98 trans am vs 2005 mustang gt
#1
98 trans am vs 2005 mustang gt
me and my friend are gonna run them today he has a stock 98 trans am auto what are my chances the only thing i got is a short shifter and a new clutch also some nito 555
does anybody know the weight and hp numbers on the trans am i keep getting diffrent numbers
does anybody know the weight and hp numbers on the trans am i keep getting diffrent numbers
#2
6th Gear Member
All else being equal, it all boils down to the weight to HP ratio as you imply. Maybe the TA's engine heat soaks as bad as our S197's to help you out.
Sorry, but I'm at work and can't go hunting the numbers.
Sorry, but I'm at work and can't go hunting the numbers.
#5
a stock ta in 98 was rated at like 305 hp but they were seriously underrated from factory and they weight like 3200 to 3300 lbs...GM did a heck of a job of selling that car as de-tuned vette...but they're a monster
#6
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Camp Lejeune, North Carolina and Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Posts: 470
The T/As/Camaro's with those LT1s are pretty damn awesome cars. I hate to say it. The guy at the shop I goto has a 95 Z28 with nothing but aggressive *** cams and he runs 12.5s all day long on street tires.
You may have him though. I ran a bolt-on WS6 with intake/exhaust/cams/gears and Drag Radials when my NSX had nothing but headers/Exhaust/intake and I beat him pretty bad. But my NSX was makin 280 to the wheels and only weighed 2200lbs...
Good luck! let us know how it goes!
You may have him though. I ran a bolt-on WS6 with intake/exhaust/cams/gears and Drag Radials when my NSX had nothing but headers/Exhaust/intake and I beat him pretty bad. But my NSX was makin 280 to the wheels and only weighed 2200lbs...
Good luck! let us know how it goes!
#10
the 98 is the first year for the LS1 and yes, the factory understated the power. THe 93-97's had the LT1.
But, here is the difference. The car is 12 years old. If it's never been rebuilt, then it's tired. You can't compare honestly but you should take the tired car.
I'm not hating because I own both vehicles but I do applaud Ford for bumping up the v6 and launching the new 5.0 for 2011. it's pathetic that my rebuilt 95 maro outperforms my 2007 stang.
I also have a 95 Z and the LT1 engine and with bolt ons and 1.6 rr's, she goes and the low end torque is better than the stang. 70 cubic inches makes a difference.
If the engine was the LS1 (like that 98 will have) and had the same mods that my LT1 does, WHP would be 320-330, maybe more.
Again, I would still say you because unless it's been rebuilt, the car is tired
But, here is the difference. The car is 12 years old. If it's never been rebuilt, then it's tired. You can't compare honestly but you should take the tired car.
I'm not hating because I own both vehicles but I do applaud Ford for bumping up the v6 and launching the new 5.0 for 2011. it's pathetic that my rebuilt 95 maro outperforms my 2007 stang.
I also have a 95 Z and the LT1 engine and with bolt ons and 1.6 rr's, she goes and the low end torque is better than the stang. 70 cubic inches makes a difference.
If the engine was the LS1 (like that 98 will have) and had the same mods that my LT1 does, WHP would be 320-330, maybe more.
Again, I would still say you because unless it's been rebuilt, the car is tired