Answer to the 390 H.P Cobra!!!!
 

I love my Mustang but these cars are scary! They all have ls6 V8!!
390 to 400 Horspower!!!:eek:

www.gmmginc.net


What to you think?:rolleyes:

Have you looked at the price tag on any of the cars?the transam says starting at 42,500 hahahah as long as price isnt an issue anymore why dont you just hop down and buy a new GT40 rated in excess of 500HP.For that kind of money i could goto town and lay down cash on about any vehicle i wanted but it certainly wouldnt be a pontiac or a chevrolet.You can bet money those cars have had everything done to them performance wise that could possibly be done to them.I could go down and buy a 2003 cobra slap a few more performance items on it to boost the power up over 400HP and still drive home with cash in my pocket.
Not to mention general motors is still using pushrod engines with large displacement to get horsepower.pushrod engines are a dead horse IMO general motors needs to look ahead to the future a little bit and design something new.Ford on th eother hand is pumping out 390+ horsepower from a small displacement V8 modular engine 281 cubic inches.
Hell theres guys out there pumping out 400 horse from their honda civics so really those cars arent that impressive to me.
:rolleyes:

Not to mention the GM will have squeeks and rattles from the day you drive it off the lot!!! GM SUCKS!!! LONG LIVE FORD! :D

I love the old pushrods are dead and old technology line. Overhead cam engines are older than pushrod technology. Thanks, but their giant 5.7L displacement engine is just as, if not more compact than the 4.6L.

Maybe somebody would like to tell me which engine is superior for naturally aspirated performance.

1) 302ci TFS TW Heads, Holley Intake, TFS #2 cam.

2) 302ci Boss. Stock heads, stage 1 cam, stock intake.

3) 281ci Ported/Polished PI Heads, Bullitt Intake, .550 lift cams.

I can tell you right now combo #1 is going to make somewhere in the neighborhood of 375hp, and combo #2 will be over 400hp. On top of that, you would be safe adding a 125hp shot of nitrous, on the stock bottom end, and even the stock top end if you were 1987-1992 for combo #1, and you could add a supercharger to combo #2 on the stock engine components pushing hp levels to 600.

OHV vs OHC. Neither means anything if the rest of the engine isn't put together with quality parts. The 4.6L's are nice little (displacement) engines. They take up a lot of space, and the SOHC engine doesn't offer exceptional performance potential without forced induction. Neither the DOHC or SOHC engines have good bottom end components.

As far as the question posted above, the stock 2003 Cobra is RATED at 390hp, but it's dynoing near 390rwhp, meaning it's making more like 450. You're talking a chubby Cobra running low/mid 12's on street tires at over 110mph through the traps. If Ford had actually kept an alumium block, and tried to keep the Cobra from becoming a tank with wheels, it would be a solid 11sec on drag radials trapping near 120. I'd take the Cobra. Personally, I'd rather have a 1999, or 2001 Cobra than a 2003 for the price difference.

Re: Answer to the 390 H.P Cobra!!!!
 

I say BRING IT ON! I'm tired of beating on the local talent. With my built engine & P&P heads getting installed in a few days, it's only going to be harder to find a fast LS1 to race. I will have spent a total of 42K for a car that is built from end to end, 9 sec capable(10s all day) with working A/C, defroster and every other factory option. I was going to trade it in for a new Cobra, but decided to have an engine built and order P&P heads. All I'm missing is the warranty, damn.

5.7L OHV V8
 

Isnt that the same motor that comes in the Pickups....Atleast Ford is trying new things like IRS and 4v powerplants. Freaking chevy guys "My big displacemnt bow tie makes gobs of power", so what.....its still a piece of **** :D

Re: 5.7L OHV V8
 

LOL, yeah, and the 4.6L GT engine and 5.4 SOHC and DOHC have never made their way into a pickup either.

