turn a bolt-on LS1 into a low 11-second car easy. That's the good thing about the old LS1, the aftermarket is super-cheap and readily available. Just saw a guy roll through the dyno with a stock-bottom 346, EPS 22x and some home-ported 243's lay down 46xrwhp. Just spend a little dough and you can stay in the game no prob.

On the flipside those 2011 GT's are some sweet lookin' rides. :D

- Demon

Great post Jasik! That's the same setup i'm doing on my 2000 F-body. EPS 222/226 on a 115 with ported 243's.

This car did 430/415 with stock (untouched) 243's through a stalled A4. :eek2: My car is an M6 and the heads will be ported. :D

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1213394-baby-eps-cam-lays-down-430rwhp-415rwtq-track-results-3.html

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 10:16 AM
Up early with the B.S. again I see. :eyes:

Full Bolt-on 2011 GT will get WALKED with that setup. They don't run low 11's with full bolt-ons. :judge:

that was on an LS6 long block (not all ls1's came with the ls6 stuff if i remember correctly) and look at the MPH. 117.9mph......(oh yeah also almost 150lbs weight reduction it looks like)

That means it had a hell of a launch (1.5 60'). Bolton mustangs are already running that trap speed or faster. With the mustangs gearing, i wouldnt say low 11's will be out of reach for long with just boltons. its only a monster launch away.

ss1129
01-06-2011, 10:24 AM
that was on an LS6 long block (not all ls1's came with the ls6 stuff if i remember correctly) and look at the MPH. 117.9mph. That means it had a hell of a launch (1.5 60'). Bolton mustangs are already running that trap speed or faster. With the mustangs gearing, i wouldnt say low 11's will be out of reach for long with just boltons. its only a monster launch away.

An ls1 is an ls1. LOL. Man so many mytholigies about ls1's from the ford side.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 10:34 AM
An ls1 is an ls1. LOL. Man so many mytholigies about ls1's from the ford side.

so the Z06 came with an LS1????

it says they started off with an LS6 longblock.

Ke^in
01-06-2011, 10:40 AM
Up early with the B.S. again I see. :eyes:

Maybe you should go to bed earlier so that wont happen ;-)

Bolton mustangs are already running that trap speed or faster. With the mustangs gearing, i wouldnt say low 11's will be out of reach for long with just boltons.
This is just common sense. I see a lot of hopeful posts on here. Like I said, when the LS1 first came out the Mustang boards were doing the same. THey WAAY underrated it. And said it was hyped too much. It's been over 10 years now, and it lived up to the hype. So will the 5.0. There will always be those in denial. There will always be those drinking the Hateraid®.

WSsick
01-06-2011, 10:47 AM
so the Z06 came with an LS1????

it says they started off with an LS6 longblock.

No one said a Z06 came with an LS1.

Some 01/02s got the LS6 block (nothing for hp), and all 01/02s got the LS6 intake. Other than that, nothing from the LS6 went on an LS1.

Only difference in an LS1 & LS6 is heads and cam, and for certain years the intake.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 10:50 AM
Maybe you should go to bed earlier so that wont happen ;-)

This is just common sense. I see a lot of hopeful posts on here. Like I said, when the LS1 first came out the Mustang boards were doing the same. THey WAAY underrated it. And said it was hyped too much. It's been over 10 years now, and it lived up to the hype. So will the 5.0. There will always be those in denial. There will always be those drinking the Hateraid®.

tru. Its not like these new Mustangs (modded) arent gonna be kicking the crap out of my car also. I dont see them as being on MY team, im just presenting some facts and showing people that the competition shouldnt be taken lightly.

anyways heres a bolton automatic mustang. apparently theyve hit 11.4@119 with it which is .11 away from the cammed LS6 quoted above.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STmlGMANS0Q

ss1129
01-06-2011, 10:54 AM
so the Z06 came with an LS1????

it says they started off with an LS6 longblock.

01plus fbodies had ls6 intakes and sometimes blocks. The full ls6 is came with 243 heads and a bigger cam.

There have been rumors of fbodies coming with 243 heads, but I have not see one personally.

But a ls6 block doesnt do shit performance wise, plus if you have an 01+ fbody you have the ls6 intake and a good chance of an ls6 block. But basically the z06 is a cammed ls1 with lighter valves.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 10:55 AM
No one said a Z06 came with an LS1.

Some 01/02s got the LS6 block (nothing for hp), and all 01/02s got the LS6 intake. Other than that, nothing from the LS6 went on an LS1.

Only difference in an LS1 & LS6 is heads and cam, and for certain years the intake.

well if they started with an LS6 block and LS6 heads and cam and intake, why would somebody say "an LS1 is an LS1"?? If thats considered an LS1 then wouldnt the z06 engine be considered an LS1 then??

also, ive read that the LS6 block allows better bay to bay breathing at higher rpms....Thats gotta be worth SOMETHING

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 10:58 AM
.. But basically the z06 is a cammed (01-02) ls1 with lighter valves and LS6 heads.

fixed.

Arc00TA
01-06-2011, 11:03 AM
An LS6 block is NOT the same as an LS1 block. There are differences in the block design that separate them. They are similar enough that there will be no difference in power output, however the LS6 block has better bay to bay breathing so it is possible to see a few hp difference at high rpm.

Ke^in
01-06-2011, 11:04 AM
anyways heres a bolton automatic mustang. apparently theyve hit 11.4@119 with it which is .11 away from the cammed LS6 quoted above.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STmlGMANS0Q

But...but...

:D

My original statement stands.

ss1129
01-06-2011, 11:06 AM
fixed.

243 heads werent specific to ls6 motors. The sodium filled valves were specific to the z06 though. So no, you didnt fix anything.

Ke^in
01-06-2011, 11:09 AM
They are similar enough that there will be no difference in power output, however the LS6 block has better bay to bay breathing so it is possible to see a few hp difference at high rpm.

Are they similar enough that there will be no difference in power, or is it possible to see HP differences in higher RPMs? Not trying to bust your balls, but you kinda contradicted yourself there.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 11:11 AM
243 heads werent specific to ls6 motors. The sodium filled valves were specific to the z06 though. So no, you didnt fix anything.

243 heads with sodium valves are not LS1 heads either. And they certainly shouldnt be considered LS1 heads if they came on an LS6 longblock

ss1129
01-06-2011, 11:12 AM
Are they similar enough that there will be no difference in power, or is it possible to see HP differences in higher RPMs? Not trying to bust your balls, but you kinda contradicted yourself there.

Anything is possible....but there is no evidence that an ls6 block increases hp over an ls1 block.

Pretty much every year there were changes to the ls1..from 97 all the way to 2002. No two years are really the same...only the power.

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 11:24 AM
anyways heres a bolton automatic mustang. apparently theyve hit 11.4@119 with it which is .11 away from the cammed LS6 quoted above.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STmlGMANS0Q

That car you listed above IS NOT a full weight car. If you wan't to talk about weight reduction/suspension bolt-on cars, the LS1 has already been der done dat!

Naturally Aspirated - Bolt-on's - Stock Motor* :..

F-Body
Board ID - 1/4 ET @ MPH (60ft), Yr & Type of car
RUQWIKR -------- 10.685 @ 122.91 (1.37), 01 Formula T400
Project_SS ----- 10.866 @ 122.14 (1.45), 98 Camaro SS A4
Magnus --------- 10.987 @ 119.31 (1.42), 97 Firebird A4
Promod1955 ----- 11.030 @ 124.18 (1.45), 00 Camaro SS A4
Skelton -------- 11.088 @ 119.10 (1.44), 01 Formula A3
1BAD98LS1 ------ 11.089 @ 120.62 (1.47), 98 Formula A4
Hawkn01 -------- 11.256 @ 118.48 (1.52), 01 Firehawk A4
SilentbutViolent 11.302 @ 117.84 (1.52), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
V6 Bird -------- 11.322 @ 118.67 (1.53), 01 Formula A4
Matt D --------- 11.421 @ 116.24 (1.47), 99 Camaro Z28 A4
ATwelveSec02Z28 11.424 @ 119.26 (1.53), 02 Camaro Z28 M6
BAIN ----------- 11.429 @ 116.81 (1.51), 00 Camaro SS A4
Lane ----------- 11.458 @ 117.33 (1.53), 01 Camaro Z28 A4
11SECSS -------- 11.458 @ 116.94 (1.50), 01 Camaro SS A4
DMcRacer ------- 11.468 @ 116.88 (1.56), 02 Camaro SS A4
MDBlackZ28 ----- 11.494 @ 115.85 (1.56), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
Black Sunshine - 11.496 @ 116.24 (1.52), 01 Camaro SS A4
NSSANE02 ------- 11.514 @ 119.50 (1.64), 02 Camaro SS M6
Birdman -------- 11.519 @ 115.60 (1.55), 98 TransAmWS6 A4
WILWAXU -------- 11.544 @ 115.36 (1.53), 01 Formula A4
01-Z ----------- 11.549 @ 117.82 (1.60), 01 Camaro Z28 M6
Lynda ---------- 11.550 @ 115.36 (1.51), 01 Camaro Z28 A4
chrs1313 ------- 11.558 @ 116.24 (1.54), 02 Camaro Z28 A4
Raughammer ----- 11.562 @ 115.25 (1.50), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
2002Z ---------- 11.564 @ 115.75 (1.52), 02 Camaro Z28 A4
Colonel -------- 11.565 @ 115.54 (1.51), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
RAGEman -------- 11.568 @ 121.13 (1.71), 01 Camaro Z28 M6
Dangerous SS --- 11.576 @ 116.52 (1.55), 02 Camaro SS A4
Shon Herron ---- 11.592 @ 113.00 (1.50), 97 Z28 LS1swap A4
MikeHoffpauir -- 11.593 @ 116.00 (1.56), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
JFM ------------ 11.623 @ 115.44 (1.57), 99 Camaro SS A4
DOUBT IT ------- 11.623 @ 114.94 (1.57), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
mmiller -------- 11.664 @ 114.55 (1.53), 01 Camaro SS A4
JS12 ----------- 11.672 @ 119.23 (1.72), 02 Camaro Z28 M6
LARRY01Z28 ----- 11.674 @ 118.20 (1.71), 01 Camaro Z28 M6
JASON ---------- 11.682 @ 116.37 (1.62), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
FASTR A4 ------- 11.694 @ 114.57 (1.56), 00 Formula A4
Magnet --------- 11.699 @ 115.38 (1.59), 02 Camaro SS A4
LS1INSIDE ------ 11.700 @ 114.93 (1.55), 99 Camaro Z28 A4
AliWantsNss ---- 11.702 @ 116.58 (1.56), 02 Camaro Z28 M6
MikeG ---------- 11.702 @ 115.66 (1.63), 01 Camaro SS A4
Kent1 ---------- 11.704 @ 115.38 (1.51), 99 Camaro SS A4
1999TransamWs6 - 11.715 @ 115.93 (1.73), 99 Trans am A3
JonCR96Z ------- 11.715 @ 113.39 (1.56), 01 Trans-Am A4
XtremeLS1Z28 --- 11.719 @ 115.07 (1.64), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
2Quick4U ------- 11.721 @ 115.19 (1.58), 00 Trans-Am A4
MADCOW --------- 11.730 @ 115.80 (1.57), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
black02-z28 ---- 11.731 @ 113.81 (1.50), 02 Camaro Z28 A4
z28kid98 ------- 11.740 @ 113.55 (1.56), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
Durien --------- 11.747 @ 117.59 (1.60), 99 Camaro SS M6

:chug:

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 11:26 AM
^^Not too shabby for an old SBC i'd say.

