Stock '01 WS6 vs Stock 04' Mach1
08-06-2006, 03:39 PM
#121
Staging Lane
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Denom
Yeah, I gotta agree with that assessment. Alot of you Mach1 owners know that the LS1 has alot more power potential. I mean you add a cam, cold air intake, full exhaust (Long Tubes, X Pipe, etc..), throttle body, and most LS1's will see close to 400whp. From what i've seen on Mach1 registry your cars put down like 330-340rwhp. This is just what i've seen.
Knowing that you guys have the superior suspension, you work even more on it. I've seen Mach1 owners numbers on boards, and it's all in their 60'. Some are as low as 1.4 sec. 60'. You guys essentially make a full on drag suspension car, put in a different tranny (Typically, as your cogs blow out from what i've read), slap in some 4.56 gearing, 33 spline axles, and some huge slicks, and whoila, that 300rwhp stang is running low 12's. Nevermind that he has weight reduction, launches his car at 6K rpms, cause it only has 300rwhp. Come on now. That's alot of money invested in the suspension too. Doesn't matter how much you spend on suspension mods, but it does for power mods???????!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not trying to flame, i'm just analyzing the whp versus suspension money allocation. IMHO the car's are equal 1/4 mile wise stock. Don't use the whole whp for a rationale behind why the Mach1 puts its power down better, when you have a full on drag suspension.
Knowing that you guys have the superior suspension, you work even more on it. I've seen Mach1 owners numbers on boards, and it's all in their 60'. Some are as low as 1.4 sec. 60'. You guys essentially make a full on drag suspension car, put in a different tranny (Typically, as your cogs blow out from what i've read), slap in some 4.56 gearing, 33 spline axles, and some huge slicks, and whoila, that 300rwhp stang is running low 12's. Nevermind that he has weight reduction, launches his car at 6K rpms, cause it only has 300rwhp. Come on now. That's alot of money invested in the suspension too. Doesn't matter how much you spend on suspension mods, but it does for power mods???????!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not trying to flame, i'm just analyzing the whp versus suspension money allocation. IMHO the car's are equal 1/4 mile wise stock. Don't use the whole whp for a rationale behind why the Mach1 puts its power down better, when you have a full on drag suspension.
That's an interesting - if somewhat distorted - assessment.
I must say though, drag racing in general is "All in the 60' "
The same goes for any car drag racing - if it doesn't optimize it's 60' time, it's not going to run to it's full potential - PERIOD.
As far as the transmission comment you made, very few Mach 1's to my knowledge run aftermarket transmissions. I ran my stock tranny for almost 3 years - beating on it @ the track 4- 8 times a month during racing season - and it was quite tough.
When I finally did damage the 3rd gear synchro at the end of last season, I put a Tremec TKO in it because the stock tranny is proprietary & has close to ZERO aftermarket parts available for it.
It was actually cheaper to put a brand-new TKO in my Mach than to get a new factory replacement tranny.
I also stepped-up to an SFI bellhousing (which many tracks require & is a great safety item to have), which I can't even get for my factory tranny.
The other thing you mentioned was "33 spline axles & huge slicks" Since when are 26" X 10" slicks huge???
That's a pretty common tire size for late-model Mustangs, F-Bodies, Etc,...
There's also only a few guys running 33-spline axles, but since the parts are the same $$$ as 31-spline stuff (and a heck of a lot stronger) why do you even make a point to mention it? F-Body guys use 31 & 33-spline rear-end parts too BTW.
We simply put our money where we get the best return for what we spend.
As a result, I spent $$$ on suspension, chassis stiffening & optimizing the power I can make with bolt-ons.
I mean really - why would I spend ~ $1500 on (4) new camshafts to run the same ET (or only marginally faster) because I can't put the power to the ground?
(I'm personally not interested in big trap speeds with a high ET.)
This approach is a proven drag-racing formula - work on chassis & suspension 1st, then add power and you'll actually be able to use it efficiently.