Chevy had a 4V powerplant back in the early 90's. They called it the ZR-1, and it made about 400hp in the Corvette chassis. The Corvette has been IRS for a LONG time. IRS doesn't make for good launches, which is why the new Mach 1 is a solid axle. Where was Ford's DOHC technology back then? The Thunderbird had IRS starting in 1989, and 4 wheel disc brakes as early as 1987. The Mustang got the bottom of the barrel for a long time as Ford tried to kill it. How many of you know what the 1989 Probe was originally going to be? Yep. The new Mustang. Good thing enthusiasts screamed bloody murder.

I have to agree with GM building cheap, disposable vehicles, but they do make power. At least find legitimate complaints.

?????
 

Whos side are u on anyway u *******!!! :D

The side that hates GM, but always finds indisputable reasons to dislike their offerings (especially the F body). Hehehe.

Exceptable complaints for LT-1 Fbody are:

High compression
Poor reliability
Weak rear end
Crappy ergonomics
Poor outward visability
Rough ride
Flexible flyer chassis
Low quality interior
Strange fart-honk V-6 sounding exhaust
Dated appearance
Difficult to work on
Loss of power on higher mileage vehicles

Exceptable complaints for LS-1 Fbody are:

Is that a Chrysler Concord front mated to a Sebring rear?
Hey I like that SS scoop, NOT
High compression
Poor reliability
Weak rear end
Crappy ergonomics
Poor outward visability
Rough ride
Flexible flyer chassis
Low quality interior
Strange fart-honk V-6 sounding exhaust
Ugly
Limited aftermarket
Expected loss of power on higher mileage vehicles
Few people actually like them (discontinued)
Crappy valvetrain

So if you want a POS that goes fast, the LS-1 is a good choice, for a while. Good luck finding a good shape LT-1.

Thats funny
 

LMFAO @ fart-honk sounding exhaust...nice dude, very nice

Forgot "hollow" fart-honk Cause it's a different fart-honk than a ricer. It's got that sounds like a V-6 with 10 catalytic converters and glasspacks with some loose hunk of metal up there somewhere making that rapping noise. You guys have to know what I mean?

fwauuggghhhhaaaawwooooauuuuuuooooooooggggggggghhhh hhhhgggggggggaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Something like that. Should be illegal to sound like a hi po exhaust was slapped onto their 2.8L V-6 engine. Also, ever notice how the 2.8L V-6 sounds like a quiet local transit bus?

I was the moron owner of a '93 LT-1 6spd Formula and yes, it was a POS. It was a fast POS, though...capable of 12.68 @106 and change. I never popped a single head bolt doing it, just ram air, bypassed smog pump(belt), roller tip 1.6 rockers, 3.73 gears, Mickey Thompson Competitors, gutted cats and a Flowmaster 2 chamber muffler. Thing sat for half of the 2 years I had it, though, so I traded it for a BMW. That lasted exactly 4 weeks before I traded it for my first of 4 Mustangs and 1 Mark VII LSC. So far, all of my Mustangs have been POS as well, including my 2001 GT. Heh heh, I faced reality and realized that all of the engineering and quality go into the car companies' bread 'n' butter cars and econoboxes...(Variable valve timing and a six speed for a Focus?!?!?)

I guess Ford had to put a blower on that weak DOHC engine that GM has had a field day with since it's introduction on the Mustang in '96. I guess GM's thinking with the 350 cid is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I hear all of the bragging from the Ford fans, but we all forgot one small detail: you can still put a blower on those nasty LS-1 and LS-6 motors. So I ask, what then? I'm not impressed with a fast supercharged car, it should be fast. When my GT convertible breaks the 13s (on my way to the track now), then I'll be where my LT-1 started life(13.82 @102.7 best, first day at the track). That's sad to me, I have spent loot already and that should be the case. In the 80s, my car would be fast, but there are sedans now that are as fast as my car and I don't like that. I guess I'm done rambling....show me a modular going 12's with A/C, Mach 1000 stereo, leather power seats and no supercharger and then us Ford guys will have something to brag about.

The 2003 Mach 1 ran 12.97@105mph in the
quarter-mile at Fun Ford Weekend in Atlanta April 20.