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 11:28 AM
^^Not too shabby for an old SBC i'd say.

Correct and the 10-second BOLT-ON 5.0 car from Evolution Performance had a decent amount of weight reduction done to as well. :nod:

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 11:29 AM
That car you listed above IS NOT a full weight car. If you wan't to talk about weight reduction/suspension bolt-on cars, the LS1 has already been der done dat!

Naturally Aspirated - Bolt-on's - Stock Motor* :..

F-Body
Board ID - 1/4 ET @ MPH (60ft), Yr & Type of car
RUQWIKR -------- 10.685 @ 122.91 (1.37), 01 Formula T400
Project_SS ----- 10.866 @ 122.14 (1.45), 98 Camaro SS A4
Magnus --------- 10.987 @ 119.31 (1.42), 97 Firebird A4
Promod1955 ----- 11.030 @ 124.18 (1.45), 00 Camaro SS A4
Skelton -------- 11.088 @ 119.10 (1.44), 01 Formula A3
1BAD98LS1 ------ 11.089 @ 120.62 (1.47), 98 Formula A4
Hawkn01 -------- 11.256 @ 118.48 (1.52), 01 Firehawk A4
SilentbutViolent 11.302 @ 117.84 (1.52), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
V6 Bird -------- 11.322 @ 118.67 (1.53), 01 Formula A4
Matt D --------- 11.421 @ 116.24 (1.47), 99 Camaro Z28 A4
ATwelveSec02Z28 11.424 @ 119.26 (1.53), 02 Camaro Z28 M6
BAIN ----------- 11.429 @ 116.81 (1.51), 00 Camaro SS A4
Lane ----------- 11.458 @ 117.33 (1.53), 01 Camaro Z28 A4
11SECSS -------- 11.458 @ 116.94 (1.50), 01 Camaro SS A4
DMcRacer ------- 11.468 @ 116.88 (1.56), 02 Camaro SS A4
MDBlackZ28 ----- 11.494 @ 115.85 (1.56), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
Black Sunshine - 11.496 @ 116.24 (1.52), 01 Camaro SS A4
NSSANE02 ------- 11.514 @ 119.50 (1.64), 02 Camaro SS M6
Birdman -------- 11.519 @ 115.60 (1.55), 98 TransAmWS6 A4
WILWAXU -------- 11.544 @ 115.36 (1.53), 01 Formula A4
01-Z ----------- 11.549 @ 117.82 (1.60), 01 Camaro Z28 M6
Lynda ---------- 11.550 @ 115.36 (1.51), 01 Camaro Z28 A4
chrs1313 ------- 11.558 @ 116.24 (1.54), 02 Camaro Z28 A4
Raughammer ----- 11.562 @ 115.25 (1.50), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
2002Z ---------- 11.564 @ 115.75 (1.52), 02 Camaro Z28 A4
Colonel -------- 11.565 @ 115.54 (1.51), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
RAGEman -------- 11.568 @ 121.13 (1.71), 01 Camaro Z28 M6
Dangerous SS --- 11.576 @ 116.52 (1.55), 02 Camaro SS A4
Shon Herron ---- 11.592 @ 113.00 (1.50), 97 Z28 LS1swap A4
MikeHoffpauir -- 11.593 @ 116.00 (1.56), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
JFM ------------ 11.623 @ 115.44 (1.57), 99 Camaro SS A4
DOUBT IT ------- 11.623 @ 114.94 (1.57), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
mmiller -------- 11.664 @ 114.55 (1.53), 01 Camaro SS A4
JS12 ----------- 11.672 @ 119.23 (1.72), 02 Camaro Z28 M6
LARRY01Z28 ----- 11.674 @ 118.20 (1.71), 01 Camaro Z28 M6
JASON ---------- 11.682 @ 116.37 (1.62), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
FASTR A4 ------- 11.694 @ 114.57 (1.56), 00 Formula A4
Magnet --------- 11.699 @ 115.38 (1.59), 02 Camaro SS A4
LS1INSIDE ------ 11.700 @ 114.93 (1.55), 99 Camaro Z28 A4
AliWantsNss ---- 11.702 @ 116.58 (1.56), 02 Camaro Z28 M6
MikeG ---------- 11.702 @ 115.66 (1.63), 01 Camaro SS A4
Kent1 ---------- 11.704 @ 115.38 (1.51), 99 Camaro SS A4
1999TransamWs6 - 11.715 @ 115.93 (1.73), 99 Trans am A3
JonCR96Z ------- 11.715 @ 113.39 (1.56), 01 Trans-Am A4
XtremeLS1Z28 --- 11.719 @ 115.07 (1.64), 00 Camaro Z28 A4
2Quick4U ------- 11.721 @ 115.19 (1.58), 00 Trans-Am A4
MADCOW --------- 11.730 @ 115.80 (1.57), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
black02-z28 ---- 11.731 @ 113.81 (1.50), 02 Camaro Z28 A4
z28kid98 ------- 11.740 @ 113.55 (1.56), 98 Camaro Z28 A4
Durien --------- 11.747 @ 117.59 (1.60), 99 Camaro SS M6

:chug:

so youre saying that after only 6 months of existence, that 5.0 is already 10th on your all time cam only list with the handicap of only having BOLT ONS!?!?! thats impressive considering the ls1 has had a 13year head start!

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 11:29 AM
Heck if those car really do drop a full 2-seconds with just BOLT-ONS and nothing else i'm trading in my vette tomorrow. :lol:

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 11:30 AM
so youre saying that after only 6 months of existence the 5.0 is already 10th on your all time cam only list with the handicap of only having BOLT ONS!?!?! thats impressive

That's not the CAM-ONLY list do-do head. :gtfo: That's BOLT-ONS.

Naturally Aspirated - Bolt-on's - Stock Motor* :..

The cam-only record is in the 9's now.

ss1129
01-06-2011, 11:32 AM
so youre saying that after only 6 months of existence, that 5.0 is already 10th on your all time cam only list with the handicap of only having BOLT ONS!?!?! thats impressive


When you throw a better motor/trans/gear into a platform that has been out for 6 years thats what happens. I love how people act like the new mustang fell out of the sky.


EDIT: I missed the part where he thought it was cam only. LMAO

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 11:32 AM
Correct and the 10-second BOLT-ON 5.0 car from Evolution Performance had a decent amount of weight reduction done to as well. :nod:



edit: that was bolt on list my mistake

why is weight never listed and never spoken of on all the lists (even on other boards and other makes)??

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 11:38 AM
edit: that was bolt on list my mistake

why is weight never listed and never spoken of on all the lists (even on other boards and other makes)??

Those cars had weight reduction of course, some a great amount, just like the Evolution Performance bolt-on 5.0 that wen't 10s. All is fair. :)

ss1129
01-06-2011, 11:40 AM
edit: that was bolt on list my mistake

why is weight never listed and never spoken of on all the lists (even on other boards and other makes)??

The secret is what people cant see.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 11:41 AM
Those cars had weight reduction of course, some a great amount, just like the Evolution Performance bolt-on 5.0 that wen't 10s. All is fair. :)

i see, just wondering what the final weights were. But im sure the evo performance car in the 10's is certainly not the fastest we will see. The 5.0 has only been around a few short months.

Arc00TA
01-06-2011, 11:42 AM
Are they similar enough that there will be no difference in power, or is it possible to see HP differences in higher RPMs? Not trying to bust your balls, but you kinda contradicted yourself there.

Yeah, I see what you mean. I was saying on average you won't see a difference, but its possible if you put them both on an engine dyno back to back you might see a few peak hp. The variation between engines of the same kind is probably bigger than the difference you might see there. Sorry to sound contradictory, I'm at work and was typing it in a hurry.

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 11:44 AM
i see, just wondering what the final weights were. But im sure the evo performance car in the 10's is certainly not the fastest we will see. The 5.0 has only been around a few short months.

I'm sure it isn't. That's a bad ass motor. I can't wait to see how they compare with more extensive mods (i.e. Heads, Cams, Intake Manifolds)

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 11:44 AM
The secret is what people cant see.

thats stupid. so if you can hide a nitrous system then you really feel its fair game just because its not visible? what is it with people that drive hacked up cars that dont want others to know? is it shame?

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 11:47 AM
thats stupid. so if you can hide a nitrous system then you really feel its fair game just because its not visible? what is it with people that drive hacked up cars that dont want others to know? is it shame?

That's the fun part of drag racing. You don't have to tell the next man what all you got. Guys have been doing that since the beginning. Ever heard of a 'Sneaky Pete'? :devil:

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 11:58 AM
That's the fun part of drag racing. You don't have to tell the next man what all you got. Guys have been doing that since the beginning. Ever heard of a 'Sneaky Pete'? :devil:

i know its been around since the beginning. i just think the more someone has to hide, the more dishonorable or untrusting. I just like racing for fun and to keep it competitive. I remember when i was younger in my LT1, some dumbass in a 5.0 wanted to race me. I told him it might be a good race cuz he said he had boltons. we went out lined up and turned out he had a 200shot of nitrous and ran by me like nothing. Really? why even line up cars KNOWING that it aint even gonna be a good race??? so we will have to disagree on this subject, its a gray area of right and wrong IMO. i dont like that evo performance acts like they list all their mods, but removing things is also a mod.

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 12:02 PM
i know its been around since the beginning. i just think the more someone has to hide, the more dishonorable or untrusting. I just like racing for fun and to keep it competitive. I remember when i was younger in my LT1, some dumbass in a 5.0 wanted to race me. I told him it might be a good race cuz he said he had boltons. we went out lined up and turned out he had a 200shot of nitrous and ran by me like nothing. Really? why even line up cars KNOWING that it aint even gonna be a good race??? so we will have to disagree on this subject, its a gray area of right and wrong IMO.

