You don't know slow until running the quarter in my car with the ignition missing through the entire ******* powerband 14.1@97mph

LONG LIVE OPTI-SPARK

 

Gray's my boy...had to stick up for him. He's too stupid to defend himself.

 

My NA curve is pretty straight from 32-5300rpms. On my nitrous tune without spraying it peaks early and slowly declines at around 5k rpms.


Found a guy on a stang site:

"270hp/310tq = 12.89 @ 106 with almost full body weight minus spare in trunk. 96 Mustang with 01 motor and bolt-ons."

--Greg

 

wtf, 270hp running 12.89 @ 106?

ok, i'll buy that's enough hp to run that et if you're on slicks and weigh 2800lbs... with driver.

i can't imagine that's enough hp to produce that trap speed in any american v8 i've ever heard of.

 

oh and i drove a 94 gt for 2 years. i know how much SN95 cars weigh.

 

I agree those seem pretty good but I don't know if he's running slicks or not, I'll ask him. Here is another on with mods in sig.

Best Time 12.797sec@104.71mph
1.650sec 60' 26x8.5x15 ET Drags, ghetto skinnies up front, Steeda Triax, K&N w/cold air mod, Dynomax Race Bullet dumps, Steeda underdrives, MAC off-road H-pipe, 4.10 gears, FRPP HD clutch, Fidanza aluminum FW, Pro3i weight jacker lowers, Pro3i non-adjustable uppers, Lakewood 90/10's, drag bags, 31spline Superiors w/Eaton posi
Fordchip.com dyno tune: 266.5hp, 309lb-ft tq



And I'm not sure with such low hp how he is pulling off these times?

96GT, 00 pi headswap, mac longtube headers, mac prochamber, 2 chamber flows, steeda t/a, steeda pulleys, steeda triax shifter,steeda clutch quadrant, steeda firewall adjuster, 4.10 richmond gears, 31spline trak-loc, 31spline moser axles, ram H.D. clutch, billet adjustable fuel pressure regulator, 190lph fuel pump, mac cold air kit, 70mm frpp throttle body, 125shot compucar nitrous kit, bottle heater, purge, msd window switch (3k-5800rpm), RR hood w/svo scoop, white face guages, and autometer tach.

237hp & 260.7tq (mustang dyno)

Best Times N/A:
1/4 time: 12.934 @105.42mph
1/8 time: 8.252et@ 82.88mph

 

I like stangs... o3's and mach 1's are nice. GT's just need work and they are respecatble. Not really respeactble from the factory. Ive been watching SRT4's lay the smack down on some stock/mild modded GT's hehe I have vowed never to get one when i seen that happen mustang guys should mod til they can at least beat the neon. anyway nice kill joe I believe you.

 

That is on a mustang dyno .... we are used to seeing Dynojet results, which tend to be higher given the same car/conditions.

Was your car dyno'd on a mustang dyno too ... that would answer a lot if it was.
.

 

ill also vouch for the SRT4's i remember we went into philly one day with my buddies. One of my friend drives a Supra with a single turbo conversion and a big front mount intercooler he raced a srt4 that had a boost controller light weight wheels and a catback and it SPANKED HIM. i wasnt there for the race so i dont know what boost he was running but he looked like he was going to cry hehe...there pretty fast with some light mods

 

I paid over $100 for my dyno at Eastside (a sponsor here) so I hope they're correct. I wanted it done as a baseline before my H/C install. Personally, I don't think these numbers are very impressive However, you must be pretty naive to believe all of the bs that goes on in this department of the site. It's entertaining, sure, believeable NOT. I call it as I see it

 

That's fine, you can call BS all you want. I just dont understand why it is difficult to imagine a modded mustang running LOW 13's?!? All that work and he was only able to put a half car on a WS6 ... why would anyone lie about that?
.

.

 

I have a dyno slip that says my car put down 418rwhp on a MUSTANG dyno.
Does my car have 418rwhp? No.

 

haha, amen to that!

