Ke^in

Good average for a stock LS1 driven by someone who can drive a manual decently. We aren't disagreeing. The average person can't drive their cars to their potential.

Take 30 random stock Camaro owners back in 2003. I would say 20 or more wouldn't get below a 13.9 in the 1/4 on a stock LS1. Does that mean a stock LS1 isn't capable of going faster? Yes. My point was, I was seeing people claim my claim was absurd because from what they have seen a certain car run with a certain bolt-ons didn't match.

Like Lemons said, with the drivers being at par with one another a intake/geared/tuned etc 2v will take a stock LS1.

Ke^in

And he wasn't full bolt-ons. So put the seat back in, and put the rest of the bolt-ons on, and he's back to 12.77 or maybe better. Which would be pulling an LS1 hard.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

Why use 2003? This is 2011. There are good, bad, and average drivers out there. I'd hardly call a 13.3 the LS1's "potential" seeing as they've hit 12s. It's a solid average for exceptionally well driven manuals, poorly driven ones, average drivers as well as the autos which will always be in that area unless the DA is bad or they are fucked up. That 13.3 is .5 slower than the fastest times put down. That's like saying how the average 2011 5.0 (good/bad/avg drivers + autos) is around 13.0. They have run .5 faster, and much slower, but the average is hovering around a 13.0. I think that is fair, and so is a 13.3-4. At the track, stock LS1 vs full (or close to) bolt-on 2v...I would give the edge to the 2v if it had a DR, otherwise driver's race. Street race, driver's race from a dig, roll advantage goes to the LS1 superior top end (2v's always feel like LT1s up top, very out of breath) but still a very close race. You seem to only want to count manuals, when there are plenty of autos running consistent mid-low 13s. My friend's 2.73 geared auto LS1 is the slowest stock LS1 I've ever seen, and it ran a 13.6. 3.23'd cars will run 2 or 3 tenths higher.

Take 30 stock LS1 driver's, most will run 13.3-4.
Take 30 bolt-on 2v drivers today, I'd say most will run a low to mid 13.
Take 30 stock 5.0 drivers today, most will run a very low 13 or high 12.

**counting autos of both gearing and manuals of every skill level for all

I am agreeing that it would be a good race, but you seem to think I am saying it will be the LS1s race hands down. Conditions/race type are my main sticking point for the winner.

Ke^in

Because in 2011 there are very few completely stock LS1s out there.
The average for a LS1 Fbody is around 13.5 LS1s have hit 12s yes, but it's not that usual. A 2v GT has hit 13.6s before. But I'd not claim 2v GTs were mid 13s cars.
Ok autos running mid 13s. Mod stock bolt on 2v GTs are running low 13s to high 12s.

You got to be kidding me. I've seen mid 14s runs on stock LS1 cars. Especially when they first came out. Heck I just saw a 3v GT with full exhaust and a tune run 14.7!
I doubt that. Decent driver will atleast run 13.5. Most people run 13.5 or worse in them. We aren't talking about the average poster IN HERE. But the average owner.
Most will run low 13s. Better drivers will be in the 12s Those modding their cars usually can drive them better than those that keep them completely stock. IMHO.

LT/LS Guy

Where did you get 12's from?

Eh Mid 12's in your average full bolt-on/full weight LT1 is pushing it! More like bottom 13's or very, very high 12's if your lucky.

Yes that bolt-on car had a dry weight of 2900lbs. I don't see how that is relevant to what were talking about here but I get what you are saying.


The bottom line is you said a full bolt-on 2v will "pull a stock LS1 hard" and i'm telling you that is not the case. A well driven bone-stock LS1 will go bottom 13's right along with a well driven bolt-on 2valve, with the 2v maybe having a couple tenths advantage due to tires, gears and so forth. Either way it will be a closer race than you think, nowhere near pullin' hard like you stated.

Ke^in

The average full-bolt-on GT runs low 13s to 12s. The average stock LS1 runs low 13s to mid 13s Even given the WORST case scenario in the 2v and the BEST case scenario in the LS1, and that is dead even. Now again that is comparing average WORST case for the GT, and average BEST case for the LS1. Now if you want to argue that the fastest LS1 has went high 12s, I can argue a stock 2v GT went 13.6s and would probably be mid 12s with the same driver with full bolt-ons (Evan Smith)

Considering most stock LS1s run in the 13.3-13.5 range, what do you think a bolt-on 2v that is running 12.7s is going to do to a car running 13.3-13.5?

Pull on it hard.

LT/LS Guy

The "average" bolt-on 2v does not run 12's. Short and simple for you.

Ke^in

The average FULL-bolt on 2v does indeed. Again we've shown where a simply rear seat delete and a non-full bolt-on car easily ran 12.7. The seats don't weight THAT much. How do you think it would run with the seats in, and FULL bolt-ons? I've seen Full bolt-on and tuned 2vs with DRs running high 12s all day. The AVERAGE driver will however run low 13s. When I say AVERAGE I am meaning someone that doesn't know how to drive his or her car very well. Which is the average person.

You can keep saying it doesn't run what it does, but no matter how "simply" you put it (and it was simple) it doesn't change the facts.

You're just going to have to bite the proverbial pillow on this one.

Ke^in

In case you didn't see this again.

http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=998283

mods:

4.10s, full exhaust, intake with plenum, built rear (Notice, not full bolt-ons)

1.74 60'
8.13 @ 86
12.7 @ 106

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbQKL5aM5DI

As far as I can tell a 12.7 is indeed running in the 12s.