I'd personally rather run 11.5's with 335 rwhp than run 12.5's with 400+ rwhp...
08-06-2006, 04:15 PM
#122
12 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sugarland Texas
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
some people like drag racing, some people like roll racing. But more often then not it seems like the guys who's cars are set-up better for freeway runs get draged into racing the cars set-up for the strip from a dig. 99% of my runs are from a roll, so id rather have a 12 second 117mph car then a 11 second 113-114mph car, some feel the exact opposite.
08-06-2006, 04:28 PM
#123
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: West Pembroke Pines,Fl
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sprayed1998
some people like drag racing, some people like roll racing. But more often then not it seems like the guys who's cars are set-up better for freeway runs get draged into racing the cars set-up for the strip from a dig. 99% of my runs are from a roll, so id rather have a 12 second 117mph car then a 11 second 113-114mph car, some feel the exact opposite.
08-06-2006, 07:30 PM
#124
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sprayed1998
some people like drag racing, some people like roll racing. But more often then not it seems like the guys who's cars are set-up better for freeway runs get draged into racing the cars set-up for the strip from a dig. 99% of my runs are from a roll, so id rather have a 12 second 117mph car then a 11 second 113-114mph car, some feel the exact opposite.
You mean some are into legal racing and some are into unsafe illegal racing......got it.
08-06-2006, 08:19 PM
#126
Originally Posted by Angus66
That's an interesting - if somewhat distorted - assessment.
I must say though, drag racing in general is "All in the 60' "
The same goes for any car drag racing - if it doesn't optimize it's 60' time, it's not going to run to it's full potential - PERIOD.
As far as the transmission comment you made, very few Mach 1's to my knowledge run aftermarket transmissions. I ran my stock tranny for almost 3 years - beating on it @ the track 4- 8 times a month during racing season - and it was quite tough.
When I finally did damage the 3rd gear synchro at the end of last season, I put a Tremec TKO in it because the stock tranny is proprietary & has close to ZERO aftermarket parts available for it.
It was actually cheaper to put a brand-new TKO in my Mach than to get a new factory replacement tranny.
I also stepped-up to an SFI bellhousing (which many tracks require & is a great safety item to have), which I can't even get for my factory tranny.
The other thing you mentioned was "33 spline axles & huge slicks" Since when are 26" X 10" slicks huge???
That's a pretty common tire size for late-model Mustangs, F-Bodies, Etc,...
There's also only a few guys running 33-spline axles, but since the parts are the same $$$ as 31-spline stuff (and a heck of a lot stronger) why do you even make a point to mention it? F-Body guys use 31 & 33-spline rear-end parts too BTW.
We simply put our money where we get the best return for what we spend.
As a result, I spent $$$ on suspension, chassis stiffening & optimizing the power I can make with bolt-ons.
I mean really - why would I spend ~ $1500 on (4) new camshafts to run the same ET (or only marginally faster) because I can't put the power to the ground?
(I'm personally not interested in big trap speeds with a high ET.)
This approach is a proven drag-racing formula - work on chassis & suspension 1st, then add power and you'll actually be able to use it efficiently.
I'd personally rather run 11.5's with 335 rwhp than run 12.5's with 400+ rwhp...
I must say though, drag racing in general is "All in the 60' "
The same goes for any car drag racing - if it doesn't optimize it's 60' time, it's not going to run to it's full potential - PERIOD.
As far as the transmission comment you made, very few Mach 1's to my knowledge run aftermarket transmissions. I ran my stock tranny for almost 3 years - beating on it @ the track 4- 8 times a month during racing season - and it was quite tough.
When I finally did damage the 3rd gear synchro at the end of last season, I put a Tremec TKO in it because the stock tranny is proprietary & has close to ZERO aftermarket parts available for it.
It was actually cheaper to put a brand-new TKO in my Mach than to get a new factory replacement tranny.
I also stepped-up to an SFI bellhousing (which many tracks require & is a great safety item to have), which I can't even get for my factory tranny.
