2001 Mustang Bullitt vs. 1994 Z28?
4 Months and no race ?
Registered User
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 501
From: Chesapeake, VA USA
Wow. I'm a former Mustang guy and I'm appalled...
The Bullit is no faster than a similarly equipped GT. MM&FF had multiple articles on it and you can even check out the times MM&FF got for the Bullit in the famous 12-second stock LS1 article with Evan Smith driving both vehicles.
Stock vs. stock a Mach 1 M5 and LS1 F-body M6 is a good race, but it isn't due to the 4.6 4V as much as it is to the Mach's superior tranny and rear gearing and slight weight advantage. Check out the traps on both and the LS1 will be 3-5mph higher. Still a Ford success story in my book...
LT1s will dyno 10-25rwhp more than a 99+ M6 2V GT, I won't even go into the non-PI 96-98 2Vs or the automatics. The torque curve advantage for a push-rod engine vs. OHC of lesser displacement should be obvious.
And for the guy that wants to race his Bullit, be careful what you wish for...
The Bullit is no faster than a similarly equipped GT. MM&FF had multiple articles on it and you can even check out the times MM&FF got for the Bullit in the famous 12-second stock LS1 article with Evan Smith driving both vehicles.
Stock vs. stock a Mach 1 M5 and LS1 F-body M6 is a good race, but it isn't due to the 4.6 4V as much as it is to the Mach's superior tranny and rear gearing and slight weight advantage. Check out the traps on both and the LS1 will be 3-5mph higher. Still a Ford success story in my book...
LT1s will dyno 10-25rwhp more than a 99+ M6 2V GT, I won't even go into the non-PI 96-98 2Vs or the automatics. The torque curve advantage for a push-rod engine vs. OHC of lesser displacement should be obvious.
And for the guy that wants to race his Bullit, be careful what you wish for...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 234
From: Syracuse NY
Except for 1 person no one said the Bullitt was faster than a SIMILARLY packaged GT. We have concluded that the Bullitt for all intensive purposes is faster but only marginally when stock.
Also I have seen stock Machs hit 105 or so stock and I have never seen a LS1 hit a 110 or higher stock. Granted the LS1 should walk away on the top end but for a 1/4 mile either car has a legitimate chance to win.
Also I have seen stock Machs hit 105 or so stock and I have never seen a LS1 hit a 110 or higher stock. Granted the LS1 should walk away on the top end but for a 1/4 mile either car has a legitimate chance to win.
Registered User
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 501
From: Chesapeake, VA USA
Like I said "3-5 MPH". Even giving you the 105 MPH (most Machs I've seen/read about are 101-104 stock), that statement is true. I've never seen a stock LS1 F-body go above 108 trap (Atco and G Lakes Dragaway), so that's what I have to go on. The LS1 WILL walk away up top all things being equal. If you notice, I am agreeing that Mach vs. LS1 F-body is a driver's race...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 381
From: scranton, nd
First of all notice he compared His SS to a Bullitt not a cobra 2nd the v6 camaro was rated at 200 hp (l36) and 205 (yb3) so please shut up about the v6 vs a GT Look a little harder. ford rated the bullitt at 265 in 2001 and came back in 2003 with a 280 rwhp, Had to justify the the extra 4 grand for the 2001 cobra. Thought I would inclued a few quotes about the side by side test of these 2 cars. the only thing the f-body is rated better at is a straight line.
Looking at the final rankings reveals a landslide victory for the Mustang Bullitt GT. Despite being slower and more expensive (two adjectives that no sport coupe will ever want to be associated with), our editors unanimously picked the Mustang over the Camaro for what they would personally buy and what they would recommend to consumers. The Chevy is fun to punt around in for a few days, and Lord knows it's fast. But it's too unwieldy, too boisterous and not something you want to make a long-term commitment to. Wondering why the Mustang outsells the Camaro (and its Firebird sibling) almost three to one? Now you know.
So the Camaro has the muscle, but the Mustang typically has more grace. So what happens when the road gets twisty? To find out, we took these cars to Willow Springs Raceway along with the other sport coupes. The Vegas betting line (you can bet on anything in Vegas, right?) favored the Mustang. Because of its lowered suspension, Tokico shocks and subframe connectors, the Bullitt is arguably the best handling Mustang for 2001. And yes, we're including the SVT Cobra
In city environments, more of the Camaro's faults are revealed. Outward visibility is poor due to a long dash and hood and small side mirrors. Camaro drivers will also encounter front seats that lack headrests or any real head support. Our editors ranked them as the least comfortable of all the cars' in the test. We also were not impressed with the Camaro's controls or the quality of its interior materials. Both the window switches and the optional steering wheel-mounted audio controls have a toy-like feel that makes them hard to operate, and the gray cloth on our test car had a depressingly cheap look to it.
In terms of refinement, the Mustang is clearly better than the Camaro. It's interior, while still no match against cars like the RSX or GTI, isn't so obviously low-grade like the Camaro's. The Bullitt trim certainly helped the Mustang in this regard, as it adds nice retro touches like charcoal-colored leather seats, a '60s-era font for the gauges, and metal highlights for the shifter, pedals and doorsills. It is also the better-looking of the two cars thanks to its subtle but effective Bullitt exterior trim. What minor complaints there were revolved around the awkward clutch and shifter and a fussy power driver seat that kept blowing its fuse.