The AVERAGE driver doesn't get a LS1 below 13.5s either. But I wouldn't say "The average LS1 doesn't run below 13.5s"

I would say the average DRIVER doesn't.

LT/LS Guy

Again, on average with full bolt-ons/full weight they run in the 13's. They do not average 12's.

I can find examples too ya know! Like this old article from MM&FF "Two-Valve Shootout" where these cars are sporting stronger blocks, more compression, cams, heads, intakes, full bolt-ons, crazy gears, slicks/skinnies, weight reduction, the whole nine and struggling to get out of the low 12's! Yes it 's different than what were talking about here just trying to educate you on how slow they really are. Please read through it.

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

LT/LS Guy

You failed to list the raceweight of that car? I'd put money on it's substantially lighter than a stock vehicle.

Ke^in

I just told you, it had it's rear seats deleted. It ALSO didn't have FULL BOLT ONS. Put the seat back in, and add the missing bolt-ons and you'll probably see better times.

Read the thread.

LT/LS Guy

Read the article (a legit one BTW) above to get a realistic idea of how a 2-valve performs.

They are slow period - sorry.

LT/LS Guy

STRIP SPECS
Owner: Mike Bowen
Hometown Trenton, New Jersey
Driver Mike Bowen
Year/Model '01 Mustang GT
Weight w/Driver 3,066 lbs
Engine '03 Ford Explorer 4.6-liter, 281ci
Built By Ford Motor Company
Tuner MD Motorsports of Cincinnati, Ohio
Intake Manifold Bullitt
Cylinder Heads Stock
Compression Ratio Stock 9.4:1
Camshafts VT Engines Stage II, 225/235 at 0.050, 0.560/0.575 lift, 108 LSA
Exhaust BBK long-tube headers, BBK off-road X-pipe, MagnaFlow after-cat system
Transmission Tremec 3650 five-speed
Converter/Clutch Spec Stage I clutch, Fidanza aluminum flywheel, Pro-5.0 Shifter
Rear Type 8.8, 4.30 gear, Superior 31-spline axles, Detroit Locker
Wheels Center Line Telstar 15x4 front, 15x8 rear
Tires F/R Moroso DS2 26x4.5 front, M/T ET Drag 26x10 rear Suspension Front QA1 tubular K-member, '86 Mustang lower control arms, stock coil springs, Lakewood 90/10 struts, sway bar removed
Suspension Rear Steeda Hardcore lower control arms, '86 Mustang rear springs, QA1 adjustable shocks, swaybar removed
Previous Best ET/MPH 12.05/112.69

That driver was no lightweight, looked to be pushing atleast 200lbs or VERY close to it. If that's the case then that car has a dry weight of about 2800lbs, roughly 500lbs lighter than a stock car. Holy Shish Kabob!

lemons12

iTrader: (71)

You can't talk average times and use a really good drivers time, you have to use average drivers times.

BTW.. my 98 full weight trans am in 1500+ DA ran 8.4@85mph in the 1/8.. convert that to quarter..

Puck

iTrader: (17)

You guys crack me up.

I'm not talking Shon's or Tom's crazy 11 second bolt-on LT1 cars here, just normal street cars.

A 2v will be a little slower mod for mod, but still should AVERAGE into the 12s with full bolt-ons. With most LS1s running around 13.5 stock, that is indeed "pullin hard".

Full bolt on LT1/full bolt-on 2v > stock LS1.

It may not sound like it to a street racer, but for those who actually go to the track .5 seconds is a spanking.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

True, but with so much available data from the years following, why not use it? The longer something is out, the more chance there is for a better average.

And I didn't claim they all ran 12s, so what's your point? Oh wait, there wasn't one.


[quote]You got to be kidding me. I've seen mid 14s runs on stock LS1 cars. Especially when they first came out. Heck I just saw a 3v GT with full exhaust and a tune run 14.7! [quote]

Poorly phrased on my part. We really just use that kind of description when people ask about his car. It is definitely on the slower half, but it was consistently that slow. 13.6----13.6----13.6---etc. Running a mid 14 is truly an accomplishment in an LS1 car if your DA isn't crazy. You'd have to miss a gear 2 or 3 times. When I missed one, my ET was .4 off. You are only shifting 3 times in a stock LS1, and if you botch 2 you pretty much abort the run.

Doubt it all you want, it's the truth. There are plenty of people who could crack off a 13.1 or 13.2 to offset the 13.7s. Oh wait, there are consistent autos that would be right in the 13.3-5 range all day. Totally believable.

You seem to have this assumption that all 2v drivers are better drivers. 2v's take a lot of gear in the manual cars to get them moving. That gear makes them harder to launch, and not even a majority will run a DR or slick. Street tires for most people, and there are TONS of terrible drivers out there with modded cars of all kinds. Modded car drivers are better drivers is a TERRIBLE assumptions. Hell, there was a guy a few weeks ago with a cammed LS1 that had a solid 1 second or more between shifts. His car is highly modded, but he was terrible.

LT/LS Guy

I like how you said that. Most. Good job of covering your ***.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

FWIW, my friend's car is a 96 ws6 m6 with longtubes, true duals and a tune. The previous owner was a pretty good driver, as was his dad, and they took the car to the track pretty regularly. Never got lower than a 13.5 (on street tires but some people seem to think people these days only run on DRs at the track). I pulled on him a little bit when I was bone stock too.

Ke^in

Try telling these clowns that ;-)

Like I said, a Full Bolt on 2v will spank a most LS1s out there. There is that occasional freak high 12 stock run, but bolt ons going 12.7 could still take those.