2011 Mustang GT - GM better power up
02-15-2010, 06:54 PM
#81
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, there were 7 or 8 on a Fri night test & tune one time & the best stock(100% bone stock) went high 13s & some 14s-they were 5 speeds and I know that a few were good drivers. Plus the few moded cars werent to fast either & there were some lightly moded GTs with gears that ran better than the Machs. Me & my brother both bought new Machs, he traded it in on a 07 GT & our friend that worked for Ford bought a new 03 & 04 Mach & all sold them because they were over rated turds but they do look cool.
How do you like your passenger side outside lock?
How do you like your passenger side outside lock?
(psst...I've owned two mach...and a cobra. SO, I guess that means I know twice as much as you do. i'll just say you're 'double wrong').
LOL...yep.A car that is under rated HP wise from the factory is an over rated turd. You didnt' get that memo kevin?
+1
Again, I've owned two! I can show you proof all day that they are low/mid 13s. But IDk if I wanna waste my time.
And you are one of those, "I can't do it so nobody can" guys. If PI GTs can run high 13s, only an idiot would think that a car with ~40rwhp more, more torque, 3.55s vs. 3.27s, and a much broader powerband cannot run atleast half a second faster in the 1/4 mile. But you owned one, so what you say goes 
Well I have always been a stick shift guy & do ok. My brother saw a stock 03 run 13.20 @ Norwalk, a good track. Since they made less than 17,000 over 2 years comparing them to LS1 f bodies wouldnt mean that much, just because some run good as with most perf cars doesnt make it the rule.
Do some math weight=3465+ driver=3665 RWHP of 280=13.61 et
305=13.2
And you know they dont have 305 @ the wheel
So??????????????
They also had transmission issues, mine was hard to shift when racing & I had a Pro 5.0 shifter. I talked to a guy from Pro 5.0 & a tech guy @ Tremec, I got the same answer from both-short shift it.
I was told that a 3650 wont shift good @ the higher rpm of that 4 valve, they said that transmission was the wrong choice for that motor.
My car was an 03 and in storage for 2 years, it didnt see the road until April 05 and by then there were plenty of threads all over the place with Mach problems.
But you guys are right, I dont know what I am talking about & cant drive but all you that never owned/drove one of them know it all.
Do some math weight=3465+ driver=3665 RWHP of 280=13.61 et
305=13.2
And you know they dont have 305 @ the wheel
So??????????????
They also had transmission issues, mine was hard to shift when racing & I had a Pro 5.0 shifter. I talked to a guy from Pro 5.0 & a tech guy @ Tremec, I got the same answer from both-short shift it.
I was told that a 3650 wont shift good @ the higher rpm of that 4 valve, they said that transmission was the wrong choice for that motor.
My car was an 03 and in storage for 2 years, it didnt see the road until April 05 and by then there were plenty of threads all over the place with Mach problems.
But you guys are right, I dont know what I am talking about & cant drive but all you that never owned/drove one of them know it all.
b) you OBVIOUSLY can't driver for ****...and you proved it by saying you are supposed to short shift.
C) driving any old manual tranny means NOTHING. it's about tranny gearing, rear gears, and power band. Shifting a foxbody, MGT, Fbody, Mach, Cobra, Vette are ALL different.
Well I do own one. In fact mine was the 92nd '03 Mach 1 produced in November 2002.
You can put all the math up here you want, but these formulas are not absolutes, merely suggestions, and numbers can be manipulated to produce a desired outcome, just ask Bernie Madoff how that works.
Here's what I know to be fact. My car, dealership stock, with a full tank of gas, ran a 13.19 @105 and change, at Cecil County Dragway in April 2003 on my third run of the day, that's a fact. The same day, a friend of mine with a catback only 03 Mach 1, ran a 13.02 @107.
That transmission that you seem to think is junk, is the only stock piece of my drivetrain still in the car! It has endured everything I've thrown at it, including over 500 lb. ft. of torque from a 100+ shot of nitrous for over four years, and now 600+ horsepower and torque from a supercharger! I will concede that some people have had issues with the TR3650 tranny, and I even had a couple of 3rd gear "lockouts" happen to me, but it was a relatively easy problem to fix.
You can put all the math up here you want, but these formulas are not absolutes, merely suggestions, and numbers can be manipulated to produce a desired outcome, just ask Bernie Madoff how that works.
