Track Kill Stories Race Track Victories, 1/4 Mile Times, Dyno Numbers - DRIVE RESPONSIBLY

Lt1 - 5.0

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 3, 2007 | 08:52 PM
  #16  
lovescamaros25's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 153
I dont like to magazine race but in 94 motortrend got a 94 camaro z28 m6 to run a 14.2.The Mustang GT ran a 15.1.So that does kinda back me up there(lol).The lt1 was definetly faster than .5(half a second) or lower than the Mustang Gt.In 93-94 the LT1 had a 60 horsepower advantage over the 5.0 GT (215 versus 275).I have never heard of a bone stock 5.0 breaking into the 13's with no mods.It is hard enough to get some LT1's in the high 13's.If a 5.0 did run a 13.9 it would be about as rare as an LS1 running a 12 second 1/4...VERY VERY RARE....Here is a link of posted 1/4 mile times by magazines...http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html

Last edited by lovescamaros25; May 3, 2007 at 09:16 PM.
Old May 3, 2007 | 09:21 PM
  #17  
lovescamaros25's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 153
I was just stating what I felt were facts(lol).The LT1 basically owns the 5.0 and I dont think it would surprise anyone if an LT1 ran .8 faster than a 5.0 with equal drivers.Dont scold me for being a bit biased toward the Camaro over the Mustang (lol).
Old May 3, 2007 | 11:44 PM
  #18  
scott9050's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
Originally Posted by SSlither
Watch out.......I can see Scott coming with his Bob Cosby timeslips!
Don't need Bob's timeslips, it's been done numerous times by many many people. Only idiots magazine race. On another note, some of the new children on here probably don't remember our "other" Bob (Robert AKA Backinblack) who drove his 6spd LT1 to a 13.XX at 107 with just a catback. A lot of people called him out, but it was witnessed by countless others. Saying a 5.0 runs one time or another discounts transmission options, gear options, body style, options etc. A stock Mustang 5.0 can run anywhere from low 14's to low 16's depending on these variables.
Old May 4, 2007 | 12:07 AM
  #19  
scott9050's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
Originally Posted by SSlither
I agree. I just see more of the high 14's to low 15 sec performers.
These cars are old now, many are neglected and run by asshats who could not drive their way out of a paper bag.
Old May 4, 2007 | 12:39 AM
  #20  
scott9050's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
Originally Posted by SSlither
No, I was talking about the real clean super taken care of ones. The old ones that are as you said, I have always seen high 15's on up! I saw a guy last year run a completely new 302 broken in and all, he ran like a 14.8 if I remember right?
That is pathetic as I drove a well worn AOD free mods only 5.0 to a 14.59. Hell, my heavy *** (4236 with me in it) 94 Mark VIII ran a 14.651 at 97.21, and it had a 3.07 open rear!!! There is also density altitude and track conditions to consider, it can mess with times badly. On my above runs the track was prepped properly, though I have been to track in Michigan that were like glass.
Old May 4, 2007 | 12:29 PM
  #21  
lovescamaros25's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 153
Yeah,the chance now of finding a bone stock 5.0 that runs high 13's would be about as rare as finding a needle in 500 haystacks.
Old May 4, 2007 | 01:00 PM
  #22  
oneclean97z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 301
From: North Houston, TX
5.0 > 4.6 ftw
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
92ragtop
New Member Introduction
1
Dec 27, 2014 01:56 PM
CaRParts102
Parts For Sale
0
Dec 6, 2014 08:45 AM
Hot Rod Hawk
Midwest
4
Aug 30, 2002 10:12 PM
91Bird305
Midwest
7
Aug 13, 2002 10:02 AM
dreamer1q
Midwest
0
Aug 8, 2002 10:23 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:41 AM.