You can see it here.
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/conc...ch1/index.html

So now i guess your all done rambling?

One key point you GM lovers seem to always omit is the fact that you also pay 3000.00 - 5000.00 more for a new camaro or trans am versus the final cost of the mustang.

My name is already on one of the 2003 MACH1 and im getting it for 28,445.00 minus rebate, i also went down and looked at a 2002 transam that wasnt even loaded and its MSRP was 32,000.00 and change.
The MACH already runs in the 12s,and with that extra 4000.00 i can add a few choice items and rip any GM piece of @#$% a new #$%@

Well shut my mouth...I am impressed!

If thats not enough 2004 will see the Boss 302 reborn as a limited edition.Which rumor has it, will house a 302 C.I.
modular V-8 instead of the 281 C.I. 4.6 litre

I've owned 5 Mustang's. They've all been reliable.

A 13.87 out of a bone stock LT1 is the new worlds record, and a 12.whatever is too.

You had the fastest LT1 in history, congrats.

Hell yeah it will! Why do you guys think Ford Racing now sells Modular 5.0 blocks? They are test parts for the upcoming Boss 302!!! As for GT's that run 12's with all options and no blower there are plenty out there. Ask MUSTANG92. He runs mid twelves with very mild mods and NO BLOWER. It's mostly suspension mods that do the trick for him. And as for blowers on F-cars, NOBODY DOES THAT!!! Have you looked under the hood of 4th gen F-body? You have to do some serious rigging to get a centrifugal blower under the hood. Nobody modifies the 4th gen F-cars 'cause there's no damn aftermarket for them!!! Those cars are quite fast stock but they usually don't go much farther than that. The only mod LS-1 guys commonly do is the lid for the airbox which adds like 1 RWHP. Nobody does smart mods like gears on the GM's. You also gotta love the awesome skip shift feature on the 6-speeds. I don't know about you guys but skipping 2nd and 3rd is really fun!!!

Well, I see a lot has happened in 24 hours...

13s from bone stock LT-1 6 speed FBodies is not unusual if you know how to drive. I had a Formula, not a Trans Am, so it was probably 200 lbs lighter. I did not have a full tank of gas, so that saved some weight as well. I guess next I'll hear that my 14.0 run on GS-C Goodyears with a 2.0 60' from a bone stock 2001 GT 5spd convertible is a record, as well. At any rate, I didn't say that GTs were not capable of 12s...not at all, my Pop has an 11 second 302 sitting in his garage. What I said was that Ford does not have a 12 second, fully optioned (that means Cobra R does not count) modular car without the benefit of a blower. That's all I was saying, GM on the other hand does...

As far as my 12 second runs with my 93 FBody, that took a LOT of trips to the track, good track conditions, a lot of help from a race engine builder friend of mine who taught me the art of drag racing and all of the sily little tricks that make a car run like hell. Ofcourse driving like a *******' animal helped as well - I swear I have a parts truck sitting in my driveway...heh heh.

How in the hell do you figure a Formula is 200 pounds lighter than a T/A. I don't think leather and power windows/locks weighs 200 extra pounds. Maybe 5-10. I've actually taken down a 6-speed LT-1 (Not stock either. Has a few bolt-ons.) Slomaro w/ my weak stock '97 GT that makes a pavement melting 215 hp. Not to mention my car is auto. I beat him not once... but twice in a row. The problem with F-bodies their owners can't drive worth a crap.

Actually they did a weight comparison between the Mustang Bullitt and the GT and they foun dthat the Bullitt weighed about 200 pounds more,due to exactly that,heavier seats,thicker sway bars,ect...

Quit Bit**in
 

I simply cannot believe that you guys are arguing about this as much as you are. No matter how fast a GM pos is, the stang will always be better. Tell me that i'm not the only one who understands this. The Mustang has been and always will be America's muscle car. Why do you think that GM is scrapping the LS-1's? It's because we're better. We brave knights are the only ones to ride the Iron Pony. Long Live the Mustang Spirit! -Matt-

It's basically about envy. The LT-1 guys are going through the same thing the modular guys went through when the 4.6L first came out. The LT-1 get's thrashed in the 1/4 mile by the LS-1 so they all decide the LT-1 F body is a 13sec car because one out of 1000 runs a 13. If that.