Here's what I know to be fact. My car, dealership stock, with a full tank of gas, ran a 13.19 @105 and change, at Cecil County Dragway in April 2003 on my third run of the day, that's a fact. The same day, a friend of mine with a catback only 03 Mach 1, ran a 13.02 @107.
That transmission that you seem to think is junk, is the only stock piece of my drivetrain still in the car! It has endured everything I've thrown at it, including over 500 lb. ft. of torque from a 100+ shot of nitrous for over four years, and now 600+ horsepower and torque from a supercharger! I will concede that some people have had issues with the TR3650 tranny, and I even had a couple of 3rd gear "lockouts" happen to me, but it was a relatively easy problem to fix.
+73000
Flipping morons.
That doesn't even include stopsign that drove his GF's mach to a 13.2 with nothing but a CAI and midpipe (UNTUNED).
02-15-2010, 11:52 PM
#83
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok fool where is some proof? You guys all talk **** but cant back it up, one of my best friends(a Ford employee bought 2 03 Cobras new & 03 & o4 M1s new)& agreed, funny all those guys @ Ford never bothered with Machs.
Look @ the Ford sites & find me a stock one that made more than 285 rwhp.
As far as #s meaning nothing that shows you are an idiot, or maybe laws of physics dont apply to the Machs.
Short shift was Tremec & Pro 5.0 told me to do since 3650 are far from good, but I must be wrong again since yours is good or maybe you drive like a girl.
google tremec 3650 problems Einstein
And as far as driving a stick if you can get good consistant 60 ft times & your trans shifts ok wtf does it matter. But what do I know, I drove my 68 RA2 4 speed/3.90 rear Firebird with bias tires low 12s over 15 years ago & have always had sticks even in my daily drivers, but you know everything & I cant drive.
Maybe I should have you guys teach me how to drive my M6 Camaros. LMFAO
And as far as good ets @ Cecil, my 98 Z came from MD & was run there. Because it has an ATI trans/converter I called ATI, the tech guy there told me that track is fast & runs down hill so much its kind of hard holding a car on the starting line but you guys wile surely dispute that. Not to say your car wasnt one of the exceptions & on a fast track its possible, some guys claim they ran in the 12s all stock but internet ETs without proof dont mean a thing.
Look @ the Ford sites & find me a stock one that made more than 285 rwhp.
As far as #s meaning nothing that shows you are an idiot, or maybe laws of physics dont apply to the Machs.
Short shift was Tremec & Pro 5.0 told me to do since 3650 are far from good, but I must be wrong again since yours is good or maybe you drive like a girl.
google tremec 3650 problems Einstein
And as far as driving a stick if you can get good consistant 60 ft times & your trans shifts ok wtf does it matter. But what do I know, I drove my 68 RA2 4 speed/3.90 rear Firebird with bias tires low 12s over 15 years ago & have always had sticks even in my daily drivers, but you know everything & I cant drive.
Maybe I should have you guys teach me how to drive my M6 Camaros. LMFAO
And as far as good ets @ Cecil, my 98 Z came from MD & was run there. Because it has an ATI trans/converter I called ATI, the tech guy there told me that track is fast & runs down hill so much its kind of hard holding a car on the starting line but you guys wile surely dispute that. Not to say your car wasnt one of the exceptions & on a fast track its possible, some guys claim they ran in the 12s all stock but internet ETs without proof dont mean a thing.
http://www.streetfire.net/video/My-2...Atco_29846.htm
02-16-2010, 03:08 AM
#84
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-16-2010, 03:29 AM
#85
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pacific Ocean, US.
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to push a useless argument. Any slips or testaments from either side can be rendered moot(including mine) due to the bs factor of the internet, but dead stock I could easily put a car or more on any of the bolt on Mach 1's on post, usually at any speed except 30-40. And back then there were several that loved to race light to light here. After my tune, I don't even see a full bolt on one as a major threat. They just don't seem that fast. Is the transition from street to track conditions making them some incredible beast compared to when I see them?
Again, not to flame. I bow down to the cobra at my status, but all the 2v gt's and mach 1's here that don't have major H/C work or forced induction seem kind of pathetic if they cannot put anything on my slow auto from a roll.
I still like mustangs(father is a huge ford guy), but on the budget I'm on, I can't really afford to dump a lot in a car like that just to get into the low 13's territory.
Again, not to flame. I bow down to the cobra at my status, but all the 2v gt's and mach 1's here that don't have major H/C work or forced induction seem kind of pathetic if they cannot put anything on my slow auto from a roll.
