Why can't a 05 Mustang hit 13's stock? They weigh about the same as an LT1 F-Body, and dyno higher at the wheels. Everyone I have seen run always traps higher than an LT1 either. I hae never driven one, but I don't think it would be that hard. I have almost never seen a stock LT1 run in the 13s, but that is possible too.
Everybody likes to say how much Car and Driver suck at running good times out of some of the cars they test, so it is worth considering that they ran a 13.9 out of a new Mustang. It is obvious you have a bias about Mustangs, with your 15 second car comment in the beginning, so I don't think you are ever going to bother listening anyways. I would just be careful if an 03 or 04 Mach1 pulled up next to you, because even with your mods you are still a goner in your LT1, and you can forget an 03 or 04 Cobra for that matter.
I have agreed with you on many of your posts, but some of your information is very skewed.

 

For the record, that's first time I've seen it in print

Would GM ever publicly state that the top Camaro has the same or more hp than the base Vette? There have been occasions, but as a matter of rule no. But what the cars are actually putting out is a whole different story. Certainly the automotive press would be scratching their heads when a "400hp" Camaro hangs with at 450hp Shelby. Just like they did for years with the LS1 Fbodys routinely routing the Cobras, with the "SAME HP".

So how does this sound?
LS3 Base Vette=450hp
LS3 Top model Camaro=425 hp
Shelby=450hp

So the vette beats all because of weight, power to weight, and aerodynamics. Camaro hangs or beats Shelby with what is said to be less hp. And the Corvette people are happy because their car is God and no Camaro can touch it performancewise because, after all, it's a Vette right? [/sarcasm]. How does that lineup suit everybody?

 

Most of my pricing info was from fords sites, and comparitive buy pages. Both matched up. I wouldnt know 100% as i dont own any of the cars listed.

the 2003 Cobra was a supercharged version of the Non-release of the 2002 Cobra (not released because it couldnt make its advertised HP might i add..) and cost about 36,000 off the lot. Although locally i saw them stickering at 39,000 for hard-tops. Locally thats 14,000 more then the base 2002 SS off the lot, i can think of alot of ways to break 400+ HP with $1,000 of that saved money. Ive seen 2002 Anniversery SS's run next to 2003 Cobra's, both clearing the light @ 12.99 Repeatidly actually. Mind you, at a 5,500 less price tag Vs a NA car. Im not afraid to mention the cobra and 02' SS in the same sentence, I'm actually Proud to.

In regards to the 2003 Mach 1, Again I happily compare it to even the base Z28. which was about 5,000 cheaper locally brand new.


agreed.

I usually attend all Local Dyno nights, and see stock Vs stock Ybody to Fbody LS1's run on the dyno. Dont assume im ignorant to the world of LS1 Fbodys. Most of my buddys who still drive F-bods own 98+'s at this point. Im familiar with both there speed, and under there engine bays because i spend the majority of my weekends in them or under them. Back to the point. I will use 3 seperate occasions.

1999 Camaro SS Vs 1999 Corvette (both claimed to be stock): Vette 15HP advantage.
1999 Camaro Z28 Vs 2000 Corvette (again stock): Vette 33HP advantage.
2001 SS Vs 2000 Corvette (Stock): Vette 29HP advantage.

I beleive all where Dyno Jet runs.

I only comment on what i see Personally when it comes to numbers, because the internet isnt the most honest place when it comes to them.

ofc, i beleive the Z06 was coming regardless of the R's appearance or lack there of. Thanks for the correction on the year of the R's.

Hasnt this kinda been the whole point of this post? concerns over what the camaro is actually going to be a contender for?

 

So the LS1 Camaros were dynoing in the 260-270rwhp range? For what it's worth, my Formula put down 307rwhp, C5 299rwhp. So there!

 

Yes alot of the traps ive seen are similar to my stock Z's numbers. Ive never seen a 05' stang dyno, but ive drove one. Seemed similar in the Z's acceleration, but kinda doggy mid-band. It also seemed to have the standard GT "roll" in the suspension.

I have no bias either way, i draw my conclusions again only on what i witness in person, dont assume. My first dip into the pony car wars wasnt on this side of the fence. 1991 Fox Box 1995 GT 1996 Cobra where my first cars, then i drove a 1995 Camaro Z28 in 1999 and that was the end of my Ford reign.

First Camaro was the 1994, which i traded the 1996 Cobra for straight up.

In regards to the comment about stock LT1 numbers. First Camaro (1994 M6) ran 14.5 first run, second 14.2 third 14.2. bone stock, this was 1999. Car had 38,900 Miles. Which that car is far from now.

Second stock LT1 i ever ran was in 2001, my 1993 which i got for a 2000 GSXR. Had 92,000Miles, ran 14.0 , 14.2 , 13.999 , 13.901 , 13.887. first time at the track. I later heard the 1993's where the fastier of the LT1's no clue lol, but it is far from stock now as well.

