Ok, just a simple question...what do LT1's do stock in the 1/4 mile? 1/8 mile?both with the stick and auto, maybe some of you guys can post some of your times and Mods...Thanks

 

This is what my 96 Z M6 ran right after I bought it. With absolutely NO MODS and 74,400 miles! Haven't ran it with cold air, TB bypass, and Flowmaster catbak yet. I'd say 13.90's for sure.

R/T .643
60 2.096
330 5.913
1/8 9.062
mph 78.54
1000 11.25
1/4 14.025
mph 99.77

That is with street tires at 22 psi and about a 68* day, and I was granny shiftin.
BTW, I beat an 89 convertable Mustang on that run!!
Thinkin about switchin to were the real power is?? J/K, Go get the ricers!!

 

Nah I like my stang just fine I am just asking because a friend that drives a 95Z thinks that the Stangs can't keep up with a Z when in actuality the 99+ GT's and LT1's are about even and the 96-98 SN95's with the PI head swap are right there as well (actually faster than the 99+ Stangs) because there is a bump in compression with the PI heads on the 96-98 blocks, I prefer the looks of the Mustang over the Camaro is Most of the reason I chose one....and oh yeah as my sig says "Blue oval forever" hehe just looking for a few Numbers so keep em coming guys....and please lets keep the flames to a minimum eh...


Maybe if he hears it from a fellow Camaro driver he will believe it hehe

 

I aint flamin ya but it has been my expierence that the 99+ can,t hang with a slighltly modded LT1 and my car even beat the crap out of a friends 96 Cobra, he got so fed up he sold the car. I can respect your loyalty to Ford and all but if you wanna go fast get a Camaro.

 

To quote the guy at the car dealership when I was looking for a GT:
"Yeah. Mustangs are nice...but if you want to get a serious muscle car, go find a camaro"




did I mention that was a ford dealership!!!


No flamin'! I bought my girl a 96 6 banger mustang that she loves to peices.

Peace! -mj

 

when my car was nearly bone stock (throttle body airfoil), 40K miles and i was pretty inexperienced at the track and at shifting....3 weeks after buying it and my first time at the track ever.

i managed a 14.2 @ 97.x with a 2.2-.3 60' and the temp was in the low 80's with pretty high florida humidity.

with traction and better more consistent shifting i could've squeaked a 14.0 i'm sure.

 

A Bone stock car can be as quick as 13.5 with ideal conditions and a good driver in a 6 speed to as slow as a 14.5 with a moron driving it.

Most every car even the so called factory freaks or just poorly running cars fall into that time range. Average time i would say is right at 14.1 for an auto and 13.9 for a manual.

What about over there on that stang board, what is the overall breakdown of times for different years and trannies.

 

14.0 was done on a slightly slipping clutch. when i fixed that and went to kevlar clutch and ran 13,7x two cosecutive runs. stock except for the clutch.

not trying to bash ford or mustang. but ive never seen a stock gt or cobra for that matter until the supercharger hang with a stock Z. the one thing ive noticed at the street and some at the track is that mustangs have alot of low end torqe but nothing up top.

im not trying to start the age old mustang-camaro debate by saying the above. and thanks for asking a legitiment question, comparing mustang and camaro.

but let me ask you, what do the stock mustangs run, and do yall have factory freaks as well.

 

My best stock run was:

R/T: .647
60': 2.107
1/4 ET: 14.127
1/4 mph: 98.7

 

Generally very low 14's in the quarter. Not sure about the 1/8 mile split.

With shorty headers, shifter, and drag radials, mine ran 13.65 at 100, 1/8 was 8.75 at 80mph. Mine was a stick at the time. The driver has a whole lot to do with ET as you already know...

 

Mine was running 9.0-9.1 at like 80-82mph when I had CAI and couldn't drive it on street tires. I love Mustangs and my local F-body club has meetings with the local Mustang club all the time. Even they will admit that a Mustang has to have a few good mods to hit those times; they're big advantage is the smorgasboard of products and BIG price difference in mods.

A bone stock 95Z "should" be able to hand a bone stock Mustang its behind any ol' day of the week...but, a poor Camaro driver could be beat by an experience Mustang driver without too much effort, IMO. Driver counts for a lot more than people seem to realize.

 

I dewel in both worlds Camaro and Stang. The LT1 compared to the 4.6 and 5.0 pulls a lot harder on top end and bottom. Not to mention with minor mods it gets real ugly. But nevertheless do the math $5000-7000 for Camaro, $12,000-16,000 Stang.
PS the Stang is my wife's car

 

I agree that the 99+ GT's run about the same as the LT1's stock. But i think the LT1 is a better engine in the long run. I heard the GT's dont respond as well to mods but hey they are both nice cars. I ran a 14.1 stock at 99. After all the mods in my sig i should be low 13's high 12's at 110 or so. I wouldnt trade my Camaro for the world...........................well maybe for a vette.


Chris

 

I was looking at GT's for a while. I had a Ford salesman tell me I might as well get the 6cyl over the 4.6L because it had more power for the $. Something I've never heard a Chevy salesman say. Then again, all they had were 6 bangers and I imagine he was just wanting a sale.

I always found it interesting how Ford magazines always compared the Cobra to the Z28 instead of the SS. That is until the new Cobra. I wish I had 36k to spend, but then again an SS or Firehawk w/ a super charger....

To answer the ? posted. The LT1 I've been around (a '93 Firehawk) ran 13.5's. With a few bolt ons, low 13's high 12's. It was pretty traction limited too. A set of drag radials would do wonders.

 

my trans am went 14.3's stock on a hot day with high humidity. my current mods net me 14's flat with almost identical weather conditions. on a good day and a good r/t and i think i can get it down to 13.8-9. i agree that stangs lack alot of power with mods, but it comes down to the drivers!