2002 Camaro SS vs 2011 Mustang
#62
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Okay the Stang I raced was a 6-speed with 4.10s. I texted him again to see what everything he has had done to it.
2011 Mustang
-6-speed w/ 4.10s
-Air raid CAI
- 93 octane race tune
- bigger throttle body
If u any of u guys remember the post of when i beat that 2008 GT bullit, that same mustang raced this 2011 stang. the GT beat it 6 times by about half a car length each time. So i am trying to understand how i beat the GT by 3 lengths, other then him under-shifting into 4th. Plus while talking to the GT guy we were trying to figure out why i loss so bad, and he says that the 2011 doesnt make anywhere close to 335 like u all said. He was guessing around 325. And I have no real clue how much horse i make other then looking up the GM specs for the 2002 Camaro SS, so im guessing i make less then what has been posted. and apparenltly i have 3.23 gears. And the flowmaster exhaust is what my dad put on it like 3 weeks after he got it from the dealership back in 02'. idk he likes it lol.
anyway this kid must be bull shitting me with his calculations. so... thoughts?
Heres a video of my car going about 0-60. I didnt floor but it push it a bit hard. Video of the Speed and RPMs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRAzA...ature=youtu.be
2011 Mustang
-6-speed w/ 4.10s
-Air raid CAI
- 93 octane race tune
- bigger throttle body
If u any of u guys remember the post of when i beat that 2008 GT bullit, that same mustang raced this 2011 stang. the GT beat it 6 times by about half a car length each time. So i am trying to understand how i beat the GT by 3 lengths, other then him under-shifting into 4th. Plus while talking to the GT guy we were trying to figure out why i loss so bad, and he says that the 2011 doesnt make anywhere close to 335 like u all said. He was guessing around 325. And I have no real clue how much horse i make other then looking up the GM specs for the 2002 Camaro SS, so im guessing i make less then what has been posted. and apparenltly i have 3.23 gears. And the flowmaster exhaust is what my dad put on it like 3 weeks after he got it from the dealership back in 02'. idk he likes it lol.
anyway this kid must be bull shitting me with his calculations. so... thoughts?
Heres a video of my car going about 0-60. I didnt floor but it push it a bit hard. Video of the Speed and RPMs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRAzA...ature=youtu.be
Last edited by Garret-SS; 12-15-2013 at 08:07 PM.
#64
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
#65
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I went 13.78 @ 102 stock with 2.73s. With 3.73s, tune, jlt cai, o/r xpipe, tire I went 13.30 @ 105. 12.7 with full exhaust and ported tb. Pointless point but just saying.
#66
Teching In
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Okay the Stang I raced was a 6-speed with 4.10s. I texted him again to see what everything he has had done to it.
2011 Mustang
-6-speed w/ 4.10s
-Air raid CAI
- 93 octane race tune
- bigger throttle body
If u any of u guys remember the post of when i beat that 2008 GT bullit, that same mustang raced this 2011 stang. the GT beat it 6 times by about half a car length each time. So i am trying to understand how i beat the GT by 3 lengths, other then him under-shifting into 4th. Plus while talking to the GT guy we were trying to figure out why i loss so bad, and he says that the 2011 doesnt make anywhere close to 335 like u all said. He was guessing around 325. And I have no real clue how much horse i make other then looking up the GM specs for the 2002 Camaro SS, so im guessing i make less then what has been posted. and apparenltly i have 3.23 gears. And the flowmaster exhaust is what my dad put on it like 3 weeks after he got it from the dealership back in 02'. idk he likes it lol.
anyway this kid must be bull shitting me with his calculations. so... thoughts?
Heres a video of my car going about 0-60. I didnt floor but it push it a bit hard. Video of the Speed and RPMs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRAzA...ature=youtu.be
2011 Mustang
-6-speed w/ 4.10s
-Air raid CAI
- 93 octane race tune
- bigger throttle body
If u any of u guys remember the post of when i beat that 2008 GT bullit, that same mustang raced this 2011 stang. the GT beat it 6 times by about half a car length each time. So i am trying to understand how i beat the GT by 3 lengths, other then him under-shifting into 4th. Plus while talking to the GT guy we were trying to figure out why i loss so bad, and he says that the 2011 doesnt make anywhere close to 335 like u all said. He was guessing around 325. And I have no real clue how much horse i make other then looking up the GM specs for the 2002 Camaro SS, so im guessing i make less then what has been posted. and apparenltly i have 3.23 gears. And the flowmaster exhaust is what my dad put on it like 3 weeks after he got it from the dealership back in 02'. idk he likes it lol.
anyway this kid must be bull shitting me with his calculations. so... thoughts?
Heres a video of my car going about 0-60. I didnt floor but it push it a bit hard. Video of the Speed and RPMs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRAzA...ature=youtu.be
The only thing I could say is that his gears might have jumped him out to a good lead on the initial hit and he ended up holding it until you guys shut down. If you were to run it out longer, eventually you would have caught him.
With you having an Auto, there is also a delay for you. This, in conjunction with his gears and 6-speed gave him the jump and you ended up playing catch-up.
#73
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Agreed, but without any track numbers from the OP all we can use is what either car would run at sea level.
#74
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So your saying that 3:73 gears with a 3600 stall would do nothing for the car? I highly disagree with you just from my personal experience alone. With my set up and most my power starting around 3500 rpm's my gears and stall (3600 btw) it fell's very different! Hell when I just had headers, lid, full exhaust done my trans blew and then I had it rebuilt with a 3600 stall put in and even the guy who runs the Sun shine drag strip down in Tampa Fl even said it would run a lot better and it did. Also you saying "Again wrong" regarding to my other statement what part of that is wrong do explain. Because the 60E trans is a garbage trans so thats not wrong, If your reffering to me saying a 4000 stall and 4:10 gears is a good match up then I can see that being wrong because IDK on that but i could see how that would be a better match up than a 3600 stall with 4:10 gears and depending on what kinda stall he puts in should depend where he wants his power band to start. Thats why after I put a 3600 stall in mine I made sure to have good power around 3500 to 3600 rpm's. So just saying wrong is pointless do explain as to why you think im wrong.
#76
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Im 24 man i just dont like how someone says im wrong and thats it if im wrong on something then say why so I know not to give bad info to the next guy, figured that was common sense on here guess not. Ive had plenty of people tell me to use 3:73 gears with my 3600 stall so I bought them. Also I had a couple of tuners tell me that as well, that way it can be more street friendly. like I said I bought the stall first so I built the car *** backwards. truth be told I should of built the car like this (IMO that is) suspension, rear end, transmission, then motor/engine (what ever you prefer). Like I said if im wrong then explain why im wrong considering you have to be so politically correct on here give me facts as to why im wrong