Which is faster?
09-08-2006, 01:05 PM
#12
RE: Which is faster?
ORIGINAL: hotrod7687
The 96 would be faster because of the supercharger. Stock the 96 has 275 hp and the 01 has 315 i believe. thats not a big difference but when you throw on the supercharger on the 96, youre probably around 400 rwhp
Price on both seems to be a little on the high side. I would look elsewhere and see if you can find one for a better price.
I would go with the 01 if you're really set on one of these. Looks WAY better, and the LS1engines are awesome. You could just do some bolt on's with the 01 and be able to hang with the 96 even with its supercharger.
The 96 would be faster because of the supercharger. Stock the 96 has 275 hp and the 01 has 315 i believe. thats not a big difference but when you throw on the supercharger on the 96, youre probably around 400 rwhp
Price on both seems to be a little on the high side. I would look elsewhere and see if you can find one for a better price.
I would go with the 01 if you're really set on one of these. Looks WAY better, and the LS1engines are awesome. You could just do some bolt on's with the 01 and be able to hang with the 96 even with its supercharger.
09-08-2006, 02:37 PM
#15
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 8,467
RE: Which is faster?
I think it must depend on the tune, i know a guy with a centrifical on an LT1 and he's stuck in the low 13s, i also know a guy with a full exhaust and gears on his LT1 running high 12s, so that one kids car is screwed. I wouldnt buy an LT1, either get the LS1 or stick with Mustangs.
09-08-2006, 04:23 PM
#16
2010 Blue Ball Award Recipient
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Eskimo Village, Indiana *No Igloo*
Posts: 7,907
RE: Which is faster?
Mach 1's are usually good for 'high-low 13's to low-mid 13's' if that makes any sense
13.3's to 13.5's are what I have seen. Though there was a guy running 13.9's on some 2.2 60's last time i was at the track. I wanted to drive his car and see what I could do, but I wasnt doing much better, 13.9's myself in my GT.. :-(
keep looking for something that catches your eye.. you'll be alot better off looking however, if you can nail yourself down to 2-3 models you want... if youve got your eyes looking for GTO's, LS1's, LT 1's, and many numerous mustangs, you wont find exactly what you want
settle it down, make yourself promise not to spend X amount and never buy something over X many miles...
i can't imagine how hard it is though when you want something to buy and have the money
13.3's to 13.5's are what I have seen. Though there was a guy running 13.9's on some 2.2 60's last time i was at the track. I wanted to drive his car and see what I could do, but I wasnt doing much better, 13.9's myself in my GT.. :-(
keep looking for something that catches your eye.. you'll be alot better off looking however, if you can nail yourself down to 2-3 models you want... if youve got your eyes looking for GTO's, LS1's, LT 1's, and many numerous mustangs, you wont find exactly what you want
settle it down, make yourself promise not to spend X amount and never buy something over X many miles...
i can't imagine how hard it is though when you want something to buy and have the money
09-08-2006, 06:54 PM
#17
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 8,467
RE: Which is faster?
ORIGINAL: 72MachOne99GT
Mach 1's are usually good for 'high-low 13's to low-mid 13's' if that makes any sense
13.3's to 13.5's are what I have seen. Though there was a guy running 13.9's on some 2.2 60's last time i was at the track. I wanted to drive his car and see what I could do, but I wasnt doing much better, 13.9's myself in my GT.. :-(
keep looking for something that catches your eye.. you'll be alot better off looking however, if you can nail yourself down to 2-3 models you want... if youve got your eyes looking for GTO's, LS1's, LT 1's, and many numerous mustangs, you wont find exactly what you want
settle it down, make yourself promise not to spend X amount and never buy something over X many miles...
i can't imagine how hard it is though when you want something to buy and have the money
Mach 1's are usually good for 'high-low 13's to low-mid 13's' if that makes any sense
13.3's to 13.5's are what I have seen. Though there was a guy running 13.9's on some 2.2 60's last time i was at the track. I wanted to drive his car and see what I could do, but I wasnt doing much better, 13.9's myself in my GT.. :-(
keep looking for something that catches your eye.. you'll be alot better off looking however, if you can nail yourself down to 2-3 models you want... if youve got your eyes looking for GTO's, LS1's, LT 1's, and many numerous mustangs, you wont find exactly what you want
settle it down, make yourself promise not to spend X amount and never buy something over X many miles...
i can't imagine how hard it is though when you want something to buy and have the money
09-09-2006, 05:19 AM
#18
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Appleton, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,097
RE: Which is faster?
Well Ive kinda picked out these 2 so im trying to decided between the two, what do you guys think is a better buy? which ever I get I prolly wont be able to do if any mods to the car for awhile (year or 2)
09-09-2006, 09:32 AM
#19
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Clarksville TN
Posts: 6,828
RE: Which is faster?
I take it you like the looks of the Trans Am over the Camaro? Which I dont blame you if you do, but you can get LS1 Camaros for under $10,000 all over the place. I just recently gave my friend this ad in the Peddler here, its a paper for cars, and there was a 98 Camaro with 70,000 miles on it for only $7500.