GT to Mach 1?
- Thread starter southernpony
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
if we're going to keep this thread going, we should at least define what a "bolted-on gt" or a gt with "minimal bolt-ons" is....
here in southern california i've never seen a gt with "minimal" mods to break the 13.9's barrier.(Cai,Pullies,catback,shifter). maybe our track sucks big time, maybe is a driver issue.
i'm pretty there are plenty of southern california gt guys here that can step in, tell us their mods and their times.
that doesn't mean a bolted-on gt won't run mid 13's or even lower than that with the right driver, but again, let's define the add-ons first ...
and not everybody would drive like evan smith,john force or jackie chan
here in southern california i've never seen a gt with "minimal" mods to break the 13.9's barrier.(Cai,Pullies,catback,shifter). maybe our track sucks big time, maybe is a driver issue.
i'm pretty there are plenty of southern california gt guys here that can step in, tell us their mods and their times.
that doesn't mean a bolted-on gt won't run mid 13's or even lower than that with the right driver, but again, let's define the add-ons first ...
and not everybody would drive like evan smith,john force or jackie chan
JonJon
Founding Member
who is jackie chanmach1dsg said:if we're going to keep this thread going, we should at least define what a "bolted-on gt" or a gt with "minimal bolt-ons" is....
here in southern california i've never seen a gt with "minimal" mods to break the 13.9's barrier.(Cai,Pullies,catback,shifter). maybe our track sucks big time, maybe is a driver issue.
i'm pretty there are plenty of southern california gt guys here that can step in, tell us their mods and their times.
that doesn't mean a bolted-on gt won't run mid 13's or even lower than that with the right driver, but again, let's define the add-ons first ...
and not everybody would drive like evan smith,john force or jackie chan
hahah, thanks for the props. actually i would say a bolt on gt would have the good stuff, which there are really only a couple that work. The 2 best mods for a gt would be tune and midpipe.....gears of course are a great help too. the other stuff like cai's, catbacks, plenum, tbs and pullies maybe equal what a midpipe will give you power wise.mach1dsg said:if we're going to keep this thread going, we should at least define what a "bolted-on gt" or a gt with "minimal bolt-ons" is....
here in southern california i've never seen a gt with "minimal" mods to break the 13.9's barrier.(Cai,Pullies,catback,shifter). maybe our track sucks big time, maybe is a driver issue.
i'm pretty there are plenty of southern california gt guys here that can step in, tell us their mods and their times.
that doesn't mean a bolted-on gt won't run mid 13's or even lower than that with the right driver, but again, let's define the add-ons first ...
and not everybody would drive like evan smith,john force or jackie chan
04azuremach
New Member
I saw my name under the list of low 13 second Mach's with very little mods and thought I'd chime in. I ran a 13.08 @ 108.63 with a 1.973 60'. You forgot to mention that I have flow master mufflers along with my X pipe and K&N drop in air filter, but the flow master's didn't do crap anyway.
The ET isn't in the 12's, but the mph is still pretty high. I don't think there's any argument that a trap speed of 108.63 could easily be in the 12's with more traction. My 60' is good, but I still spin all over the place going into 2nd gear... so bad that I've almost hit the wall going into it oh about 3 times now. I don't see any minimally modded GT's getting that kind of trap speed on this forum. Trap speed is a good measurement for ET potential.
This is my first stick shift as well as first RWD vehicle and I'm still learning. Still I don't think 13.08 is all that bad.
.6 tenths is more than you think. That's not exactly 'hanging' with a car.
Here's me beating a bone stock Mach by 1.5 tenths of a second, but because of the reaction time I crossed the finish line about .5635 seconds before him. You can't tell in the picture, but I'm winning by at least 3 car lengths
Here's the timeslip from that race:
It's the time slip on the right. Ignore the one on the left. The one on the left was the first run of the day and I spun all over the place; the 60' tells the story.
And here's a timeslip of me vs. an '01 Cobra with almost the exact same mods I have:
The timeslip for me vs. the yellow Mach was the yellow Mach driver's very first run ever. Later he had a second run of 13.15x @ 105.82 mph. Not too shabby considering it was his first time at the track and he was bone stock!
If you think the time slips might have been doctored for whatever reason or maybe our cars aren't close to stock, take a look at this:
http://www.mirdrag.com/results/04results/0410/041023.htm
I'm Robert Braddock Junior under the factory stock table and the yellow Mach 1 driver is Kevin Hassler right under me. I forgot to put Mach 1 under model for the registration.
Saying a minimally modded GT can take a Mach 1 is rice boy talk. "I can take a '72 honda Civic and put 8 grand into it and have it run low 10's and spend 15 grand less than you did for your Mach 1!". You're saying basically the same thing.
