02 ceta ws6 vs 2000 supercharged gt stang
07-26-2011, 01:32 AM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02 ceta ws6 vs 2000 supercharged gt stang Me and my bud were toying around on the highway with his recently supercharged gt which only put 350hp and 390tq. Only a lil higher than mine NA. Anyways from a 45 roll we kept up for a few seconds but he slowly pulls away. Its pretty funny how a NA car keeps up with a lighter supercharged car lol idc that I got beat but its still funny how ford has to turbo or supercharge somthing to keep up 
07-26-2011, 01:47 AM
#4
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree my bad for the ford joke lol but I thought was funny and I don't race often, but I had to post it for some laughs plus he told me since he beat me I had to let everyone know..so sorry for lettin y'all down. All in good fun tho no harm no foul
07-26-2011, 10:28 AM
#7
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me and my bud were toying around on the highway with his recently supercharged gt which only put 350hp and 390tq. Only a lil higher than mine NA. Anyways from a 45 roll we kept up for a few seconds but he slowly pulls away. Its pretty funny how a NA car keeps up with a lighter supercharged car lol idc that I got beat but its still funny how ford has to turbo or supercharge somthing to keep up
I am by no means making a **** storm but just stating a fact.. and that is fairly low numbers for a s/c 2v pooper stang.
Trending Topics
07-26-2011, 11:25 AM
#13
12 Second Club
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Meadville, PA
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's still true that Chevy does the most with the least in terms of technology and level of complication. A pushrod V8 is about as simple and oldschool as it gets and it still whoops the crap out of just about anything on the road, stock vs stock and modded vs modded. One cam, two valves per cylinder naturally aspirated is all it really takes for a GM small block to compete with just about anything else out there when set up correctly. Look at how many 1000+hp N/A smallblocks there are these days.
07-26-2011, 11:45 AM
#15
Sounds like he did more than keep up. The 2011 Mustang puts down more rwhp stock than your modified LS1 and does it with less displacement. The Mustang guys have to use what the factory gives. He got a weak 281ci motor when he bought his car, you got a 346ci motor. There is a lot of difference. You have to work with what the factory gives you. Ford has finally stepped up to the plate and built a 5.0 motor that puts out 411hp. GM makes a 6.2 that makes 426hp. If Ford would ever build a bigger ci motor the sky is the limit.
Last edited by Blown383LS1; 07-26-2011 at 11:51 AM.
07-26-2011, 12:22 PM
#16
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4v's buddy. Its not like its a pushrod 5.0 hanging with the 6.2. The motors are too different to compare. Simplifying and saying the ford motor is better because it puts out the same power as a 6.2l is an idioic comment. Pull your head out of your ***
07-26-2011, 01:01 PM
#17
12 Second Club
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Meadville, PA
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like he did more than keep up. The 2011 Mustang puts down more rwhp stock than your modified LS1 and does it with less displacement. The Mustang guys have to use what the factory gives. He got a weak 281ci motor when he bought his car, you got a 346ci motor. There is a lot of difference. You have to work with what the factory gives you. Ford has finally stepped up to the plate and built a 5.0 motor that puts out 411hp. GM makes a 6.2 that makes 426hp. If Ford would ever build a bigger ci motor the sky is the limit.
One head uses more cams/valves (and is much more expensive to build and/or modify due to having that number of cams, springs, valves etc etc etc) and the other simply drills a bigger hole and leaves the consumer room to drill an even BIGGER hole.
07-26-2011, 01:04 PM
#18
My head is not in my *** fucktard. I never said it was better, I am comparing current production engines from Ford and GM. I love an LSX just as much as the next guy, they can make stupid power with minimal mods. I have owned several.
07-26-2011, 01:08 PM
#19
Remind me again how many cams and how many valves the ford motor needs to use to make LESS power than the chevy motor?
One head uses more cams/valves (and is much more expensive to build and/or modify due to having that number of cams, springs, valves etc etc etc) and the other simply drills a bigger hole and leaves the consumer room to drill an even BIGGER hole.
One head uses more cams/valves (and is much more expensive to build and/or modify due to having that number of cams, springs, valves etc etc etc) and the other simply drills a bigger hole and leaves the consumer room to drill an even BIGGER hole.
07-26-2011, 01:27 PM
#20
Me and my bud were toying around on the highway with his recently supercharged gt which only put 350hp and 390tq. Only a lil higher than mine NA. Anyways from a 45 roll we kept up for a few seconds but he slowly pulls away. Its pretty funny how a NA car keeps up with a lighter supercharged car lol idc that I got beat but its still funny how ford has to turbo or supercharge somthing to keep up