Yeah I remember the stang guys being the most good for that. Especially the fox-body guys. They would almost always hide their mods. I didn't mind though, it made the game more fun for me. Just gotta be sure you bring enuff. :D

ss1129
01-06-2011, 12:06 PM
i know its been around since the beginning. i just think the more someone has to hide, the more dishonorable or untrusting. I just like racing for fun and to keep it competitive. I remember when i was younger in my LT1, some dumbass in a 5.0 wanted to race me. I told him it might be a good race cuz he said he had boltons. we went out lined up and turned out he had a 200shot of nitrous and ran by me like nothing. Really? why even line up cars KNOWING that it aint even gonna be a good race??? so we will have to disagree on this subject, its a gray area of right and wrong IMO. i dont like that evo performance acts like they list all their mods, but removing things is also a mod.

When you race in events for prize money and there are power or weight limits you dont want people to know how you got your car down that light ect ect. Its like helping out the competition. Plus if you set up a street race for $$ and you only have bolt ons, but -300 from crafty weight removal it really helps you out.

Arc00TA
01-06-2011, 12:08 PM
I like that list. The only REAL advantage the 5.0 motor has over the LS1 is the VVT and great head flow, which we already know is the advantage of the DOHC design. Its not like the basic science behind engine power changed because the 5.0 label was applied to it. LS1 is under-cammed to meet all the things it needs to do as a street car (NVH, emissions, etc) where the 5.0 can have its cake and eat it too with the VVT. They can add heads with huge flow but not sacrifice low rpm torque. Technology is a great thing.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 12:09 PM
Yeah I remember the stang guys being the most good for that. Especially the fox-body guys. They would almost always hide their mods. I didn't mind though, it made the game more fun for me. Just gotta be sure you bring enuff. :D

damned stang guys.maybe i should start telling people my car has a slow revving 429 and weighs 5000lbs people always assume it weighs that much. shoot it has almost no weight reduction is a full framed,full sized CONVERTIBLE and still weighs less than a challenger.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 12:13 PM
I like that list. The only REAL advantage the 5.0 motor has over the LS1 is the VVT and great head flow, which we already know is the advantage of the DOHC design. Its not like the basic science behind engine power changed because the 5.0 label was applied to it. LS1 is under-cammed to meet all the things it needs to do as a street car (NVH, emissions, etc) where the 5.0 can have its cake and eat it too with the VVT. They can add heads with huge flow but not sacrifice low rpm torque. Technology is a great thing.

i think the magic will start happening when they want to make real power. Seems everybody and there momma is stuck in 500rwhp land. When boost and low compression becomes the norm,there will be a lot of insane mustangs out there. DOHC + Boost = :devil:

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 12:18 PM
I like that list. The only REAL advantage the 5.0 motor has over the LS1 is the VVT and great head flow, which we already know is the advantage of the DOHC design. Its not like the basic science behind engine power changed because the 5.0 label was applied to it. LS1 is under-cammed to meet all the things it needs to do as a street car (NVH, emissions, etc) where the 5.0 can have its cake and eat it too with the VVT. They can add heads with huge flow but not sacrifice low rpm torque. Technology is a great thing.

Great post! :cheers:

damned stang guys.maybe i should start telling people my car has a slow revving 429 and weighs 5000lbs people always assume it weighs that much. shoot it has almost no weight reduction is a full sized CONVERTIBLE and still weighs less than a challenger.

Heck when I had my old '69 Nova (original L78 396/375 car) I kept the original "396" badges on it, even though it had a new BPE 496 (600/620) in place of the original motor. At the street races I would tell people, "oh, it's just a 396 with a medium cam and exhaust". :devil:

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 12:21 PM
i think the magic will start happening when they want to make real power. Seems everybody and there momma is stuck in 500rwhp land. When boost and low compression becomes the norm,there will be a lot of insane mustangs out there. DOHC + Boost = :devil:

What? I haven't seen a N/A Coyote break the 500 mark yet. It's bound to happen very soon though.

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 12:22 PM
Heck when I had my old '69 Nova (original L78 396/375 car) I kept the original "396" badges on it, even though it had a new BPE 496 (600/620) in place of the original motor. At the street races I would tell people, "oh, it's just a 396 with a medium cam and exhaust". :devil:

That car was a monster. I remember when the rear quarter panels were starting to split open from all that dang torque. lol 496ci seemed so huge back then. Now you got people riding aroung with 572's and 600+ BB's in their cars.

Ju1ce
01-06-2011, 12:24 PM
I like that list. The only REAL advantage the 5.0 motor has over the LS1 is the VVT and great head flow, which we already know is the advantage of the DOHC design. Its not like the basic science behind engine power changed because the 5.0 label was applied to it. LS1 is under-cammed to meet all the things it needs to do as a street car (NVH, emissions, etc) where the 5.0 can have its cake and eat it too with the VVT. They can add heads with huge flow but not sacrifice low rpm torque. Technology is a great thing.

It's still technology that's older than a lot of members on this board and is being touted as 'the new shit'. So many people are doing back flips because of this motors awesome technology... it's funny.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 12:34 PM
What? I haven't seen a N/A Coyote break the 500 mark yet. It's bound to happen very soon though.

youre right, currently the 5.0 is putting down 435rwhp with limited boltons (they have a nice intake manifold coming out soon). I just meant that there are a shit ton of cars out there already making over 500rwhp to the point where it aint even a big deal.

Demon 383
01-06-2011, 12:34 PM
That car was a monster. I remember when the rear quarter panels were starting to split open from all that dang torque. lol 496ci seemed so huge back then. Now you got people riding aroung with 572's and 600+ BB's in their cars.

Ya know I never could get traction in that thing. :lol:

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 12:39 PM
Ya know I never could get traction in that thing. :lol:

:devil:

youre right, currently the 5.0 is putting down 435rwhp with limited boltons (they have a nice intake manifold coming out soon). I just meant that there are a shit ton of cars out there already making over 500rwhp to the point where it aint even a big deal.

Wasn't the EVO or one of the other tuner cars making that number with LT's? Just wondering if some of the bolt-ons that might add gains for other motors (i.e. MAF sensors, TB's, etc) might not add much for the Coyote. I know all engines are different and the Coyote seems to flow very well out of the box. Just curious.

Ke^in
01-06-2011, 12:49 PM
It's still technology that's older than a lot of members on this board and is being touted as 'the new shit'. So many people are doing back flips because of this motors awesome technology... it's funny.

The hardware is not new. The software that runs it is.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 12:59 PM
:devil:



Wasn't the EVO or one of the other tuner cars making that number with LT's? Just wondering if some of the bolt-ons that might add gains for other motors (i.e. MAF sensors, TB's, etc) might not add much for the Coyote. I know all engines are different and the Coyote seems to flow very well out of the box. Just curious.

yes. the Evo and just about all other long tube headered 5.0's are putting down that much. cai/LT/xpipe/tune = 435rwhp.

the boss intake manifold sounds like itll be something special though.

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 01:01 PM
... At the street races I would tell people, "oh, it's just a 396 with a medium cam and exhaust". :devil:

why did you feel the need to lie?

assasinator
01-06-2011, 03:47 PM
What? I haven't seen a N/A Coyote break the 500 mark yet. It's bound to happen very soon though.

theres no doubt in my mind the coyote will approach the following number: this motor is 330cubic inches.



In the world of dyno numbers and the myriad of excuses that can be made why this car or that didn’t hit the numbers expected there is one defining moment that clears the air; when the rubber hits the pavement.

We can talk about dyno numbers all we want but the times and traps posted at the track cut through all the minutia and tells us definitively what is under the hood, and more. For Johns 5.4L, carbed race engine the performance backs up the dyno sheet and more. We’re talking about mid 9's with 150+ MPH trap speeds. We’re talking about a C4 automatic transmission, high stall converter and a whole lot of RPM. 9100 through the traps to be specific. We've posted 615+ RWHP but the obvious truth is that is a conservative number. Using the Moroso Power Speed Calculator we find 750 horsepower at the crank with a 2800# race weight. Had the typical G-force T5 or similar manual transmission been used we would be talking somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 crankshaft horsepower. Seems a shame to have to post up only 615 rwhp!

Let's take a look at the combo:

850 CFM Holley Carburetor
Sullivan Single Plane Intake Manifold
Ported 05+ GT 4v Cylinder Heads
Proprietary .480 Lift Camshaft
Crank Driven Distributor
5.4L GT Aluminum Block
Stock 5.4L Cast Iron Crank
Custom Aluminum Rods
Diamond Flat Top Forged Aluminum Pistons

Congratulations to John for owning the top spot on the list!

MauriSSio
01-06-2011, 03:51 PM
theres no doubt in my mind the coyote will approach the following number: this motor is 330cubic inches.

this. And since the 5.0 is better than the 5.4 in every way its only logical to expect bigger and better things from it. Id trade my engine for a new 5.0, and then stupercharge it!

ss1129
01-06-2011, 03:52 PM
why did you feel the need to lie?

Because odds are that if you are going to street race for money, you are already being lied to as well.:confused:

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 04:15 PM
theres no doubt in my mind the coyote will approach the following number: this motor is 330cubic inches.

Oh I never said it couldn't do it, just that it hasn't done it yet.

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 04:16 PM
Because odds are that if you are going to street race for money, you are already being lied to as well.:confused:

This.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 04:32 PM
Oh I never said it couldn't do it, just that it hasn't done it yet.

were saying the same thing. i get it. just an example.


the guys who are going to make BIG power from the coyote on motor are gonna spin it past 10,000 rpms. i admit being tempted to build a 10k rpm coyote motor. oliver billet rods, diamond pistons, fully ported heads with 39mm intake valves. livernois says they expect to exceed 400cfm with coyote heads. thats better than ported gt500/GT heads. everything is there to do it. boss302 intake.

Ke^in
01-06-2011, 04:44 PM
Would rather have a GT350 over a GT500 :D

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 04:52 PM
were saying the same thing. i get it. just an example.


the guys who are going to make BIG power from the coyote on motor are gonna spin it past 10,000 rpms. i admit being tempted to build a 10k rpm coyote motor. oliver billet rods, diamond pistons, fully ported heads with 39mm intake valves. livernois says they expect to exceed 400cfm with coyote heads. thats better than ported gt500/GT heads. everything is there to do it. boss302 intake.

That's nice and all but it would be so much more cost effective to just go FI.

The Manalishi
01-06-2011, 04:58 PM
That's nice and all but it would be so much more cost effective to just go FI.

But NA you get that RAW wheel horsepower. :D

WSsick
01-06-2011, 05:09 PM
well if they started with an LS6 block and LS6 heads and cam and intake, why would somebody say "an LS1 is an LS1"?? If thats considered an LS1 then wouldnt the z06 engine be considered an LS1 then??

also, ive read that the LS6 block allows better bay to bay breathing at higher rpms....Thats gotta be worth SOMETHING

An LS6 is an LS1 with a couple extras. Technically, it could be called an LS1, but no one really cares enough to call their LS1 an LS6 or their C5Z06/CTS-V an LS1 powered car. You call it as they called it from the factory.