The other thing you mentioned was "33 spline axles & huge slicks" Since when are 26" X 10" slicks huge???
That's a pretty common tire size for late-model Mustangs, F-Bodies, Etc,...
There's also only a few guys running 33-spline axles, but since the parts are the same $$$ as 31-spline stuff (and a heck of a lot stronger) why do you even make a point to mention it? F-Body guys use 31 & 33-spline rear-end parts too BTW.
We simply put our money where we get the best return for what we spend.
As a result, I spent $$$ on suspension, chassis stiffening & optimizing the power I can make with bolt-ons.
I mean really - why would I spend ~ $1500 on (4) new camshafts to run the same ET (or only marginally faster) because I can't put the power to the ground?
(I'm personally not interested in big trap speeds with a high ET.)
This approach is a proven drag-racing formula - work on chassis & suspension 1st, then add power and you'll actually be able to use it efficiently.
I'd personally rather run 11.5's with 335 rwhp than run 12.5's with 400+ rwhp...
Anyways, you are detracting from my original statement. I'll put it in caps and bold so that it is obvious what message I am trying to relay.
MACH 1 OWNERS TEND TO ALWAYS POINT OUT HOW MUCH BETTER THEIR CARS PUT DOWN THE POWER, AND CITE THEIR TIMES VERSUS MODIFIED LS1'S. THEY JUMP UP AND DOWN WHEN THEY BEAT A HEADS/CAM LS1, BUT FAIL TO CONVEY THE MESSAGE THAT THEY HAVE SPENT JUST AS MUCH MONEY ON MODS AS THE LS1 OWNER IN AFTERMARKET SUSPENSION PARTS.
Of course an LS1 owner can do the same thing. Most do not do it. I think the main reason they don't is because the LS1 leaves alot on the table for one to add power then the Mach1. Heck a cam can add over 50whp to an LS1. I don't believe a Mach1 has that same potential. If you can find one, without the FR500 heads, then please point it out.
It's good Angus that you run 11's NA. Obviously it takes skill and quite a bit of power to the ground to do so. I'm just citing the fact that on Mach1registry you guys tend to point the finger and laugh at the LS1 owner w/ 400whp that is stuck in the 12's. Not all of you, but i'm sure you know of what I speak.
08-06-2006, 08:35 PM
#127
12 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sugarland Texas
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ponygt65
You mean some are into legal racing and some are into unsafe illegal racing......got it.
Mach guys get stuck after bolt-ons because the 4V head and cam options are stupid expensive, so they begin to wok the suspension/drivetrain/weight, the LS1 guys have so many NA options, cams, heads, strokers ect. It is that simple, some guys like 400-500rwhp cars set-up to be full weight street cars, some guys like 300rwhp geared up, lightened cars launching off a two step (or the rev limiter, lol), it is simply personal preference. It has been my expeirence that the higher HP cars run just as quick in the 1/4 and ALOT better on the streets.
08-07-2006, 12:01 AM
#128
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tha Cuntree
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are 4V cams that add 50-70 hp but Denom is right about the cost....expensive. The cams normally run about 1,000-1,200 $'s and also require installation and r. springs. There are a few Mach's with aftermarket cams on the registry that are running 11's but just like the H/C LS1 cars, they normally have all the bolt-on mods to compliment the cams. I considered cams but was afraid of drivability issues because my Mach is my DD. I chose N20 instead which adds more power and can be turned on or off at my descretion.
BTW-I just replaced my rear axles because I snapped one launching at the track and I lowered the car for appearance reasons but other than that I have no tricked out suspension or weigh reduction done. That stuff is boring and does nothing for the butt-o-meter. I like go-fast mods too.
BTW-I just replaced my rear axles because I snapped one launching at the track and I lowered the car for appearance reasons but other than that I have no tricked out suspension or weigh reduction done. That stuff is boring and does nothing for the butt-o-meter. I like go-fast mods too.
