foxbody vs. ls1
09-12-2005, 12:31 AM
#41
QUOTE:Like I said good running, your not racing the right 5.0Ls, I gave you examples of my 1/8 mile in both my cars and its not like my LS1 is a dog, 12s on RSAs with only a lid and a catback is alot better than most LS1 guys see. On the back half the LS1 pulls away dramatically but its a good run to the first 1/8. I never said they were in the same league, I just said they are a good run stoplight to stoplight. Id appreciate it if you didnt put words in my mouth thank you.
I never said that you stated the 2 cars are in the same league, so don't put words in my mouth. I'm the one that said the cars aren't in the same league. They are nowhere close in terms of straightline performance. I don't know how short of a race you are talking about. If you mean just through 1st gear, then you could also say a stock honda civic would be a good race. Stock for stock a fox mustang and an LS1 are not even close. As I said before the LS1 is in a completely different league.
I never said that you stated the 2 cars are in the same league, so don't put words in my mouth. I'm the one that said the cars aren't in the same league. They are nowhere close in terms of straightline performance. I don't know how short of a race you are talking about. If you mean just through 1st gear, then you could also say a stock honda civic would be a good race. Stock for stock a fox mustang and an LS1 are not even close. As I said before the LS1 is in a completely different league.
09-12-2005, 11:09 AM
#43
On The Tree
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Moline, IL
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
I never said that you stated the 2 cars are in the same league, so don't put words in my mouth. I'm the one that said the cars aren't in the same league. They are nowhere close in terms of straightline performance. I don't know how short of a race you are talking about. If you mean just through 1st gear, then you could also say a stock honda civic would be a good race. Stock for stock a fox mustang and an LS1 are not even close. As I said before the LS1 is in a completely different league.
Why did you feel the need to say the two cars werent in the same league if you didnt feel that I inferred it.
No I didnt mean through 1st gear, I believe I said 1/8 mile, if your not familiar with the 1/8 mile the distance in gears in an LS1 F-body is just barely touching 3rd. I gave you examples of my cars, unlike you I happen to own both, its not some friends car that might of had some sneaky mods, but my car which I was fully aware of the modifications present. Like I said through the 1/8 they were a good run. Are you calling me a liar?
And I happen to own a Civic as well, its pretty decisive even in 1st gear between the Civic vs Camaro or Civic vs Mustang. And yes I have raced them for the hell of it.
09-12-2005, 11:14 AM
#44
On The Tree
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Moline, IL
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cam99
I can't honestly believe a stock fox Mustang is going to hang anywhere close to a stock LS1. Modded fox is another story , but stock for stock , no way.
09-12-2005, 01:15 PM
#45
QUOTE: Why did you feel the need to say the two cars werent in the same league if you didn't feel that I inferred it.
Simple answer. Because I felt like it. It had nothing to do with your opinion.
I won't change your mind, and you won't change mine. I completely disagree with you.
Simple answer. Because I felt like it. It had nothing to do with your opinion.
I won't change your mind, and you won't change mine. I completely disagree with you.
Last edited by Redneck Z; 09-12-2005 at 04:20 PM.
09-12-2005, 04:08 PM
#46
TECH Addict
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Garden City, KS
Posts: 2,529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a stock 5.0 with many bolt ons and nitrous and would get smoked by LS1's and even some fast LT1's. That is why I now own a LT1. It seemed like no matter what I would do that 5.0 never got any faster. I lost all hope when my friends built 331 93 GT weighing it at 2900lbs got beat by a stock 98 Z with nitrous and a few other bolt ones. And when I saw a few other I mean a very minimal amount.
Yes, a modded Fox can keep up with LS1's, but takes a lot less to get a LS1 to run what a heavily modded fox will. Simply put.
Yes, a modded Fox can keep up with LS1's, but takes a lot less to get a LS1 to run what a heavily modded fox will. Simply put.
09-12-2005, 04:53 PM
#51
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
Stock??? Also, what happened to the exhaust you had in a previous post?
09-12-2005, 05:29 PM
#52
Notch Back Coupe
Originally Posted by Ghostriderr
My 5.0 was really fast for its time but my LS1 makes it look slow. The lighter weight of some of the mustangs w/ manuals and mild bolt-ons vs. the relatively heavy F-bods with autos gives the impression of a more responsive, faster car, at low speeds. Especially compared with the LT1s and 3rd gen rides most people are holding them up too. But they just aren't equal to the broad power of the LS1 or LT1s that have been worked.