You guys quit bitching... we all no, Im the slowest turd around... Nice kill Joe347R6 It is believable... I think its funny though, cuz 300HP in my car should get me in the 11's with good tires and driving... But then again, not all cars can weigh 2300lbs...

 

[QUOTE=xphantomws6x]That's fine, you can call BS all you want. I just dont understand why it is difficult to imagine a modded mustang running LOW 13's?!? All that work and he was only able to put a half car on a WS6 ... why would anyone lie about that?

Did you read the part about "I let off the gas a couple of times" Later, he tried to respond to that by saying some about "Oh, I just did it real quick"

I'm not saying that a modded stang can't take down a stock (or even modded) WS6. It's just that this particular thread had as many holes as a slice of swiss cheese.

BTW, Phantom, I have never said to one of your threads

It's all about the presentation. Is it or is it ? Finally, "why would anyone lie about putting half a length on an LS1? Cause we're the s**t. That's why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Wow, that last post by DD was tough to read! I agree, though, look at my earlier posts...I never believed him.

 

Yeah, at first I was thinking the same thing ... but I do that all the time, you let off for a split second then slam it back down again ... it barely slows you down at all, same as if you were to quickly bark the tires.

Well honestly, if he HAS run mid 13's ... with 25rwhp less then what he currently has (which I do believe), I would assume that he would definately be at least a mid 13 flat now. I have seen plenty of LS1's run high 13's with shitty drivers, and this is on a perfectly prepped track, in decent conditions, etc. A road race leaves it even more up to driver ability. If the guy in the LS1 was just a decent, or even a plain bad driver .... or if his car was running slightly off ... or if he just couldn't get traction .... etc etc etc. There are plenty of reasons why a mid 13 second stang could beat an LS1 ... especially on the street. He just seems like a good guy, he isn't argueing, he isn't trolling like a lot of the stang guys do, and he has the attitude of "if you wanna call BS that's fine, I don't care" .... most people who act like that aren't lying.

Also, did we establish whether or not these numbers were on a Mustang dyno? 270rwhp on a stang dyno is pretty good.

I know. You know me, normally I would be up in the front of the BS calling ... but I just think this was more likely a true story.
.

 

Man, you guys are a tough crowd. I've had LS1 guys who know me and my car vouch for me and also posted NA stang times. I guess I'm just fighting a losing battle? Hell there is a 99 cobra at 3200lbs on slicks running 11.60 with 318rwhp.



You guys have inspired me to get to the track as soon as possible to prove 269rwhp can run at least a 13.3, and 300rwhp can run "consistant" 12s with a full weight stang. And after blowing out 4th gear when my wife still owned it, I no longer speed shift

 

You probably wouldn't even be in 11s... FWD sucks ***

 

Forget about FWD ... its a VW man ... it's built to go 60mph, TOPS.

If that thing ever saw 11 second trap speeds all you'd see would be pieces flying off past your head as you were driving down the track.

 

some of you guys need to get around and see what other cars are running.hate to say it but horsepower isnt the sole motivator for good et's.

actually joes car is slow considering the power its putting out.a 300rwhp gt should be good for at least mid 12's with a drag radial and about 108 to 109 traps.Joe practice driving that thing and get some good times before running the bottle!!!!!

couple examples of low hp and decenct times....

my car,stock mach 1 with drag radials.......12.97@106.56 w/a crummy 1.91 60
also at 3535 weight.about 280rwhp

my friends gt,weight taken out(3250)no cats,good mufflers,4.30's and drag radial.makes about 245rwhp,runs........13.01@105.45 w/a 1.86 60

friends mach,exhaust and 4.10 gear,k@n and drag radials.over 3600lbs and made 294rwhp ran a ........12.74@107.9 w/a 1.85 60ft

these are just slow car examples.i am not a huge fan of the 2v's but they are starting to come around.quite a few 11 second n/a'ed cars showing up now.

also on hp numbers,know of a few 11 second ls1's that only make about 330rwhp.