MY MACH 1 Vs LT1
04-13-2009, 07:11 PM
#41
You both are wrong. The 1994 Z28 will be worth more in 10 years over both the Boss and the ZR1...lol
I've never bought a car for it's resale value either. The cars been in the family for a VERY long time. My dad bought it after he got out of Vietnam..I won't say how much he payed either. Let's just say I've got about that much money sitting in my wallet in my back pocket.
I've never bought a car for it's resale value either. The cars been in the family for a VERY long time. My dad bought it after he got out of Vietnam..I won't say how much he payed either. Let's just say I've got about that much money sitting in my wallet in my back pocket.
04-13-2009, 07:22 PM
#42
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gods Country
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have never bought a car for it's resale value. I think that's a horrible way to buy a car. There should be many other characteristics of a car that determine whether or not you want it or not. If you like it enough, you'll keep it forever, that being said, I understand why Elliot still has the Boss. But I'd rather have a car that I want now, and would drive regularly, instead of being coped up in the garage. That's just me.
I see what your sayn, BUT investment wise?????????????
04-13-2009, 07:23 PM
#43
TECH Resident
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Panama City Florida
Posts: 934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My bolt on, stalled auto LT1 Trans Am has beaten several at the track. I typically run 12.7 - 12.8 1/4's and 8.1x - 8.2x 1/8th miles all motor. Most of the ones at the 1/8th mile track I go to run 8.3x - 8.5x. On the street may be a different story.
04-13-2009, 07:58 PM
#44
Launching!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Henderson NV
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You both are wrong. The 1994 Z28 will be worth more in 10 years over both the Boss and the ZR1...lol
I've never bought a car for it's resale value either. The cars been in the family for a VERY long time. My dad bought it after he got out of Vietnam..I won't say how much he payed either. Let's just say I've got about that much money sitting in my wallet in my back pocket.
I've never bought a car for it's resale value either. The cars been in the family for a VERY long time. My dad bought it after he got out of Vietnam..I won't say how much he payed either. Let's just say I've got about that much money sitting in my wallet in my back pocket.
04-13-2009, 08:00 PM
#45
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
So back on topic... When I worked at the parts store, a guy came in and was talking to me about his Mach 1, which he bought as an 'Upgrade' to his normal Mustang. He told me he was so dissapointed with it, that it was totally underpowered and quite frankly an insult to the original Mach 1! This was a die-hard Ford/Mustang owner too.
BTW SRJ: I'm willing to bet that 90% of us here consider "Full Bolt Ons" to be under the hood mods (ie: Engine). Though I do see your train of though in regards to how all those would still be 'bolt ons' considering they do technically bolt on
Oh, and a engine-bolt on LT1 can easily hit 12s, to whoever said they're usually mods to only put them into the 13s.
BTW SRJ: I'm willing to bet that 90% of us here consider "Full Bolt Ons" to be under the hood mods (ie: Engine). Though I do see your train of though in regards to how all those would still be 'bolt ons' considering they do technically bolt on
Oh, and a engine-bolt on LT1 can easily hit 12s, to whoever said they're usually mods to only put them into the 13s.
04-13-2009, 08:08 PM
#46
So back on topic... When I worked at the parts store, a guy came in and was talking to me about his Mach 1, which he bought as an 'Upgrade' to his normal Mustang. He told me he was so dissapointed with it, that it was totally underpowered and quite frankly an insult to the original Mach 1! This was a die-hard Ford/Mustang owner too.
BTW SRJ: I'm willing to bet that 90% of us here consider "Full Bolt Ons" to be under the hood mods (ie: Engine). Though I do see your train of though in regards to how all those would still be 'bolt ons' considering they do technically bolt on
Oh, and a engine-bolt on LT1 can easily hit 12s, to whoever said they're usually mods to only put them into the 13s.
BTW SRJ: I'm willing to bet that 90% of us here consider "Full Bolt Ons" to be under the hood mods (ie: Engine). Though I do see your train of though in regards to how all those would still be 'bolt ons' considering they do technically bolt on
Oh, and a engine-bolt on LT1 can easily hit 12s, to whoever said they're usually mods to only put them into the 13s.
04-13-2009, 09:59 PM
#48
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think the mach1s are very underrated.. my dad has a stock 03 mach1 and it is just as fast as my ss. his is a manual, but when they came out with the 04 mach1s they rated the manuals at 335hp and didn't change anything whatsoever. the mach1 is one of the stouter stangs ford produced, but really now.. you can't really compare cars like that(modded vs. stock) almost always the modded car will win except with certain situations. i've seen a black 03 mach1 run a 12.8 with just dr's and a catback, i'd say they are pretty respectable cars.. performance wise stock 98-02 ls1=03-04mach1>93-97lt1. i'm just saying what i think man. but with full bolt-ons i would say the lt1 for sure.