I still like mustangs(father is a huge ford guy), but on the budget I'm on, I can't really afford to dump a lot in a car like that just to get into the low 13's territory.
02-16-2010, 04:20 AM
#86
God I ******* hate mustang threads, its always the same people argueing the same exact ****. Who gives a **** what the new mustang is going to run? Is the world going to come to a ******* end if Ford makes a mustang thats faster then your Camaro? Will your wife leave you because you got beat by a mustang? Will she suck PonyGT off because he has a low 13 sec Mach 1? Just be happy with what ever the **** you got.
If you dont think a Mach 1 can run low to mid 13's your either A. Stupid or B. in denial.
If you dont think a Mach 1 can run low to mid 13's your either A. Stupid or B. in denial.
02-16-2010, 04:49 AM
#87
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After all the B.S. and you reply with this? :/ The little comic I posted seems to fit your debating style pretty decently. :/
02-16-2010, 10:51 AM
#88
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Internet racers? There are have been Mach1 owners that race on the track posting in this thread. Even other GM owners in here have told you that you don't know what you are talking about in this case.
I've been to Ohio tracks and seen plenty off Machs hit low to mid 13s slightly stock around 2003/05. I don't know of many even close to stock now. Most Mach1s I know of are in the 11s/12s or better.
I mean a freakin magazine even got a low 13 with them and magazines are usually slower than a decent driver.
I don't know why it's so hard to believe. I guess some people don't want to believe for their own reasons.
*shrug*
BTW I've seen plenty of stock LS1 fbodies hit low 13s. Some has even hit *gasp* high 12s.
I think because of your bad times on your Mach1, you refuse to believe anyone can do any better. I see that a lot on the internet. People will even underrate their cars when asked simply because they are bad drivers. And if you tell them times that are average for said car, and said times are faster than what they could get, they usually argue and deny. The ego is fragile.
I've been to Ohio tracks and seen plenty off Machs hit low to mid 13s slightly stock around 2003/05. I don't know of many even close to stock now. Most Mach1s I know of are in the 11s/12s or better.
I mean a freakin magazine even got a low 13 with them and magazines are usually slower than a decent driver.
I don't know why it's so hard to believe. I guess some people don't want to believe for their own reasons.
*shrug*
BTW I've seen plenty of stock LS1 fbodies hit low 13s. Some has even hit *gasp* high 12s.
I think because of your bad times on your Mach1, you refuse to believe anyone can do any better. I see that a lot on the internet. People will even underrate their cars when asked simply because they are bad drivers. And if you tell them times that are average for said car, and said times are faster than what they could get, they usually argue and deny. The ego is fragile.
02-16-2010, 12:05 PM
#92
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You all talk like you have seen hundreds of them
Me my brother & our best friend all bought them new & went to the track together, since they were rare anyone with one would usually talk to other owners it they were all pretty close.
But once again you guys seen all of them & really know.
Anyone that thinks all of them ran exactly the same is just stupid
& a 99 A4 TA is not normally a low 13 second car.
TAs are heavier than Camaros & 99s are not the fastest LS cars, imho a 99 automatic TA running that fast @ Norwalk is a real good running car & I would consider it a factory freak.
But I have only been messing with street & race cars for almost 30 years so I dont know a thing.
No one in here is lying to you.
I am sorry you and your friends that all bought their Mach1s at the same time and all got similar numbers didn't have luck with your Mach1s.
02-16-2010, 12:49 PM
#93
well dont believe me but even with the small bore of the ls1 there are proven h/c/i/e setups that make 500rwhp on pump. You are not going to see that with these mustangs.
These new 4.6 engines will not respond very well to boltons or head and cam swaps either just watch and see.
These new 4.6 engines will not respond very well to boltons or head and cam swaps either just watch and see.
how bout you wait and see....
02-16-2010, 12:57 PM
#94
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you are wrong, plain and simple. You were proven wrong with you proving nothing yourself. You called out mach owners, we replied and you are STILL saying we are FOS. Pathetic. Simply pathetic.
Not to push a useless argument. Any slips or testaments from either side can be rendered moot(including mine) due to the bs factor of the internet, but dead stock I could easily put a car or more on any of the bolt on Mach 1's on post, usually at any speed except 30-40. And back then there were several that loved to race light to light here. After my tune, I don't even see a full bolt on one as a major threat. They just don't seem that fast. Is the transition from street to track conditions making them some incredible beast compared to when I see them?
