2001 Mustang Bullitt vs. 1994 Z28?
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 234
From: Syracuse NY
SSlither: You must have missed the part about the guys saying the 2v would lose to a lt1 along with yourself. I said a near stock, which is what I am. They could have pulleys, ypipe back, computer flash.... I'm saying I'll take that bet.
You said that the lt1 will win when I said it was a drivers race. I'm saying find a similarly modded lt1 and I will race and tape it.
My previous post stated times for a normal 96-98 GT aswell as a best for the lt1 and a awesome run for a 99-04....what was so categorized about that?
Oneclean: The cobra was for the ls1, the Saleen and Roush were to dominate the track not the GM competition. The only Mustang that was made to run with the vettes was the GT500 as the Ford GT was on its way out.
You said that the lt1 will win when I said it was a drivers race. I'm saying find a similarly modded lt1 and I will race and tape it.
My previous post stated times for a normal 96-98 GT aswell as a best for the lt1 and a awesome run for a 99-04....what was so categorized about that?
Oneclean: The cobra was for the ls1, the Saleen and Roush were to dominate the track not the GM competition. The only Mustang that was made to run with the vettes was the GT500 as the Ford GT was on its way out.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 234
From: Syracuse NY
I know the 13.8 was impressive as all hell. I will admit that most should hit around 14.0-14.2. I have seen some good drivers hit 13.9 at low elevation and very few hit lower but still possible.
I love both the Camaro and Mustang and year for year the Camaro had em on power and performance for most of the 90s and 00s. But the PI 2v was matched perfectly with the then outdated lt1 which was replaced with the "god"
of motors.
Now once again the 3v is matched with the ls1 but still to late. Ford gets to the plate it seems but only after GM has left the field. What the 09-10 model years will bring will be anyones guess but I will dare say that both your and my car will be severely outclassed.
I love both the Camaro and Mustang and year for year the Camaro had em on power and performance for most of the 90s and 00s. But the PI 2v was matched perfectly with the then outdated lt1 which was replaced with the "god"
of motors.Now once again the 3v is matched with the ls1 but still to late. Ford gets to the plate it seems but only after GM has left the field. What the 09-10 model years will bring will be anyones guess but I will dare say that both your and my car will be severely outclassed.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223
From: Browns Mills, New Jersey
I don't know man.......I owned a 97's Cobra for a couple of years and I always had a hard time beating stock LT1's. When it was stock for stock it was door to door every time.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 153
(lol)Had to get you back earlier.I think I can topple the 14.2 but not the 11.2 blown stang.I just bought my car this past Sat...previous owner ran a 13.83 before the catback.This is my 3rd LT1.I have some things in mind for this one,possibly 3:73's LT's and a tune.I am wanting to maintain decent gas mileage,DD status,and just bolt ons but out-run bone stock LS1's.
Last edited by lovescamaros25; Jul 10, 2007 at 09:44 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223
From: Browns Mills, New Jersey
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 234
From: Syracuse NY
Ummm..... I would deffinently retract that statement. The 96-98 cars can swap the top end from a 99+ car and be faster than a 2v from those years. This bumps the compression and its a literal bolt-on as these just unbolt from one motor and just bolt on the other 2v. They car run pretty damn good times with 50 more rwhp as they are a bit lighter. Expect many of those cars to put a hurting on you.
Unless you know the car/driver you shouldn't assume you will beat them. I have had quite a few surprises in my day. Some from me, some to me.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 77
From: Pasadena, Md, USA
(lol)Had to get you back earlier.I think I can topple the 14.2 but not the 11.2 blown stang.I just bought my car this past Sat...previous owner ran a 13.83 before the catback.This is my 3rd LT1.I have some things in mind for this one,possibly 3:73's LT's and a tune.I am wanting to maintain decent gas mileage,DD status,and just bolt ons but out-run bone stock LS1's.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 77
From: Pasadena, Md, USA
Registered User
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
Yes I mean "MY" stock 98 when it had the whopping 225hp to the flywheel and yes it ran 14.2@97 at Cecil county back in 1998 
I have no reason to lie and it doesn't benefit me at all now, does it? Hell, I thought it was wrong too cause the car was a heavy turd. LOL.
I still say a DECENTLY driven STOCK 2v is a great match for a stock LT1. I still say it's a drivers race and have proven it.
BTW, I agree with you 100% that 96-98 were the worst years for the 2v, however, once you start modifying like I have, the game is different.
Also just to note and not that it's a significant difference but the 96 and 97 2V's had 215hp ... the 98 had a whopping 225hp mostly due to computer tuning from Furd. Also to note, the 98 was the "bastard" year and it's obvious Furd planned on the "returnless" fuel system already becuase the fuel bucket in the 98 is a bastard'ized thing and looks like ford started but didn't go all the way with returnless ---- whew aren't I glad?
I have no reason to lie and it doesn't benefit me at all now, does it? Hell, I thought it was wrong too cause the car was a heavy turd. LOL.I still say a DECENTLY driven STOCK 2v is a great match for a stock LT1. I still say it's a drivers race and have proven it.
BTW, I agree with you 100% that 96-98 were the worst years for the 2v, however, once you start modifying like I have, the game is different.
Also just to note and not that it's a significant difference but the 96 and 97 2V's had 215hp ... the 98 had a whopping 225hp mostly due to computer tuning from Furd. Also to note, the 98 was the "bastard" year and it's obvious Furd planned on the "returnless" fuel system already becuase the fuel bucket in the 98 is a bastard'ized thing and looks like ford started but didn't go all the way with returnless ---- whew aren't I glad?
Last edited by scott9050; Jul 11, 2007 at 08:46 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 77
From: Pasadena, Md, USA
Tim, you know as well as I do that Cecil is a fast track with great traction. My 94 Mark VIII which weighed 4240 with me in it, an open rear with stock 3.07 gear turned a 14.651 at 97.21 there in November of '05. It looks like a total hillbilly joint until you run down the track. You also forgot to tell them your stellar times when you started to mod the thing
I agree though, Cecil is by far, the fastest track around!