96 cobra vs 95 trans am
07-07-2017, 11:46 AM
#62
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Not really the same **** at all unless you mean that they both didn't use forged rods/pistons. The 99 cobra did have a recall due to less power.
They were coming in at 265-270hp, not the 320 hp that was claimed. The recall consisted of a new lower intake, new catback, and computer re-flash. After the recalls, people were reporting 290hp, which is still shy of the a-advertised 320. Long tubes and midpipe was needed to finally bring them to 320.
Back then it didn't matter though, because I had the 99GT and saved myself 10 grand over getting the recalled Cobra. Bolt on's, tires, and a 100 shot and I was running 11.7's all day on that weak *** 2v. Cobra recall or not...stock 99 4th gens, I was pulling bus lengths on both of them. No problems until I ran into modified 99 4th gens.
Ford having the 96-98 GT's putting out 220 hp was a joke. LT1's ate those cars alive. It wasn't until 03 that Ford finally got it half way right.
They were coming in at 265-270hp, not the 320 hp that was claimed. The recall consisted of a new lower intake, new catback, and computer re-flash. After the recalls, people were reporting 290hp, which is still shy of the a-advertised 320. Long tubes and midpipe was needed to finally bring them to 320.
Back then it didn't matter though, because I had the 99GT and saved myself 10 grand over getting the recalled Cobra. Bolt on's, tires, and a 100 shot and I was running 11.7's all day on that weak *** 2v. Cobra recall or not...stock 99 4th gens, I was pulling bus lengths on both of them. No problems until I ran into modified 99 4th gens.
Ford having the 96-98 GT's putting out 220 hp was a joke. LT1's ate those cars alive. It wasn't until 03 that Ford finally got it half way right.
Gonna have a hard time making me believe that they dyno'd 290 after the fix. Hell they would dyno more than mach 1's did at that rate.
07-07-2017, 01:25 PM
#67
They are close enough to the same to be the same. Maybe 10whp difference. Some say that's due to a improvement in the lower intake.
99 cars had irs....the other dohc 4.suck cars didn't. Again....not anything goin on there to make this drastic difference. Even after the "fix" 99 cars were turds.
Bawlt-awns are bawlt-awns nate. Either car is faster with or w/o bawlt-awns than what you have going on.
99 cars had irs....the other dohc 4.suck cars didn't. Again....not anything goin on there to make this drastic difference. Even after the "fix" 99 cars were turds.
Bawlt-awns are bawlt-awns nate. Either car is faster with or w/o bawlt-awns than what you have going on.
The Mach 1 was the best version of the C headed motor and it's a significant difference both in peak numbers and in overall numbers. We are talking 25lbs-ft more torque at the same RPM as the old B headed motors.
The B heads were a bad design from the factory, they went big and it cost them port velocity, hence that damned IMRC.
07-07-2017, 06:50 PM
#72
TECH Enthusiast
07-07-2017, 06:55 PM
#73
07-07-2017, 06:56 PM
#74
TECH Enthusiast
07-07-2017, 07:12 PM
#75
TECH Enthusiast
A properly tuned 96-86 cobro on boost can handle 450-500 rwhp. I mean properly tune. Soft timing and 11:1 AFR.
Are you referencing a termi piston struggling past 450 rwhp? I'm sure you mean the hyperpathetic 96-98 piston. I can guarantee you I can tune a cast hypereutectic piston to live at 16 psi, and do it for years. I did. All of the stock 2v pistons i removed from the first turbo engine looked like new. That is 16 psi of boost and 7000 rpms. Small turbo. He rods are a problem. I used h beams. If I had a forged crank in that engine, I would still be using them now.
07-07-2017, 07:38 PM
#76
10 Second Club
07-07-2017, 07:53 PM
#77
TECH Enthusiast
Just because you suck driving your cobro doesn't mean everyone does lol
And you know I'm a realist.
It it can't, I would say so lol. It can't.
At my home track in Clarksville TN, a stock mach runs about 8.5-8.6. full Bolton with a tire is 8.2.