08-07-2006, 01:44 AM
#129
Yeah, I read that the FR500 heads are over $2K for the Mach1. That ain't cheap. I can buy LS6 ported heads from Patriot Performance for $1,200, delivered to my door. Not going that way for awhile though.
I didn't know cams actually made alot more power for the Mach1. So far all i've read is that the cam on a Mach1 is actually pretty good sized stock (A truck cam is what I believe i've read). Dunno though. Any Mach1 owners have some dyno graphs of what a cam adds to your cars?
It's not like you guys are putting down as little power as the 99+ Mustang GT's are. I mean 280whp out of the box is impressive.
I'm still curious as to why there is such a big debate going on about the 05 Mustang GT's being faster then the Mach1. Is it true that the 05 GT is faster, and if so, by how much?
I didn't know cams actually made alot more power for the Mach1. So far all i've read is that the cam on a Mach1 is actually pretty good sized stock (A truck cam is what I believe i've read). Dunno though. Any Mach1 owners have some dyno graphs of what a cam adds to your cars?
It's not like you guys are putting down as little power as the 99+ Mustang GT's are. I mean 280whp out of the box is impressive.
I'm still curious as to why there is such a big debate going on about the 05 Mustang GT's being faster then the Mach1. Is it true that the 05 GT is faster, and if so, by how much?
08-07-2006, 04:38 AM
#130
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tha Cuntree
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Denom
Yeah, I read that the FR500 heads are over $2K for the Mach1. That ain't cheap. I can buy LS6 ported heads from Patriot Performance for $1,200, delivered to my door. Not going that way for awhile though.
I didn't know cams actually made alot more power for the Mach1. So far all i've read is that the cam on a Mach1 is actually pretty good sized stock (A truck cam is what I believe i've read). Dunno though. Any Mach1 owners have some dyno graphs of what a cam adds to your cars?
It's not like you guys are putting down as little power as the 99+ Mustang GT's are. I mean 280whp out of the box is impressive.
I'm still curious as to why there is such a big debate going on about the 05 Mustang GT's being faster then the Mach1. Is it true that the 05 GT is faster, and if so, by how much?
I didn't know cams actually made alot more power for the Mach1. So far all i've read is that the cam on a Mach1 is actually pretty good sized stock (A truck cam is what I believe i've read). Dunno though. Any Mach1 owners have some dyno graphs of what a cam adds to your cars?
It's not like you guys are putting down as little power as the 99+ Mustang GT's are. I mean 280whp out of the box is impressive.
I'm still curious as to why there is such a big debate going on about the 05 Mustang GT's being faster then the Mach1. Is it true that the 05 GT is faster, and if so, by how much?
We do put down about 50 more hp than the 2v GT's and that number is probably more.
I have raced a couple 05+ GT's and made quick work of them but I feel they are capable of surprising a Mach or even a LS1. The auto trans (5 speed) is much better in the 05+ GT's.
08-07-2006, 07:42 AM
#131
On The Tree
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by grey03mach1
There are 4V cams that add 50-70 hp but Denom is right about the cost....expensive. The cams normally run about 1,000-1,200 $'s and also require installation and r. springs. There are a few Mach's with aftermarket cams on the registry that are running 11's but just like the H/C LS1 cars, they normally have all the bolt-on mods to compliment the cams. I considered cams but was afraid of drivability issues because my Mach is my DD. I chose N20 instead which adds more power and can be turned on or off at my descretion.
BTW-I just replaced my rear axles because I snapped one launching at the track and I lowered the car for appearance reasons but other than that I have no tricked out suspension or weigh reduction done. That stuff is boring and does nothing for the butt-o-meter. I like go-fast mods too.
BTW-I just replaced my rear axles because I snapped one launching at the track and I lowered the car for appearance reasons but other than that I have no tricked out suspension or weigh reduction done. That stuff is boring and does nothing for the butt-o-meter. I like go-fast mods too.
he posted the graph and the details in mach1registry.com long time ago.
look for 400rwhp n/a and you would probably find it.
at least 4.30's would be a must, and i think he was making 400rwhp at like 8000rpm or so. adding any kind of FI is cheaper and would yield similar or better results depending on setup.