Looking at the final rankings reveals a landslide victory for the Mustang Bullitt GT. Despite being slower and more expensive (two adjectives that no sport coupe will ever want to be associated with), our editors unanimously picked the Mustang over the Camaro for what they would personally buy and what they would recommend to consumers. The Chevy is fun to punt around in for a few days, and Lord knows it's fast. But it's too unwieldy, too boisterous and not something you want to make a long-term commitment to. Wondering why the Mustang outsells the Camaro (and its Firebird sibling) almost three to one? Now you know.
as for where do I live Augusta Ga but I don't race V6's or Z28's but pull next to me in a SS or a ws6 and lets see what happens.
Looking at the final rankings reveals a landslide victory for the Mustang Bullitt GT. Despite being slower and more expensive (two adjectives that no sport coupe will ever want to be associated with), our editors unanimously picked the Mustang over the Camaro for what they would personally buy and what they would recommend to consumers. The Chevy is fun to punt around in for a few days, and Lord knows it's fast. But it's too unwieldy, too boisterous and not something you want to make a long-term commitment to. Wondering why the Mustang outsells the Camaro (and its Firebird sibling) almost three to one? Now you know.
So the Camaro has the muscle, but the Mustang typically has more grace. So what happens when the road gets twisty? To find out, we took these cars to Willow Springs Raceway along with the other sport coupes. The Vegas betting line (you can bet on anything in Vegas, right?) favored the Mustang. Because of its lowered suspension, Tokico shocks and subframe connectors, the Bullitt is arguably the best handling Mustang for 2001. And yes, we're including the SVT Cobra
In city environments, more of the Camaro's faults are revealed. Outward visibility is poor due to a long dash and hood and small side mirrors. Camaro drivers will also encounter front seats that lack headrests or any real head support. Our editors ranked them as the least comfortable of all the cars' in the test. We also were not impressed with the Camaro's controls or the quality of its interior materials. Both the window switches and the optional steering wheel-mounted audio controls have a toy-like feel that makes them hard to operate, and the gray cloth on our test car had a depressingly cheap look to it.
In terms of refinement, the Mustang is clearly better than the Camaro. It's interior, while still no match against cars like the RSX or GTI, isn't so obviously low-grade like the Camaro's. The Bullitt trim certainly helped the Mustang in this regard, as it adds nice retro touches like charcoal-colored leather seats, a '60s-era font for the gauges, and metal highlights for the shifter, pedals and doorsills. It is also the better-looking of the two cars thanks to its subtle but effective Bullitt exterior trim. What minor complaints there were revolved around the awkward clutch and shifter and a fussy power driver seat that kept blowing its fuse.
Looking at the final rankings reveals a landslide victory for the Mustang Bullitt GT. Despite being slower and more expensive (two adjectives that no sport coupe will ever want to be associated with), our editors unanimously picked the Mustang over the Camaro for what they would personally buy and what they would recommend to consumers. The Chevy is fun to punt around in for a few days, and Lord knows it's fast. But it's too unwieldy, too boisterous and not something you want to make a long-term commitment to. Wondering why the Mustang outsells the Camaro (and its Firebird sibling) almost three to one? Now you know.
as for where do I live Augusta Ga but I don't race V6's or Z28's but pull next to me in a SS or a ws6 and lets see what happens.
you r a baby!
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 153
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223
From: Browns Mills, New Jersey
Well back when my 94 lt1 only had CAI and air foil I raced my friends 2000 Gt stock from a 45 mph pull and just kept pulling all the way past 100 mph plus.The GT is an automatic,I have a m6.It is as simple as this 93-95 5.7 liters of underestimated engine 275hp@5000rpm 325tq@2400 versus 4.6 sohc liters of engine 260 hp@5250 302tq@4000rpm.Considering horsepower is the amount of work done by the force of torque over a period of time.The lt1 engine actually has the 4.6 by the ***** almost through the entire power curve.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223
From: Browns Mills, New Jersey
Hey all u LT1 lovers, thought I would help you out on your questions about the BULLITT. It seems most of you are a lil cocky about the fact your cars walk away(LOL) from a GT. first and foremost you need to understand that Ford underrated the HP of the bullitt as not to interfear with their cobra sales. 2nd, the bullitt makes its peak HP & tourqe at 2200 rpm instead of 4700 like the GT. So out of the hole it will pull away from a 94 LT1, and with a good driver you will NEVER catch it
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 77
From: Pasadena, Md, USA
You raced a stock auto which is much slower then a properly driven 5spd plus you had a mod or 2. Remember the Gt is also lighter. Do whatever math you want but both cars being manual/stock its a very close race and the LT1 certainly doesnt pull away. Problem w/ the 2 valves is unless you go Tims route or go FI its hard getting the cars fast without dropping serious coin. They need a ton to even hang w/ a stock manual LS1, and even modded pretty good dont trap a whole lot.Most of the crowd has moved on the the Mach's, 3 valves, or Cobras.