The saying "An LS1 is an LS1 is an LS1..." means that no matter the year of LS1, 97-02 & 04, they all produce almost identical hp #s. LS6 block MIGHT give you 1hp TOPS, although this has never been proven.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 05:15 PM
That's nice and all but it would be so much more cost effective to just go FI.

i have a FI car. it has billet stuff. and turbo. this is all motor. for fun. ill end up driving the caddy i want, and parking this one too. i promised myself to leave the V alone....when i get it.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 05:43 PM
That's nice and all but it would be so much more cost effective to just go FI.

And it'd be more cost-effective to buy a 3rd gen than a C6. People spend money because it's what they WANT to do. I think a 10,000rpm N/A Coyote motor would be Grade-A badass.

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 05:45 PM
But NA you get that RAW wheel horsepower. :D

:lol:

I'll take that over Forced Induction anyday.

An LS6 is an LS1 with a couple extras. Technically, it could be called an LS1, but no one really cares enough to call their LS1 an LS6 or their C5Z06/CTS-V an LS1 powered car. You call it as they called it from the factory.

The saying "An LS1 is an LS1 is an LS1..." means that no matter the year of LS1, 97-02 & 04, they all produce almost identical hp #s. LS6 block MIGHT give you 1hp TOPS, although this has never been proven.

x2!

i have a FI car. it has billet stuff. and turbo. this is all motor. for fun. ill end up driving the caddy i want, and parking this one too. i promised myself to leave the V alone....when i get it.

10,000rpms in a street car would be crazy. I'd love to go for a spin in something like that. :D

What year 'V' are you talking about? Hopefully LS9...

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 07:16 PM
This is just common sense. I see a lot of hopeful posts on here. Like I said, when the LS1 first came out the Mustang boards were doing the same. THey WAAY underrated it. And said it was hyped too much. It's been over 10 years now, and it lived up to the hype. So will the 5.0. There will always be those in denial. There will always be those drinking the Hateraid®.

Except the difference between the LS1 and the 2V's was... a lot. Nowadays the the difference between the LS3 Maro's and the 2011 GT's is... basically nothing. Most people on here know stock for stock its a drivers race. Stock for stock they dyno about the same, boltons and there still about the same, anything more and the LS3 edges out the 5.0. Too much hype for a car that performs on par, not above.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 07:22 PM
Except the difference between the LS1 and the 2V's was... a lot. Nowadays the the difference between the LS3 Maro's and the 2011 GT's is... basically nothing. Most people on here know stock for stock its a drivers race. Stock for stock they dyno about the same, boltons and there still about the same, anything more and the LS3 edges out the 5.0. Too much hype for a car that performs on par, not above.

Do you know something that nobody else knows? :confused:

Edit: And people aren't comparing the new GT to the LS3 Camaros here... they're trying to compare it to 4th gens.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 07:30 PM
:lol:

I'll take that over Forced Induction anyday.



x2!



10,000rpms in a street car would be crazy. I'd love to go for a spin in something like that. :D

What year 'V' are you talking about? Hopefully LS9...

Man im in love with any V. i just couldnt buy a car i had to re-engineer the whole rear suspension for running the way i like to. yes im going to get a LSA when i pay off the stang. 4 doors though. i do like the coupe, but i need 4 doors and comfort for 4 adults.

i dont HAVE to get a new one, if there's a deal on a used 2009+ its mine, otherwise a new one it is. im not too proud to buy a used car. it will be my 4th cadillac. 3 northstars and soon enough a LSA.

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 07:31 PM
Do you know something that nobody else knows? :confused:

Edit: And people aren't comparing the new GT to the LS3 Camaros here... they're trying to compare it to 4th gens.
I know something that everyone knows, there is no replacement for displacement.


Did you read what i quoted? He is saying that the way it was when the LS1's came out, it is now, except now that landslide victory goes to ford. Im sorry but thats :barf:.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 07:38 PM
I know something that everyone knows, there is no replacement for displacement.


Did you read what i quoted? He is saying that the way it was when the LS1's came out, it is now, except now that landslide victory goes to ford. Im sorry but thats :barf:.

im going to use an extremism example, but a 2.5 liter F1 makes 820hp. on pump gas.


rpm=cubic inches.

a cylinder head with a set flow makes exactly the same power regardless of cubic inches.

airflow in lb/minute = HP.


whether or not the smaller motor can spin high enough to make up for cubic inches is another matter.

plz dont ignore engine building basics here. this is LS1"tech", not LS1opinion.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 07:39 PM
Ok Jeff, are you reading something here that I'm not getting?


This is just common sense. I see a lot of hopeful posts on here. Like I said, when the LS1 first came out the Mustang boards were doing the same. THey WAAY underrated it. And said it was hyped too much. It's been over 10 years now, and it lived up to the hype. So will the 5.0. There will always be those in denial. There will always be those drinking the Hateraid®.
He's saying that Mustang guys underestimated the LS1 when it came out. Which is definitely true. And he's saying that people are doing the same thing with the 5.0 now. Which is definitely true. I don't think he said anything about the 5.0 having a "landslide victory." That one was all you.

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 07:54 PM
im going to use an extremism example, but a 2.5 liter F1 makes 820hp. on pump gas.


rpm=cubic inches.

a cylinder head with a set flow makes exactly the same power regardless of cubic inches.

airflow in lb/minute = HP.


whether or not the smaller motor can spin high enough to make up for cubic inches is another matter.

plz dont ignore engine building basics here. this is LS1"tech", not LS1opinion.

Yes true, but that is an extreme comparison, apples to apples, cubic inches is the victor. If an engine is boosted then cubic inches doesnt matter and usually only changes the powerband, N/A it is an entirely different story. What does a bigger engine ALWAYS make more of? Torque. If there are 2 engines, both at 5000rpm, one at 400tq and one at 500tq, which one will produce MORE hp. Mathematically the one with more tq. HP=Torque X RPM/5252. Displacement is a HUGE factor, something not as easily changed as as a set of heads or a cam.
Ok Jeff, are you reading something here that I'm not getting?

He's saying that Mustang guys underestimated the LS1 when it came out. Which is definitely true. And he's saying that people are doing the same thing with the 5.0 now. Which is definitely true. I don't think he said anything about the 5.0 having a "landslide victory."

He didnt exactly say that but, to me thats the message i got. The 5.0 is definitely a TRUE competitor, 360whp stock, 430whp with full boltons, how many cars can do that? Not much, but i will say that an LS3 is right on par with it. If he didnt mean that then disregard my post and that is my fault.

The Manalishi
01-06-2011, 07:54 PM
Assasinator you are kind of oversimpifying some of that. A head that flows a certain number will not make the same power on a large and a smaller engine unless both engines are built to optimize that amount of flow and even then it may be impossible to make the smaller engine capable of using it.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 08:02 PM
Assasinator you are kind of oversimpifying some of that. A head that flows a certain number will not make the same power on a large and a smaller engine unless both engines are built to optimize that amount of flow and even then it may be impossible to make the smaller engine capable of using it.

yes the example is a simplified one, but with all things equal and optimized, ie bearing surface resistance, total engine drag coeficcient, perfect intake tuning, etc, a smaller motor will make the same power give or take.

of course if you are comparing a 7 liter 350cfm motor to a 5.8liter engine with the exact same head, the 351 needs a lot of tuning and attention to detail. it also need a bunch more rpms to do it. - i mention those ^3 inches because its the hurricane cubic inches range.


but just a generic, "no replacement,etc" blanket statement is not true. i wasn't picking on anyone.

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 08:06 PM
but just a generic, "no replacement,etc" blanket statement is not true. i wasn't picking on anyone.

Its not ALWAYS true, but guess what, it is true.

Arc00TA
01-06-2011, 08:06 PM
rpm=cubic inches.

I know you know thats not entirely true. There will never be a replacement for total volume. More RPM and FI both use the same volume more efficiently. If you had a 10000 RPM 200ci motor with X amount of airflow, and scaled it up proportionally to 500ci (obviously if the head flowed the same this is pointless) the bigger motor would always make more power. Of course, in the world of engine building we have to factor in cost and available materials so the perfect "numbers game" doesn't work, which is why small high RPM engines are successful.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 08:08 PM
And why a high-rpm Coyote motor would be very successful.

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 08:12 PM
Eh, just throw a turbo on it.

Arc00TA
01-06-2011, 08:21 PM
And why a high-rpm Coyote motor would be very successful.

I agree, I would love to see one turning 9k. I'm wondering how far the heads will go at this point. I would also be curious about tuning the VVT to operate at that high of an RPM.

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 08:27 PM
I agree, I would love to see one turning 9k. I'm wondering how far the heads will go at this point. I would also be curious about tuning the VVT to operate at that high of an RPM.

That would be crazy, you could have it all, decent power down low and ridiculous power up top. Except to rev that high you would need a cam to feed it, and that cam would need have the VVT detuned (at the least), or like on 3V's, lock it in a set position so as to not have pistons knocking out valves, which completely defeats the purpose of having VVT.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 08:29 PM
I think with the DOHC setup, they can take the "aggressive" setup further than they could with the SOHC setup.

jeffreycastgsx
01-06-2011, 08:39 PM
I think with the DOHC setup, they can take the "aggressive" setup further than they could with the SOHC setup.

Maybe we'll see, in my opinion, most 5.0's will mostly see boltons or boost, i dont see many in the grey area.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 08:49 PM
Well 430-440rwhp with bolt-ons, and 550-600rwhp on boost will be enough for most people, I'm sure.

The Manalishi
01-06-2011, 08:55 PM
Dohc engines aren't liked by the hardcore drag racers which limits where the knowledgable head porters will take that head. If there isn't a market for it a lot of them won't mess with them. There will be a few guys testing the limits NA but they will have deep pockets and likely won't be sharing that stuff. I agree they will be relegated to bolt ons or boost. Just seems to be the trend with the overhead cam stuff.

s346k
01-06-2011, 09:13 PM
well, now we know what the ford guys felt like in 98 when their modded GTs ran our stock ls1 cars...

the thing you guys are missing is how bad the 4th gen fbod platform sucks. the ls motors in swap cars weighing 3k lbs are damn near untouchable.