Most are mid 14 cars. I don't get into the ricer philosophy of quoting the very fastest possible time for a car. 13's are not uncommon, stock, ROTFLMAO. With a good driver, lol. I love that. Yeah, there are lots of professional drivers out there that fall into the "good category," and the vast majority of LT-1 Fbody's are freaks from the factory too.

Let's see. A 1987 Mustang GT is a 13.80@100mph car because one ran that time once.

A new GT is a 13.60@102mph car because one ran that time once.

A new F body is a 12.90@108mph car because one ran that with a professional driver with a factory wringer.

I quote real world times, not ricer times. By the way, the idea 200lbs can be found in a hollow sway bar and thicker leather is a totally idiotic comment.

The 1987 Mustang GT weighs 21lbs more than a 1987 Mustang LX with the same options. It has heavier seats, and bigger ground effects. Most people think it weighs 200lbs more. LOL. This old wives tale BS is nothing more than somebody trying to make an excuse for their car being slow, or their driving being crappy.

Unit i suggest you watch who your calling an idiot.Its a fact not a statement made on a wim its a statement of fact.
As soon as i get some time i will send you the specs on the cars.
Do you really think a 1" steel rod weighs the same as a 3/4" steel rod? do you think a 12" brake rotor weighs the same as a 13" brake rotor?do you think a steel wheel weighs the same as an aluminum wheel?
Better do some math and homework.I will post the details ASAP.
Once again you have gone and proved how much you dont know.

Heres a quick math tutorial for you in case you forgot just to oversimplify it for your pee brain.
a can of coke weighs in at 16 oz thats equal to 1 pound,remember math class? 200 cans of coke weighs in at 200 pounds,thats 8.3 cases of soda is that really so hard to comprehend?Its not that much weight when you consider the overall weight of the average vehicle.

Sorry
 

I did not mean to cause so much hostility. I did state that I did not have a full tank of gas or had all of the options the car could possibly have, which did save some weight. I'm sorry I gave up my timeslips with the car, I would scan them and post them, but like I said...to see a 13.90 - 13.80 was not something out of the ordinary. Mind you, NJ is damn near sea level. Hey, I don't know for a fact how heavy the Formula is compared to a T/A, but it was always a little lighter. Yeah, I may have had a good example of my LT-1, but it sat more than it ran, so who cares. Also mind you that I am driving my 5th Ford, 4th Mustang. I had the chance to get anything under 35,000 bux which means I could have a 2001 SS Camaro right now, but I don't...that has to say something. I'm not trying to make enemies here, just talking about cars. I'm in my 30s and have spent a lot of years at the track. All you 99 - up GT hardtop guys have it good, you can get 13.90s with those cars bone stock, I've seen it done. If I can get 14.0s with a 3700-3800 lb. Convertible, I know you guys can do that.

Again my apologies...The FyreMan

Did I mention that on the average, I saw a lot of mid 14s from those LT-1s and high 13s from the LS-1s? :D

Little input on the subject.
 

I dont understand what you mean by now after market.
www.slpeng.com
www.tbyrne.com
www.thunderracing.com
www.mmsracing.com
www.ls1speed.com
(theres more I assure you.)
As for rattling, nothing that some 200 subframes cant fix. Rearends suck, you got me there. Looks, im telling you I LOVE the looks of my car. Formula probably does weigh about 200 less dont forget the trans am has ground affects also. Lumbar weighs alot to. We do have a bigger motors, but still get the same or better gas mileage? Wish I could put true dual like you guys but ohwell cant get everything you want. Live around Northwest burbs of chicago ill let you listen to my exhaust you will not be dissappointed i promise. The SS scoop is ugly but you guys know that the WS6 is one wicked looking machine. I prefer the more subtle look of the Firehawk personnally (Biased View). Oh a 2002 Z28 most options is about 25,800 not including rebates. Put a lid, exhaust, and if you really want some gears and hello consistant 12's. Gears, headers, cam, and suspension that baby will SCREEEAAAM into high 11's. As far as noone with a blower (heres a link for you Turbo99GT http://www.tbyrne.com/projectls1.html) Give Tom a call im sure he will be glad to race you once he gets it all in tune. But as far as normal drivers, $900 for some pistons, a 9 pound blower thats 500+ REAR WHEEL horsepower. Dont worry about the bottom end our 6 bolt mains will do just fine. Come on guys whats with all the bashing? Sounds like a bunch of supra owners, "Were better because, uh because we are". I mean im a gm guy on a ford message board(rhymes by the way). So lets just concentrate a little more on eliminating rice ok?? :confused: :D :cool: :rolleyes: :)

