BS thread - 2011 GT 11.80's @ 118 with bolt ons
05-09-2010, 04:00 PM
#142
A4? But im not talking **** i said I want to meet him someday cowboy get back on your horse and move on
05-09-2010, 04:32 PM
#144
05-09-2010, 04:37 PM
#145
The girl and me will be at Mustang Week at the beach in July if anyone wants to go. Not sure if we will take her Mach or my 5.0. Probably take her car since its alittle more....civilized.
05-09-2010, 04:47 PM
#146
Ill look into it if my wife can get time off id like to go down there like you said we would probably end up taking her nissan rouge lol for gas saving purposes
05-09-2010, 04:50 PM
#148
Let me know if you are going. I'll give you my cell number and we all can grab somethin to eat one night and hit up some of the car shows.
05-09-2010, 04:54 PM
#149
Go for it man. Should be very fun! Alot of stupid kids in bolt on cars thinking they are fast though. Kinda makes it fun though. You should be able to win some races in her Rouge.
Let me know if you are going. I'll give you my cell number and we all can grab somethin to eat one night and hit up some of the car shows.
Let me know if you are going. I'll give you my cell number and we all can grab somethin to eat one night and hit up some of the car shows.
05-09-2010, 04:55 PM
#150
i will say this though: If Ford comes out with a big cube modular with 5.0 tech in it, the gen V cannot come fast enough.
05-09-2010, 05:01 PM
#151
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Schertz, Texas
Posts: 2,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think there are any plans to put it in the Mustang, however. Sad.
11.9 idiot!
05-09-2010, 06:22 PM
#153
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Schertz, Texas
Posts: 2,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zigroid
what post are you talking about?
zigroid, you are asking questions that NONE of us could know, unless one of the members here designed the 5.0. How would anybody know how strong the bottom end is and how much RPM it could take before popping? The ONLY way to find that out is trial and error and I don't think there are any 5.0's on the road yet but I may be wrong.
I will say you are correct about the displacement and torque arguement, but come on man. Who races from such a low RPM you have to rely on low end torque? We aren't diesels.
I will add however that bolting on a supercharger will solve the whole low end torque problem and Mustang guys have been going the boost route because of the expense of an NA build for the better part of 15 years now. The last time it didn't cost a first born child to do a massive NA build was in 1995 with the death of the famed 302.
Like I said, as far as torque goes the LSX has the 5.0 beat purely because of displacement.
I'm very interested in what this engine's capabilities are both NA and with FI. It should make for a very interesting few years for the GM-Ford wars.
I will say you are correct about the displacement and torque arguement, but come on man. Who races from such a low RPM you have to rely on low end torque? We aren't diesels.
I will add however that bolting on a supercharger will solve the whole low end torque problem and Mustang guys have been going the boost route because of the expense of an NA build for the better part of 15 years now. The last time it didn't cost a first born child to do a massive NA build was in 1995 with the death of the famed 302.
Like I said, as far as torque goes the LSX has the 5.0 beat purely because of displacement.
I'm very interested in what this engine's capabilities are both NA and with FI. It should make for a very interesting few years for the GM-Ford wars.
05-09-2010, 06:25 PM
#154
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 18013
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you seriously asking me that question? PLease don't tell me you are that ignorant. That question implies that all cars should be shifted near redline in all gears. Ever hear of something called.......................transmission gear ratios? I certainly wouldn't have shifted my machs the same as my cobra's. Nor would i do it the same as an N/A cobra or an LS1. It's not just about the powerband genius, but the gear ratio's and where you are in the powerband in the next gear. And that will depend on what the ratios are in the transmission......comprende'? Whose the one looking like an idiot now?
http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2...g_GT_Specs.pdf
and this site:
http://www.pszweb.com/car/gears.htm
I came up with the following:
shifting at 7000 rpm in 1st gear will put you at about 4600 in 2nd
shifting at 7000 rpm in 2nd gear and youre at ~4850
7000 rpm in 3rd gear puts you at 5450 in 4th
7000 rpm in 4th puts you at 5300 in 5th (1:1)
now that it is all figured out and pictured for you tell me with a straight face that thing really wants to be shifted at 7000 and not closer to 7500. whos the idiot now?
See above genius. IT'S ALREADY ALMOST AT 450lbs.!!!!......man, please don't tell me you are THAT ignorant that you can't see what's right in front of you. Up until this, I took you as a pretty knowledged guy. But now, I'm having my doubts. YOu just said never ever in all caps, and I just showed you how it's a bolt on or two away from it. And, if it makes you feel better, we can lower the DT loss percentage to 12%; that'd put it at 426.14 TQ. Still only LT's and a tune away IMO. (yes, opinion. I can admit that seems how it hasn't been done yet).
Again....back and forth. Are we talking factory only or a/m too? You keep going all over the place. Come to think of it, I dont' think I've ever seen a dyno sheet of a mach one that starts at 2k rpm. Have you? I'd like to see it if you have one. No really, post it up. I'd actually love to see a dyno comparison of that.
ford isn't going to see a whole lot more torque out of the engine. the aftermarket isn't either. now both bases are covered. as for a dyno of a mach 1 at 2000 rpm this is the best I have:
thats my bone stock LS1 formula vs 5 mach 1s that are either stock or very close.
I never said any of the big blocks did. You're reaching on this one bubba. I know the boss 351s were under rated. I also know that the vast majority of the small and big block motors were. Did you not happen to notice my username? classics is what got me into performance cars. I said advertised because there's nothing concrete to show just how under rated motors were back then. Advertised is all we have to go off of. Sounds like you are simply trying to make yourself appear right with that comment of under-rated, but the fact is even if you went off of that argument you'd still be wrong as it wasn't the first to be under rated. The first one that I can personally think of........is the Modular 4V motor. Having said that, I don't see what the entire point of that is though. WHo really cares how long it took for them to make 1hp per L? I guess if we really have to look at that we'd have to say It's good to see gm do that over ford. Seems how they always came after Ford anyway. Camaro was GM's answer to mustang; the LS1 was the answer to the 5.0foxes (which were quicker/faster than 3rd gens); the 3rd gen cam after the fox design; and now after an 8 year break they have an answer to a 5 year old sales killer.......the S197. However, I try not to look at it that way as I like both cars/setups.
Again, back on the production part. You keep going back and forth.....but I'll keep my response on a production level point. Ford CAN do more. Do you not know how restrictive the midpip is on that thing? They did it for control to keep the car at the advertised hp level they wanted. They can easily open up the piping and lean just a tad for the tune. That will not only get more hp, but keep the mpg there. Not only that....again, they can use different intake cams if they so choose. You have NO IDEA what is at the descression for them to use or not.
I don't have an engineering degree but I do have many advanced college level calculus and physics classes under my belt.
05-09-2010, 06:32 PM
#156
Wtf. a 2011 stang hits a 11 somthing in the 1/4 and people are crying about it? Its a American built car and it is fast with minor upgrades. Just food for thought. Why dont people compair numbers on the more high end cars, say a 430 vs 2011 stang in the 1/4.
05-09-2010, 06:35 PM
#157
[/Certain GM owners] 
05-09-2010, 06:39 PM
#160