08-07-2006, 09:06 AM
#132
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a never ending argument, which really has no merit anyway. Of course the LSx series of engines will respond better while remaining N/A, THEY'RE BIGGER!
If you break down the motor to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a big air pump. It takes in air and fuel, compresses it, burns it (creating power), and blows hot air out the exhaust. When you have a bigger combustion chamber to start with (LSx), then you can create more power without having to resort to more exotic means of getting more air/fuel into the motor, plain and simple!
The 4.6 mod motor can only handle so much air volume N/A, that's just plain physics! So to get around that shortcoming, forced induction, be it in the form of supercharger, nitrous, or turbo, is pretty much a neccessity to achieve 400+ horsepower. It's just one of those cases where size does matter.
If you break down the motor to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a big air pump. It takes in air and fuel, compresses it, burns it (creating power), and blows hot air out the exhaust. When you have a bigger combustion chamber to start with (LSx), then you can create more power without having to resort to more exotic means of getting more air/fuel into the motor, plain and simple!
The 4.6 mod motor can only handle so much air volume N/A, that's just plain physics! So to get around that shortcoming, forced induction, be it in the form of supercharger, nitrous, or turbo, is pretty much a neccessity to achieve 400+ horsepower. It's just one of those cases where size does matter.
08-07-2006, 09:11 AM
#133
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tha Cuntree
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11th post down
Ford Racing Cam Dyno
It appears that the cams alone do not net big numbers but the porting and head work combined with the cams make for some nice numbers.
Ford Racing Cam Dyno
It appears that the cams alone do not net big numbers but the porting and head work combined with the cams make for some nice numbers.
08-07-2006, 09:23 AM
#134
11 Second Club
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TRMach1
This is a never ending argument, which really has no merit anyway. Of course the LSx series of engines will respond better while remaining N/A, THEY'RE BIGGER!
If you break down the motor to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a big air pump. It takes in air and fuel, compresses it, burns it (creating power), and blows hot air out the exhaust. When you have a bigger combustion chamber to start with (LSx), then you can create more power without having to resort to more exotic means of getting more air/fuel into the motor, plain and simple!
The 4.6 mod motor can only handle so much air volume N/A, that's just plain physics! So to get around that shortcoming, forced induction, be it in the form of supercharger, nitrous, or turbo, is pretty much a neccessity to achieve 400+ horsepower. It's just one of those cases where size does matter.
If you break down the motor to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a big air pump. It takes in air and fuel, compresses it, burns it (creating power), and blows hot air out the exhaust. When you have a bigger combustion chamber to start with (LSx), then you can create more power without having to resort to more exotic means of getting more air/fuel into the motor, plain and simple!
The 4.6 mod motor can only handle so much air volume N/A, that's just plain physics! So to get around that shortcoming, forced induction, be it in the form of supercharger, nitrous, or turbo, is pretty much a neccessity to achieve 400+ horsepower. It's just one of those cases where size does matter.
08-07-2006, 09:32 AM
#135
Teching In
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Machs do not need FR500 heads. The factory heads (same as the Terminator's) flow near the same scf of air as the FR's do so there's really no need in buying a head that you already have. As a matter of fact in an issue of MM&FF some time ago, they tested heads and I believe the '03 DOHC head outflowed the FR500 head. I'll have to look that up.
Nazman is who has the '99 Cobra. He's running upwards of 460 rwhp with his new motor I believe.
Right now I have the matching FR500 intake and will have the matching FR500 cams in before the summer is over with ported stock heads/valve job. Looking for a nice power increase that will put me solidly in the 11's N/A...
Nazman is who has the '99 Cobra. He's running upwards of 460 rwhp with his new motor I believe.
Right now I have the matching FR500 intake and will have the matching FR500 cams in before the summer is over with ported stock heads/valve job. Looking for a nice power increase that will put me solidly in the 11's N/A...
