06 GT vs 97 LT1 vid
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,830
From: Colorado Springs, CO
There were no camaros in 03-04, but if you would have read what was typed earlier, you would have realized that he said SAME YEAR. And i'm sure chevy would have done something to combat the terminators if they would have kept produceing camaros.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 77
From: Pasadena, Md, USA
Neither of us take message boards very seriously.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 3,144
From: Jackstandican
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 271
From: TN
the truth is you guys are compareing cars with a 10 year+ difference. wait for the new camaro to come out and then compare the 2007 with a 2007. not a 1996 to a 2006. there shouldnt even be comparable but they are and that is a + for the camaro.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 3,144
From: Jackstandican
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 271
From: TN
i also heard both, but i think its in late 2008. great looken car with the v8 base line of 400hp.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,308
From: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
I'll throw my $.02 into the mix ...
... my LS1 has run a 14.1 @ 101 w/A4 & 2.73 gears, completely bone stock, and only ~1000 miles on the clock
. It's also run 13.0 @ 107 w/A4 & 4.10 gears, a lot more miles on the clock, and the only "power" mods being a lid and Flowmaster cat-back. That's a pretty big range of times for just 1 car, but my #'s are typical of average LS1 cars at the track.
... I've seen friends run their LT1's from 14.6 @ 96 ('96 TA, A4, 3.42's) to 13.7 @ 100 ('97 Z28, M6 ... bone stock). So that's nearly a ~1 full second range, but again, pretty typical #'s for LT1 cars.
... I have not yet seen / paid attention to what '05+ GT's are running at the track, but considering their ~300 HP 4.6L is roughly half-way between the LT1 and LS1 power wise, then it only seems fair to reason that they should run mid-low 13's to mid-low 14's?
And I'd estimate speeds in the low-mid 100's.
SO, looks like we've got a lot of 13 - 14 second cars on our hands here, in which case, it seems pretty reasonable to assume that all of them are a good run for each other, but probably in this order: LS1 > '05+ GT > LT1. Yes, I believe that the GT's "should" take LT1's, albeit not by much, however, with a few light mods, there's no reason an LT1 can't lay the smack down on an LS1, so then it's not unreasonable to think that they could "stomp" a GT as well either.
The only time I was in a Mustang (ever! in my whole life!
) was a couple months ago at Mosport (big road track, east of Toronto). I had my car there for a weekend course/event, and my instructor drove an '06 GT. I went for a few laps with him, and while his driving was phenomenal (he lapped 10 seconds faster than me!! 
), his car only pulled about ~205 km/h going up the back stretch (~127 mph) compared to my LS1, which could pull ~220 (~136 mph) 
. By that time, my car now had the T56 w/3.23 gears, and his GT was obviously a 5-speed, but I don't know what 'Stangs come with for gears? 
Clearly though, there is a significant power difference between the two.
While I'm not going to jump on the "bash all Mustangs" band-wagon, I'm not going to bash a guy for beating one with a modded LT1 that's ~10 years old! Considering the age difference, and even compared to my ~4 y/o LS1, one might "expect" more of the Mustang at this point?? I don't see a problem with the Camaro continuing to out-power / out-perform the Mustang in years to come, especially with the Camaro making a come-back in a couple more years. But hey, that's all IMO!! 
Ok, back to the insults!!!
... my LS1 has run a 14.1 @ 101 w/A4 & 2.73 gears, completely bone stock, and only ~1000 miles on the clock
. It's also run 13.0 @ 107 w/A4 & 4.10 gears, a lot more miles on the clock, and the only "power" mods being a lid and Flowmaster cat-back. That's a pretty big range of times for just 1 car, but my #'s are typical of average LS1 cars at the track.... I've seen friends run their LT1's from 14.6 @ 96 ('96 TA, A4, 3.42's) to 13.7 @ 100 ('97 Z28, M6 ... bone stock). So that's nearly a ~1 full second range, but again, pretty typical #'s for LT1 cars.
... I have not yet seen / paid attention to what '05+ GT's are running at the track, but considering their ~300 HP 4.6L is roughly half-way between the LT1 and LS1 power wise, then it only seems fair to reason that they should run mid-low 13's to mid-low 14's?
And I'd estimate speeds in the low-mid 100's.SO, looks like we've got a lot of 13 - 14 second cars on our hands here, in which case, it seems pretty reasonable to assume that all of them are a good run for each other, but probably in this order: LS1 > '05+ GT > LT1. Yes, I believe that the GT's "should" take LT1's, albeit not by much, however, with a few light mods, there's no reason an LT1 can't lay the smack down on an LS1, so then it's not unreasonable to think that they could "stomp" a GT as well either
.The only time I was in a Mustang (ever! in my whole life!
) was a couple months ago at Mosport (big road track, east of Toronto). I had my car there for a weekend course/event, and my instructor drove an '06 GT. I went for a few laps with him, and while his driving was phenomenal (he lapped 10 seconds faster than me!! ), his car only pulled about ~205 km/h going up the back stretch (~127 mph) compared to my LS1, which could pull ~220 (~136 mph) . By that time, my car now had the T56 w/3.23 gears, and his GT was obviously a 5-speed, but I don't know what 'Stangs come with for gears? Clearly though, there is a significant power difference between the two.While I'm not going to jump on the "bash all Mustangs" band-wagon, I'm not going to bash a guy for beating one with a modded LT1 that's ~10 years old! Considering the age difference, and even compared to my ~4 y/o LS1, one might "expect" more of the Mustang at this point??
I don't see a problem with the Camaro continuing to out-power / out-perform the Mustang in years to come, especially with the Camaro making a come-back in a couple more years. But hey, that's all IMO!! Ok, back to the insults!!!