I am watching who I'm calling an idiot, which is why I'm picking on you right now, hick boy. I want to make sure I got a real, true idiot.

Sway bars aren't solid, and we're not talking about can's of coke because I don't know anybody who drives around with 200 cans of coke in their car. Maybe you should switch to diet coke, which would weigh much less than regular coke. I can't give you the actual numbers off the top of my head because I've never been inclined to weigh my beverages, or coke for the people who actually drink the stuff. I remember my physics and calculus, pre-algebra boy. You got me though. The seat material is 20lbs heavier. The brakes are 10lbs heavier, and I don't know of any steel wheeled performance cars lately, if it were steel wheeled, you'd be talking a bigger 1/4 mile difference than what you'd see just because of weight, though. You see, accelerating unsprung weight is a lot harder to do than just adding a few lbs in the trunk, especially since you have to accelerate the rotational mass of the wheel. Heck though, if you think 20+10 = 200, maybe I don't even need to debate you.

200lbs is a shitload of weight in the average vehicle. You're talking over 5% of total vehicle weight, and on a Fox body Mustang, you'd be giving up over 2 tenths with an extra 200lbs on board. A pretty decent rule of thumb for the Fox is 10hp, or 100lbs equals 1 tenth and 1 mph.

Go open your book and do a comparison between a stripper car and a fully loaded car with an auto and feel justified if you want. LOL. Dumbass.

The examples i gave were for weight comarisons,i didnt say the GT or the Bullitt had steel wheels on it my point was not all components and parts weigh the same.I f you add up all the components that are different on the Bullit car it comes in at approx. 200 pounds heavier than the GT car.
Thats fact they did the comparison way back when they were debating if the Bullitt was going to be a farce like the 1999 cobra which didnt deliver the advertised HP.The conclusion was that you only gain 5 HP Bullit vs GT yet you added 200 pounds to the gross weight which adds up to no real performance advantage when comparing the Bullit to the GT.

I wasn't talking about the Bullitt, but that's a bunch of BS as well. Ford's listed curb weight for the Bullitt is 3273lbs, and the GT Premium is listed the same. Ford's listed weight on the GT Base 3241lbs. Even maxxed out, the weight difference between a fully optioned GT Premium is only 32lbs. Not 200lbs. The Bullitt hardly weighs another 168lbs more than a GT Premium. If you're weighing cars on a scale there are always differences. They don't have exactly the same amount of fuel, the scale can be inaccurate. What's even more inaccurate is guestimating what parts weigh on a car. That's how the legend that the Fox GT weighs 200lbs more than the same car in an LX 5.0 body does. You know, those ground effects are pretty big, they probably add like 100lbs. Then the GT has different seats, so that's like 75lbs, and say an LX comes with no options (yeah, right) and that's like 25lbs so a GT weighs 200lbs more than an LX.

put the pipe down !!!
 

ford makes some nice vehicles and engines, but so does GM.
i'm partial to the mustang right now, but you can't begin to tell me the LS1 is junk. it's right on par with the 4.8 and makes more power b/c it has more cubes. put the pipe down guys ! there is no substitute for cubic inches. (if ford is so great, why did they make those awful 70's mustangs?)

T/As and stangs are both nice.