The Manalishi
01-06-2011, 09:16 PM
It must not suck too bad there are more than a few in the single digits. There have also been some really successful road race 4th gens so suck probably isn't the word I would choose.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 09:19 PM
Yes true, but that is an extreme comparison, apples to apples, cubic inches is the victor. If an engine is boosted then cubic inches doesnt matter and usually only changes the powerband, N/A it is an entirely different story. What does a bigger engine ALWAYS make more of? Torque. If there are 2 engines, both at 5000rpm, one at 400tq and one at 500tq, which one will produce MORE hp. Mathematically the one with more tq. HP=Torque X RPM/5252. Displacement is a HUGE factor, something not as easily changed as as a set of heads or a cam.

your argument ends at 5252. let that same big inch long stroke motor try to rev to 8200 with EXACTLY the same heads.

lets talk about LSX. not mix modular and ls.

if you use a 225cc head on a 5.5liter motor you can rev it well past 7k and make power there. take the exact same head on a 400inch LS and it will make as much horsepower but at a lower rpm. its harder to rev a 4" stroke motor to the moon with a 225cc head.

the 400inch motor will MURDER the 5.5 in torque. so how can the little motor compete? gearing. you gear the 5.5 aggressively to pull 7500k rpms at specific MPH. where a 400inch motor will rev 6200 and pull say 50mph in 2nd, gear the 5.5 for 7500 at the same mph.


forget about 4 valve, or 2 valve, this is about a fixed head on each different displacement , with EACH combo optimized.

same power at vastly different rpms. but, the little motor wins every time. it has a gearing advantage the larger more torquey engine cant match.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 09:20 PM
That would be crazy, you could have it all, decent power down low and ridiculous power up top. Except to rev that high you would need a cam to feed it, and that cam would need have the VVT detuned (at the least), or like on 3V's, lock it in a set position so as to not have pistons knocking out valves, which completely defeats the purpose of having VVT.

he coyote is free revving. no PTV issues.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 09:28 PM
I know you know thats not entirely true. There will never be a replacement for total volume. More RPM and FI both use the same volume more efficiently. If you had a 10000 RPM 200ci motor with X amount of airflow, and scaled it up proportionally to 500ci (obviously if the head flowed the same this is pointless) the bigger motor would always make more power. Of course, in the world of engine building we have to factor in cost and available materials so the perfect "numbers game" doesn't work, which is why small high RPM engines are successful.

the argument was never to scale flow and port dynamics. the argument was wih a fixed flow a 500 inch motor will do very little. to use another extreme example, use the 500 inch motor withe heads that flow 250 cfm and have 180cc ports. its an average number , but at what rpm with the heads "choke" on the 500 inch motor. sonic choke is the limit here. on a 350.....

The HP for your Cylinder Head Flow of 250 is 514.01 at a RPM of 5,259.01 for your engine size of 500 CID - i submit that a 180cc port on a 500 inch motor would choke long before 5200.


The HP for your Cylinder Head Flow of 250 is 514.01 at a RPM of 7,512.87 for your engine size of 350 CID


those are ideal numbers. and are simply head flow numbers converted to lb/minute and the pumping an average 500 and 350 will do.



even with FI port volume is DIRECTLY proportional to pressure ratio across that port. if a port flows 5 lb/minute at 0bar and you force 1 bar across it, the port will flow nearly double the original volume. 10 lb/minute.

5 lb/minute on a v8 per port is just less than 400hp.
10 lb/minute on a v8 per port is 80 lb/minute or just less than 800hp.

The Manalishi
01-06-2011, 09:34 PM
Assasinator you are correct with what you you just posted a small engine with the right gear can beat up on larger engines, on the track. On the street cubes are where its at, since a larger engine would be more tame and streetable. Hell I had a friend that had a 302 chevy in the 9's but it spun to 10k. I wouldn't of drove that damn thing across the street if any kind of traffic was involved. Small engines can make great power but at the expense of drivability and torque.

assasinator
01-06-2011, 09:39 PM
Assasinator you are correct with what you you just posted a small engine with the right gear can beat up on larger engines, on the track. On the street cubes are where its at, since a larger engine would be more tame and streetable. Hell I had a friend that had a 302 chevy in the 9's but it spun to 10k. I wouldn't of drove that damn thing across the street if any kind of traffic was involved. Small engines can make great power but at the expense of drivability and torque.

i agree with that.

i imagine an f1 engine which IDLES at 9000 rpms is unmanagable with 7:1 rear end gearing.

Irunelevens
01-06-2011, 09:39 PM
That's where Ti-VCT comes in ;)

LT/LS Guy
01-06-2011, 10:31 PM
Assasinator you are correct with what you you just posted a small engine with the right gear can beat up on larger engines, on the track. On the street cubes are where its at, since a larger engine would be more tame and streetable. Hell I had a friend that had a 302 chevy in the 9's but it spun to 10k. I wouldn't of drove that damn thing across the street if any kind of traffic was involved. Small engines can make great power but at the expense of drivability and torque.

I agree. I like the idea of making 600rwhp N/A at only 6,150rpms like this 427 LS3. :D And it sits in a sub 3k pound FD. Who needs 10,000 rpms on the street.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1203807-603-rwhp-583-rwtq-ls3-427-na.html

or this 440 LS from LME making over 600rw N/A as well. Now that's BIG power.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36934

interlscubes
01-06-2011, 10:57 PM
Decent death,Now put some more mods and take another swing at it.

Arc00TA
01-07-2011, 12:45 AM
the argument was never to scale flow and port dynamics.

Sorry, I missed the part where you said using the same head, I was assuming you meant two equally optimized engines. Using a fixed flow head doesn't prove rpm=displacement, it just proves the smaller motor will use up the available flow at a higher RPM, giving it a wider powerband. I'm not sure how you think this is a valid argument since nobody sets out to build a handicapped engine. If you let the big engine breathe to 7500rpm just like you let the small one, it will make more power, and also more torque which would give it the advantage assuming traction is set aside. A well built 632ci BBC can make 1200hp at 7500rpm, so whats the point of trying to spin a smaller motor to the moon to make the same power?

I'm not saying your point that the small motor can win using the proper gearing is invalid, just the way you're presenting it doesn't make much sense. You're specifically handicapping the bigger motor to prove your point.

It'llrun
01-07-2011, 02:08 AM
I'm not saying your point that the small motor can win using the proper gearing is invalid, just the way you're presenting it doesn't make much sense. You're specifically handicapping the bigger motor to prove your point.He did that for a specific reason. He wasn't saying larger engines aren't as good or anything like that, just that smaller engines revving much higher can make the same power as a larger engine which can't physically hold together at the high rpm. He was using a set flow just to make the point. Part of the point was that smaller engines are capable of more rpm, which is why they'll equal the power if the head capability matches.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 07:36 AM
Except the difference between the LS1 and the 2V's was... a lot.
If you are referring to speed, it's about the same as the difference between the new 5.0 and a LS1 stock for stock.

Nowadays the the difference between the LS3 Maro's and the 2011 GT's is... basically nothing.
I wasn't referring to the new Camaro. But even it's slower than the new 5.0

Most people on here know stock for stock its a drivers race. Stock for stock they dyno about the same, boltons and there still about the same,
AGAIN I was referring to those comparing the LS1 to the 5.0.
anything more and the LS3 edges out the 5.0. Too much hype for a car that performs on par, not above.
Not so sure about that.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 07:40 AM
I know something that everyone knows, there is no replacement for displacement.

Actually there is when you are speaking about different motor designs. If there is no replacement, why isn't the newest Camaro faster than the 5.0? How come the new SRT-8s aren't faster than all 3? There are A LOT of factors that are in the mix. Displacement a lone isn't the only one.

Did you read what i quoted? He is saying that the way it was when the LS1's came out, it is now, except now that landslide victory goes to ford. Im sorry but thats :barf:.

No, what I said was when I was on the Mustang boards when the LS1s came out, those that were insecure about them and had sour grapes were belittling it. Saying it was overhyped, and with few mods they could take one. They were wrong. While I know there have been slightly modded 2v take LS1 fbodies in races, it's not the norm. And if it happens, it's because the LS1 driver sucks. I was comparing that with how some LS1 fbody owners in here are acting towards the 5.0. And it's a legit comparison. Don't like it? Too bad.

Ok Jeff, are you reading something here that I'm not getting?

He's saying that Mustang guys underestimated the LS1 when it came out. Which is definitely true. And he's saying that people are doing the same thing with the 5.0 now. Which is definitely true. I don't think he said anything about the 5.0 having a "landslide victory." That one was all you.

Bingo. I didn't think what I said was that hard to comprehend.

WSsick
01-07-2011, 08:24 AM
FWIW (adding fuel to the fire), there have been a pretty good amount of bolt-on f-bodies taking out 5.0s, even on this board alone. I'd say an LS1 has a better chance of beating a 5.0 than a 2v beating an LS1.

Just sayin...

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 08:54 AM
FWIW (adding fuel to the fire), there have been a pretty good amount of bolt-on f-bodies taking out (stock - added by Kevin) 5.0s, even on this board alone. I'd say an LS1 has a better chance of beating a 5.0 than a 2v beating an LS1.

Just sayin...

And there have been even more bolt-on 2vs that have taking out stock LS1s. Why? They both have been around a lot longer.

You guys act like the 2v can't take a LS1 in any shape or form without boost. And that's simply not true. Stock for stock, there is about a .5 difference in times compared to the Ls1 and 2v. Same goes for the LS1 and 5.0

I am speaking about 1/4 mile races.

If you wanna talk roll races up to 150+ MPH when it comes to a LS1 vs a 2v, the 2v would have to have a lot more than just bolt-ons.

The current 5.0 vs the current Camaro is comparable to a LS1 and a Mach1. But this time the 5.0 has the advantage.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 08:58 AM
What I CAN'T wait for is the Z28 coming out. That should make things even MORE interesting. Especially if it comes in black, with red trimmings. :drool:

When it comes to pony cars, as far as looks go, the WS6 is still the hottest looking one around. Even more so than the 5.0 and the new Camaro IMHO. I love those LS1 T/As.

Demon 383
01-07-2011, 09:10 AM
I agree. I like the idea of making 600rwhp N/A at only 6,150rpms like this 427 LS3. :D And it sits in a sub 3k pound FD. Who needs 10,000 rpms on the street.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1203807-603-rwhp-583-rwtq-ls3-427-na.html

or this 440 LS from LME making over 600rw N/A as well. Now that's BIG power.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36934

Good find! I remember Keith @ Force Fed knew a local guy that was pushing 600rw N/A in a '98 Z/28. 6spd car. Had like 4.56 gears and a 3100lb dry weight. Was fast as shit.

It would take a Coyote probably 25,000rpms to make that kind of power. :lol: I kid I kid. :D

LivernoisMotorsports
01-07-2011, 09:12 AM
But NA you get that RAW wheel horsepower. :D

I'm impressed with the 5.0L

Our shop car went pretty quick with relatively few mods. The build can be followed here (http://www.livernoismotorsports.com/tab.phtml?gk=695&t=News)

I have over 140 track passes in the car to date. Everyone said it couldn't safely rev high with stock hardware, but it shifts every gear at 7,800 rpm's with stock springs, stock cams, ported heads.