This is how it is: If you put the same mods and the Mach 1 as you do on the GT, the Mach will always win. Same thing with a Cobra vs a Mach 1, mods being equal the Cobra will always beat the Mach 1. Although you could be a smartass and make the Cobra and Mach 1 both have a Kenne Bell supercharger and the Mach 1 will win, but let's not get into that.
And about LS1's
My friend has an '01 Z28 with all those free mods, full exhuast 4.10 (or maybe it's 4.11) gears, K&N drop in air filter and U/D pullies and we run side by side ALL the way. I also beat a stock appearing 35th anniversary SS Camaro TOP end on a highway up to 150 mph. That's where the LS1 is SUPPOSED to be strongest. I've beaten countless 'vettes also. Most of them I've raced were faster than the F-bodies which I've also beaten. I have another friend with a Trans Am who's mostly stock running 13.5's at the SAME track as I do. The LT1's are even worse; they're a joke.
But to get back to the original question that was asked for this thread. You cannot make your GT engine the same as the Mach 1 engine. The engines are COMPLETELY different and share no parts. The Mach 1 even has a different block. You can obviously get the same power with mods, though.
Just thought I'd post some evidence of my own. Thanks for reading.
I've got no beef with the Mustang GT owners. If they weren't so successful, my car would have never been built.
EDIT: I have NO idea why the pictures aren't showing up.. but you can see them all here:
http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/529610/5
The ET isn't in the 12's, but the mph is still pretty high. I don't think there's any argument that a trap speed of 108.63 could easily be in the 12's with more traction. My 60' is good, but I still spin all over the place going into 2nd gear... so bad that I've almost hit the wall going into it oh about 3 times now. I don't see any minimally modded GT's getting that kind of trap speed on this forum. Trap speed is a good measurement for ET potential.
This is my first stick shift as well as first RWD vehicle and I'm still learning. Still I don't think 13.08 is all that bad.
.6 tenths is more than you think. That's not exactly 'hanging' with a car.
Here's me beating a bone stock Mach by 1.5 tenths of a second, but because of the reaction time I crossed the finish line about .5635 seconds before him. You can't tell in the picture, but I'm winning by at least 3 car lengths
Here's the timeslip from that race:
It's the time slip on the right. Ignore the one on the left. The one on the left was the first run of the day and I spun all over the place; the 60' tells the story.
And here's a timeslip of me vs. an '01 Cobra with almost the exact same mods I have:
The timeslip for me vs. the yellow Mach was the yellow Mach driver's very first run ever. Later he had a second run of 13.15x @ 105.82 mph. Not too shabby considering it was his first time at the track and he was bone stock!
If you think the time slips might have been doctored for whatever reason or maybe our cars aren't close to stock, take a look at this:
http://www.mirdrag.com/results/04results/0410/041023.htm
I'm Robert Braddock Junior under the factory stock table and the yellow Mach 1 driver is Kevin Hassler right under me. I forgot to put Mach 1 under model for the registration.
Saying a minimally modded GT can take a Mach 1 is rice boy talk. "I can take a '72 honda Civic and put 8 grand into it and have it run low 10's and spend 15 grand less than you did for your Mach 1!". You're saying basically the same thing.
This is how it is: If you put the same mods and the Mach 1 as you do on the GT, the Mach will always win. Same thing with a Cobra vs a Mach 1, mods being equal the Cobra will always beat the Mach 1. Although you could be a smartass and make the Cobra and Mach 1 both have a Kenne Bell supercharger and the Mach 1 will win, but let's not get into that.
And about LS1's
My friend has an '01 Z28 with all those free mods, full exhuast 4.10 (or maybe it's 4.11) gears, K&N drop in air filter and U/D pullies and we run side by side ALL the way. I also beat a stock appearing 35th anniversary SS Camaro TOP end on a highway up to 150 mph. That's where the LS1 is SUPPOSED to be strongest. I've beaten countless 'vettes also. Most of them I've raced were faster than the F-bodies which I've also beaten. I have another friend with a Trans Am who's mostly stock running 13.5's at the SAME track as I do. The LT1's are even worse; they're a joke.
But to get back to the original question that was asked for this thread. You cannot make your GT engine the same as the Mach 1 engine. The engines are COMPLETELY different and share no parts. The Mach 1 even has a different block. You can obviously get the same power with mods, though.
Just thought I'd post some evidence of my own. Thanks for reading.
I've got no beef with the Mustang GT owners. If they weren't so successful, my car would have never been built.
