Stock 02 Z28 vs Modded 2v
09-30-2013, 01:50 AM
#321
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Omaha
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 166K mile 97 Cobra ran a 14.3@99 with track temps over 100 and terrible street tires. out them needing mods to run 13's.Had a midpipe and some mufflers. Cooler weather and better tires and it would have easily been in the high 13's.
Hell, motorweek tested a 98 Cobra with a 13.7@104.
Hell, motorweek tested a 98 Cobra with a 13.7@104.
09-30-2013, 06:14 AM
#322
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NewHampshire
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before I went ls I had a lt1 a4 stock down to the paper air filter, for a short period. And a guy I worked with got a 97 cobra m5. He had full exhaust and possibly a cai. He said he would say he would blow my doors off. So we raced and it went down in history his cobra was not faster than my formula at any speed. And my formula was possibly a low 14 with yhe tire I had
09-30-2013, 12:31 PM
#326
2V's are like the 305's (Which I know has been debated on here recently) not sure why people argue about which motor sucks the least...
They shouldn't be defended for a performance platform......Yes they can go fast.......But so can anything with enough money...
They shouldn't be defended for a performance platform......Yes they can go fast.......But so can anything with enough money...
09-30-2013, 02:11 PM
#327
This. No point in defending either, they both don't belong in a performance build.
09-30-2013, 02:17 PM
#328
11 Second Club
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-Mark
09-30-2013, 06:41 PM
#329
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09-30-2013, 06:55 PM
#330
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Well unless the length of a second has changed.....alot. But it is a 2v. And according to you they're as fast as cobra's.
09-30-2013, 06:59 PM
#331
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"According to me?" How about, "according to factual information that has been gathered in the 14+ years since the cars were released?" Both typically run low 14s and are capable of running high 13s stock. Both trap ~100mph, with the Cobra typically having 1-3mph on the 2V.
09-30-2013, 07:52 PM
#333
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good-running LT1 isn't exactly a slow car... even automatics could crack 13s on a good day. IIRC, the quickest stock "regular" LT1 hit a 13.6 and the '96-'97 SS was 13.3. Quickest 2V was a 13.7 (tons of practice and great DA). So the LT1 was realistically a length or three in front of a 2V, ceteris paribus. But they were close enough to make it interesting if there were good drivers involved. I definitely would agree that (except from a dead stop) the LT1s powerband was more forgiving than the 2Vs, so an average driver will more than likely perform better in the LT1.
09-30-2013, 07:56 PM
#334
A good-running LT1 isn't exactly a slow car... even automatics could crack 13s on a good day. IIRC, the quickest stock "regular" LT1 hit a 13.6 and the '96-'97 SS was 13.3. Quickest 2V was a 13.7 (tons of practice and great DA). So the LT1 was realistically a length or three in front of a 2V, ceteris paribus. But they were close enough to make it interesting if there were good drivers involved. I definitely would agree that (except from a dead stop) the LT1s powerband was more forgiving than the 2Vs, so an average driver will more than likely perform better in the LT1.
09-30-2013, 09:08 PM
#337
11 Second Club
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will say my wife's 01 Z28 (A4) stock went 13.72 at 103 with her driving. Her best pass was 12.97@108 with just a lid, MAF, cutout, and 3.42's. Sold it for 10,500 w/ 42k miles on it....had a baby coming....now she drives a 5.3L silverado crew cab. lol.
96-98 vs an LS1...yes I will say the LS is faster by a lot.
mach 1's with better heads vs LS1... much closer race..equal drivers..LS would win.
But thats the beauty of it, not everyone drives the same. Thats why they play football on Sunday's....upsets are possible.
09-30-2013, 09:10 PM
#338
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a reason few people pick a 2V if they are looking to build something faster than high 11s/low 12s. Most people that buy them do so because they are cheap, plentiful (lots of selection), fairly reliable, relatively quick, and they sound awesome.
09-30-2013, 09:27 PM
#340
A good-running LT1 isn't exactly a slow car... even automatics could crack 13s on a good day. IIRC, the quickest stock "regular" LT1 hit a 13.6 and the '96-'97 SS was 13.3. Quickest 2V was a 13.7 (tons of practice and great DA). So the LT1 was realistically a length or three in front of a 2V, ceteris paribus. But they were close enough to make it interesting if there were good drivers involved. I definitely would agree that (except from a dead stop) the LT1s powerband was more forgiving than the 2Vs, so an average driver will more than likely perform better in the LT1.
Slow...just not as slow as a 2V
.