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 271
From: TN
While I'm not going to jump on the "bash all Mustangs" band-wagon, I'm not going to bash a guy for beating one with a modded LT1 that's ~10 years old! Considering the age difference, and even compared to my ~4 y/o LS1, one might "expect" more of the Mustang at this point?? I don't see a problem with the Camaro continuing to out-power / out-perform the Mustang in years to come, especially with the Camaro making a come-back in a couple more years. But hey, that's all IMO!!
Ok, back to the insults!!!
I don't see a problem with the Camaro continuing to out-power / out-perform the Mustang in years to come, especially with the Camaro making a come-back in a couple more years. But hey, that's all IMO!! Ok, back to the insults!!!
agreed, same thing i was talking about
Last edited by nick3; Dec 10, 2006 at 12:29 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 77
From: Pasadena, Md, USA
I'll throw my $.02 into the mix ...
... my LS1 has run a 14.1 @ 101 w/A4 & 2.73 gears, completely bone stock, and only ~1000 miles on the clock. It's also run 13.0 @ 107 w/A4 & 4.10 gears, a lot more miles on the clock, and the only "power" mods being a lid and Flowmaster cat-back. That's a pretty big range of times for just 1 car, but my #'s are typical of average LS1 cars at the track.
... I've seen friends run their LT1's from 14.6 @ 96 ('96 TA, A4, 3.42's) to 13.7 @ 100 ('97 Z28, M6 ... bone stock). So that's nearly a ~1 full second range, but again, pretty typical #'s for LT1 cars.
... I have not yet seen / paid attention to what '05+ GT's are running at the track, but considering their ~300 HP 4.6L is roughly half-way between the LT1 and LS1 power wise, then it only seems fair to reason that they should run mid-low 13's to mid-low 14's? And I'd estimate speeds in the low-mid 100's.
SO, looks like we've got a lot of 13 - 14 second cars on our hands here, in which case, it seems pretty reasonable to assume that all of them are a good run for each other, but probably in this order: LS1 > '05+ GT > LT1. Yes, I believe that the GT's "should" take LT1's, albeit not by much, however, with a few light mods, there's no reason an LT1 can't lay the smack down on an LS1, so then it's not unreasonable to think that they could "stomp" a GT as well either.
The only time I was in a Mustang (ever! in my whole life! ) was a couple months ago at Mosport (big road track, east of Toronto). I had my car there for a weekend course/event, and my instructor drove an '06 GT. I went for a few laps with him, and while his driving was phenomenal (he lapped 10 seconds faster than me!! ), his car only pulled about ~205 km/h going up the back stretch (~127 mph) compared to my LS1, which could pull ~220 (~136 mph) . By that time, my car now had the T56 w/3.23 gears, and his GT was obviously a 5-speed, but I don't know what 'Stangs come with for gears? Clearly though, there is a significant power difference between the two.
While I'm not going to jump on the "bash all Mustangs" band-wagon, I'm not going to bash a guy for beating one with a modded LT1 that's ~10 years old! Considering the age difference, and even compared to my ~4 y/o LS1, one might "expect" more of the Mustang at this point?? I don't see a problem with the Camaro continuing to out-power / out-perform the Mustang in years to come, especially with the Camaro making a come-back in a couple more years. But hey, that's all IMO!!
Ok, back to the insults!!!
... my LS1 has run a 14.1 @ 101 w/A4 & 2.73 gears, completely bone stock, and only ~1000 miles on the clock
. It's also run 13.0 @ 107 w/A4 & 4.10 gears, a lot more miles on the clock, and the only "power" mods being a lid and Flowmaster cat-back. That's a pretty big range of times for just 1 car, but my #'s are typical of average LS1 cars at the track.... I've seen friends run their LT1's from 14.6 @ 96 ('96 TA, A4, 3.42's) to 13.7 @ 100 ('97 Z28, M6 ... bone stock). So that's nearly a ~1 full second range, but again, pretty typical #'s for LT1 cars.
... I have not yet seen / paid attention to what '05+ GT's are running at the track, but considering their ~300 HP 4.6L is roughly half-way between the LT1 and LS1 power wise, then it only seems fair to reason that they should run mid-low 13's to mid-low 14's?
And I'd estimate speeds in the low-mid 100's.SO, looks like we've got a lot of 13 - 14 second cars on our hands here, in which case, it seems pretty reasonable to assume that all of them are a good run for each other, but probably in this order: LS1 > '05+ GT > LT1. Yes, I believe that the GT's "should" take LT1's, albeit not by much, however, with a few light mods, there's no reason an LT1 can't lay the smack down on an LS1, so then it's not unreasonable to think that they could "stomp" a GT as well either
.The only time I was in a Mustang (ever! in my whole life!
) was a couple months ago at Mosport (big road track, east of Toronto). I had my car there for a weekend course/event, and my instructor drove an '06 GT. I went for a few laps with him, and while his driving was phenomenal (he lapped 10 seconds faster than me!! ), his car only pulled about ~205 km/h going up the back stretch (~127 mph) compared to my LS1, which could pull ~220 (~136 mph) . By that time, my car now had the T56 w/3.23 gears, and his GT was obviously a 5-speed, but I don't know what 'Stangs come with for gears? Clearly though, there is a significant power difference between the two.While I'm not going to jump on the "bash all Mustangs" band-wagon, I'm not going to bash a guy for beating one with a modded LT1 that's ~10 years old! Considering the age difference, and even compared to my ~4 y/o LS1, one might "expect" more of the Mustang at this point??
I don't see a problem with the Camaro continuing to out-power / out-perform the Mustang in years to come, especially with the Camaro making a come-back in a couple more years. But hey, that's all IMO!! Ok, back to the insults!!!
This one time at band camp......................