The best ET to date - 10.82 @ 123 mph. It really needs a set of cams to get the full potential out of the current mods.

There is no weight reduction other than removing the spare tire and jack and of course the wheels/tires. The car weighed 3,680 lbs. with me in it (I am 180 lbs.)

It made 441 RWHP through the auto, so it's up 110 RWHP over stock.

Mods are:

Livernois Motorsports 12:1 Pistons/H-Beam Rods
Livernois Motorsports Stage 1 CNC Heads
Stainless Works Headers, Catted Mid-Pipe, and Catback
FRPP Manifold
FRPP Throttle Body
Custom CAI
4.10 Ring & Pinion
Circle D Stall Converter
Livernois Motorsports 1-Piece Aluminum Driveshaft
Livernois Motorsports Dyno Tune
FRPP Cobra-Jet Springs & Adjustable Shocks/Struts
BMR Panhard Bar
BMR Swaybar Relocation Brackets
Drag Radials/Skinnies

Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTCL-eT2lbs)

-Rick

LivernoisMotorsports
01-07-2011, 09:16 AM
I agree. I like the idea of making 600rwhp N/A at only 6,150rpms like this 427 LS3. :D And it sits in a sub 3k pound FD. Who needs 10,000 rpms on the street.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/1203807-603-rwhp-583-rwtq-ls3-427-na.html

or this 440 LS from LME making over 600rw N/A as well. Now that's BIG power.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36934

This is impressive too!

Nothing like crazy N/A power.

We built a Z06 for a customer that made 630 RWHP N/A; 729 RWHP with 100 shot.

Stock bottom end, trans, rear end, and half shafts! It went 9.93 @ 139 on motor and 9.4 @ 148 on 100 shot.

Mods are:

Livernois Motorsports Stage 3 LS7 Cylinder Heads
Livernois Motorsports Stage 3 LS7 Camshaft
Livernois Motorsports Dual Valve Spring Kit
FAST 102mm Intake Manifold
Halltech Cold Air Intake System
Kooks Longtube Headers
Kook's X-Pipe
Stock Catback w/ Mild-to-Wild Controller
Lowered on stock bolts
Tuned by Livernois Motorsports

Click (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JOmJkuSvYU&fmt=22)

-Rick

The Manalishi
01-07-2011, 10:08 AM
I'm impressed with the 5.0L

Our shop car went pretty quick with relatively few mods. The build can be followed here (http://www.livernoismotorsports.com/tab.phtml?gk=695&t=News)

I have over 140 track passes in the car to date. Everyone said it couldn't safely rev high with stock hardware, but it shifts every gear at 7,800 rpm's with stock springs, stock cams, ported heads.

The best ET to date - 10.82 @ 123 mph. It really needs a set of cams to get the full potential out of the current mods.

There is no weight reduction other than removing the spare tire and jack and of course the wheels/tires. The car weighed 3,680 lbs. with me in it (I am 180 lbs.)

It made 441 RWHP through the auto, so it's up 110 RWHP over stock.

Mods are:

Livernois Motorsports 12:1 Pistons/H-Beam Rods
Livernois Motorsports Stage 1 CNC Heads
Stainless Works Headers, Catted Mid-Pipe, and Catback
FRPP Manifold
FRPP Throttle Body
Custom CAI
4.10 Ring & Pinion
Circle D Stall Converter
Livernois Motorsports 1-Piece Aluminum Driveshaft
Livernois Motorsports Dyno Tune
FRPP Cobra-Jet Springs & Adjustable Shocks/Struts
BMR Panhard Bar
BMR Swaybar Relocation Brackets
Drag Radials/Skinnies


-Rick

That's pretty impressive. How much improvement did you get by porting the heads? I'm just assuming you tested the car before and after the heads to see what the difference would be. If not an educated guess would be fine. :chug:

MauriSSio
01-07-2011, 10:11 AM
I'm impressed with the 5.0L

Our shop car went pretty quick with relatively few mods. The build can be followed here (http://www.livernoismotorsports.com/tab.phtml?gk=695&t=News)

I have over 140 track passes in the car to date. Everyone said it couldn't safely rev high with stock hardware, but it shifts every gear at 7,800 rpm's with stock springs, stock cams, ported heads.

The best ET to date - 10.82 @ 123 mph. It really needs a set of cams to get the full potential out of the current mods.

There is no weight reduction other than removing the spare tire and jack and of course the wheels/tires. The car weighed 3,680 lbs. with me in it (I am 180 lbs.)

It made 441 RWHP through the auto, so it's up 110 RWHP over stock.

Mods are:

Livernois Motorsports 12:1 Pistons/H-Beam Rods
Livernois Motorsports Stage 1 CNC Heads
Stainless Works Headers, Catted Mid-Pipe, and Catback
FRPP Manifold
FRPP Throttle Body
Custom CAI
4.10 Ring & Pinion
Circle D Stall Converter
Livernois Motorsports 1-Piece Aluminum Driveshaft
Livernois Motorsports Dyno Tune
FRPP Cobra-Jet Springs & Adjustable Shocks/Struts
BMR Panhard Bar
BMR Swaybar Relocation Brackets
Drag Radials/Skinnies

Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTCL-eT2lbs)

-Rick

wow thats only stage 1 porting + boltons and full weight. Impressive!

LivernoisMotorsports
01-07-2011, 10:13 AM
That's pretty impressive. How much improvement did you get by porting the heads? I'm just assuming you tested the car before and after the heads to see what the difference would be. If not an educated guess would be fine. :chug:

Thanks!

In all honesty, we hope to do some engine dyno testing here soon with various port designs.

We were invited to a magazine shootout and had very little time to get the car together, so we did several mods at one time. The heads do flow great out of the box, so on a pretty much stock engine with stock cams, I'm sure they do very little. With a power adder or increased displacement and cams, I'm sure they would help more.

-Rick

WSsick
01-07-2011, 11:00 AM
And there have been even more bolt-on 2vs that have taking out stock LS1s. Why? They both have been around a lot longer.

I didnt say anything about number of victories, so that's an irrelevant point.

You guys act like the 2v can't take a LS1 in any shape or form without boost. And that's simply not true. Stock for stock, there is about a .5 difference in times compared to the Ls1 and 2v. Same goes for the LS1 and 5.0

Id say you're wrong about the .5 second difference. When I was searching for a 13 second stock 2v in that other thread, I had a hard time finding cars 14.2 or under. Id say the stock 2v average is around 14.3 or 14.4, almost a full second behind a stock ls1.

Can't really say what the 5.0 average is fairly yet, since it hasn't been out long enough to see what a true average is. For now, 12.8 seems fair, maybe higher. Lots of slow times rolling in, but some pretty good fast ones too.

[Qupte] The current 5.0 vs the current Camaro is comparable to a LS1 and a Mach1. But this time the 5.0 has the advantage.[/QUOTE]

That is a fair assumption I would say.

LT/LS Guy
01-07-2011, 11:19 AM
This is impressive too!

Nothing like crazy N/A power.

We built a Z06 for a customer that made 630 RWHP N/A; 729 RWHP with 100 shot.

Stock bottom end, trans, rear end, and half shafts! It went 9.93 @ 139 on motor and 9.4 @ 148 on 100 shot.

Mods are:

Livernois Motorsports Stage 3 LS7 Cylinder Heads
Livernois Motorsports Stage 3 LS7 Camshaft
Livernois Motorsports Dual Valve Spring Kit
FAST 102mm Intake Manifold
Halltech Cold Air Intake System
Kooks Longtube Headers
Kook's X-Pipe
Stock Catback w/ Mild-to-Wild Controller
Lowered on stock bolts
Tuned by Livernois Motorsports

Click (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JOmJkuSvYU&fmt=22)

-Rick

:drool:

That's just badass! I heard about that car on another board and was curious as to who did the build. Not only does it have the dyno numbers it's got the track times to back it up! You guys always do awesome work. Hopefully one day I can work with you guys on one my projects. :cheers:

LT/LS Guy
01-07-2011, 11:28 AM
Id say you're wrong about the .5 second difference. When I was searching for a 13 second stock 2v in that other thread, I had a hard time finding cars 14.2 or under. Id say the stock 2v average is around 14.3 or 14.4, almost a full second behind a stock ls1.

I agree. Watching them back at home on the East Coast (Englishtown) and here on the West Coast @ Sacramento Raceway (sea level) i've seen the majority of 99-04's go 14.2-14.4 @ 97-100 on average, even on the Mustang vs F-body nights where there would be 15 or so two-valves running all night long. Just speaking average. I think a 14-flat is really "driving" that car. A 13.x is really REALLY driving that car. LS1 M6 F-bodies on the other hand will run 13.4/5 @ 105-107 with little effort, I think we can all agree on that. The more skilled guys will go bottom 13's, 13.1-13.2 range. They've got the power to do it, about 80-90rwhp more than a 2-valve.

Demon 383
01-07-2011, 11:38 AM
This is impressive too!

Nothing like crazy N/A power.

We built a Z06 for a customer that made 630 RWHP N/A; 729 RWHP with 100 shot.

Stock bottom end, trans, rear end, and half shafts! It went 9.93 @ 139 on motor and 9.4 @ 148 on 100 shot.

Mods are:

Livernois Motorsports Stage 3 LS7 Cylinder Heads
Livernois Motorsports Stage 3 LS7 Camshaft
Livernois Motorsports Dual Valve Spring Kit
FAST 102mm Intake Manifold
Halltech Cold Air Intake System
Kooks Longtube Headers
Kook's X-Pipe
Stock Catback w/ Mild-to-Wild Controller
Lowered on stock bolts
Tuned by Livernois Motorsports

Click (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JOmJkuSvYU&fmt=22)

-Rick

630RWHP N/A is ridiculous. :hail:

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 11:46 AM
I didnt say anything about number of victories, so that's an irrelevant point.

You said

"There have been a pretty good amount of bolt-on f-bodies taking out 5.0s"

Since when does "good amount" not = numbers?


Id say you're wrong about the .5 second difference. When I was searching for a 13 second stock 2v in that other thread, I had a hard time finding cars 14.2 or under. Id say the stock 2v average is around 14.3 or 14.4, almost a full second behind a stock ls1.
An auto maybe. Did you not see the link posted when the two cars were tested? The Camaro SS got a mid to high 13s rating, and the 2v a flat 14. Now we KNOW the SS can do better than 13.7s. The GT can do better than 14 too.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll35/n20lt4/99_MustangGTvsComp_Article1k.jpg

fiveoh
01-07-2011, 11:54 AM
I didnt say anything about number of victories, so that's an irrelevant point.



