Cobra got beat
03-30-2009, 07:47 PM
#121
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 64
The point wasn't so much the octane Mr. Force, as it was the additional 100 lbs... although I doubt a man of your substantial command of physics would argue that the increase in ignition/cumbustion efficiency realized through the additional 19 points from 93 to 112 octane would not benefit he who used it...
Now I know you're sufferin' from Z envy, but courtesy is the friend of the underdog... Pony Boy.
Last edited by OVA1; 03-30-2009 at 08:35 PM.
03-30-2009, 08:15 PM
#122
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Snow Belt, PA
Posts: 654
it matters because he was running 93 while the other guy was using a good bit of 112
03-30-2009, 08:28 PM
#123
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 64
A 7.8 @ 87 is about 1 full second and 13 mph off from the average Termi 1/8 as described in the previous posts. The Mustang you describe is definately not the norm.
On a side note, why is your car only running 87 in the 1/8? Mine did that on street tires with nothing more than a K&N, 4.10 gears, and an HPP tune. There could be more left in yours. Not Cobra fast times, but better.
On a side note, why is your car only running 87 in the 1/8? Mine did that on street tires with nothing more than a K&N, 4.10 gears, and an HPP tune. There could be more left in yours. Not Cobra fast times, but better.
Cobra's are no problem... remove the induction and there's no contest. The simple fact is, I've run hundreds of Mustangs and never lost to a single one that was naturally aspirated...
And I don't mind losing to an induced car... why would I?
It's an absurd argument... the FACT is the Mustang powerplant is a weaker power plant than the LT-1 and SUBSTANTIALLY weaker than the LSx platform... PERIOD.
Pound for pound and dollar for dollar the F-body is a superior automobile to the Mustang... And when that great gettin' up mo'ning comes that I bolt a blower into the Z... I'll be more than ready to prove it to any Mustang operator that chooses to feel otherwise. Hell I'll do NOW... I've got a Nano-backed nitrous kit that's been sitting at the shop for 6 months... The biggest jet is a 200, but I wouldn't need more than the 75 to take down 95% of the Cobras on the PLANET. I doubt it'd take more than a day to bolt that up and tune it...
With regard to the mid 80 trap you laid down, I'd suggest more torque... It's not unusual at all to see mid to high 80mph traps on cars pulling mid 8 ETs... occasionally we see a low 90...
Bolt-on Mustangs do it all night, pretty much every Friday night. Of course that's only if I'm in the Pits... as if I'm making a pass, I'm generally making the turn by the time they hit the trap... having hit 87 moh substantially faster than they hit 90 mph over the same measured course.
But you're exactly right, there's plently left in the old gal... I doubt that she's anywhere CLOSE to topping out.
We've got a set of ported AFR heads coming, and I expect that she'll react favorably to the new breathers... given that their flowing a third more volume than the set she was born with. If we're not in the mid -low 7s in warm air, I'll be sorely disappointed.
Last edited by OVA1; 03-30-2009 at 08:39 PM.
03-30-2009, 10:30 PM
#125
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Snow Belt, PA
Posts: 654
04-02-2009, 11:51 AM
#132
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Pasadena, Md, USA
Posts: 77
04-02-2009, 12:41 PM
#133
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton, IL
Posts: 694
Got shorties on there now. Need to step up to LT's but they'll just end up with the pile of other crap I've got waiting on the shelf. 
Nice!!!
The quicker you learn that there really is no difference between these three cars (Mustang, Camaro, Firebird) the less devastating your first loss is going to be. It's absurd to think that one platform is better than the other. I've seen 7 second 1/4 mile versions of all three so the capability is there regardless of what make it is.
Only counting N/A Mustangs is just as absurd as the old "wait till I put a blower on my 'Maro" reply. Just because they go the FI route doesn't make it any different than going with a H/C package on an F-body.
You must run at a small track with very few people. 87 mph in the 1/8 isn't going to win much around here. Unless you are very selective about who you wanna race. I'll tell you what. Come on up to STL and I'll set you up with a couple of friends and we'll see what your opinion is. 
P.S. I happen to know a full bolt-on 2V N/A GT would run your time no sweat. That's with less than 300 to the wheels.
Cobra's are no problem... remove the induction and there's no contest. The simple fact is, I've run hundreds of Mustangs and never lost to a single one that was naturally aspirated...
And I don't mind losing to an induced car... why would I?
It's an absurd argument... the FACT is the Mustang powerplant is a weaker power plant than the LT-1 and SUBSTANTIALLY weaker than the LSx platform... PERIOD.
And I don't mind losing to an induced car... why would I?
It's an absurd argument... the FACT is the Mustang powerplant is a weaker power plant than the LT-1 and SUBSTANTIALLY weaker than the LSx platform... PERIOD.
Only counting N/A Mustangs is just as absurd as the old "wait till I put a blower on my 'Maro" reply. Just because they go the FI route doesn't make it any different than going with a H/C package on an F-body.
Pound for pound and dollar for dollar the F-body is a superior automobile to the Mustang... And when that great gettin' up mo'ning comes that I bolt a blower into the Z... I'll be more than ready to prove it to any Mustang operator that chooses to feel otherwise. Hell I'll do NOW... I've got a Nano-backed nitrous kit that's been sitting at the shop for 6 months... The biggest jet is a 200, but I wouldn't need more than the 75 to take down 95% of the Cobras on the PLANET. I doubt it'd take more than a day to bolt that up and tune it...
P.S. I happen to know a full bolt-on 2V N/A GT would run your time no sweat. That's with less than 300 to the wheels.
Last edited by 95firehawk; 04-02-2009 at 12:45 PM.
04-02-2009, 05:06 PM
#135
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Pasadena, Md, USA
Posts: 77
Ahh... that explains it... Severe intellectual limitations... Hoodothunkiit?
The point wasn't so much the octane Mr. Force, as it was the additional 100 lbs... although I doubt a man of your substantial command of physics would argue that the increase in ignition/cumbustion efficiency realized through the additional 19 points from 93 to 112 octane would not benefit he who used it...
Now I know you're sufferin' from Z envy, but courtesy is the friend of the underdog... Pony Boy.
The point wasn't so much the octane Mr. Force, as it was the additional 100 lbs... although I doubt a man of your substantial command of physics would argue that the increase in ignition/cumbustion efficiency realized through the additional 19 points from 93 to 112 octane would not benefit he who used it...
Now I know you're sufferin' from Z envy, but courtesy is the friend of the underdog... Pony Boy.
Hey boy wonder! Glad you could reply to me but hey, I realize you're probably still admiring your 87mph 1/8th mile traps! Muahaha........Welcome to like 10+ years ago!
By the way, put some 112+ octane in a regular car and see what it does. Want to use that nugget of yours and bet it goes slower? Again, I couldn't give a rats azz if you're using 150+ octane your shat is STILL A TURD!
I'll await your next dissertation for entertainment purposes