I might have a hard time with the 1993 Vs a 03' 04' as you mentioned, with the 93' but i'd be just fine with the 94'

 

Actually, your info is wrong again. Their was no 02 Cobra because the 03 Cobra was released very early in the model year. You are thinking of 2000 Cobras, because of the debacle in 99 with the overrated hp number. They had too many recalls to produce a volume 00 cobra, although they did come out with the Cobra R that year. And yes, a 99 or 01 Cobra cost roughly the same as a Camaro SS. The 03/04 Cobras were the only one to run over $30k MSRP. I know, I can't tell you the amount of dealerships I have priced them at a few years ago.
And you can compare a Mach1 to an SS as well as a z28, because z28s and SSs both run the same speeds anyway. An SS can cross the lights at 12.9 stock, I have no problem agreeing with you there, but I have seen stock 03/04 cobras run mid 12s. Ask Bob Cosby on this forum, he owns one, and I am sure he has eeked out more than a few 12 second runs from his.

About this dyno thing, I don't know where you are seeing these cars dyno, but I have witnessed them in person too. On a dynojet, I always see stock fbodies regardless of trim level dyno almost identically to a Corvette. How much do you propose a Corvette dynoes? With a 33HP advantage to the vette, what did it dyno, 335 rwhp or something? I don't see that happening. Check this link out.
http://www.stangbangers.com/01_Bullitt_Article2.htm
Read about halfway down, to a part of the article called Measuring the Competition. It is interesting to note what they dynoed this car at, and even more interesting to note that this is a Ford magazine, so there would be no inherent "Chevy bias" there. Have you ever actually pulled an LS1 apart? As I said earlier, there is almost no difference between the Camaro and Corvette LS1s. The exhaust manifolds, throttle linkage, and some very minor other stuff is different. Ever watch a 02 z28 dyno back to back with a 02 "345 HP package" SS. It is quite amusing to see how little the 345HP package actually does for the car.

 

the ol' saying stands true!

"Texas does it best"

 

Direct quote from a personal friend, working on the ford line. Also seen this repeated at both dealerships, Magazines and media outlets alike. "They just keep bitching about the numbers! it never ends, 03 it seems".

Ive only seen one 03' cobra run mid 12's and it wasnt stock, I also agree thats alot of car to handle so getting it to dip a bit might be some work.

Ive never stripped it down completely, but ive been past the heads. Replacing those awesome ignition packs is a common thing for me to do 1100 times each summer

You said it best, Nearly Identical numbers. I dont directly recall the exact number from the 10,000 runs ive seen this life but usually in regards to LS1 derived cars, it seemed to be F-bod 290-302 range, Vette 300-325 range. Roughly.

 

 

sloooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww wiiiiiiiithhhhhhh thhhoooooooosssssseee mooooooddddddds......

should be cracking the 12s, although the exhaust is more for ear tuning than engine tuning.

Did they defeat the e-throttle? Ford in what is basically a good move on thier part for warranty purposes limits engine torque on shifts via the throttle, unless you get the compy tuned, your stuck in granny shift mode.

the 8.8 has 31 spline axles (I assume for weight and power) so its in pretty good shape, but maybe its the tranny is what Ford is really worried about? (although it would be nice to see a TK0 600 in there!) I think its a TR3650???? which is stronger than the T45 and T5, but man they have the most craptacular shifting, 1st to 2nd is pure snot and occassionally 2nd to 3rd blows too.

 

Heat related failure? Is it electronics or the coil packs themselves?

 

I beleive the actual packs atop the head pans, No clue why, he's using a 175 shot and seems to replace about 4 a summer.

Always wants to use my garage when he does it, its called community tools

 

I was thinking more of a 13 flat, but i guess should be high 12's. Again ive not seen any stock 05 in my parts break the 14 sec barrier stock at the track.

And for the E-throttle, i have no clue just asked the question after he beat my 93'.

 

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=32006

this guy went 12.70's with CAI, 4.10's, compy tune, exhaust and tires (CAI and exhaust being the most useless) - I dunno if the GT motor benefits from a more aggressive ignition tune compared to the 2v GTs? but I'm sure a big part of this guys run is the elmination of the torque management feature.

 

Wrong way to look at things. Viper had 500 horses, and the next level till the SRT8s came out was 250 horse V6s. I don't see the point here.

Corvettes have had the same horsepower as top Camaros many many times over the years. 4th gen LS1s were within 10 horses of Corvette LS1s. Z06 is a relatively late edition to the party.

With Corvette now weighing around 3000-3100 pounds, and the next Camaro likely to weigh 3500+ in top form, horsepower differences between the Vette and Camaro are irrelevent.


You're overthinking things here.

GT 40 is top.
GT350 is next.

Even if the GT350 puts out identical horses, it's not going to be as quick as the GT because of weight.

230 horses has been done before, so it wouldn't have surprise me.

But when we start talking about 400 plus horses, then things are starting to get a little crazy. Keep in mind that the new SRT8 engines at 425 net horsepower are making more horses than the legendary 425 gross horsepower Hemis of the 60s? When we talki about the 500 horsepower LS7 engine, we are talking about THE most powerful passenger car V8 GM has EVER made in it's entire history.

Keep the subject on new cars, not used, Mustang was the better package. Research backs it up, and so do sales.


Admittedly, nostalgia, play a role. But in the REAL world of new car purchases, where the median Mustang buyer is 37 years old (43 for Mustang convertibles) and has a median income of $58,000 per year, Teenage guys worried about the opinions of teenage girls don't hold much water with product planners.

BTW: Mustang GT buyers median age is also 37 with a median age of 35, indicating that V6s are bought more by older people than the V8s.

Convertible GTs median age is 47 years old with an income of $83,000 per year and are 63% male.

Don't underestimate market research.

High 13s and low 14s is a far cry from the 15 seconds you asserted earlier.