I believe you meant M29

 

My 93' Formula has 3:23's with my 6-speed and it's still bone stock right down to that restrictive air cleaner, never done my 1/4 mile but my 0-60 on street tires is 6.1 sec's (when my tires bite up that is haha)
Mostly the 95's and 97's are quicker only cuz of the Ram Air induction unlike the early 4th gen T/As and Formulas.

But I also found specs on 93-97 LT1 cams, and 93 lt1's have a slightly bigger cam than others. and when I say slightly I mean like a couple thousandths of an inch so not really dramatic but maybe it helps a little haha.


Also may I add that I raced an 03' Mach 1 stang (40 MPH roll each time)and I beat him twice by a car length and he beat me twice by a fender. ( pretty good for stock). and also totally owned an 05' GT 5speed Slutstang by two car lengths from a dig.

 

Aren't our cars supposed to do 5.4s?

And I keep mixing up cams now after looking at so many and misplacing links to the specs. 93 is .450/.460 and the rest are .447/.459 right?

 

That was the word around the camp fire so to speak back in the 90s and I remember hearing it quite a few times but with never any real evidence. With most LT1 being in such poor disrepair and neglected 15 years later, I don't think theres really any way to test the theory. I actually own a 93, it never ran any better or worse then my friends other year LT1s. I just remember back when they were newer and not whored out, the more stocker cars were a lot quicker then what I see now. Starting to see that with LS1 cars, just beat to **** and all the owner wants to do is half *** mod it and drag race it.

 

Ive not had any experience with 93s but this is interesting.

Ive usually heard 95s being the strongest running engines but I agree with what someone else said - probably depends on the day the car was made more than anything, and how well its been maintained.

 

When my old 93 T/A A4 was stock it ran 14.2s

 

Agreed. That is the reason so many LT1s are slow now - tons of them are beat to hell and half-*** modded.

 

I was faster than the 94 and 95's when I bought my 93 back in 1995.

 

I have seen a lot more low option, hard tops from 1993 than the later years. By 1997 it seemed that every car on the lots was fully loaded. The weight difference would also be a factor. The 561 heads used in the 1996-97's are not as good, but the intake is better than the 1994-95's. The 1993 intake works well.

 

My 93 (A4) with bolt ons ran a 13.00@105 with a bad 2.2 60' (spinning on bald street tires). Just headers, intake, exhaust with 148,xxx miles on the motor/drivetrain