~JOSHUA

iTrader: (92)

My bone stock Firehawk did 13.1 (No traction) @107.8 mph. The trap speed tells the story. That kind of trap speed is good for very low 12's if the traction is there off the line. I burnt rubber all through 1st and spun 10 ft in 2nd.

It's RARE for a '01+ F-body dynoing less than 295-300.

nostyta

iTrader: (6)

Dynoed my car with just a lid and Flowmaster exhaust (308 rwhp). It ran 13.5@ 108 mph with very bad traction.

TAdan

My bone stock 99, auto, T/A ran a 13.5 @ 103.

epic

iTrader: (2)

When I got the car brand new, I ran a 13.3 in the 1/4. This was my first time ever driving a LS1-powered vehicle, too.

Your friend is pretty ignorant.

Orange Terror

Loved that article, cause IMO Ford =

300bhp/ton

then you are very narrow minded and rather dim witted. No offense meant, just stating a fact.

BigE

iTrader: (2)

My 1998 Formula 6spd put down 293.5hp to the rear wheels on a Dynojet. The ONLY modifications from 100% stock were Mobil 1 oil (stock for a Vette, not an F-body) and a Skip Shift Eliminator. Most people wouldn't even consider these mods but I mentioned them for the sake of completeness. In the same trim, it went 13.5 @ 106 on a 2.16 60' spinning off the line and getting sideways on the 1-2 shift. If I could drive and I had newer (read: not dry-cracked) tires, it would have been a low 13 for sure. At the track, I swapped in a lid and filter and still couldn't better my times so you can see how much traction/skill was limiting me.

racer88

My 2000 with a detonationg motor dyno'd 254 overall and was rich as a pig- needless to say it went back to GM via the Lemon Law.

MY bone stock 2001 with 7Kmiles dyno'd 327 with a lid, 316 in July with the stock lid in 95 degrees.

Now I have no freaking idea but it ran 13.105 @ 106.77 stock, 12.5 @ 113.5 with gears and headers, and what it's gone now in my sig after a small cam. It has gone 11.94 @ 117 and 11.92 @ 116 with my Man driving it tho

StealthZ06

iTrader: (1)

I dyno'd 300.1 rwhp and 306.3 rwtq in a bone stock M6 1999 Trans Am (non WS6). That was with less than 5k miles on the clock too. When I took it to the track the next week, I got a 13.01@108.8 as the best run of the night. This was also my very first night out at the track.

Ouchburns

I have 80 000k on my 2000 SS and I just went to the dyno for the first time. With an SLP lid, K&N filter and magnaflow cat back and a little dyno tuning I put down 320hp & 332 torque to the wheels.

Orange Terror

Oh, somebody wants to get personal, what are you a Ford rep spying on the competition? I was stating my opinion. I don't like fords, IMO they're vehicles are not stylish and I don't care for how they sound or drive. I've driven a few, they feel cheap to me. However, the new mustang is a step in the right direction. A step GM needs to take with the Camaro and GTO IMO. I grew up on GM vehicles and right now I'd have to say I have little use for anything GM has put out recently either, unattractive variations of the same old things. As for being narrow minded, I'd much rather drive a Chrysler/Dodge, Toyota, Nissan, or Mazda over a ford because IMO they are better and more exciting vehicles. So, I can understand how you would get that from my earlier statement and I think this shows the reverse. As for being dim witted, well, I think your statement shows that you are narrow minded and dim witted. No offense of course, just stating my opinion.

VTC_WS6

iTrader: (9)

The '01-'02's have the LS6 manifold, none the less my '00 WS6 put down 329whp with a lid and catback alone, also managed a 13.08 @ 108 with a 2.0 60', again with a lid and catback as the only mods.

02 Camaro SS

iTrader: (4)

13.2@107

B.W.

iTrader: (3)

He is probably thinking of LT1 fbodies, but even some of then have dipped into high 13's

2002LS1Z

iTrader: (1)

My first 2002 LS1 Z28 M6 ran 13.6@105 bone stock and dynoed 294rwhp/318lb/ft with a muffler and lid and later ran 13.18@109.
My current 2002 LS1 Z28 A4 also ran 13.6@105 bone stock. Never dynoed totally stock but with my mods dynoed 324rwhp/343lb/ft and has run a best of 12.8@108.
Any LS1 car should be in the 13's.

BriancWS6

iTrader: (18)

12.992@108.96 in the 1/4 mile. Put down 321rwhp 331rwtq

Slow Vette

iTrader: (1)

my times in sig, with the worst gears in the world..lol, don't kno if 400 ft above sea level makes any difference

300bhp/ton

Ford rep - No.

Your opinion - and my opinion

As I said no offense meant, I just get fed fed up of all these stupid comments. Its as bad on Mustang sites so I'm singling you out.

Lets face it, Ford, GM and all the others all make crap cars. Most of them have/do made/make some great cars.

So why bitch about it. You don't have to like Ford but that doesn't mean SOME of their cars arn't good. Example:

-The Mustang, like it or not it is a great car and without it there would not have been an Fbody! Yes there have been some poorer examples in the past but in all reality they are pretty decent cars for the money and still in production today.
-Ford GT40, the car that beat Ferrari at Le Mans, are rare feet indeed. When has GM done this? A purpose built race car, which some 40 years on is still regarded as on of the best looking cars ever.
-Ford GT, a true American supercar. Which in all reality is a rare thing. Looks good and goes well enough to compare with the best out there.
-Mk1 & MK2 Escort, dominated the rally seen for over 10 years. Still very popular today and also a winner. A Mk2 Escort has taken the podium for the last few years at the Tour of Mull where it goes up against the latest WRC Impreza's and Evo's.
-The model T, could this really be left out of any list.
-Sierra & Escort Cosworths, the cars that spawned the 4wd Rally wanta be's you see today.

To name a few. No don't get me wrong I'm no more as Ford fan than I am any other car maker. I just like cars (performance ones of course). And at the present GM offer little alternative to Ford. And remeber where I live this is the face of Chevy:

CRAGER

How is he not to take offense to that comment.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Like he said "IHMO..." And like you said you will see the same comments like his on other sites, mainly because people can be a little bias. Is it wrong, no. I've seen alot worse comments from the Stang sites and so what. You can't change people's minds, they have to change it themselves. You might be able to shed some light, but thats about it.

I like most sports cars out there, I don't really care for FWD cars and euro-trash! j/k I have plenty of friends with all types of cars and if I had the money I'd buy all kinds of cars. You just can't make people like what YOU like. And if they did there would not be as much rivalry, which pushes the car manufactures against each other to produce better/faster cars.



x Pitch Black x - Back to the subject:
An LS1 can dyno "around" 260rwhp on a Mustang Dyno. Mustang Dyno shows less then a Dyno-Jet dyno. An LS1 making 300rwhp on a Dyno-Jet might show around 270rwhp on a Mustang Dyno.

Mid to low 14's? If the track were at a higher elevation then sure thats possible.

Try a search button (lol) and see what other threads are out there for this subject, but I bet your buddy is thinking LT1 power/times not LS1 like others have mentioned.



Peace,
Craig.

777

iTrader: (21)

I think he meant mustang gt, but they don't even get 260 to the wheels