90Mustangfan

The camaro was a LT1, stock ones run High 13 to 14.3. LT1's arent good engines. I believe in 96' Z28 will run low 14's.

Guest

LT1s aren't good engines huh? what crevice of your body did you pull that crap from? LT1s are torque monsters, and a force to be reckoned with.

90Mustangfan

Ok for how big that engine is a 350, that only put out 285 hp in 96' compared to the 305hp,4.6. for that size engine it should put out more HP.the mustangs engines are more efficient.The ony good engine is the LS1, now thats a good engine.

98LS1

LT1 motor > all Ford engines produced to date.....forge the pistons and rods and go 6 second hunting....those motors are badass.

Guest

Compare the power output of the LT1 at the time of introduction compared to that of any Mustang Motor of that same era and the LT1 >>>>>>>>> ANY MUSTANG MOTOR. OMG!!! the 5.0 (being 4.9 liters) only made 225 hp... and you're calling the LT1 weak? Please...

If you want to compare an 04 Mach I motor against anything, compare it against the Z28/SS LS1 310/325 >>>> 305 hp.

End of story.

roundman

sorry dude, but there's no way that just those tires will shave 1 full sec off your 1/4 mile time. no tire in the world will do that unless you started out with ones about 4" wide and then moved up to the 285's.

Stinger

LOL LT1s Rock!!! Yea Tommy it should be good but LS1s are hard to hook up i think.With tires i should drop into the 12s.But well see who knows anything can happen.

WS6speeDemon

I love you babe BUT, I gotta be mean, you mean, don't learn how to drive and just get something that drives for you? JK, a lot of manual drivers have a hard time with it, cough cough, as for me, I think of myself as a good M6 driver[sm=trust_me.gif] hehe, but anywyas, you are right, an auto with a stall is a very good way to go, for drag racing


And I agree with you and 2000SI below, ford came out with competition when we had the ls1, so, i agree...

DUB 6

I'm sorry man...But i find that story very, very, very hard to believe....LT1 maros and Birds should put about 4 carlengths on you with your mods...Trust me i owned a 87 GT back in 93 when the new LT1's came out and i had lots more mods on my GT and still got my *** handed to me...I had full exhaust, shorty headers...no cat's, GT40 upper and lower intake and a set of gears and still got my butt whipped by every single LT1 maro in my town.....

That had to be one sick LT1 or the driver must have been a 14 year old driving for the very first time....LT1's are only 2 tenths of a second off the LS1 in the quarter and runs neck and neck with it all the way up to 140....then it starts to fall off a bit..The LT1 is only 1 second behind the LS1 to 130 and the 99+ GT's are more than 14 seconds behind it, so i find that story very very hard to believe that you had 4-5 carlenghts up to 115.... I'm just not buying that....IF you want me to post article accleration times of each cars i will.....you can read it for your self.

I'm not stepping on your toes here....just letting you know how terrible that LT1 driver had to be...

http://www.stangbangers.com/93_Cobra...28_Article.htm

90Mustangfan

Ok, heres a good link, for a 96' Z28
96' Z28
If you read, a 96' Z28 has 285 like I said. And does 14.2 in the 1/4 mile, like I said, Also thats with a PRO driver, that has been testing cars for years and years,and again they take the BEST times out of the 10 TRIES. They take the BEST TIMES with a PRO driver and they get 14.2 with a PRO driver.Now imagine a average guy driving...hes not a PRO DRIVER and you expect him to get 14.2,something says crazy Unless he races cars often, which he doesnt I asked the guy. And on top of that my car with slicks runs around 13.5 to 13.9 at the track.Unless im crazy, I think theres something wrong a mid 14 stock camaro compared to a modified mid-high 13's mustang.Should I ask myself again...Am I crazy?