Id say you're wrong about the .5 second difference. When I was searching for a 13 second stock 2v in that other thread, I had a hard time finding cars 14.2 or under. Id say the stock 2v average is around 14.3 or 14.4, almost a full second behind a stock ls1.

Can't really say what the 5.0 average is fairly yet, since it hasn't been out long enough to see what a true average is. For now, 12.8 seems fair, maybe higher. Lots of slow times rolling in, but some pretty good fast ones too.

[Qupte] The current 5.0 vs the current Camaro is comparable to a LS1 and a Mach1. But this time the 5.0 has the advantage.

That is a fair assumption I would say.[/QUOTE]

12.8 with a stock tire is probably close. My auto bone stock with 300 miles went 12.91@111 with a crappy 2.07 60'(spinning). That was in 800' DA with the spare in the trunk and a full tank of gas.

LT/LS Guy
01-07-2011, 12:01 PM
An auto maybe. Did you not see the link posted when the two cars were tested? The Camaro SS got a mid to high 13s rating, and the 2v a flat 14. Now we KNOW the SS can do better than 13.7s. The GT can do better than 14 too.

Don't forget the T/A WS6 wen't 13.5 @ 107.4 in that same test. Don't know why you only compare the GT to the Camaro. The T/A and SS are virtually the same car.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 12:05 PM
Don't forget the T/A WS6 wen't 13.5 @ 107.4 in that same test.
Did I not say that we all know said cars can go faster than 13.7?

Don't know why you only compare the GT to the Camaro. The T/A and SS are virtually the same car.

Actually I usually say LS1 based fbody. My point of posting said link was to show the 99GT 14.0@100.2 1/4 time done by a magazine. So you say the TA went 13.5? The 2v went 14.0

What's the difference? .5 of a second. Just like I said.

We both know however LS1 fbodies can go faster than 13.5-13.7

Just like 2v NewEdge GTs can go faster than 14.0

LT/LS Guy
01-07-2011, 12:10 PM
Did I not say that we all know said cars can go faster than 13.7?


Actually I usually say LS1 based fbody. My point of posting said link was to show the 99GT 14.0@100.2 1/4 time done by a magazine. So you say the TA went 13.5? The 2v went 14.0

What's the difference? .5 of a second. Just like I said.

We both know however LS1 fbodies can go faster than 13.5-13.7

Just like 2v NewEdge GTs can go faster than 14.0

Yeah but if were talking magazine times I can pull up road tests where an LS1 F-body has gone as fast as high 12's. You couldn't pull up one single piece of proof that a 99-04 GT has even dipped into the 13's. That's the issue. I'm going off of proof, your going off assumption.

WSsick
01-07-2011, 12:12 PM
You said

"There have been a pretty good amount of bolt-on f-bodies taking out 5.0s"

Since when does "good amount" not = numbers?



My bad, worded it poorly. It was really to add to my point of who has the better chance of winning, wasn't really focusing on # of W's.

An auto maybe. Did you not see the link posted when the two cars were tested? The Camaro SS got a mid to high 13s rating, and the 2v a flat 14. Now we KNOW the SS can do better than 13.7s. The GT can do better than 14 too.

I saw AND defended that exact argument saying yes it is possible, but we are talking average times, NOT fastest times. The thing about that article really is that we know the LS1s can go MUCH faster, but in my search for even 1 13.x stock 2v, I ran across a great majority over 14.2 (14.6-14.3 seemed to be a the norm). There are plenty more people running faster than a 13.7 in LS1s, can't say the same for that 2v & it's 14.0 time. There will be some, just not many (and hardly any documented).

Something people seem to forget, LS1s will have much more traction issues than a 2v. Have you driven a stock LS1? It blows the tires off quite easily, a 2v can but with more work. My car stock would spin pretty hard after the shift into 2nd. Precious tenths been wasted.

So are you really going to say that the AVERAGE time for a stock 2v should be faster than a 14.0??? I could find 3 stock LS1 running 13.0 or better for each 2v you find running 14.0 or better.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 12:14 PM
LT/LS guy, didn't we already go through this once? Do I need to post thread links and posts?

Magazine times are usually SLOWER than real world times. Hence the 13.5 - 13.7. You'll freely admit that those are high numbers. Yet you can't seem to grasp your mind around the fact that 14.0 is also a poor performance number. Just like the 13.5 13.7. So the 14.5 comments are silly. You're not being intellectually honest in this conversation.

At least be consistent.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 12:18 PM
I could find a ton of videos of stock 2v running 13.7 - 13.9 times all day (not the fastest time) And all I'd get was "PROOVE IT'S STOCk!!!1" been through this already once.

Magazine times are usually not a good indicator of speed. They are usually slower.

If someone running a 13.7 in a LS1 SS Camaro can also run a 14.0 in a 2v GT it would only make sense it could easily be gotten faster.

Like I've said before, I'm no master racer. I've been to the track a handful of times. And even I could get my stock 2v to 13.9. In every mustang board I was on that asked me what my time was on it, none of them were impressed. With DRs you can easily get a 2v in the mid 13s. Bolt-ons in the 12s.

LT/LS Guy
01-07-2011, 12:19 PM
LT/LS guy, didn't we already go through this once? Do I need to post thread links and posts?

Magazine times are usually SLOWER than real world times. Hence the 13.5 - 13.7. You'll freely admit that those are high numbers. Yet you can't seem to grasp your mind around the fact that 14.0 is also a poor performance number. Just like the 13.5 13.7. So the 14.5 comments are silly. You're not being intellectually honest in this conversation.

At least be consistent.

And you can't seem to grasp the fact that 99-04 GTs don't run 13's. They didn't start doing that until 2005. :D

And if your so set on the fact that they are indeed a "solid" 13-second car why in all this time haven't you taken your GT to the track and proven all of us naysayers wrong? :)

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 12:23 PM
And you can't seem to grasp the fact that 99-04 GTs don't run 13's. They didn't start doing that until 2005. :D

So the magazine times (which is underrated as we both agreed on) 14.0 time was a fluke? With those trap speeds can you not see 13 potential? Hell in my 13s run I didn't even get into the triple digits. Or how about the other thread where not only I, but others had to tell you that your "logic" was faulty? Again, do I have to post quotes?

And if your so set on the fact that they are indeed a "solid" 13-second car why in all this time haven't you taken your GT to the track and proven all of us naysayers wrong? :)
Who said I hadn't? As a matter of fact I did. I've stated as such. I ran 3 times. The last time was the 13.9 time. And I don't have a ton of track time under my belt. I'm certainly no Evan Smith. WHO btw ran a 13.6 in the 1/4 using a completely stock 2v.

WSsick
01-07-2011, 12:40 PM
I could find a ton of videos of stock 2v running 13.7 - 13.9 times all day (not the fastest time) And all I'd get was "PROOVE IT'S STOCk!!!1" been through this already once.

Humor me then, find a ton just for me. :D

Care to take my 3:1 offer? I already have a couple nice examples. :)

If someone running a 13.7 in a LS1 SS Camaro can also run a 14.0 in a 2v GT it would only make sense it could easily be gotten faster.

I already answered that, so why do you keep repeating yourself?

Like I've said before, I'm no master racer. I've been to the track a handful of times. And even I could get my stock 2v to 13.9. In every mustang board I was on that asked me what my time was on it, none of them were impressed. With DRs you can easily get a 2v in the mid 13s. Bolt-ons in the 12s.

Modded times aren't what we are discussing. But if you'd like to, here's local kid. I'd have to ask him his best time, this vid is just for fun (think it's 12.0): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAZx2VRB41k&feature=related

WSsick
01-07-2011, 12:45 PM
Local guy/shop owner (been on Pinks actually):
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/12042834-post3.html

Mod here:
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/12670471-post16.html

Possibly the record holder, although no slip makes is sketchy:
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/13486125-post34.html

12.9 + a mention on other guys who have done it (NineBall being one):
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/12196995-post2.html

Another unproven post, but a claim none the less:
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/12199440-post8.html

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 12:47 PM
Modded times aren't what we are discussing.

Mine was stock. So was Evans. The fastest known time for a 2v in the 1/4 is 13.5-13.6 The fastest know time for stock LS1s is 12.8 - 12.9

Again proving my about .5 difference comment that started all this.

The difference between a stock 5.0, and a stock LS1 is similar to the difference between a stock 2v and a stock LS1. They are all about .5-7 differences in speed.

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 12:49 PM
Bolt-on LS1s can take 5.0s.

Bolt on 2vs can take LS1s

http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=998283

Stopsign32v
01-07-2011, 12:52 PM
Modded times aren't what we are discussing. But if you'd like to, here's local kid. I'd have to ask him his best time, this vid is just for fun (think it's 12.0): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAZx2VRB41k&feature=related

That is SO badass!!! I love seeing close to stock powered cars running hard! That's why I'd love to take the wife's car and put my suspension and tires on it! The slow mo had me LOLing but badass...

WSsick
01-07-2011, 12:57 PM
Mine was stock. So was Evans. The fastest known time for a 2v in the 1/4 is 13.5-13.6 The fastest know time for stock LS1s is 12.8 - 12.9

.................ok? Kind of irrelevant, since we aren't talking about fastest times. Is there a reason you keep bringing up fastest times? Since we need no proof to back up fastest times, one of those guys I posted up ran a 12.7 stock, so that's .9 faster than the fastest 2v stock. But we are talking AVERAGE, not fastest.

They are all about .5-7 differences in speed.

What happened to sticking to the .5 second difference? An admission that you were wrong? .5 is being very generous to the 2v, .7 sounds fair (maybe .8 but .7 will suffice).

Bolt-on LS1s can take 5.0s.

Bolt on 2vs can take LS1s

http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=998283

I assume that wasn't directed at me, since I have not once argued that fact. :)

WSsick
01-07-2011, 12:59 PM
That is SO badass!!! I love seeing close to stock powered cars running hard! That's why I'd love to take the wife's car and put my suspension and tires on it! The slow mo had me LOLing but badass...

He's on here, cool kid. A couple years younger than myself and he owns more f-bodies than me. :( That car ran very hard for what it was. Has a cam in it now, but hasn't dialed the car in yet. 11.4 is the last time I saw from that car.

The Manalishi
01-07-2011, 01:00 PM
Who gives a flying fuck?

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 01:03 PM
.................ok? Kind of irrelevant, since we aren't talking about fastest times.
Actually my statement was that they were about .5 from each other. I was showing that even with their recorded fastest times they were. That was my only point by posting such a thing.