08-07-2006, 11:36 AM
#136
Originally Posted by TRMach1
This is a never ending argument, which really has no merit anyway. Of course the LSx series of engines will respond better while remaining N/A, THEY'RE BIGGER!
If you break down the motor to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a big air pump. It takes in air and fuel, compresses it, burns it (creating power), and blows hot air out the exhaust. When you have a bigger combustion chamber to start with (LSx), then you can create more power without having to resort to more exotic means of getting more air/fuel into the motor, plain and simple!
The 4.6 mod motor can only handle so much air volume N/A, that's just plain physics! So to get around that shortcoming, forced induction, be it in the form of supercharger, nitrous, or turbo, is pretty much a neccessity to achieve 400+ horsepower. It's just one of those cases where size does matter.
If you break down the motor to it's bare essentials, it's nothing more than a big air pump. It takes in air and fuel, compresses it, burns it (creating power), and blows hot air out the exhaust. When you have a bigger combustion chamber to start with (LSx), then you can create more power without having to resort to more exotic means of getting more air/fuel into the motor, plain and simple!
The 4.6 mod motor can only handle so much air volume N/A, that's just plain physics! So to get around that shortcoming, forced induction, be it in the form of supercharger, nitrous, or turbo, is pretty much a neccessity to achieve 400+ horsepower. It's just one of those cases where size does matter.
Don't believe me, go to a shop, and measure your 4V motor and then measure the size of the LS1. You've got a small block/big block. I'm serious, i'm not joking.
08-07-2006, 12:50 PM
#137
Teching In
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Pearland, Tx
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Denom
WTH are you talking about!!!! I helped take a Mustang Saleen's engine out at Race Prep. That engine is damn near two times the size of the LS1 (You do realize the heads are part of the engine). That engine was heavy as a **** too, and I almost blew my back out aiding in it's take out. We compared the engine dimensionally to the LS1. It was alot bigger.
Don't believe me, go to a shop, and measure your 4V motor and then measure the size of the LS1. You've got a small block/big block. I'm serious, i'm not joking.
Don't believe me, go to a shop, and measure your 4V motor and then measure the size of the LS1. You've got a small block/big block. I'm serious, i'm not joking.
Damn dude, come back to earth.
08-07-2006, 01:07 PM
#138
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Denom
WTH are you talking about!!!! I helped take a Mustang Saleen's engine out at Race Prep. That engine is damn near two times the size of the LS1 (You do realize the heads are part of the engine). That engine was heavy as a **** too, and I almost blew my back out aiding in it's take out. We compared the engine dimensionally to the LS1. It was alot bigger.
Don't believe me, go to a shop, and measure your 4V motor and then measure the size of the LS1. You've got a small block/big block. I'm serious, i'm not joking.
Don't believe me, go to a shop, and measure your 4V motor and then measure the size of the LS1. You've got a small block/big block. I'm serious, i'm not joking.
Originally Posted by lxh89
Wow are you joking or what? He's talking about the displacement, not the physical dimensions of the exterior of the engine.
Damn dude, come back to earth.
Damn dude, come back to earth.
08-07-2006, 05:53 PM
#139
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Iranndia
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by will82
just re-read and saw he had DRs
now it makes sense, can take a full second off over stock tires in some cases.
now it makes sense, can take a full second off over stock tires in some cases.
I beat a mach 1 from a 40 drop running on 7 cylinders. They aren't impressive, and all I had at the time were bolt-ons.
08-07-2006, 06:15 PM
#140
Originally Posted by TRMach1
Are you friggin' dense or what?? I'm not talking about the physical dimensions of the outside of the engine! I'm talking about the internal size of the cylinder combustion chambers. You know, the part that gives the motor it's nomenclature of "4.6 liters", or "281 cubic inches." I believe the LS1 is 5.7 liters or about 347 cubic inches, that's considerably larger than the Ford motor!
LOL! I didn't see this before I posted LOL!
LOL! I didn't see this before I posted LOL!
I can see why some of the Mach1 owners have a bad rep on this board.