VENGEANCE

Yeah, it is a shame.

But dont get me wrong, you can make anything fast. Theres a red mach 1 around here with a cowl hood with an F1R on it, makes like 700 at the tires. Its deadly from a roll

but it went like 12.5 @ 130 at the track.... aka he wouldnt even stay within sight of me on motor where it counts (at the track)

You can make anything fast, but bolt on to bolt on a mach 1 is not going to beat an LS1 car unless the LS1 driver is the worst possible example. you can tell yourself whatever you want to help you sleep at night, but its a fact.

rickyracer25

iTrader: (11)

there's a red Mach here in AMA and he's pretty quick. Nose and nose when I was just a bolt on car with street tires... it happens to the best of us o well. God those cars sound great...

Angus66

Really?

Then how do you explain my (stock internals) bolt-on Mach running 11.35 @ 119mph?

That's quick enough to be # 8 on the "Quickest STOCK INTERNALS List" on this very board & ahead of the quickest manual-trans stock internal F-Body listed (ATwelveSec02Z28 11.424 @ 119.26).

Looks like my Mach is right there with the quickest stock-internal F-Bodies around at a similar - or in some cases higher - race weight.

Timeslips & videos show facts - you're just sharing your (biased) opinion...

germeezy1

Its amazing some of the comments in this forum. Any LS1 or even SS LS1 F-body is a drivers race for a Mach 1. Many have run very low 13's bone freaking stock....and yes I know some LS1 cars have run 12's stock but thats an exception and not a rule. There is no way in hell its a 3 or 4 car difference unless the Mach 1 driver can't drive. The Machs were very underrated they put out more mid range and low rpm torque than the 320 hp rated 99/01 Cobras.

04azuremach

My Mach is far from stock now, but when it was stock, I had no problems racing bolt on F-bodies. Please know about the car you're talking about before you bash it. My Mach is my very first Manual car and after learning to drive it after 3 months even I managed a 13.2 bone stock @ 106 MPH. After an X pipe I went 12.9 @ 108. I have seen them go 12.9 bone stock first hand. The guy whose trailer I borrow all the time has hit 12.9 in his bone stock Mach at least 3 times, and rarely does worse than 13.1.

I beat a TA with a couple bolt on's with just an X pipe on my car by over a car. Just ask this guy: https://ls1tech.com/forums/member.php?u=44030

I raced him and he even posted the loss on LS1 tech but a mod deleted it (go figure).

The average Mach 1 owner is as old as a Corvette owner and most of them take their car to the track 2 times a year at most and never learn to drive their car. Those must be the people you see driving 14's. LOL, that's just pathetic. I've missed gears and ran 13.5's when the car was stock.

germeezy1

At the dragstrip, the '99 GT's performance numbers, though great for a Mustang, are still not tops in this muscular crowd. Yet, 0-60 mph in 5.4 seconds and a 14.0-second/100.2-mph quarter-mile run is as good or better than any stock Mustang we've ever tested

If even the non drag racing editors at MT can get this out of a 260 hp GT, I would say that guy could not drive his way out of a wet paper bag

ULTIMATEORANGESS

iTrader: (4)

why is it evan smith couldnt get a 12 out of a stock mach but theres tons of claims that here? you guys should take his job.

a mach here just barely edging out a an ls1 GTO which is slower than an ls1 fbody. fact is both cars are pretty evenly matched.

http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...gto/index.html

evan smiths best time.


http://www.mach1registry.com/FAQ.htm

i think these are fair comparisons since its head to head testing by above avg. drivers.

its really not arguable ls1 fbodies make considerably more power stock too.

04azuremach

Don't race dynos, you'll end up losing to someone like 03av8R who makes less than 320 RWHP and runs 11.3's @ 117 MPH. Compare time slips, not horse power. I'll admit to anyone that the LS1 F-body vs Mach 1 race could go either way. I think we've all seen both cars have crappy drivers in the 14's on bone stock cars. Don't tell me that doesn't happen to either car. I saw two LS1's run side by side 14.0's and then later tell me it was one of their best times. I've seen similar from Mach 1 owners too so don't think I'm knocking on just those LS1 drivers. The LS1 seems to be the most inconsistant car ever though. There are some that are factory freaks and some that are duds. This is why the race could go either way. No car was created equal. Maybe Evan Smith had a dud. I know for a fact a 12.9 is very much possible in both cars in stock form. I've seen both cars do it in person...

ULTIMATEORANGESS

iTrader: (4)

i agree completely anything can happen in a race. modded cars have many variables.


i was comparing two STOCK cars.


yes, evan smith had a 13.1 dud mach while the couple LS1s he drove to 12s stock were all freaks.

who wouldve thought?

04azuremach

He did that with a 2.0 60', meanwhile myself and many others have cut 1.9's on the stock tires...

ULTIMATEORANGESS

iTrader: (4)

im still not buying a stock 12 sec. pass from a mach. sorry.

germeezy1

This is funny all of this debate and the fact is LS1 to 4.6 its a drivers race.