Again, not to flame. I bow down to the cobra at my status, but all the 2v gt's and mach 1's here that don't have major H/C work or forced induction seem kind of pathetic if they cannot put anything on my slow auto from a roll.
I still like mustangs(father is a huge ford guy), but on the budget I'm on, I can't really afford to dump a lot in a car like that just to get into the low 13's territory.
Again, not to flame. I bow down to the cobra at my status, but all the 2v gt's and mach 1's here that don't have major H/C work or forced induction seem kind of pathetic if they cannot put anything on my slow auto from a roll.
I still like mustangs(father is a huge ford guy), but on the budget I'm on, I can't really afford to dump a lot in a car like that just to get into the low 13's territory.
God I ******* hate mustang threads, its always the same people argueing the same exact ****. Who gives a **** what the new mustang is going to run? Is the world going to come to a ******* end if Ford makes a mustang thats faster then your Camaro? Will your wife leave you because you got beat by a mustang? Will she suck PonyGT off because he has a low 13 sec Mach 1? Just be happy with what ever the **** you got.
If you dont think a Mach 1 can run low to mid 13's your either A. Stupid or B. in denial.
If you dont think a Mach 1 can run low to mid 13's your either A. Stupid or B. in denial.
I laughed pretty good on that one. And we are too. A few posters even owning them and racing them. You brought up magazine times and ricer math as "proof" if you don't remember. Then when actual owners and racers of said cars post, you call THEM "Internet Racers" I am not sure, but that comes off as kinda pretentious don't you think? I am not going to be all sarcastic and flamey in this post. I am actually trying to reason with you. To maybe understand where we are coming from. And it's just not "Ford Guys" saying this either.
No one in here is lying to you.
I am sorry you and your friends that all bought their Mach1s at the same time and all got similar numbers didn't have luck with your Mach1s.
No one in here is lying to you.
I am sorry you and your friends that all bought their Mach1s at the same time and all got similar numbers didn't have luck with your Mach1s.
02-16-2010, 01:00 PM
#95
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow did I learn a few things from this thread.
1 I cant drive a stick, anyone want to buy one of my M6 cars?
2 The mod on the YB is right, this place has a bunch of idiots on it.
3 The sayings "ignorance is bliss" & "you cant argue with an idiot" are true.
4 Math dont mean ****, I guess you guys that brag about your RWHP dont know horsepower is calculated not measured.
Man how could I be so ignorant?
Funny I found this place on one of the Mach 1 sites, seems the owners of moded cars were a little dissapointed in their results after seeing what LS cars do but that cant be true because Ford under rated the Mach hp.
Any of you blue oval guys remember Ford having to recall & fix 1 year 4 valve Cobra because they over rated the hp? I guess based on Fords pevious error you could think they were under rated.
I am sure out of the 17,000 Machs made some were fast but I know of 1 bone stock 99 A4 WS6 that ran 13.20s but that dont make them "low 13 second cars".
And any dyno ticket or et slip dont mean ****, I can post any time slip I want & get a dyno to read high. A dyno is a tool to tune & compare but I bet you know that.
We used to have 2 all Ford races a year in OH, I watched all the Mach 1s I could and dont remember ever seeing any stock ones as fast as your 13.19/105 but maybe they dont run fast in OH since our tracks dont run down the side of a mountain.
Of course I dont know anything & am wrong on every point.
Internet bench racers, what a joke!
1 I cant drive a stick, anyone want to buy one of my M6 cars?
2 The mod on the YB is right, this place has a bunch of idiots on it.
3 The sayings "ignorance is bliss" & "you cant argue with an idiot" are true.
4 Math dont mean ****, I guess you guys that brag about your RWHP dont know horsepower is calculated not measured.
Man how could I be so ignorant?
Funny I found this place on one of the Mach 1 sites, seems the owners of moded cars were a little dissapointed in their results after seeing what LS cars do but that cant be true because Ford under rated the Mach hp.
Any of you blue oval guys remember Ford having to recall & fix 1 year 4 valve Cobra because they over rated the hp? I guess based on Fords pevious error you could think they were under rated.
I am sure out of the 17,000 Machs made some were fast but I know of 1 bone stock 99 A4 WS6 that ran 13.20s but that dont make them "low 13 second cars".
