02 SS vs. 04 Mach 1
#41
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Angus66
Shame I don't live in NC anymore - I'd be happy to oblige.
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.
#42
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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...
#43
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by VENGEANCE
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.
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.
![Devil](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_devil.gif)
Originally Posted by VENGEANCE
you can tell yourself whatever you want to help you sleep at night, but its a fact.
![Winky](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_wink.gif)
#44
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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.
#45
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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.
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.
#46
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by t/a for life
Everyone says that a stock mach is a good race, but last night. I ran one at the track and I ran 13.5 he ran like a 14.1. You think driver mod on his part or what?
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
![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
#47
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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.
![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
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.
#48
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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...
#49
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by 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...
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?
![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
#50
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
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?![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
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?
![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
#53
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
im still not buying a stock 12 sec. pass from a mach. sorry. ![Sad](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_sad.gif)
![Sad](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_sad.gif)
#54
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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?
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?
#55
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
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?
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
#56
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Since this IS the Multimedia section, here's a video of my (stoc internals) '03 Mach 1:
Angus66 at Cecil Dragway 10/22/06
Angus66 at Cecil Dragway 10/22/06
#57
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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.
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:
![](http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a130/MachManRobby/Speed.jpg)
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:
![](http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a130/MachManRobby/distance.jpg)
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.
Last edited by 04azuremach; 05-01-2007 at 08:49 AM.
#58
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by VENGEANCE
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.
#59
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
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?![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
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?
![The Jester](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_jest.gif)
Paul from Pauls high performance got a high 12 in a stock mach.
#60
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
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.
Nice kill.
LS1's are a bit trickier to launch than the Mach on street tires as others have stated.