4.8?
 

Right on par with the 4.8 huh? When did ford come out with that motor? Talk about a dumbass, since u seem to think GM is so great you should stick to one of their message boards and leave the ford stuff to us seeing is how you know nothing about em!!

U are killin me unit
 

That last response to doug about the cans of coke was classic, i couldn't stop laughing. I cant wait untill he comes back with some more crap so you can shoot him down again.

16 fluid ounces and 16 ounces are 2 different things

my point is that ford has to make a special edition car to keep up with an average one from gm. level of technologly has nothing to do with output. just b/c something is more complicated and/or new doesn't make it better. if the so called 'junk' LS1s keep beating the crap out of 'state of the art' 4V 4.8s (i happen to own one), maybe it's not so great. give me a legitimate thought-out reply. tell me what you know, not what you think or feel.

im confused
 

What is with this new 4.8 liter motor you guys are talking about?
Please fill me in, I mean one guy talked about the 4.8 cobras and now another guy....I mean come u both cant be that stupid can ya?

4.6L
 

When I was purchasing a new car a month and a half ago, I was thinking about Lightnings, Trans Ams, SS Camaros, and 2003 Cobra Mustangs. What do they all have in common? $30,000+ price tag and 300+ HP, factory built. Well, time came to buy, I looked at a $600/month for 4 years payment and $1500 a year in insurance...

Hmmmm....I make about $50,000 a year. I'm still single. I could do it....But what about those other things in life that cost money?...Houses, women, junk......I'll go with the GT Mustang, cause I can always bolt on some suspension upgrades, work on the engine internals when I can afford to, and put a blower on it in the future. Oh, that and I have a cousin who builds F-250s so he can get me the x-plan which is 4% over A-plan price. Then add the $1500 rebate on that. OK. Oh, that and my cousin and his friends race and build mustangs. They will work on Mustangs for fun(free).

That was my thought process. I owned GM vehicles from age 15 to 23. I liked them pretty well. Cause of circumstances, low price tag, and huge aftermarket, I went Mustang GT all the way. I try not to bash most auto manufacturers. I like power. If a manufacturer can give me good power and handling in an attractive vehicle that fits my budget and needs, I'll buy it. My only real bias with cars is that I don't like front wheel drive. Cars I own need to be primary rear wheel drive. All wheel drive is fine, but I like for most of the power to go to the rear end, be it independent or solid axle. I always research expensive items before I go and buy them, though.

Cars are fun, driving kicks a**, working on them is fun until something gets screwed up...

As far as special edition to keep up thing....well, the $/HP ratio seems pretty even amongst the brands and types of cars. It depends on what you are buying for. Power, handling, looks, ergonomics, passenger room(Mustangs and Camaros suck for this), whatever your looking for. It is hard to compare apples to apples with lots of cars.

Vehicles, I like them all, wish I had one of everything. I got a Mustang GT that I like a lot, though. It keeps me occupied. Driving the mountains or speeding down the interstate...it is all good.

Re: 4.6L
 

Thank you Wjf for that lovely comentary on how you feel about performance vehicles, Im sure that will be most helpful to the people who read this board. You're opinion really matters thanx again.....not

Not to point out the obvious here, but he said CAN of coke. Meaning 12oz. And 16fl oz of water weighs 16oz. Since regular Coca-Cola sinks in water, it's reasonable to assume the beverage weighs somewhat more than water, and 16oz for a 12fl oz can would be believable.

wally6761, your engine displacement is 281ci, or 4.6L. You do not have a 4.8L. I suggest you learn what kind of engine you have before you decide to debate people on it.
By the way, you obviously don't understand much about the performance capabilities of the engine. There have been guys running 11's on the stock engine DOHC 4.6L since the late 1990's. It's not a pushover, and unlike the "junk" LS-1's, (which has more to do with the crappy quality put into the car than the engines output), the 4.6L DOHC has been a proven engine to 100k. There are a lot of high mileage Cobra's out there.

wjfawb0, I happen to agree with your sentiments. Paying over 30k for a car places it out of my range. Good thing the new Mach 1 goes for $28,500, has well over 300hp, and will run 12's from the factory with drag radials. 6000 will be built. 1000 Cobra's as well. While they may be limited edition cars, Ford has been pushing the performance up on the GT in the background as well. I fully expect to see a near 300hp GT for under $25k in the next couple of years.