And any dyno ticket or et slip dont mean ****, I can post any time slip I want & get a dyno to read high. A dyno is a tool to tune & compare but I bet you know that.
We used to have 2 all Ford races a year in OH, I watched all the Mach 1s I could and dont remember ever seeing any stock ones as fast as your 13.19/105 but maybe they dont run fast in OH since our tracks dont run down the side of a mountain.
Of course I dont know anything & am wrong on every point.
Internet bench racers, what a joke!
The mere fact that you are comparing your M6 Fbod to that of an M5 Mach and saying you know how to drive a stick only further proves your ignorance on how to ACTUALLY drive. plain and simple: THE GEARING and POWERBAND are DIFFERENT!..YOU can not compare the two. You will not shift them at the same shift points.
HELLO MCFLY!!!!! You blattenly admitted to short shifting your ******* car. Of COURSE you are going to post shitty *** ET's.
Your stupidity/ignorance is astounding. Completely astounding.
SO that makes you an expert on every make and model? Again, the fact that you are comparing a mach to all other cars and using it as your basis of knowledge 'proves' just how ignorant you are.
02-16-2010, 01:16 PM
#96
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow did I learn a few things from this thread.
1 I cant drive a stick, anyone want to buy one of my M6 cars?
2 The mod on the YB is right, this place has a bunch of idiots on it.
3 The sayings "ignorance is bliss" & "you cant argue with an idiot" are true.
4 Math dont mean ****, I guess you guys that brag about your RWHP dont know horsepower is calculated not measured.
Man how could I be so ignorant?
Funny I found this place on one of the Mach 1 sites, seems the owners of moded cars were a little dissapointed in their results after seeing what LS cars do but that cant be true because Ford under rated the Mach hp.
Any of you blue oval guys remember Ford having to recall & fix 1 year 4 valve Cobra because they over rated the hp? I guess based on Fords pevious error you could think they were under rated.
I am sure out of the 17,000 Machs made some were fast but I know of 1 bone stock 99 A4 WS6 that ran 13.20s but that dont make them "low 13 second cars".
And any dyno ticket or et slip dont mean ****, I can post any time slip I want & get a dyno to read high. A dyno is a tool to tune & compare but I bet you know that.
We used to have 2 all Ford races a year in OH, I watched all the Mach 1s I could and dont remember ever seeing any stock ones as fast as your 13.19/105 but maybe they dont run fast in OH since our tracks dont run down the side of a mountain.
Of course I dont know anything & am wrong on every point.
Internet bench racers, what a joke!
1 I cant drive a stick, anyone want to buy one of my M6 cars?
2 The mod on the YB is right, this place has a bunch of idiots on it.
3 The sayings "ignorance is bliss" & "you cant argue with an idiot" are true.
4 Math dont mean ****, I guess you guys that brag about your RWHP dont know horsepower is calculated not measured.
Man how could I be so ignorant?
Funny I found this place on one of the Mach 1 sites, seems the owners of moded cars were a little dissapointed in their results after seeing what LS cars do but that cant be true because Ford under rated the Mach hp.
Any of you blue oval guys remember Ford having to recall & fix 1 year 4 valve Cobra because they over rated the hp? I guess based on Fords pevious error you could think they were under rated.
I am sure out of the 17,000 Machs made some were fast but I know of 1 bone stock 99 A4 WS6 that ran 13.20s but that dont make them "low 13 second cars".
And any dyno ticket or et slip dont mean ****, I can post any time slip I want & get a dyno to read high. A dyno is a tool to tune & compare but I bet you know that.
We used to have 2 all Ford races a year in OH, I watched all the Mach 1s I could and dont remember ever seeing any stock ones as fast as your 13.19/105 but maybe they dont run fast in OH since our tracks dont run down the side of a mountain.
Of course I dont know anything & am wrong on every point.
Internet bench racers, what a joke!
The one thing I posted that you can't refute was the video! Run after run after run after run of low 13 second times, and I believe three high 12 second runs from a car with a drop in filter, and a Bassani exhaust system, not exactly stock, but not a very modded car either. Stock tires, in cold weather no less, stock tranny (that piece of junk!), stock rear. The kid embarassed a C5 Corvette! A lighter car with a bigger engine, not once, but twice! How friggin delusional do you have to be to not see how ridiculous you sound?
02-16-2010, 03:10 PM
#99
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-16-2010, 03:21 PM
#100
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MOV
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts