git_sum

iTrader: (10)

Oh, and perhaps mr. cosby maybe your being a smartass. How in the hell is he supposed to know how his car runs better than others, maybe it's one of those super secret invisible superchargers from the factory?

03AV8R

Im gettin all confused on this "freak" thing?? Is a 13.3 @ 109 pass good or bad for a 99 Trand-Am?? The 109 looks sweet but the ET is like way off ?? My 4.6L was doin 13.1's @ 107 before the exhaust mod.. Must not be a good comparison i guess??

We have "supposedly" different heads that were being used after June 03 from the factory on our Mach1's.. These last few units off the line seemed to be muchos "quicker".. These are what we used to call a "factory ringer" or freak i guess but the point is its because of a possible head change during production year not because of an un-explained circumstance?? Most freaks are probably caused by such a change during production, some later discovered, some not ever discovered.. Beating some random bloke on the street surely doesnt mean you have a freak car.. What if i raced some kid playing around with his Daddy's Z06 & i actually beat him with my N/A Mustang?? It was real close & impressive race too, My passenger is all "white" & shaking, Does that mean i have a "Bucking Freak" Mustang?? Certainly Not

Venkman

iTrader: (4)

So let me get this straight, you have a freak, but dont believe in freaks? Im not sure why my car is as fast as it is. If you figured out why some ls1's are making more power than ls6's mod for mod, then youve answered the million dollar question that more than a few members of this board have asked. Nothing was touched on the car when the motor was put in. Service dept agreed my first motor was trashed, and ordered a new LS1 long block. It came in and went in the car. Babied it for 500 miles, changed the oil, and the first time i nailed it, it felt wayyy faster than my old engine. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, just the facts. Mach1Registry.com proved you cant change a mustang owners mind once they are "sure" of something . The plain and simple fact is one ls1 rolled off the line pushing 300rwhp while the next would dyno 320+. If youre implying i had/have an ls6 when i dynoed 357rwhp, youre very wrong. It gets harder to measure freaks after theyre modded, so i can only use my lid and exhaust dyno #'s....saying a car traps 121 modded, and is it a freak makes no sense at all. Im in the process of putting my dynograoh on my new server, I'll send you the link when im done, just so you dont think i'm all talk.

git_sum

iTrader: (10)

I don't think the 13.3 is very freakish but considering how bad my traction was i think it kinda is. It spun bad, how much this actually adds on to my time i don't know maybe a second maybe a half second, who knows. And as far as the 109 thing goes i'm not real sure how that goes along with the 13.3, i'm kinda new to this whole racing thing.

Venkman

iTrader: (4)

It also couldnt hurt to see that dynograph. You should feel lucky to have a high horsepower stock 99 cobra, since ford openly admitted that most 99 cobras wont dyno for **** and were overrated in the horsepower dept. Its also interesting you say that youve gone faster than 115, yet your best mph in your sig is 114

To answer your question av8tor, the 99TA you referred to in your above post was considered a freak by the owner more than likely due to the 109 trap. Most 99's were around 105, give or take. No doubt that the new mach 1's are underrated like ls1's

loveOliver

My Mach is a freak. Freakin' cool, that is. I like my car a lot. I also like other fast cars a lot. I like fast cars.

Ryan

Bob Cosby

One never knows.

ROFLOL Venkman, you're a funny dude. I suppose we can continue. Tis good fun, and perhaps we'll all learn something?

Nah. Anyways...

Uh, No, and yes. I do not have a "freak", and I don't believe in them.

Maybe it isn't as fast you think it is?

ROFLOL. I'll take that as a "no" to my answer above about what makes your car a "freak". I'll take that as a "yes" to my assumption that it "just is".

Ok. Whatever you say.

I disagree. The evidence in this thread suggests quite strongly that you are indeed trying to convince me that your car is a "freak".

As far as we know.

Once again...Mr Kettle, kindly meet Mr Black. But no, you have not proven much of anything to me. Then again, I didn't think you were trying to?

Haven't we already been over this? Maybe GM quality control is just seriously BAD that the motors vary so much? That's sad.

Pssst....I don't believe GM's quality control was that bad. You can if you wish.

Was I implying that? Hmmm...have to think about that one.

LOL. That's kind of funny. So is it harder to measure "non-freaks" after they're modded, or is it not so hard?

Let's compare.

Car A) runs 121 mph on the stock 3.42 gear with only external bolt-ons.

Car B) runs 114 (or was it 115? Whatever) on the stock 3.42 gears with only a lid and exhaust.

Which one is the proverbial "freak"? There's a lot more to it, of course.

Cool, but I have some really sad news for you - I think you're a lot of talk. Not all talk, but a lot of it. And I said before, I can send you whatever kind of dyno you want. It can say modded, stock, 277 RWHP, 315 RWHP, SAE, STD, ACTUAL, whatever.

*sigh*. Obviously my comment went right over your head. I should know better.

You are correct - 99's were actually recalled due to not making their claimed HP. I didn't dyno mine before the recall, so I cannot provide after results.

My sig contains my best pass. My best ET and my best MPH were not on the same run. I am alll about ET, thus that is what I posted. My best ever MPH is 115.06, but that came on a "slow" 11.62 (1.65 60 ft....that was my shoulda/coulda/woulda 11.5 pass).

Anyways...you're just barking up the wrong tree. One more time....I don't believe in "freaks", and your car does nothing - at all - to change my mind.

Probably ought to call this an evening, and besides, I have to take my eldest (high school freshman - will be driving soon ) to TaeKwonDo....he's only about 6 months away from his black belt.

Have a good evening.

PS...In case you didn't know, I'm a HUGE fan of the LS1/LS6, and am quite aware of what they are capable of. I've said many times before that my Cobra would be damn near perfect if it had come from the factory with an LS1 (I'll keep the rest, thanks).

03AV8R

OK Cool.. Well 109 is really good as far as im concerned cause im only turning 109's when im hitting 12.5 & 12.6 ET's.. Oherwise im at 107 or 108's when the car is way off at 13.0's

I do not know, nor have i ever met Bob personally, but this Bob Cosby guy (posts up above) was at 1 time (& still is im sure) in the mid to low 11 ET's with a Naturally Aspirated Mustang that i believe has about 70 cubic inches less than an LS1 motor.. Aparantly he's got all his "ducks in a row" & when he speaks on other sites people probably pay attention

git_sum

iTrader: (10)

i really can't stress how bad the traction with that 109 was too.

git_sum

iTrader: (10)

Is your Mach1 manual or automatic, and if your gettin getting 12.5's at a 108 do you think i could also run 12.5's with good traction considering my trap was 109? And i'm gonna have to agree with cosby i don't think gm quality control was bad enough to make a 20 or 30hp difference in their engines.

Venkman

iTrader: (4)

I'll try posting like you...here we go
I try to be funny, it usually comes naturally and hey, maybe we will
Maybe it is

If i knew exactly why my car was a freak, i assure you, the first time someone asked my why it is as fast as it is I would have told them the answer then and there and much to my shagrin, we wouldnt be here right now. It gets old after a while everytime you race someone new, they dont believe youre not spraying or more modded then you say you are

Like i stated above, there is no convincing mustang owners who already know it all
Now youre just putting words in my mouth and trying to prove something off that. I have also owned a 2001 Mustang GT, and it was at the slow end of the freak/dog spectrum. Every car is going to have a variation in one that rolls off the line to another. If you think its a GM or LS1 isolated occurance take a stroll on over to mach 1 registry or stangnet where ive read countles posts on "one of mach feels tons stronger than another.", and there's about a 20 hp stock variation dyno proven there too
Let me know when you reach your final answer

When youre comparing two different cars with two possible different drivetrains with different mods it a little harder than comparing two stock cars, isnt it?

Well unlike you, im not the type of person to bullshit numbers or track times. I am proud of my no bs reputation and i just dont care enough to lie even if i didnt. All of my dyno runs are also videotaped to avoid any future confusion

Theres a little truth out of you. That didnt hurt near as much as you thought, did it?

Well bob, not to flame you, but when i'm your age, i hope to be on a lamborghini board having a similar conversation with their owners about my ferrari

Im glad youre a fan of our cars. Hope i've given you insight on what they are capable of with a lid and exhaust

03AV8R

My Mach1 is a standard 5-speed.. 109MPH is where im at with a 12.5 sec. pass but i do not know if that would hold true with your setup.. Basically if i have really bad track prep & spin real bad i still get most of my trap speed 106 to 108 but my ET falls way off.. Alot of that has to do with my 4.30 gear i believe.. I probably have more of an ET car perhaps because of it.. Your 109 MPH does tell me you have the potential to be mid 12's either way, so id find some better launching tires or something & practice of course always helps..

git_sum

iTrader: (10)

Thanks for the advice, much appreciated

Bob Cosby

You did a pretty fair job (for a rookie). Congrats.

LOL. I was getting told I had Nitrous way back in 1989 when my 88 Coupe was running high 12's with a few bolt-ons and slicks. However, the car wasn't a freak. And neither is yours. No amount of blabbering is going to change my mind.

Correct. We've been over that. The issue seems to be over how much variance. I believe it is 5-10 HP (about 2-4%). You believe it is 20-ish HP (about 8%).

You know who Butch Leal is? Regardless, he once said "the seat of the pants is the worlds biggest liar". Good words. How a car "feels" means damn near nothing. I had a mostly-stock car that didn't "feel" fast at all. But for almost 3700 lbs raceweight, it did pretty good (12.8 @ 109 on the stock rubber).

