WS6 vs Mach1 again!
08-06-2007, 10:10 PM
#21
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brichdp06
you like the way mach1s look?.....
...mach 1s fell from the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down
...mach 1s fell from the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down 
08-06-2007, 10:30 PM
#24
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA (Pittsburg)
Posts: 4,240
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Good Kill.
I think Mach's look pretty good once they get a good set of wheels. The stock wheels are ugly to me. But they aren't ugly.
I wish i had more experience with Mach's
I think Mach's look pretty good once they get a good set of wheels. The stock wheels are ugly to me. But they aren't ugly.
I wish i had more experience with Mach's
08-06-2007, 10:53 PM
#25
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My brother has a A4 Mach1 and when we were both stock, I was about .5 faster. I ran a 13.7 to his 14.2 on the same night. I know those times seem slow but the track we ran at was not the best. When we were driving home from the track though, we went at it on the freeway. From about 70 - 120 when he was able to start in 3rd gear (1:1) and I was in 4th gear (1:1) I would barely inch ahead of him so they seemed pretty even at the higher speeds.
He now has a Pro-Charger, 4.10's, exhaust, etc and with only a 2.0 60', he ran a 7.9 @ 93 in the 1/8th. His car would probably drop another .4 - .5 tenths with a converter.
He now has a Pro-Charger, 4.10's, exhaust, etc and with only a 2.0 60', he ran a 7.9 @ 93 in the 1/8th. His car would probably drop another .4 - .5 tenths with a converter.
08-06-2007, 11:00 PM
#26
Originally Posted by GMmexican
Isnt the mach 1, 32valve motor made from aluminum compared to the cobras iron block?
http://www.stangbangers.com/03_Mach1_Article4.htm
08-07-2007, 07:09 AM
#28
Originally Posted by mach1nut
My brother has a A4 Mach1 and when we were both stock, I was about .5 faster. I ran a 13.7 to his 14.2 on the same night. I know those times seem slow but the track we ran at was not the best. When we were driving home from the track though, we went at it on the freeway. From about 70 - 120 when he was able to start in 3rd gear (1:1) and I was in 4th gear (1:1) I would barely inch ahead of him so they seemed pretty even at the higher speeds.
He now has a Pro-Charger, 4.10's, exhaust, etc and with only a 2.0 60', he ran a 7.9 @ 93 in the 1/8th. His car would probably drop another .4 - .5 tenths with a converter.
He now has a Pro-Charger, 4.10's, exhaust, etc and with only a 2.0 60', he ran a 7.9 @ 93 in the 1/8th. His car would probably drop another .4 - .5 tenths with a converter.
08-07-2007, 09:02 AM
#29
Teching In
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Paint_It_Black
not according to this, the mach also has an iron block
http://www.stangbangers.com/03_Mach1_Article4.htm
http://www.stangbangers.com/03_Mach1_Article4.htm
08-07-2007, 10:36 AM
#30
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Omega Doom
and I was just about to ask to race him until the last paragraph!
Here's his car.
08-07-2007, 10:45 AM
#31
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Omega Doom
are you sure they are that fast stock? the DSG Mach I had raced the night Mach1nut whooped me had an X pipe and a catback and ran a mid 9 sec. 1/8 best!!! and then this white Mach I raced off of a roll seem not to have the same snap of a 5 speed car when it dropped down and I know a stick car would have been "not that far behind" me!
and then this white Mach I raced off of a roll seem not to have the same snap of a 5 speed car when it dropped down and I know a stick car would have been "not that far behind" me! 
08-07-2007, 10:52 AM
#34
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by svodave
Dude, if you beat a Mach, he wasn't racing......or so I've been told. 
It's funny..I am a stang guy and get crap for being on an LS1 website.....yet, I ahve more posts than you, and you seem to stir up more crap on the stang posts than any stang guy I have seen.
Why do you have ot be SOO dang ignorant/arrogant?....why is it hard to believe that there is a stang that is actually a quick car?...and a driver's race with an LS??...I can't believe the arrogance some people have.
