Sunset'01Z

iTrader: (10)

granny shifting ^^^

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

yeah, i suppose he wasn't double clutching like he should....

88blackgt

ya no kidding who would want a car that will run 9s w/ some bolt ons and small shot

to the OP, either theyre joking w/ you or theyre retarded, so either way it doesnt really matter what they say.

GMmexican

iTrader: (7)

runs 9's comes supercharged from the factory and on top of that it needs nitrous

Justin00SS

iTrader: (5)

12.9s aren't the norm for f-bodies either. But they have happened.

MOST guys with stock LS1 f-bodies are in the mid 13s just like the 05+ Mustang GTs are.

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

ehh, i would still kind of disagree with you there.

If I had to choose a car that would run a 12.9, it would be an LS1 over the 4.6

That's not trying to sound biased either, thats just how it is.

The norm from personal experience, and from our board members, the times look a bit like this

LS1 F-Body = Low 13s, mid 13s with normal drivers
GT = High 13s, super low 14s with normal drivers

Justin00SS

iTrader: (5)

The 99-04 mustang GTs are high 13s low 14s stock. The 05+ come with a proven 300hp and better gearing. 12.9s stock or with basic bolt-ons (cai, chip/tune) has happened on more then a few occasions. 5sd's only though. Ford still hasn't figured out the auto.

I'm not saying the mustangs are dead even. Just that that numbers have happened.

Much much more common in the f-bodies than the mustangs stock for stock. But they numbers are there and not hard to find. There are hundreds of mustang forums. lol

I just hate homers. Ford biased. GM biased. There are people on this forum that still don't think Ford put s/c's on the 03-04 cobras stock.
People need to look at the whole spectrum of cars and what different cars can do instead of sticking to what they're personal choice can do.

BaddillaK

iTrader: (13)

mach's are pretty damn fast stock. these are the times from one I ended up on the side of last year. It was his worst run of the night his best was a 13.0xx, with runs on other days in the 12.9xx's

R/T .542
60' 2.099
330' 5.717
1/8 8.656 @ 84.25
1000' 11.169
1/4 13.297 @ 105.07

i can post a pic of the timeslip if you still doubt it

Spink

iTrader: (1)

My neighbor just got an all stock 06 GT and we raced several times and I beat him by a good margin every time. He paid way too much for it and it's only got 8000 miles on it and now he thinks something is wrong with it. He's a young guy that really knows very little about cars and I kind of felt bad for him. He really thought he was going to blow me away. I think he bought it because he's jealous that his girlfriend is a little obsessed with me and my car. This girl is always telling me how much she loves it and wants to ride in it. She's very cute but my girl is a 10 and I'd never mess around on her so I always blow her off and I think that makes it even worse. She'll say **** right in front of him or my girl.

'Trust'

iTrader: (24)

We all know Mach I's are very capable cars, but the 05's GT's are still jokes. A second ago you were saying that they were running 12.9's stock, and now that they need bolt-ons. I don't doubt them hitting 12.9's with CAI, bolt-ons, and a tune, however, I ran a guy that was running his mouth (there is a thread on this board about it) in an 05 with boltons, CAI, and a tune and had him by 1.5 cars the first race in a bone stock A4 01 TA with a magnaflow, second race he beat me by a car and I spun badly, still lost though, no excuse there. Point is, that they are about even with a stock LS1 even with bolt-ons. They are too heavy, and don't make enough power to be anything but slow in stock trim.

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

Yeah, I'm not going to lie, Machs can keep up with me, although I still don't have a problem beating them by a few lengths.

but the GTs... you have got to be one deluded fool to think those are keeping up with LS1s stock....

carado1984

over head cams need big valve covers.. put an eaton on that and its really a monster.. but since a 454 lsx block is the same size about as my ls1 346 you should understand why.

carado1984

they are geared well until third. and they have a solid rear and decent ok torque. that can last you 60 ft esp with a sticky tire. having less power probably helps that.

AronZ28

iTrader: (2)

2005+ Mustang GT:
300hp
3500lb curb weight

2002 Camaro SS
345hp(using the Corvette rating, which is what these cars really make stock)
3500lb curb weight

I'd like to know how a car with 45 less hp is going to run similar times, if both are stock.

I've put several car lengths a new style Mustang GT, with the 5 speed in my Z28 racing from a dead stop to 120mph. Beat him out of the hole and it just kept getting uglier

ponygt65

OP - the guys are just being jerks.....falling into the Gm vs. Ford thing. I get the same crap from a co -worker. It is very irritating, I'll give you that.Please explain that one. I agree with 99.9% of your posts on stangs, but that one, I just dont' get.
If you honestly believe that.....You've been watching too many new driver's or reading too many euro-favored magazine's.
I agree.....100%.

Do I tell you what your car runs?.....a very select few machs have hit high 12s. SAME with Fbods. BOTH are generally low to mid 13s.
Simple.......HP isn't everything. Does that really need to be explained? Do you know what gears the M5 has?..........Both sets? Since when does HP alone win races? Do you even know what an S197 Dyno's?...can you tell me what an S197 is?

1998Z20what?

iTrader: (4)

two of my buddies have owned 03 and 04 mustang gts (5 speed) and with intake and cat backs ran 14.2...

cars where sold 3 weeks later, guess what they drive now...

*hint the motor starts with a L and ends with a 1*

thanks for the back up man. it just sucks being singled out by a load of crap, and when you defend it they keep talking.

they are all faster then me though.. (fox bodys)

no pun intended for the fellow mustang brothers on this board.

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

Alright... so my proof that f-bodys generally run what I said can be viewed at the top of this page.

Click the little timeslip link if you would be so bold.

I guess asking for proof of what a GT runs is a felony in your little world then eh?

X.Modesto

S197Mustang owner here, best time stock, 13.7 on nitto street tires, All my buddies with F-bods 13.0X and below with less than a 500 in mods. But my car still looks better...

LSX engines are the **** just get rid of the f-body...

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

well at least you are honest.

chad3113

iTrader: (1)

The LS1 is by far the superior engine, but the mustangs have that low end torque which lets them compete...for awhile. My previous car was a 2000 GT with ram air, TB, shifter, gears, midpipe, flowmasters and i ran a *best of 13.6 on some DR's. My buddy has an 02 GT same mods mius the gears (i sold him my mustang after it was wrecked) and ran 13.8 with some DR's. The thing thatr should be noted was that these were some of the better runs with perfect shifting/launching, the ls1 has alot more power to be forgiving of some small mistakes. Mustangs are fun/look good but are by no means fast (n/a)