My little brother 5.0 LX notch back, bored .030, LTubes, open exhaust, F-cam, Edelbrock intake, 4.10, 5 spd, GT40 (iron) heads, with 9.5:1 CR (street tires) pulled really well against me through 2nd gear (I didn't power shift or launch aggressively) and we were even. I went to 3rd and put 3 cars on him before we let out. 5.0's need a good intake system, modern heads (alum. AFR, Trick Flow), proper CR, cam, tuning, and exhaust. Most 5.0 guys that aren't informed think that a GT40 head/intake is still the greatest technology they can buy. Just saw a '93 Cobra with a 347 and Holley Systemax Head/intake. Probably still not as fast as a stock M6 Z28 but it was faster than all of the other cars the guys says he has owned.
My little brother 5.0 LX notch back, bored .030, LTubes, open exhaust, F-cam, Edelbrock intake, 4.10, 5 spd, GT40 (iron) heads, with 9.5:1 CR (street tires) pulled really well against me through 2nd gear (I didn't power shift or launch aggressively) and we were even. I went to 3rd and put 3 cars on him before we let out. 5.0's need a good intake system, modern heads (alum. AFR, Trick Flow), proper CR, cam, tuning, and exhaust. Most 5.0 guys that aren't informed think that a GT40 head/intake is still the greatest technology they can buy. Just saw a '93 Cobra with a 347 and Holley Systemax Head/intake. Probably still not as fast as a stock M6 Z28 but it was faster than all of the other cars the guys says he has owned.
09-13-2005, 12:30 AM
#53
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bessemer City NC
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fast89stang
13.26 in my stock fox, with pullies and exhaust. Street tires. 178,000 miles. Weighed in at 3360 w/ driver. Not light.
Maybe you're joshin' us though
09-13-2005, 12:53 AM
#54
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bessemer City NC
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sukkoi19
Not really, the recipe for 12s in a Fox back in the say was a gear, short-belt and timing with a slick. Granted its a slick but you could probably pull off a low mid 13 with a drag radial.
Not really? I said stock gear; slicks aren't street legal and neither is bypassing smog equipment. 
My point was just that a 302 w/off shelf H/C/I will make around 275-310rwhp while staying emissions legal. Granted, they are usually 2-400lbs. lighter than an fbody, but they have less gear(2.73 5spd. & 3.27 auto. I believe). I would expect a 290rwhp h/c/i fox and 300rwhp stock fbody to run about the same times given the stipulations above.(slight advantage to fox)
09-13-2005, 01:25 AM
#55
QUOTE: And with an AOD?....That is the best time I have ever heard of. ~185rwhp(aod)--3360lbs--13.26......simply amazing!! To put that in perspective, a 300+rwhp fbody at about the same weight with better gearing runs similar times.
Maybe you're joshin' us though
If all you did was read the LS1tech streetracing forum, you'd think LS1's were turds. I mean.....where is that extra 115 rwhp going. Guess I should sell the T/A and buy a mustang.
Maybe you're joshin' us though
If all you did was read the LS1tech streetracing forum, you'd think LS1's were turds. I mean.....where is that extra 115 rwhp going.
Guess I should sell the T/A and buy a mustang.
09-13-2005, 07:47 AM
#56
Originally Posted by mattkimsey
And with an AOD?....That is the best time I have ever heard of. ~185rwhp(aod)--3360lbs--13.26......simply amazing!! To put that in perspective, a 300+rwhp fbody at about the same weight with better gearing runs similar times.
Maybe you're joshin' us though
Maybe you're joshin' us though
09-13-2005, 08:14 AM
#57
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by fast89stang
no, the 13.26 was my old car with a 5 speed. The 8.99 was with the AOD car.I am guessing the AOD car to run low 14s to high 13s, which is still respectable for a crappy AOD car.I have not seen any AODs around here run times like that mostly stock(3.73s, CAI, exhaust, pullies) NO SHIFT KIT, just manual shifting.
Originally Posted by fast89stang
13.26 in my stock fox, with pullies and exhaust. Street tires. 178,000 miles. Weighed in at 3360 w/ driver. Not light.
Why did a 5 speed Fox weigh 3360lb?
Also you state this:
Originally Posted by fast89stang
How do you explain my 190,000 mile car w/ 3.27 gears and just pullies and cold air running 9.08 with a aod? Thats better than some LS1 times.
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
Stock??? Also, what happened to the exhaust you had in a previous post? Ok you're right, you just proved it. Stock for stock LS1's are equal to stock fox's. 
