The better mileage of the LS1 is due in part to its tranny and packaging (body weight, shape, etc...). Why Ford doesn't use a 6 speed is beyond me but for 1/4 mile racing it's not that big a deal (if that's your thing). I doubt many of us spend our entire time driving in 6th gear anyway I agree the LSx series is a good one, no doubt about it, but packaging makes it that much better.

 

Why do you gotta wait till then? Has any LS1 AUTO (this side of a vette) ever run a 13.6 in the quarter in any of the big 3 rags?

I sure don't remember any.

If you're in a stock LS1 Fbod and you don't wanna get embarrassed by a chick in a new auto stang you better be shifting at your best.

 

Apparently not. Last time you constantly changed the baseline data to make your arguement. But if you want to try again, go for it, personally I think you'll be typing in vain...

 

Yeah, you're right...

Given the level of proof shown previously, it would take a certifiable idiot to come to the conclusion that the DOHC or SOHC mod motors are a better design for a performance car than the LSx family and that specific output actually counts for anything whatsoever.

 

Only a certifiable idiot would take your "proof" as proof.

 

I am guessing the car comes with some steep gears...

Any ideas on the rear ratio ? 3.55-3.73 ?

 

3.55 for the rear, not sure what the tranny ratio's are.

 

Anyhow, a few thoughts to this. LT1 Camaros would run 96 - 99 mph AUTO, stock, and those were rated at 285 at best. So far, I don't recall LT1 being underrated.

Perhaps 300 HP of the GT is not that far off, unless there is greater percentage of drivetrain loss. On the other hand, the Mustangs seem to be exceptionally geared in such a way that they squeeze the most out of their available power - just look at this 13.6 business. The only other cars I have heard of that trap mid-13's at only 99mph would be AWD.

BUT, Mach I is around 315 - 320 HP (so the rumormill has it)....

 

LSx = Lighter weight, smaller package, more power, more torque, better fuel economy, equivalent or lower emissions.

Yeah, that's some twisted logic.

 

Paper, the LSx is a better motor. Simple as that. It's smaller, lighter and makes more power. You've seen how huge the 5.4 got when Ford tried to make truck motor out of the mod motor to compete with the Chevy SB in displacement.

BUT, Ford has managed to massage the 4.6 into a lethal LS1 killer with the Mach1 and now the '05 GT. And it runs on 87 octane. We already KNOW theres 25-35hp to be gained from a retune. Judging from the auto car performance, a $25K manual tranny GT is probably a 12sec car with nothing more than a $300 reflash.

 

Woah, lets not get ahead of our selves. The Mach1 was no LS1 killer, it may have been close but the later LS1's would still outrun it.

How do you already conclude that the 05' GT is an LS1 killer? You KNOW the car has 25-35 hp from tuning..............no you don't. There are a lot of rumors and little known fact.

 

A source from Steeda (who is legit) said that at least 20hp could be gained from tuning.

Mach 1's kept up with LS1's. No one is saying the 05 will be an LS1 killer. I highly doubt that. But it could be as fast (possibly faster than a Mach 1 - see other post). It'll be a drivers race for sure.

 

You're playin at the same time you're moving the goal posts.

Car mags are consistant in how they run cars they test, therefore are a good baseline when comparing cars. If a car mag ran a car one way under certain conditions, they will run another car the same way.

You are saying that because one person under optimum conditions can get an LS1 under 13.6, that the Mustang tested in a car mag (where they average out times & normally correct for differences inhumidity, tempreature, and altitude) must be slower.

Unless you put the same car in the same hands under the same conditions, or make simular corrections, you simply can't state definitively which car is quicker.

Car mags are perfect measurements when comparing cars. Pick a single magazine source & flip open an article regarding an LS1 F-body and a new article with the Mustang GT. Whichever car is quicker in the mag is a safe bet as being quicker on the street. Sure, your times may actually vary depending on everything from driver skill, to condition of the oil in your rear differential, to the altitude & tempreature outside & how each car's computer handles it.

I choose Car & Driver because they tend to end up with the quickest times because they do anything necessary to get those times. Motor Trend doesn't.

Bottom line, stock vs stock, any car within .5 seconds of you in the quarter is a driver's (and particular model's) race.

 

[QUOTE=dan05gtowner]

No one is saying the 05 will be an LS1 killer. I QUOTE]

Actually Bigbluecruiser just did, and that is what I was responding to.

Damn, I am not doing good with the whole quote thing today.

 

I was looking through GM parts depot, and the ls1 didn't seem that cheap a motor. I always figured a 4.6 Dohc like the Northstar would be more expensive, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Looking at FRPP's 4.6 dohc crate motors, price seems to be the same.

Crate motor prices:
Ls1 w/computer - 5,990 dollars (msrp: 7,272 dollars)
Northstar VVT v8 - 4,265 dollars (msrp: 5,700)
Cobra's 4.6 Dohc with transmission - 5,795 - 5,995 dollars


http://www.gmpartsdepot.com/store/ca...ategory_ID=63&
http://www.fordracingparts.com/crate...dularcobra.asp

Is the MSRP just inflated despite the cheaper production costs or is the Ls1 not as cheap as we thought?