See quote above. And oh btw - ask any dyno operator worth his weight what the purpose of a dyno is. He (or she) will tell you that it is a tuning tool, and should not be used to compare actual power output from one car to the next.

Go ahead....ask.

LOL. Over your head, once again. Nevermind.

I believe your numbers, and I believe your track times.

With whom? Certainly not I.

Good!

Confusion? Who is confused? I'm not. If you are, I'm sorry. But regardless, that still proves zilch. If you can't see the reason why, then I'm ready to cry "uncle" and go on my merry way.

Oh, I'm full of truth. So much so, that I have yet to post a lie in this thread. If I have, kindly point it out.

No flame taken!! Let me know when you get out of Jr High and we can have a lucid discussion. No flame intended.

I'm not expert, but I have been around the block once or twice. Don't take it wrong, but you've given me no insight at all. There's a ton I can still learn, but I have a bit of experience with an LS1. Here are a few shots of the 99 T/A I owned...

On the street....


On the drag strip....


And on a road course....


I'll admit though, I have just a weeeee bit more experience with Mustangs (5 meg .mpg link - dial-up beware!).

BTW...that was almost 3 years ago....and you'll love the hat.

git_sum

iTrader: (10)

sorry for dissin you bob that ta was damn nice, but mustangs suck

Bob Cosby

LOL. I don't feel "dissed". You're welcomed to your opinion....even if it is misguided.

Venkman

iTrader: (4)

Thats the way to be an elitiest. Tell that moron....you were on ESPN, he doesnt have **** on you



Im not gonna lower myself to picking apart every word you said in your last post. We'll be here for the next 35 years. I'm glad youve had your 15 mins of fame, but i'll sleep better knowing mine are still ahead of me rather than long gone. BTW Bob, nice hat

Nice to have a name with a face. Now i gotta go to sleep, i got Jr. High School tomorrow

git_sum

iTrader: (10)

Misguided huh? U have to admit that mustangs arn't as good as camaros and transams, booth speed or reliability.

loveOliver

Venkman: Lighten up. Cosby is just trying to get under your skin. Let it all slide because it isn't worth getting upset with. Cosby is right about dynos. They are not comparison tools. Different dynos, even of the same brand, produce different results even in the same shop with the same car in the same time block. They're tuning tools. Track times do show a little better comparison, not perfect but better. There are variables big time, though. Your engine may have something crazy inside of it you don't even know about that makes it stronger, i don't know. Maybe your engine sold its soul to the Devil You' have also generalized Mustang people by a visit to the Mach1Registry. I was apart of the thread you go onto over there, no body believes crazy things unless they see it for them selves. I have never heard of a "stock LS1 engine powered f body" (quotes just set apart the description...not belittling your car at all) running the times yours is. So, wouldn't that be crazy if a GT owner came over claiming 120 Trap speeds and such? He'd get blasted outta here immediately. Have fun with your car, tear down the engine and build it up, sell it, trade it, wreck it, or do nothing with it except have fun. The key, no matter what the outcome of your car becomes, is to have fun.

Cosby: you're a funny guy in an evil way. Too many posts in this thread though. It has driven me crazy. It was fun while it lasted, until my head started hurting. I'd hate to be on your bad side.

git_sum: I won't admit to reliability at all, and if we're talking horsepower per cubic inch and dollar, GM doesn't make terribly better engines. On average a z28 with over a liter larger engine that also costs about the same as my Mach 1 does not have faster ET's. They're so close it is a driver's race. The GT and z28 are not as close in price as the Mach 1 and z28--sticker at high 20's. Oh yeah about your time and trap speed. A stock LS1 usually traps higher than my stock Mach 1, but, from what I've seen, the ETs are very close. So if you have a 109 trap speed, that doesn't always mean you'll be pushing the same ET as a Mach 1 with the same trap speed. That's just my two cents though. Good luck with your racing adventures. I love fast cars, as I have said before.

everyone: I'm calling an end to this thread. It has been beaten to death.

Bob Cosby

Don't worry, young man. When you grow up, it will all become clear. As for "elitist".....if that was my goal, I would of done far more than pull out the ESPN video (and I only had 3 minutes of fame, dammit). But it served its purpose. Viva la Elistist!

Oh, did I mention that you've already "lowered" yourself by picking apart my posts too? That excuse doesn't wash, Jr. Nice try though.

Thanks for the compliment on the hat - it's not near as nice as the new one I have. I'll have it out proudly displayed for the 2004 racing season. Perhaps your class can take a field trip to one of them?



Oliver...glad to see that someone caught on real quick. You must be over 15.

Ya'll have a wonderful day now, hear?

(and pssst...enjoy your car - no matter what it is. I certainly do enjoy mine)