Re: put the pipe down !!!
 

You mean mustang II's right? (74-78 i believe, the fox body was delivered in 79)

IMO the 70 Mach 1 is one of the best looking mustangs EVER!

I used to rag on 4.6 SOHC's quite a bit before I got my 02', but I offer this


LS1 V8 in SS trim 346 cid @ 320 = .92 hp per cid

4.6 SOHC in GT trim 281 cid @ 260 = .92 hp per cid

Not to shabby for a "base" motor. Granted I'd like to see something along the lines of 300 hp for the baby cammer (and I think Ford should try and push the envelop on 2 valve cars), still not to bad, especially considering the low compression ratio which brings a smile to my face when I hit the gas pump.

For Ford to push the envelope, they'll have to put a quality bottom end into the cars. Doesn't seem like something they're focusing on lately. The 4.6's have junk bottom end parts, and they've even had problems (LOTS) with the cranks on their 5.4 truck engines.

The 4.6L isn't a base engine, either. That's the 232ci 190hp 3.8L. That makes .82hp per cubic inch.

By the way, the bashing on the Mustang II is way out of place as well. It may have been much like a Pinto, but it kept the name alive while many musclecars completely died. For it's day, the Mustang II was a good handling, light, quick little car. The 139hp 302 V-8 didn't make for extreme performance by any means, but the curb weight of the car was somewhere in the neighborhood of 2700lbs, which made it's 248lb/ft of torque capable of moving the little car out okay. It was right on with the shitty *** junker F body back then too. Less hp, but a hell of a lot less weight. The little Mustang II also had a cool interior, nice gauges, and a comfortable ergonomic setup. Options like a tration lok rear end, 302 (5.0) V-8, 4spd manual or C4 automatic, rally sport interior, and appearance packages kept it right with everything else from that era. My first car was a 1977 Mustang II with the rally pack gauges, brushed aluminum gauge bezels, 302 V-8, and C4 auto. It was a neat little fastback and had 180,000 short trip miles when we had it hauled away. Still ran great too, the body was just shot.

Max that is a good comparison and I'm not bashing it, but thats factory ratings, 2001 and 2002 ls1's are putting an average of 315 to the rear wheel. Which equals about 370 to the crank with 15% drivetrain loss.

So .... 346 cid @ 370 = 1.069 hp per cid

BTW I have seen plenty of ls1's in the 100k mile ranges, none with problems, and you cant say the motor is anything but state of the art. Ls1 heads set new records for flow charactaristics for any head ever put on a stock motor with 2 valves per cylinder. I dont want to start a war of manufactuers (not sure on spelling) but if GM did ever make 4 valves per cylinder with the same technology that they use in ls1 heads, and maybe even put a supercharger on it like the new Cobra is getting, those damn cars would be damn near unstopable in stock format unless it was from an exotic car priced in the 6 figures.

CMC

pardon me
 

yes, i meant 4.6, but got carried away by some of the idiotic comments i was reading. all i want is people to to stop saying 'ford is great, everyone else sucks'. it makes ford fans look bad. there's a lot of other great cars out there. if you want to be a ford fan, that's great, but be a car fan too. you can celebrate your own stuff with bashing others.

correction, meant WITHOUT bashing others.

Well its the only reliable figure I have. If this is the case then the manufacturers are playing that number's game again (Ford included with the S/C cobra) which makes a valid comparison nothing but bunk!

As for factory ratings, I believe that they are the best average power produced by the engines (to acount for production tolerences) at whatever SAE testing method is in use now. If I'm not mistaken (which could very well be the case), current OE engine dyno runs call for 80 degree cell temperatures rather than a cool 70 or 68 degrees. I dunno if humidity and vapor standards were adjusted too.