What happened to sticking to the .5 second difference? An admission that you were wrong?
I said about .5

Stock for stock, there is about a .5 difference in times compared to the Ls1 and 2v.

www.rif.org

My point is, the difference between a stock LS1 fbody and a stock 2011 5.0 is about the same as the difference between a stock LS1 fbody and a 2v. And it is.

WSsick
01-07-2011, 01:04 PM
Who gives a flying fuck?

I felt like debating someone, and where better place to nitpick at tiny differences than a SR&K thread. :D

The Manalishi
01-07-2011, 01:04 PM
my only point is on top of my head.


Fixed.

I felt like debating someone, and where better place to nitpick at tiny differences than a SR&K thread. :D

Carry on then. :chug:

WSsick
01-07-2011, 01:11 PM
Actually my statement was that they were about .5 from each other. I was showing that even with their recorded fastest times they were. That was my only point by posting such a thing.

I said about .5



www.rif.org

My point is, the difference between a stock LS1 fbody and a stock 2011 5.0 is about the same as the difference between a stock LS1 fbody and a 2v. And it is.

:lol: Really Ke^vin? Did I ruffle your feathers or something? Use that on someone who actually needs it.

I like how you use about, to cover your ass in a conversation about drag racing, where "about" 2 tenths either way can be a big deal. If we are going to say about, I'd say its ABOUT a second difference, in both average and fastest times (13.4-14.4 / 12.7-12.6).

Now how about those tons of videos you said you could find? I would LOVE to see them. :)

Stopsign32v
01-07-2011, 01:19 PM
When I was a teen I had my 99 Cobra at the drag strip running a bolt on LS1 with ET Streets in the rear. I was on 255 all season tires with nothing but catback, x pipe, BBK cai, and a shifter. I ran 13.5 to his 13.1

Ke^in
01-07-2011, 01:40 PM
:lol: Really Ke^vin? Did I ruffle your feathers or something? Use that on someone who actually needs it.

Don't have any feathers to ruffle sugar-tits. :-)

And as far as the conversation goes. You can stay in denial all ya want. Not gonna hurt me any. :D

WSsick
01-07-2011, 01:44 PM
When I was a teen I had my 99 Cobra at the drag strip running a bolt on LS1 with ET Streets in the rear. I was on 255 all season tires with nothing but catback, x pipe, BBK cai, and a shifter. I ran 13.5 to his 13.1

I ran a cammed LS1 on DRs and ran a 12.8 to his 13.1. :lol: Plenty of shitty drivers out there.

Edit: I ran the pass after him actually.

WSsick
01-07-2011, 01:48 PM
Don't have any feathers to ruffle sugar-tits. :-)

And as far as the conversation goes. You can stay in denial all ya want. Not gonna hurt me any. :D

Nothing for me to be in denial about, just you generalizing things to better suite your argument, that's all.

Why do you keep avoiding my requests for those videos you spoke of? I thought you could find "a ton" of them, so it shouldn't take more than a few clicks. I'm not someone to automatically call BS, so post away.....unless you don't want others calling BS. In that case, PM them. Like I said, I'm dying to see a ton of stock 2v's running 13.7-13.9 all day. :)

It'llrun
01-07-2011, 02:31 PM
This is impressive too!

Nothing like crazy N/A power.

We built a Z06 for a customer that made 630 RWHP N/A; 729 RWHP with 100 shot.

Stock bottom end, trans, rear end, and half shafts! It went 9.93 @ 139 on motor and 9.4 @ 148 on 100 shot.

-RickShaWEET! :D That's all to it... Outstanding performance from an already outstanding car. Good job! :nod:

wow thats only stage 1 porting + boltons and full weight. Impressive!Don't forget the pistons... Not stock. This is a BUILT package. It happens to lack some things regarding what it could become, but this is looking, to me anyway, like the 1st stage of a serious build. With all those things done, surely much is left on the table regarding overall capability... like actually USING the heads to their probable performance level. Swapping pistons is a BIG deal, as we all know... That is, no longer can this be called a bolt on vehicle. I suspect that car is begging for nitrous to show what it knows... just me. ;)

It'llrun
01-07-2011, 02:55 PM
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll35/n20lt4/99_MustangGTvsComp_Article1k.jpg

I noticed before and left it alone, but since it's been added like 3 times now, I'm curious about something here... How is it the Mustang in this test managed to run 0-100 in 14.1 seconds, but the 1/4 mile came in at 14.0 @100.2?

Going by that article, the car actually took longer to reach 100mph than it did 100.2mph... Makes little sense to me. :confused:

Even if a shift was required at the end, this doesn't add up. Seems to me, if they reached the 1/4 in 14.0 at over 100mph, then it also got to 100 quicker than 14.1... What am I missing? Could it be they used "rough data" somewhere... Maybe the tested 0-100-0 and used that mark to deem the 0-100mph time... Each car needed 5.1 seconds to stop once they reached 100, from the looks. The Camaro just got to 100 much quicker.

Side note: One thing that truly stunned me was to see the Dakota R/T stop from 60mph shorter than the F-body. On the other hand, it needed more actual time to stop from 100mph... Inquiring minds want to know... :chug:

thunderstruck507
01-07-2011, 03:01 PM
trap speed is an average over the last distance of the track...not the actual speed that trips the light

it is calculated by how long the car takes to go between those 2 points at the end of the track

Irunelevens
01-07-2011, 03:03 PM
FWIW (adding fuel to the fire), there have been a pretty good amount of bolt-on f-bodies taking out 5.0s, even on this board alone. I'd say an LS1 has a better chance of beating a 5.0 than a 2v beating an LS1.

Just sayin...
I'd say just from the amount of experienced LS1 drivers out there (those that race and post on internet forums, at least) it's more likely. But it still takes an I/H/E F-body with a good driver to convincingly beat a stock 5.0 with a good driver.
I agree. Watching them back at home on the East Coast (Englishtown) and here on the West Coast @ Sacramento Raceway (sea level) i've seen the majority of 99-04's go 14.2-14.4 @ 97-100 on average, even on the Mustang vs F-body nights where there would be 15 or so two-valves running all night long. Just speaking average. I think a 14-flat is really "driving" that car. A 13.x is really REALLY driving that car. LS1 M6 F-bodies on the other hand will run 13.4/5 @ 105-107 with little effort, I think we can all agree on that. The more skilled guys will go bottom 13's, 13.1-13.2 range. They've got the power to do it, about 80-90rwhp more than a 2-valve.

I can agree with that. A 2V running in the 13s requires a good driver, good DA, and good track prep. And a great familiarity with the car (launch technique, shift points, etc). Any halfway-decent driver in a 6spd F-body should be able to hit a 13.5.

assasinator
01-07-2011, 03:36 PM
Sorry, I missed the part where you said using the same head, I was assuming you meant two equally optimized engines. Using a fixed flow head doesn't prove rpm=displacement, it just proves the smaller motor will use up the available flow at a higher RPM, giving it a wider powerband. I'm not sure how you think this is a valid argument since nobody sets out to build a handicapped engine. If you let the big engine breathe to 7500rpm just like you let the small one, it will make more power, and also more torque which would give it the advantage assuming traction is set aside. A well built 632ci BBC can make 1200hp at 7500rpm, so whats the point of trying to spin a smaller motor to the moon to make the same power?

I'm not saying your point that the small motor can win using the proper gearing is invalid, just the way you're presenting it doesn't make much sense. You're specifically handicapping the bigger motor to prove your point.

i used the limited head example because the poster was using the ls3 vs. coyote as his example. with better heads the coyote will hardly make less power in a maximized example.

i had to break down the argument to its basics to illustrate that a 5 liter engine with better flow and dynacmic characteristics is just as good as a larger motor with inferior flow and dynamics.


your argument is to allow 500+ cfm heads to illustrate the superiority of cubic inches. DUH. no kidding. in the limited world of bolt on and H/C/I street cars, the 500cfm prostock 707 shotgun is hardly a valid example of "no replacement for displacement".

assasinator
01-07-2011, 03:48 PM
Bolt-on LS1s can take 5.0s.

Bolt on 2vs can take LS1s

http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=998283

hold on right here i wanna chime in on this.

1st.....THE REASON I MODDED MY 96 2V WAS THE LS1
2nd.....i changed heads, updated to PI with the compression bump that goes with it

3rd. long tubes, 75mm throttle body, upper intake, offroad exhaust, tune...

4th raced a stock ls1 from a roll and did well to 80 from 60-80 i held up a little. then at 85 it was like i put my car in reverse. no bullshit. REVERSE!!!!!!


5th put a 5.4 3v in it and built countless intake manifolds from the stock manifold till i finally got to match the LS1 m6 and could just pull away from an auto ls1. exhaust with variable mufflers, custom intake, ud pullies, no tune.

a 98 z28 a4 blew up on the interstate racing me when the 3V was modded. he lost in more ways than one. said it was tuned and the rev limit was too high. felt bad for him.

8.5 @ 82.5 when it was stock -250rwhp/340rwtq
never ran it with the intake and mods at the track. -gave up patially because of 19mpg 3.90 gears. put the turbo in it and lightened it to 2973.


it took all those steps. my 2v was murdered by LS1's. murdered.and it wasnt stock.

Irunelevens
01-07-2011, 03:51 PM
Did you ever run the PI-swap/bolt-on setup at the track?

assasinator
01-07-2011, 03:58 PM
Did you ever run the PI-swap/bolt-on setup at the track?

no never did. it was quick compared to other 2v's, even being an auto i had no problems killing new edges, sn cobras, etc. mind you any ford can manual shift to 2nd, so i was always in the right gear for hitting it. it never beat a LS till i put the 5.4 3v in it.

marc97taws6
01-07-2011, 05:42 PM
I try not to be a nutswinger but HOLY HELL Livernois, that C6Z is SICK!

Your new 5.0 is definitely impressive also. Coming from a bolt-on LT1, anything running 120+mph traps is impressive to me

WSsick
01-07-2011, 08:14 PM
You're selling!?!?!? Making the move to the C6 now?

It'llrun
01-07-2011, 08:27 PM
trap speed is an average over the last distance of the track...not the actual speed that trips the light

it is calculated by how long the car takes to go between those 2 points at the end of the trackYeah... I would think they'd use the same kind of system for each though, that's all. It makes for a much better, or at least more convincing, way of telling the story. At the time, they may not have had any clear way to accomplish the tasks identically... Idonno. I just know it's really weird to see them say it took longer to reach 100 than it did to cover the 1/4, but that it finished the 1/4 at over 100mph...

marc97taws6
01-08-2011, 12:53 AM
You're selling!?!?!? Making the move to the C6 now?
Ehh, working on it. Putting the car up for sale and if I can grab the price I want (which I think is fair), I'll part with it for awhile. Looking into getting a 2010 GS or a used 06-08 Z06 here in a couple years