ls1650

my facts came straight from the link i posted above and its very interesting to know that a site that has a whole history of the mach 1 to still say 305hp i wondor why? that is not the ford comany site, it is a mach 1 site and someone posted im pretty sure all that are accurate information. mathematical u are correct but if u go on not just 1 site but many more and it says 305hp stock and neverless that can't be wrong either. well thats my opinion.

Angus

The registry simply posted the information that Ford Motor Company provided to them, which BTW was provided before the cars even hit the dealer lots.

Additionally (as I stated earlier) Ford has also said in all of it's press-releases to the media that the Mach 1 would come equipped with a cast-iron engine block, which it most certainly DID NOT.
(Ford probably intended to use a cast-iron block at some time for cost-savings, but changed to an aluminum block after all the press info packets were printed.)

GM did the same exact thing with the F-bodies the last few years they were produced BTW - they under-rated the engines (that were lifted directly out of the Corvette ) so that they wouldn't lose any 'vette sales to a lower-priced car - even a car that GM sold themselves!

F-body cars regularly dyno higher than they should (according to the GM factory hp rating), so why is it so hard to believe that Ford did the same???

ls1650

ok i believe u now

robb4964

Do mach 1's have an aluminum flywheel like the Cobra's?

stereomandan

Angus,

Man, I can tell ya, it's weird looking at a Mach1 dyno sheet after looking at LT1's for so long. The numbers are very nice for a stock car, no doubt.

A couple of things I notice, and this is being purely objective, I don't hate MACH1's. The TQ curve is rather peaky and drops quickly after 5000 rpm. Do you notice that alot while driving? Have you found that it is actually better to short shift to the next gear to get the best 1/4 mile time? It seems that might be the case with how the TQ rolls off so early and quickly, but then again you might drop into that lower TQ band before 3500 rpm. Too bad the TQ doesn't stay up there or your HP numbers would look stellar with that RPM range you have.

For comparison to a LT1 with similar HP numbers you can look at the link at the bottom of page 1 on my website. That dyno was before my valvetrain upgrade, but will give you an idea of a LT1 dyno sheet with comparable HP (285 rwhp/318 rwtq). Of coarse it's not stock though. (CAI, headers, and catback). The TQ never drops below 250 rwtq and it over 300 rwtq by 1800 rpm. Although, I bet if I ran my car up to 7k RPM (if I was crazy), my TQ would drop pretty low too.

It's fun to look at dyno sheets with cars that have similar HP, since the TQ is what really tells the story. The MACH1's are certainly putting down some good 1/4 mile times, and it's obvious that the gearing (rear and tranny) has a BIG factor in that, making use of the extra RPM capability.

Dan

Angus

No offense taken.

The stock dyno - and MY MODDED DYNO - are typical of lightly modded, bolt-on-only 4V's.

The torque difference between the two engines is due mostly to displacement, or lack of displacement in the case of the little 4.6 liter/281 cid 4V.

Free-breathing multi-valve heads make up for the lack of cubic inches somewhat, but the area under the curve shows that low-end torque is hard to come by without cubic inches.

stereomandan

Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I can see how the Bolt-Ons are helping the breathing up top, and to a certain extent down low. You do still have plenty of low RPM TQ to keep the car from feeling dogish in the lower RPM, that's for sure. I always liked the idea of the MACH-1. I like the shaker hood, the choice of engine at the time, and to be honest, I thought it was brave of Ford to put the live rear axle in there. I think it get's the Mustang back to it's good-'ol pony days though, and I like it.

The LT1's are beasts with the low end TQ, but they run out of breath fairly early in stock form, and have a lower RPM band. It's one of the reasons that I believe the 'ol 350 CI engine is so popular. Great low end grunt, and with the right intake/exhaust/valvatrain mods it can do well in the upper RPM's as well.

Dan

BirchMan98z

lol Just FYI--- our friend wasn't calling people "****" he was saying read the "faqs" (frequently asked questions)

Antz97ZNJ

Mikie how do you like those wheels? I was looking into possibly picking up a 99-00 GT(yes I said GT ) or preferably a earlier model DOHC throw some 430's and a few bolt ons on, and definately some fi in the near future and getting those wheels. Not sure where you got em but I found them failry inexpensive @ mustangtuning.com

Angus

Not that I care, but I "think" he was actually referring to the 1st part of this statement:

Mikie

Antz,
I love em. They turn heads where ever I go. I purchased mine from www.afswheels.com and agree that they are fairly inexpensive. I just went with the 17x9s all the way around for ease of rotation , but they do offer the deep dish 17x10.5 for the rear. You may want to check those out.
Good luck on your search for a GT, Im sure you will make it fly once you get it.

Keep me informed.

Antz97ZNJ

Yea the site I found them on also have the deep dish. Ill check your site out and compare prices, 1st try is gonna be for a dohc but there not the easiest to find, would like to find a 99/01 but a 96-98 is cool also. The GT's on the other hand are a dime a dozen..been on unemployment for awhile and recently started up a new job, need a few mths to get back on my feet again so well see what happens.