04-13-2009, 11:11 PM
#51
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Indianapolis, In
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry bro but since you are stock you will get drug from a roll and a dig. I have a mach and have had no problems with LT1's but I am not stock. Just pray is LT1 is tired!!
04-13-2009, 11:24 PM
#53
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Central, PA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For starters your Mach 1 can't be putting anywhere near 300rwh/325rwt being it's stock and they are rated 305 hp 320 tq "MOTOR" from the factory. So either post up a dyno chart and make me eat my words or lay off the pipe. With minor bolt on's my car used to spank them all day
........
04-14-2009, 01:15 AM
#54
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OH WOW..............WHERE TO BEGIN? Some of you...should really keep to only giving feedback about LT1s and not say a word about the machs. It's clear you have no idea what you're tlaking about...let me share as to what I mean.................. 300rwhp, bone stock, 5spd.....SAE numbers? Dyno sheet please.
IMO...it depends on alot of things...I quoted below.
UmmmHmmmm. So, am I a typical ford idiot?
+1 Nice to see someone post realistic information.
Uh.....BS flag on that one....IF it was a 'real' race.
Really?....ROFL.....I didn't realize a high 12 against a high 12 car would be a raping. Thanks for the ingenius information.
Don't believe everything you're reading on here.....and your 'buddy'....needs to freshen up on his own car.
I wont' say too much here since you realized later that 305 factory ratings are WRONG, just like 320 LS1s.
BTW - nice Boss. I had the grandfather a while back....65 Koupe GT.
+1 Another good post..for once. wow...this makes TWO so far.
putting down 300rwhp bone stock...you're right. putting down 275-285..where do I sign up to show you the proof?
Would I win a cookie?
walked a couple by at least 2 cars dig and roll....if they were factory stock Autos that you raced, I'd believe a 300rwhp stock mach before your 'wins'.
Now, that I believe....auto machs are mid upper 13 sec cars @ 103-105.
We dont' know if OP's LT1 reference is stalled or even auto. So?...IDK how much that really plays into this. But, low mid 8s for 5 spd mach is accurate.
That 'guy' was an idiot. totally under powered?....Uh, aside from the 00 Cobra R, that was the quickest/fastest production N/A mustang. That guy probably bought a GT with a mach package and had no clue what he was talking about.
engine bolt on 'only' LT1 "easily" hitting high 12s?...I'd like to see that. No gears, no DR's..M6, bolt on, that's all. Unless of course you meant DRs and Gears too.
+1 on everything EXCEPT.......335 rating in 04. Actually, 'Ford' up'd it to 310 and there were 'some' changes, but nothing really note worthy to increase power.
IDk..but I'm glad I came across it. Some of these guys really should leave their head in the sand and stop talking about what htey don't know.
OP did say it dyno'd 300 stock and he will have DR's.
OP - If you're M5 with DRs and can drive...it'll be one helluva race....and it depends on what that LT1 has. As I8Asaleen said, we need more information to give you any kind of real answer.
IMO...it depends on alot of things...I quoted below.
UmmmHmmmm. So, am I a typical ford idiot?
For starters your Mach 1 can't be putting anywhere near 300rwh/325rwt being it's stock and they are rated 305 hp 320 tq "MOTOR" from the factory. So either post up a dyno chart and make me eat my words or lay off the pipe. With minor bolt on's my car used to spank them all day.
BTW - nice Boss. I had the grandfather a while back....65 Koupe GT.
Not all factory hp ratings are accurate. Look at LS1's Fbody's, they were under rated at 310-325 hp, we all know what they put down just about that much to the wheels.
Not sure what Mach 1's regularly dyno, just stating that real dyno pull is all that matters. Then the differences in dyno readouts come into play...so the only real test is track times.
Not sure what Mach 1's regularly dyno, just stating that real dyno pull is all that matters. Then the differences in dyno readouts come into play...so the only real test is track times.
Would I win a cookie?
Just spoke to a local Performance/Dyno shop. The average Mach 1 they have dynoed put down roughly 283-290 rwh through a manual. Maybe he has a factory freak...doubt it though. When I was just CAI/catback/mid tubes and a few free mods I walked a couple by at least 2 cars from the dig and roll.
my friends with a stock 95 6spd firehawk and a stock 03 mach 1 auto raced and after about 4 runs the mach 1 had about a car length at about 85-90 mph every time. i raced the same mach 1 with my then completely showroom stock 02 ss 6spd on the same street about a week later and put about a car length on him up to the same 85-90 mph speed 3 times we have all messed around on the freeway since then and the mach 1 just cant keep up with me or the firehawk after about 100 mph
So back on topic... When I worked at the parts store, a guy came in and was talking to me about his Mach 1, which he bought as an 'Upgrade' to his normal Mustang. He told me he was so dissapointed with it, that it was totally underpowered and quite frankly an insult to the original Mach 1! This was a die-hard Ford/Mustang owner too.