I'd very much like to see a stock LS1 tested on an engine dyno using whatever standard most engine builders use currently. If I were to lay down the rules for the engine test. I would say blueprint them and run'em with accessories and stock exhaust.

I'd be curious to know what the modifications were made after 2000 to increase it by 30rwhp. Generally, there is closer to 17-18% loss on new manual transmissions.

There is a new artform out there. It's called BS dyno pulling. A lot of the new dyno's allow you to enter parameters which skew the output, and a lot of shops are more than eager to show inflated numbers because everybody wants to see their car pulling serious power. I feel this is the sole reason for the mystical increase of 40hp.

The LS1 isn't notably faster now than it was. An increase of 30rwhp would make most of them borderline 12 cars at more like 109-110mph traps. I haven't heard of that trend.

I can say the LS1's valvetrain is weak, and contrary to what I'm being told, I don't believe it's gonna last past 100k. 10.5:1 compression is HELL on piston rings.

You guys are so proud and to afraid to acctually consider that a GM car might just be better then yours. At least I took the time to come over here and attempt to learn about your cars and to help you guys in forums and offer what knowledge I know. But like usual you have to turn this into a my car is better then yours. Its proven that these cars dyno 310 - 315 average at the rear. Modifications over prior years were the addition of the ls6 intake, ls6 block, a new revised cam, and new cast iron exhaust manifolds that out flow the old cast steel ones. So if you figure 17-18% for a manual that means they are putting even more to the crank then I calculated. The only week factor in the ls1 valve train are the push rods, no over revving no problems. and the current ls1 has 10.1:1 compression not 10.5:1. BTW How many mustang cobras have you seen get into the 12's stock?
CMC

I believe that the GM cars are faster in stock trim but in no way better. If you take into account everything besides just the horsepower(looks, interior, ride and handling and overall quality) the Mustang wins hands down. And I think you will find that since this is a Mustang board almost everyone who is a member here(with the exception of our GM brother's who come here) would agree, otherwise they would be driving GM's. In fact I would venture to say the rest of the country would agree since it is the GM cars which are being discontinued due to bad sales. Also if you take into account the price differential in the two makes a Mustang owner could take the money saved and invest it in some mods and then be faster also, but that's hypothetical.

As far as the Cobra being able to run 12's stock I don't have that answer at hand. But i do know the Mach 1 ran a 12.97 at FFW in Atlanta so I would assume that the 2003 Cobra can definitely run a 12. So a GM car is faster stock. Whoopee.:p

Well folks,
I think this thread has served out its life...

After looking everything over, its hard for me to understand someone who comes over to a Mustang board, sings praises about a GM vehicle, and then becomes surprised that some do not agree with their asessment....

Its easy to see that the LS1 makes great power off the showroom floor. To be honest, I don't see anyone debating that...

Some F bodies that I've seen on the dyno pull numbers more or less consistant with the published stats from GM. (although they do seem to average on the high side) I have also seen some stock F-Bodies that put out numbers considerably higher than the norm, with absolutely no explaination as to why. I'm not a mechanic, nor an expert on these cars. All I can say is that there seems to be a WIDE margin of what to expect from these things in a stock configuration...

We have to remember that car makers are in the business of selling cars.... the F-Bodies didn't sell, so they are going away.

The reasons for this are varied from reports of poor build quality, shakes and rattles, crappy rear end, all the way to some who think they are just plain ugly...

Just as I would never buy a riced out 800 hp Civic, some would rather be slower than an LS1 and drive a stock Mustang.
Some don't even care what 1/4 mile time their car runs... (although I could never be one of those..;))

All are welcome here to discuss the Mustang, no matter what they happen to drive, that's what makes this forum interesting.

I definately respect the LS1 and I make no judgements on those who drive them. (Although sometimes I have had to roll my eyes when some idiot gives me the old LS1 can "leap tall buildings in a single bound" speech)

At the track it doesn't matter what you drive, it matters who crosses the line first.... but if I cross the line first in a Mustang, so much the better...