4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang Technical discussions on 1996-2004 4.6 Liter Modular Motors (2V and 4V) within.

Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-05-2004, 11:27 PM
  #21  
98FOUR.SIX
1st Gear Member
 
98FOUR.SIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 100
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

YEA I CAN READ YOU THINK YOUR 99+ MUSTANG IS SO BAD A@@ 260 HP BIG WOOP
98FOUR.SIX is offline  
Old 10-05-2004, 11:30 PM
  #22  
Dan04COBRA
Super Moderator
 
Dan04COBRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location:
Posts: 14,917
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

What?
Dan04COBRA is offline  
Old 10-05-2004, 11:33 PM
  #23  
Sean
3rd Gear Member
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 893
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

LMAO!!!
Sean is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 12:18 AM
  #24  
GSXRIntensity
4th Gear Member
 
GSXRIntensity's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Chi-town!!!
Posts: 1,205
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

I've read enough of this thread to know that the person who started it has no knowledge about LT1's, LS1's, nor does he know the difference between Firebirds, & Trans AMs. Furthermore, if you wish to trash WS.6's or F-bodies in particular it would help for you to do some homework, & realize you need more than Flowmaster mufflers, & K&N intake to even keep up w/a misfiring LT1 w/80k miles on it. BTW...it's 281 not 289.

Gripes about F-bodies IMO = rattling doors, very poor build quality (nod to Camaros), F*cked up unnecessary bump on passenger side floor, extremely long dashboard, HEAVY

Complements = no replacement for displacement, did I mention the FireHawk looks like the Batmobile, Can easily get into low 12's & high 11's w/a lot less work than a 4.6. They are purpose built. The downside to that is not everyone wants to go fast, & that's where the Mustang was able to succeed in the buying market. It gave everyone a bit of what they wanted.

I love Mustangs, but let's be realistic. Stock for stock no turd 96-98 GT (chambered mufflers, & an air filther doesn't do anything for a 96-98) will give any F-body driver more than a glance, & another notch on his gun if he/she tries to race the F-body. 260hp on the 99+ GT's is a significant jump from the 96-98 models. No it's not ground braking, but if you want ground braking go buy a Lamborghini

Sorry, this is so long, but that story in the beginning just disturbs me. Some Pontiac makes a turn, goes WOT (all the while the Mustang driver hating the Pontiac's exhaust...mind you exhaust sound preference is completely subjective) only to have his g/f floor it to end up catching the Pontiac, never once considering that maybe the Pontiac might have just wanted to hear that exhaust & get off of it, not even considering a 96-98 GT wanted to throw down, & could have quite possibly been laughing in his car thinking that it took the GT long enough to catch up.
GSXRIntensity is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 12:27 AM
  #25  
Big5.0.13.7sec.
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
Big5.0.13.7sec.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location:
Posts: 202
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

WOW this is great. LOL.

I guess i dont know my lt1's and ls1's...... but who gives a sh*t. Im into mustangs... I dont really care what kind of car that was... I thought the story was funny!

In all honesty.... it was just to make everyone laugh.... i guess I thought "mustang" people would get a kick out of it! And I usually dont have to worry about what kind of car is in front of me or behind
me...cause I am the faster car.... But now my fiances' car is the new project after hearing all this crap talk. I guess it needs a little work.... and some weight reduction.

Thanks for the correction on the 281 dick head.

And seeing you didnt read at the begining I said; But either way when a GT with flowmasters and and fenderwall intake w/ K&N filter: meaning Cat Backs and I said cold air intake (whooptie 4 horses) LOL

[sm=angrymail.gif]And what car did the discontinue? Oh yeah slowmaros and firechickens... Thanks LOL[sm=closed.gif]
Big5.0.13.7sec. is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 01:15 AM
  #26  
GSXRIntensity
4th Gear Member
 
GSXRIntensity's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Chi-town!!!
Posts: 1,205
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

ORIGINAL: Big5.0.13.7sec.

WOW this is great. LOL.

I guess i dont know my lt1's and ls1's...... but who gives a sh*t. Im into mustangs... I dont really care what kind of car that was... I thought the story was funny!

In all honesty.... it was just to make everyone laugh.... i guess I thought "mustang" people would get a kick out of it! And I usually dont have to worry about what kind of car is in front of me or behind
me...cause I am the faster car.... But now my fiances' car is the new project after hearing all this crap talk. I guess it needs a little work.... and some weight reduction.

Thanks for the correction on the 281 dick head.

And seeing you didnt read at the begining I said; But either way when a GT with flowmasters and and fenderwall intake w/ K&N filter: meaning Cat Backs and I said cold air intake (whooptie 4 horses) LOL

[sm=angrymail.gif]And what car did the discontinue? Oh yeah slowmaros and firechickens... Thanks LOL[sm=closed.gif]
For being such a Mustang enthusiast, you a GREAT job of showing your extensive knowledge of them...289ci...wow...then you know so much about the Mustang's arch enemy you even know that it was discontinued...Holy Sh*t!!! Seeing as you don't "give a sh*t" about F-bodies, how can you hope to beat the enemy w/out knowing his strategy?

A CrapMaster cat-back will net you 1-2rwhp, & the cold air intake is a waste of $$$ for 2rwhp. Yea, you really have some knowledge about performance gains on Mustangs[&:]. I maybe a ********, but at least I'm more performance inclined than your dumba$$.
GSXRIntensity is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 01:27 AM
  #27  
NicksMeanGT
2nd Gear Member
 
NicksMeanGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Chi-Town
Posts: 152
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

A CrapMaster cat-back will net you 1-2rwhp
Awww shucks fella. you didn't have to go and call them crapmasters. my mean sounding flows net me 3-4 fwhp every day. Females Wanting to Have
Pimp that is...
NicksMeanGT is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 02:37 AM
  #28  
Big5.0.13.7sec.
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
Big5.0.13.7sec.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location:
Posts: 202
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

Aww dont get all pissed off... you little vag. LOL

I was just saying... that I thought it was funny.

And once again I dont have to worry about my "arch enemy" of cars....

I am a mustang enthusiast, but Im a 5.0 guy, Just getting into the 281 4.6L.

I guess seeing I pull a 12.8 in my 5.0 I guess I dont know much about performance LOL. You *******.

Actually I believe the Flowmasters add on average 5-7 rwhp. And the intake is a densecharger w/k&n and that would be 4-6 rwhp. So if you add that up that an additional 10-13 horses that was bought with $300-$350. Not to mention those mods just make it sound better!

So thanks for your imput buddy
Big5.0.13.7sec. is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 02:43 AM
  #29  
Dan04COBRA
Super Moderator
 
Dan04COBRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location:
Posts: 14,917
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

ORIGINAL: Sean

LMAO!!!
What's so funny! [8D]
Dan04COBRA is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 03:22 AM
  #30  
Sean
3rd Gear Member
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 893
Default RE: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT

ORIGINAL: Dan02GT

ORIGINAL: Sean

LMAO!!!
What's so funny! [8D]
I just thought it was funny how 98Four got all pissed off, and you were like WTF?
I was thinking the same thing you were, where the *** did that come from?
Sean is offline  


Quick Reply: Trans-Am VS. Mustang GT



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 AM.