How underated are..
01-02-2008, 10:25 PM
#21
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location:
Posts: 629
RE: How underated are..
In my case, it usually came down to a driver's race, and i think its safe to say that mach's can hang with ls1's pretty decent! Stock vs Stock with equal driversi give it to the ls1 by a hair!
01-03-2008, 12:42 AM
#26
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
RE: How underated are..
Well, all Ls1s are 350hp at the crank regardless of model. Like us, they are slightly underated. Considering Machs are probably really pushing 320hp at the crank, that's about a 30hp difference. Anyway, Machs have much better gearing and a much better powerband. An Ls1 is pushing it's powerbandreving past 6k rpms, so Machs can hold a gear a little longer at 6800rpm. I agree that the Ls1 prolly/MAYBE has the Mach by a hair, but really it's a driver's race. I say that cause I've been lucky enough to either out-run or out-drive almost every Ls1 I've raced with close/Similar mods to mine. I have also owned two Ls1s. A 04 GTO and a 98 Z28. Both with Auto trannys. I modded both Ls1s with full-bolt-ons (LTs,tunes,gears,etc) and I can honestly say that mod for mod, the Mach is Faster. I had to put LTs,full exhaust, CAI,and a dyno tune on the Ls1 GTO just to get a 13.0. With Nitto DRs, I got it down to a 12.85 at 107 which sucked IMO with that amount of modding. The Z28 had a 3k raptor stall, full suspension, full exhaust, LTs, CAI, Dyno tune (340rwhp/400rwtq), and street tires. I landed a 12.70 at 107 with it on a 1.78 60'. A lot of mods for a high 12 [sm=smiley21.gif]. The GTO ran 13.8-14.0 bone stock. No idea on the Camaro since it was modded when I bought it. My Mach ran a 13.4 at 105 bone stock. I am now running a 13.0 at almost 109mph with an O/R/X and 4.10s on street tires, completely pedaling/babying it off the line and in 2nd gear. I think the Machs react better to mods and are all over an Ls1s bumper stock for stock. Really, as far as my experience with the two, the Mach is faster hands down, but with all the claims from the Ls1 guys around here, I tend to doubt my own opinion. I've had both and I vouch for the Mach.
01-03-2008, 01:17 AM
#27
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location:
Posts: 629
RE: How underated are..
ORIGINAL: Stone629
Well, all Ls1s are 350hp at the crank regardless of model. Like us, they are slightly underated. Considering Machs are probably really pushing 320hp at the crank, that's about a 30hp difference. Anyway, Machs have much better gearing and a much better powerband. An Ls1 is pushing it's powerbandreving past 6k rpms, so Machs can hold a gear a little longer at 6800rpm. I agree that the Ls1 prolly/MAYBE has the Mach by a hair, but really it's a driver's race. I say that cause I've been lucky enough to either out-run or out-drive almost every Ls1 I've raced with close/Similar mods to mine. I have also owned two Ls1s. A 04 GTO and a 98 Z28. Both with Auto trannys. I modded both Ls1s with full-bolt-ons (LTs,tunes,gears,etc) and I can honestly say that mod for mod, the Mach is Faster. I had to put LTs,full exhaust, CAI,and a dyno tune on the Ls1 GTO just to get a 13.0. With Nitto DRs, I got it down to a 12.85 at 107 which sucked IMO with that amount of modding. The Z28 had a 3k raptor stall, full suspension, full exhaust, LTs, CAI, Dyno tune (340rwhp/400rwtq), and street tires. I landed a 12.70 at 107 with it on a 1.78 60'. A lot of mods for a high 12 [sm=smiley21.gif]. The GTO ran 13.8-14.0 bone stock. No idea on the Camaro since it was modded when I bought it. My Mach ran a 13.4 at 105 bone stock. I am now running a 13.0 at almost 109mph with an O/R/X and 4.10s on street tires, completely pedaling/babying it off the line and in 2nd gear. I think the Machs react better to mods and are all over an Ls1s bumper stock for stock. Really, as far as my experience with the two, the Mach is faster hands down, but with all the claims from the Ls1 guys around here, I tend to doubt my own opinion. I've had both and I vouch for the Mach.
Well, all Ls1s are 350hp at the crank regardless of model. Like us, they are slightly underated. Considering Machs are probably really pushing 320hp at the crank, that's about a 30hp difference. Anyway, Machs have much better gearing and a much better powerband. An Ls1 is pushing it's powerbandreving past 6k rpms, so Machs can hold a gear a little longer at 6800rpm. I agree that the Ls1 prolly/MAYBE has the Mach by a hair, but really it's a driver's race. I say that cause I've been lucky enough to either out-run or out-drive almost every Ls1 I've raced with close/Similar mods to mine. I have also owned two Ls1s. A 04 GTO and a 98 Z28. Both with Auto trannys. I modded both Ls1s with full-bolt-ons (LTs,tunes,gears,etc) and I can honestly say that mod for mod, the Mach is Faster. I had to put LTs,full exhaust, CAI,and a dyno tune on the Ls1 GTO just to get a 13.0. With Nitto DRs, I got it down to a 12.85 at 107 which sucked IMO with that amount of modding. The Z28 had a 3k raptor stall, full suspension, full exhaust, LTs, CAI, Dyno tune (340rwhp/400rwtq), and street tires. I landed a 12.70 at 107 with it on a 1.78 60'. A lot of mods for a high 12 [sm=smiley21.gif]. The GTO ran 13.8-14.0 bone stock. No idea on the Camaro since it was modded when I bought it. My Mach ran a 13.4 at 105 bone stock. I am now running a 13.0 at almost 109mph with an O/R/X and 4.10s on street tires, completely pedaling/babying it off the line and in 2nd gear. I think the Machs react better to mods and are all over an Ls1s bumper stock for stock. Really, as far as my experience with the two, the Mach is faster hands down, but with all the claims from the Ls1 guys around here, I tend to doubt my own opinion. I've had both and I vouch for the Mach.
For the second "bolding" No offense, but I'd have to say that given those cars and those mods, you're times could been quite a bit better..
For the third "bolding" I have to down right disagree.. The ls1's 5.7 just breaths and responds to mods so much better than our 4.6...
I own a mach 1 and love it to death and have never owned an ls1, so i can my opinions are not biased for any of you guys thinking that!
01-03-2008, 05:50 AM
#29
corner carver
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 4,371
RE: How underated are..
It has pretty much already been said, but the Mach's dyno from 270-290 most of the time. They tend to dyno higher with more miles from what I have heard. I don't think that they are ridiculously underrated, but they are slightly. We are only 4 1/10's slower than the 03/04 Cobra's because they outweigh us by about 200 pounds (according to the internet's curb weights). Although my Mach's race weight with only the spare removed was 3522 including me. That would put my car at about 3322 without me. The weight difference may be a bit more than 200.
01-03-2008, 09:07 AM
#30
Mach I Section Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
RE: How underated are..
so the mach keep up with the ls1's due to their increased power band and the 3.55's. how do they compare weight wise? i mean the cobra is heavier, but is the end all to the ls1's. is there a way to make them compete with the new vettes without FI/happy gas?