Stock-to the paper filter 94 Z28 runs 8.9 at that track. Auto 94 ws6 a 9.17.
Just some perspective.
Your cobro completely stock 8.9 at that track with a good driver. A basic roush n/a 2007 mustang runs 8.6 at that track. My car with a stock untunned 5.4 3v ran 8.5.
Basic lid/catback Ls1 3.42 M6 runs 8.4 at that track.
A stock 2.73 Ls1 runs 9.0 at that track.
And you know I'm a realist.
It it can't, I would say so lol. It can't.
At my home track in Clarksville TN, a stock mach runs about 8.5-8.6. full Bolton with a tire is 8.2.
Stock-to the paper filter 94 Z28 runs 8.9 at that track. Auto 94 ws6 a 9.17.
Just some perspective.
Your cobro completely stock 8.9 at that track with a good driver. A basic roush n/a 2007 mustang runs 8.6 at that track. My car with a stock untunned 5.4 3v ran 8.5.
Basic lid/catback Ls1 3.42 M6 runs 8.4 at that track.
A stock 2.73 Ls1 runs 9.0 at that track.
Last edited by assasinator; 07-07-2017 at 08:03 PM.
07-07-2017, 08:59 PM
#78
Cruise around in it for a month or so, roast some tires, hit the drag strip once and then sell it.
Evan Smith ran a 13.1@105 with a 2.0 60 foot, then there was a 13.19@106.7.
http://www.mustangandfords.com/car-r...ng-comparison/
So yeah, it's fairly well documented that those cars were capable of 12's under the right conditions.
Evan Smith ran a 13.1@105 with a 2.0 60 foot, then there was a 13.19@106.7.
http://www.mustangandfords.com/car-r...ng-comparison/
So yeah, it's fairly well documented that those cars were capable of 12's under the right conditions.
07-07-2017, 09:44 PM
#79
10 Second Club
Cruise around in it for a month or so, roast some tires, hit the drag strip once and then sell it.
Evan Smith ran a 13.1@105 with a 2.0 60 foot, then there was a 13.19@106.7.
http://www.mustangandfords.com/car-r...ng-comparison/
So yeah, it's fairly well documented that those cars were capable of 12's under the right conditions.
Evan Smith ran a 13.1@105 with a 2.0 60 foot, then there was a 13.19@106.7.
http://www.mustangandfords.com/car-r...ng-comparison/
So yeah, it's fairly well documented that those cars were capable of 12's under the right conditions.
07-07-2017, 09:45 PM
#80
10 Second Club
Just because you suck driving your cobro doesn't mean everyone does lol
And you know I'm a realist.
It it can't, I would say so lol. It can't.
At my home track in Clarksville TN, a stock mach runs about 8.5-8.6. full Bolton with a tire is 8.2.
Stock-to the paper filter 94 Z28 runs 8.9 at that track. Auto 94 ws6 a 9.17.
Just some perspective.
Your cobro completely stock 8.9 at that track with a good driver. A basic roush n/a 2007 mustang runs 8.6 at that track. My car with a stock untunned 5.4 3v ran 8.5.
Basic lid/catback Ls1 3.42 M6 runs 8.4 at that track.
A stock 2.73 Ls1 runs 9.0 at that track.
And you know I'm a realist.
It it can't, I would say so lol. It can't.
At my home track in Clarksville TN, a stock mach runs about 8.5-8.6. full Bolton with a tire is 8.2.
Stock-to the paper filter 94 Z28 runs 8.9 at that track. Auto 94 ws6 a 9.17.
Just some perspective.
Your cobro completely stock 8.9 at that track with a good driver. A basic roush n/a 2007 mustang runs 8.6 at that track. My car with a stock untunned 5.4 3v ran 8.5.
Basic lid/catback Ls1 3.42 M6 runs 8.4 at that track.
A stock 2.73 Ls1 runs 9.0 at that track.
You ford guys are delusional about the NA 4.6's. It's borderline cultish