I guess LS1's just don't make good use of their 100+ extra rwhp.
I guess LS1's just don't make good use of their 100+ extra rwhp.
Originally Posted by fast89stang
except for the cold air and pullies. I couldnt believe it either. My friends thought it was awesome for a AOD car , usually they are slow as christmas. Some say its had work somewhere, but I dont see it anywhere.
Originally Posted by fast89stang
Still had stock headers and all in that post, just flowmaster mufflers, surely they didnt help that much. Afterwards I installed equal lengths and dumps, with 3.73s and only went 8.99, due to tire height and gear selection.
I'm not calling BS on you. But you certainly arn't helping yourself here. As your sotry keeps changing all the while, then suddenly it was a different car you where referring too.
If you have a 2nd hand car that seems to be WAY faster than it should be then its probably had something done to it, whether you like it or not.
As no matter how much rubbish is passed around, there is no way that physics can be defeated.
In additon on the Mustang sites it seems pretty excepted that a 99-04 4.6 Stang is faster than a 5.0 Stang, stock for stock. Yet it is also excepted that the 4.6's are slower than the LS1 Fbody's, stock for stock.
09-13-2005, 09:22 AM
#58
Stock For Stock
Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton
**continuity break**
aprt from the fact that pulley and exhaust is no longer STOCK!!
Why did a 5 speed Fox weigh 3360lb?
Also you state this:
To which this is asked:
So you answer:
then add this:
so if it had a flowmaster then the previous post listing the mods on your apparently STOCK car where, shall we say inaccurate?
I'm not calling BS on you. But you certainly arn't helping yourself here. As your sotry keeps changing all the while, then suddenly it was a different car you where referring too.
If you have a 2nd hand car that seems to be WAY faster than it should be then its probably had something done to it, whether you like it or not.
As no matter how much rubbish is passed around, there is no way that physics can be defeated.
In additon on the Mustang sites it seems pretty excepted that a 99-04 4.6 Stang is faster than a 5.0 Stang, stock for stock. Yet it is also excepted that the 4.6's are slower than the LS1 Fbody's, stock for stock.
aprt from the fact that pulley and exhaust is no longer STOCK!!
Why did a 5 speed Fox weigh 3360lb?
Also you state this:
To which this is asked:
So you answer:
then add this:
so if it had a flowmaster then the previous post listing the mods on your apparently STOCK car where, shall we say inaccurate?
I'm not calling BS on you. But you certainly arn't helping yourself here. As your sotry keeps changing all the while, then suddenly it was a different car you where referring too.
If you have a 2nd hand car that seems to be WAY faster than it should be then its probably had something done to it, whether you like it or not.
As no matter how much rubbish is passed around, there is no way that physics can be defeated.
In additon on the Mustang sites it seems pretty excepted that a 99-04 4.6 Stang is faster than a 5.0 Stang, stock for stock. Yet it is also excepted that the 4.6's are slower than the LS1 Fbody's, stock for stock.
09-13-2005, 09:43 AM
#59
YOURE RIGHT, THE MORE CUBES OF THE ls1 WOULD PREVAIL. I dont know why my 89 weighed 3360, but it was weighed w/ driver and thats what it weighed, so oh well. I have had 2 cars, one was the 89 5 speed, the other is my 90 model AOD....the aod car only has CAI, exhaust and now headers. And pullies. W/ just CAI and exhaust it went 9.08 with stock gear, added 3.73 and equal lengths and it went 8.99 due to a short tire shifting to 3rd. The 5 speed car went 8.52 with CAI, 3.55s, stock headers, pullies, otherwise the engine was stock w/ 178,000 miles on it at that time. I am sure the AOD car would weigh more that 3360 w./ me, since the AOD is heavy as hell. No way these cars are in the same class. I have seen many 99-04s that my 89 or my 90 model could outrun easily. Most of the 99-04s around here arent impressive at all. maybe 8.9s to 9.3s?? Best I have seen was 8.4s with a few mods.
09-13-2005, 10:25 AM
#60
Stock for stock the LS1 would kill the stang. But it would happen at 50mph + Point in case was my old LT1 vs. my friends mild bolt-on 5.0 we were close to =, with me pulling a foot or two every 3 seconds or so. An LS1 WALKED AWAY FROM ME when we hit 50 (0-XXmph race) but was at my door 0-50, then it WALKED, so i must say, yes it would beat the 5.0, but only kill it after about 50 mph or so, then it would be busses.
STOCK FOR STOCK
STOCK FOR STOCK