04azuremach

3 different Mach's have hit 12.9's in bone stock trim with 3 different drivers just at MIR alone. Richard Wilson and Kevin Hassler are two of them who's names that I know of and have met personally. Kevin made a 13.15 pass his first time ever at the track in his Mach. His very first pass that day was a 13.4 against my 13.2. His next visit he went 12.9. Richard Wilson hit a 12.89, yes that's a 12.8X ET in his '03 Red Mach 1 off the show room floor. An 80 foot elevation above sea level is helpful. He now has a 10 second Cobra. Not sure where that Mach ended up. These are just people that I know personally. I'm sure there are plenty of others.

ULTIMATEORANGESS

iTrader: (4)

one of those guys wasnt one that had a shifter and weight reduction and claimed it to be stock was he because one of those names sounds familiar. i read about one of those so called stock machs yrs. ago and it ended up not being stock.


but why is it that LS1 GTOs and a4 ls1 fbodies that make more power and trap similarly arent able to hit 12s stock but yet machs are?

Angus66

Come on ULTIMATEORANGESS, I know you're not that ignorant or misinformed.

We've been over this again & again & again on other boards and possibly this one too:

Weight alone kills any chance that a stock LS1 GTO will hit 12's in factory trim, not to mention the tricky to launch IRS.

Mach 1's can hit high 12's with less rwhp/rwtq due to a relatively drag-oriented suspension from the factory + aggressive transmission gearing (3.38 1st gear stock) + a 3.55 ring and pinion

Angus66

Since this IS the Multimedia section, here's a video of my (stoc internals) '03 Mach 1:

Angus66 at Cecil Dragway 10/22/06

04azuremach

Here is a physics lesson for those of you who don't understand how it is possible for a mach 1 to run a 12 in stock trim. If two cars with the same 60' and same trap speed go down the track and cut the same reaction time and have the same gearing, who will cross the finish line first? The heavier one or the lighter one? The answer is the lighter one. A Mach 1 is clearly lighter than a GTO. A lighter car trapping the same as a heavier car will pull harder at lower speeds than the heavier car plain and simple. The earlier your fastest acceleration comes in the better when it comes to 1/4 mile racing. Throw in the fact that they come stock with 3.55's and a 3.31 first gear ratio and a 1.99 second compared to the T-56's 2.66 then 1.89 and you should see a huge advantage on the first half of the track. Only at the end of the track will the GTO have stopped the Mach 1's pull (but still behind it). If it pulled on it at all, it would be after the finish line.

Here's something that you can use a little calculus to prove: Take 3 cars, both starting at 0 MPH and each 1 second interval, their new MPH after acceleration is below...

Time, Acceleration, Speed, Distance Traveled
1.....5.....5.......5
2.....5.....10.....15
3.....5.....15.....30
4.....5.....20.....50
5.....5.....25.....75
6.....5.....30.....105
7.....5.....35.....140
8.....5.....40.....180
9.....5.....45.....225
10...5.....50.....275

Now this is a car starting to accelerate by 0.5 feet/sec^2, but gaining 1 feet/sec^2 every second. Ends up the same speed after 10 seconds, but check out the distance traveled.

time, acceleration, speed, distance traveled
1.....0.5.....0.5......05
2.....1.5.....2........2.5
3.....2.5.....4.5.....7
4.....3.5.....8.......15
5.....4.5.....12.5...27.5
6.....5.5.....18......45.5
7.....6.5.....24.5...70
8.....7.5.....32.....102
9.....8.5.....40.5...142.5
10...9.5.....50......192.5

Now here is the opposite:
time, acceleration, speed, distance traveled
1.....9.5.....9.5....9.5
2.....8.5.....18.....27.5
3.....7.5.....25.5..53
4.....6.5.....32.....85
5.....5.5.....37.5...122.5
6.....4.5.....42.....164.5
7.....3.5.....45.5...210
8.....2.5.....48.....258
9.....1.5.....49.5...307.5
10....0.5.....50.....357.5

This proves that being faster at the beginning of the race is more important than at the end. Compare trap speeds to a cars weight and you should get a better idea of what it is capable of ET wise.

Here is a graph of all 3 cars accelaration and speed:



You'll notice that the average acceleration is the same in all 3 cases and the final MPH is the same. However, take the derivitive of the speed graph and you'll find the distance traveled:



I mixed up line 1 and 2 on this graph, but you get the idea. It's skewed funny due to scaling. There is more to 1/4 mile racing than just MPH and a 60' time. Gearing and weight DO make a difference.

04azuremach

This I have to disagree with. A kid in VA came to MIR in a Mach 1 with nothing but LT headers, O/R X pipe, K&N Air filter, 4.10 gears and Nitto DR's and ran a 12.4 @ 112 MPH. The 4 valve motor responds to bolt-on mods pretty evenly with the LS1 motor. Once you get into top half motor valve train stuff like cam(s) and heads, we no longer have an argument against the LS1 motor because it really does respond better to a cam than a Mach 1 does. Bone stock long blocks, the cars perform very similar with bolt-ons...

67maro

Paul from Pauls high performance got a high 12 in a stock mach.

02ZOh6

I see no reason to doubt a Mach can click off a high 12 stock. If a stock C5Z with 36X rwhp can run 11.70's at 118mph, why not? Sounds about right to me in good conditions and with a great driver.

Nice kill.

LS1's are a bit trickier to launch than the Mach on street tires as others have stated.