Oh, and a engine-bolt on LT1 can easily hit 12s, to whoever said they're usually mods to only put them into the 13s.
Oh, and a engine-bolt on LT1 can easily hit 12s, to whoever said they're usually mods to only put them into the 13s.
engine bolt on 'only' LT1 "easily" hitting high 12s?...I'd like to see that. No gears, no DR's..M6, bolt on, that's all. Unless of course you meant DRs and Gears too.
i think the mach1s are very underrated.. my dad has a stock 03 mach1 and it is just as fast as my ss. his is a manual, but when they came out with the 04 mach1s they rated the manuals at 335hp and didn't change anything whatsoever. the mach1 is one of the stouter stangs ford produced, but really now.. you can't really compare cars like that(modded vs. stock) almost always the modded car will win except with certain situations. i've seen a black 03 mach1 run a 12.8 with just dr's and a catback, i'd say they are pretty respectable cars.. performance wise stock 98-02 ls1=03-04mach1>93-97lt1. i'm just saying what i think man. but with full bolt-ons i would say the lt1 for sure.
IDk..but I'm glad I came across it. Some of these guys really should leave their head in the sand and stop talking about what htey don't know.
OP - If you're M5 with DRs and can drive...it'll be one helluva race....and it depends on what that LT1 has. As I8Asaleen said, we need more information to give you any kind of real answer.
04-14-2009, 10:58 AM
#56
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless he put 70 parts on it for some reason.
EDIT.......
THat's why....it's his dads/families. Not his.
04-14-2009, 11:05 AM
#57
You sure seem to know a lot about me and what I OWN. And your statement about winning a "cookie" with a dyno sheet,, you would win "coolest guy on ls1."
Last edited by Sarge_13; 04-14-2009 at 09:55 PM.
04-14-2009, 11:58 AM
#58
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I couldn't care less about 'coolest guy on ls1' award. What I do know, is you made some VERY ignorant right field posts and I'm the guy that's calling you out on them...and the only response you can give is that? WOW. You are wrong, plain and simple. I corrected you and showed in part where you obviously need to learn before opening your big i-net mouth.
So..what do you say grasshopper? Should we let it go from here and you can actually learn something or do you want to continue and I'll own your *** more than you own that 69...errr 70 boss 302.
04-14-2009, 12:36 PM
#59
Well......let's see, I know you don't know SQUAT about Car B that this thread is about. I know you couldn't even make an accurate post (or correct yourself) about a car that you are so proud of. I also know, that I know more about classic mustangs and Mach 1s than you'll ever comprehend.
I couldn't care less about 'coolest guy on ls1' award. What I do know, is you made some VERY ignorant right field posts and I'm the guy that's calling you out on them...and the only response you can give is that? WOW. You are wrong, plain and simple. I corrected you and showed in part where you obviously need to learn before opening your big i-net mouth.
So..what do you say grasshopper? Should we let it go from here and you can actually learn something or do you want to continue and I'll own your *** more than you own that 69...errr 70 boss 302.
I couldn't care less about 'coolest guy on ls1' award. What I do know, is you made some VERY ignorant right field posts and I'm the guy that's calling you out on them...and the only response you can give is that? WOW. You are wrong, plain and simple. I corrected you and showed in part where you obviously need to learn before opening your big i-net mouth.
So..what do you say grasshopper? Should we let it go from here and you can actually learn something or do you want to continue and I'll own your *** more than you own that 69...errr 70 boss 302.
Far as my responses towards the OP,, I simply said I didn't believe his dyno numbers and if they were in deed true to post up his dyno sheet and "make me eat my words" which I would do and put all pride aside.
Own my *** huh...lmao tough guy on the internet everyone watch out!
04-14-2009, 12:40 PM
#60
Stock for stock my friends 03 Mach raped me by 5-8 tenths on DRs, he then installed Mac X pipe & mufflers,4.10s,K&N replacement along with the spacer that raises the shaker scoop. So, i installed Lts,X pipe,flows,4.10s and tune. we hit the streets him on DRs (as usual) me on F1 285/35/19s he RAPED me out the hole by atleast 3,every gear shift i am getting space back then in 3rd gear i started pulling him pretty well 4th gear was the same i finally got him roughly 4-5 cars....
In short DONT MAKE the mistake in underestimating MACH1s they RPM hard,love gear and lauch killer, especially on DRs
here is a pic of his Mach1
In short DONT MAKE the mistake in underestimating MACH1s they RPM hard,love gear and lauch killer, especially on DRs
here is a pic of his Mach1