08-07-2007, 11:47 AM
#35
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Omega Doom
damn I need to race him after my bolt on's are installed! 
hell you should race him once you get the headers and nitrous to put lil/big bro in check!
hell you should race him once you get the headers and nitrous to put lil/big bro in check! Haha. That is my goal, to run a 7.944 or faster NA!
I actually looked at his timeslip and mine.
We went when my car had about 900 miles on it and his had about 2,000 - 3,000
He ran (2003 Mach1 Automatic - bone stock - paper filter and all)
2.257 60'
9.346 1/8th
78.83 mph
14.310 1/4
98.87 mph
I ran (2003 Mach1 5 speed - bone stock - paper filter and all)
2.175 60'
9.0350 1/8th
80.14 mph
13.878 1/4
102.04 mph
So I had 0.331 and 1.31 mph on him in the 1/8 and 0.432 and 3.17mph in the 1/4.
That's as close as a comparison that I can give you. Track conditions were not good and this was in California on 91 octane.
08-07-2007, 03:48 PM
#36
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ponygt65
Why am I NOT surprised to see you in here talking crap.
It's funny..I am a stang guy and get crap for being on an LS1 website.....yet, I ahve more posts than you, and you seem to stir up more crap on the stang posts than any stang guy I have seen.
It's funny..I am a stang guy and get crap for being on an LS1 website.....yet, I ahve more posts than you, and you seem to stir up more crap on the stang posts than any stang guy I have seen.
p.s. the reason you have a lot of posts is because your like a woman going on and on. Is there ANYTHING you don't know EVERYTHING about?
-Dave
08-07-2007, 04:33 PM
#37
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by svodave
I was just passing your wise words onto the others.
p.s. the reason you have a lot of posts is because your like a woman going on and on. Is there ANYTHING you don't know EVERYTHING about? -Dave
p.s. the reason you have a lot of posts is because your like a woman going on and on. Is there ANYTHING you don't know EVERYTHING about?
-DaveYOu have been here a FULL YEAR longer than I.....and only have 11 posts........Yet, I am the irritant?.....ok....Nuff said.
Last edited by ponygt65; 08-07-2007 at 04:46 PM.
08-07-2007, 04:45 PM
#38
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know SLodave....I just did a search to look at all your posts.....it's quite interesting. Basically, if you aren't buying something, you are talking crap about stangs. You have been on here for two years, and any member or moderator can look at your post history and count on ONE HAND how many contributing posts you have made. All the others are nothing more than talking crap.
I say again......and people think stang owners are the only ones to talk ****.
I say again......and people think stang owners are the only ones to talk ****.
08-07-2007, 04:51 PM
#39
Originally Posted by mach1nut
Haha. That is my goal, to run a 7.944 or faster NA!
I actually looked at his timeslip and mine.
We went when my car had about 900 miles on it and his had about 2,000 - 3,000
He ran (2003 Mach1 Automatic - bone stock - paper filter and all)
2.257 60'
9.346 1/8th
78.83 mph
14.310 1/4
98.87 mph
I ran (2003 Mach1 5 speed - bone stock - paper filter and all)
2.175 60'
9.0350 1/8th
80.14 mph
13.878 1/4
102.04 mph
So I had 0.331 and 1.31 mph on him in the 1/8 and 0.432 and 3.17mph in the 1/4.
That's as close as a comparison that I can give you. Track conditions were not good and this was in California on 91 octane.
I actually looked at his timeslip and mine.
We went when my car had about 900 miles on it and his had about 2,000 - 3,000
He ran (2003 Mach1 Automatic - bone stock - paper filter and all)
2.257 60'
9.346 1/8th
78.83 mph
14.310 1/4
98.87 mph
I ran (2003 Mach1 5 speed - bone stock - paper filter and all)
2.175 60'
9.0350 1/8th
80.14 mph
13.878 1/4
102.04 mph
So I had 0.331 and 1.31 mph on him in the 1/8 and 0.432 and 3.17mph in the 1/4.
That's as close as a comparison that I can give you. Track conditions were not good and this was in California on 91 octane.
08-07-2007, 06:03 PM
#40
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Omega Doom
so when is he coming down for a visit and tell him to bring the Mach so we can both drag his *** down one of are many beloved 1/8 mile tracks or even the 1 and only 1/4 the coveted ENNIS track!