99 Z/28 vs. 96 Cobra???
02-07-2007, 08:41 AM
#81
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is why i bought my 03 cobra lol, NO fbod owner talks my car down like this lol..this argument is lame but lets always remember, its not about whats under your hood, its about wats in your Pocket$ when it comes to making a car fast.
02-07-2007, 09:24 AM
#82
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canal Winchester, OH
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Irunelevens
The Machs are the fastest of the N/A 4v Mustangs though.
02-07-2007, 01:13 PM
#84
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GXPPOWER
tuff guy. your not running a Terminator Cobra. your running a slower less powerfull cobra. stock for stock an ls1 will walk a pre 03-04 cobra down properly driven
to kenny. yes a 05+ gt may run high 13s stock.. i personally havent seen one do it. but ill belive 13.9...
To bad car and driver or raod and track whichever took a stock lt1 to 13.8 in the 1/4.
no a 05 mustang GT is not a drivers race for an ls1. mabe... mabe a auto Vert with 2.73 and i still dont think a 05+ mustang would win.
to kenny. yes a 05+ gt may run high 13s stock.. i personally havent seen one do it. but ill belive 13.9...
To bad car and driver or raod and track whichever took a stock lt1 to 13.8 in the 1/4.
no a 05 mustang GT is not a drivers race for an ls1. mabe... mabe a auto Vert with 2.73 and i still dont think a 05+ mustang would win.
02-08-2007, 12:14 PM
#87
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MikesTorched05GT
Plain, simple and perfectly stated....haha
Except the 05+ 3 Valves need to go in Category 1
Raced enough of those to know that.
02-08-2007, 12:17 PM
#88
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Posts: 3,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kennyxg
What have you been smokin? Ihave had two lt1's both one 6speed and one auto that couldn't break into the 13's bone stock,my wifes auto 07 mustang ran 13.90's bone stock and it has and will eat up a stock lt1 on the highway.You talk like you have an ls1. 
YOu must have owned two dog LT1s. 05 GTs are right in line power, ET, trap etc with 96-98 Cobras and M6 LT1s
02-08-2007, 12:23 PM
#89
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Trenton NJ
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You also have to realize what the LT-1 F-bodies gain in extra power they lose much of due to weight. Your typical LT-1 F-body weights a good 100-150lbs more than a 99-04 GT, and 100lbs over a 96 cobra.
02-08-2007, 03:47 PM
#90
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Irunelevens
The Machs are the fastest of the N/A 4v Mustangs though.
Mach 1's are about on par with LS1's in terms of power, stock for stock. LS1 still has the slight edge though. Between the two, it would be a drivers race.
As to why Ford switched to a 3V engine for the '05 GT, I'll never know. They had a good thing going with the 4V heads, why take a step backwards?? The 4.6 4V DOHC from the Mach 1 was a great engine - smooth as anything, sounded great, and made excellent top end power all the way to 7,000RPM.
Last edited by USA-1; 02-08-2007 at 04:03 PM.
02-08-2007, 05:03 PM
#91
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by USA-1
This is true.
Mach 1's are about on par with LS1's in terms of power, stock for stock. LS1 still has the slight edge though. Between the two, it would be a drivers race.
As to why Ford switched to a 3V engine for the '05 GT, I'll never know. They had a good thing going with the 4V heads, why take a step backwards?? The 4.6 4V DOHC from the Mach 1 was a great engine - smooth as anything, sounded great, and made excellent top end power all the way to 7,000RPM.
Mach 1's are about on par with LS1's in terms of power, stock for stock. LS1 still has the slight edge though. Between the two, it would be a drivers race.
As to why Ford switched to a 3V engine for the '05 GT, I'll never know. They had a good thing going with the 4V heads, why take a step backwards?? The 4.6 4V DOHC from the Mach 1 was a great engine - smooth as anything, sounded great, and made excellent top end power all the way to 7,000RPM.
02-08-2007, 05:07 PM
#92
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wants an LS1
Beacuse 4v should be reserved for the elite type models, like the machs and cobras....remmeber how much it pissed off the vette owners when the fbods got the ls1 engine? yea...ford learned SOMETHING from GM i see lol
. And the 3v is really an overall step up. They flow damn near as well as the 4v heads did/do, and they can use one casting (probably) for the GT and the GT500, which saves alot of money.
02-08-2007, 09:06 PM
#93
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Irunelevens
Yeah, and they learned it back in '96 . And the 3v is really an overall step up. They flow damn near as well as the 4v heads did/do, and they can use one casting (probably) for the GT and the GT500, which saves alot of money.
. And the 3v is really an overall step up. They flow damn near as well as the 4v heads did/do, and they can use one casting (probably) for the GT and the GT500, which saves alot of money.I'm sure the 3V flow well, but when you're talking about OHC engines, 4V>3V
02-08-2007, 09:55 PM
#94
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canal Winchester, OH
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wants an LS1
remmeber how much it pissed off the vette owners when the fbods got the ls1 engine? yea...ford learned SOMETHING from GM i see lol
02-09-2007, 12:33 AM
#95
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by USA-1
How can they use the same casting for the GT and GT500 if the GT has the 3V heads and the GT500 has the DOHC 4V heads?? I don't follow what you're saying with that.
I'm sure the 3V flow well, but when you're talking about OHC engines, 4V>3V
I'm sure the 3V flow well, but when you're talking about OHC engines, 4V>3V
. But on another note, Ford's website lists the Mustang GT's engine as OHV, but the V6 says OHC and the GT500 says DOHC.
02-09-2007, 08:59 AM
#96
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by USA-1
As to why Ford switched to a 3V engine for the '05 GT, I'll never know. They had a good thing going with the 4V heads, why take a step backwards?? The 4.6 4V DOHC from the Mach 1 was a great engine - smooth as anything, sounded great, and made excellent top end power all the way to 7,000RPM.
Secondly marketing, byt using the 3v in the base model it allows Ford to use the DOHC for a "special" model in the future which they can charge a premium for.
02-09-2007, 11:52 AM
#97
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Trenton NJ
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yea I'd agree that the mach 1 is defiantly the best N/A mass production mustang. I was thinking about a cobra but I think the whistling SC would drive me nuts plus the mach is alot better balanced great 1/4 mile car and good handling not so much weight up front like the cobra. My friend has a 98 Z28 talked alot of **** about my mach until I took him for a ride after chirping 2nd,3rd and 4th then he was like "damn it pulls pretty hard". What I'd like to see in the future is the 4v head used on the GT & GT500 put on a N/A 4.6. They way those breath 375 horse should be very easy. But still I think the 3v is nice cheaper to build and puts out some good numbers. If ford had kept the weight down on the new GT to something similar to the 99-04 GT's they would have been pretty good competition for LS1 F-bodies. But as much as I love my mustangs Ford has always seemed to be a few years behind in power. If the 4.6 came out with 260hp the stangs be good comp for the LT1's. Then if the 3v had been introduced in 99 that would have been great comp for the LS1 cars. Oh well.
02-09-2007, 12:42 PM
#99
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Trenton NJ
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Irunelevens
Yeah, hindsight is 20/20...