EDIT: I have NO idea why the pictures aren't showing up.. but you can see them all here:
http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/529610/5
04azuremach said:
im taking offense to this....you are being ignorant if you dont think a bolt on gt cant run better than a stock mach you are wrong...i have two friends with coupes that i hvae competed with in fun ford weekend races with the same type of mods as i have that have ran 12's on street tires in there gt's.... This was under the old ffw street stang rule guidelines. Meaning, full weight, no longtubes stock longblock. gears, street tires and boltons only. one has ran as quick as 12.7 which was at gainesville back in june, its on video and well documented, the same guy ran 12.9 on stock gears too. there are plenty of mach guys that see me run at the track that know they will have their hands full if they lineup against me(a heavier version of the car you say cant beat yours)
i love machs, and am either getting rid of my car and buying an 03/04 cobrra or looking to swap a mach longblock in
![MAC[H]Z](https://opt.stangnet.com/unsafe/https://cdn.stangnet.com/data/avatars/s/63/63366.jpg?1322928992){kind=avatar}
Hmmm last time I checked we all owned mustangs no matter if it's a v6 or a supercharged v8. I love my mach and when I was stock I was never beaten by a slightly or heavily modded GT but I'm not going to say it wouldn't happen. Now with the few mods I have I also do very well against cobra's but I don't think for a second that my car is faster than a cobra. Bottom line it the GT is a slower car than the mach as the mach is a slower car than the cobra it all has to do with the Ford food chain. Don't get me wrong there can be freaks in any class of a car but overall a mach will beat a GT and a cobra will beat a mach period.
04azuremach
New Member
Jackie Chan said:
I think you misunderstood my point.
I wasn't comparing a GT to a '72 Honda Civic. I wasn't even saying a modded GT can't beat a Mach 1... in fact I think I admitted with mods it can have the same power. All I was saying is that any car can beat any car with mods and that kind of talk is rice boyish. But one person on here... (I don't feel like looking up his screen name) who I think started the whole argument said his 13.6 second GT can beat any mach 1. THAT is what I called bogus.
With a supercharger and forged internals I can beat a lamborghini Mercielago and save $250,000!
All I'm saying is that these statements are all similar and pointless.
i understand who you are arguing with, but your post made it sound like bolt on gts dont stand a chance against a mach, as a matter of fact most mach 1 owners that have posted on here portray that mentality04azuremach said:
04azuremach
New Member
Jackie Chan said:
I only portray that mentallity because I've yet to lose to an NA Mustang GT. Not saying it'll never happen. But so far, so good. At Ford Fever Classic here at MIR in the factory stock class there were no GT's running mid 13's and all bolt on's and even drag radials were allowed. I've had a few give me a good run for my money, but top end I start to really get moving.
I did race an '99+ GT with a supercharger and I got the jump on him and he didn't catch me until about 115 on the street. He must have not have been pushing much boost or had a bad tune or both, but I definitely heard the blower as he caught up next to me.
I've yet to see an NA GT run a 12. I'm sure it's been done.
I had a kid in a silver GT pull up next to me and instantly talking crap... he had 3.73 gears,cold air intake, exhaust, headers, predator tune, superchip, and one or two other things. Then he said "You don't even want to embarass yourself." Light turned green and I proceeded to beat him by about 2 car lengths by the time I hit 100 mph. I slowed down and he passed me while giving me the finger. Not a very great encounter.
I'll admit he hung in there for awhile, but once I was half way through 3rd...
Keep in mind you're talking about a 225-230 RWHP car to a 275-285 RWHP car stock. A 50 RWHP deficit is not an easy gap to fill.
i just want to let anyone reading this to know that i am aware of the potential of the mach stock/modded. in fact i personally think it the best engine ford(NA) has given us in our mod motor cars. Like i said the 2v is an ok engine NA with bolt ons and deserves credit where its due. If anyone doesnt see 12 sec street tire potential with a stock mach or bolt on gt then they dont know the right guys.
My definition of a full bolt on gt is(longtubes are too, but they are a pita that most people dont undertake):
gears
midpipe
plenum/tb
tune
pullies
My definition of a full bolt on gt is(longtubes are too, but they are a pita that most people dont undertake):
gears
midpipe
plenum/tb
tune
pullies
what would you like to see?mach1dsg said:i would love to see this....
if its me lining up against a mach i am game....when i went to the strip on street tires there was a 5speed mach with some exhaust work on 15 in mickey thompson et street drs running low 13's....granted i was on street tires that night, i was only .3 behind him and not pulling good 60's. If I had been in practice with my sttreet tires i would have been much closer.
04azuremach
New Member
Jackie Chan said:
My sister lives in Orlando so I might be down there within a year. By then I'd definitely race you, but right now I'd have to ask you to keep your stock tires or race me from a roll
04azuremach
New Member
04azuremach said:My sister lives in Orlando so I might be down there within a year. By then I'd definitely race you, but right now I'd have to ask you to keep your stock tires or race me from a roll
Then again, since it would probably be on the street.. I'd race you with whatever tires you had on it... you've got my best time beat by less than a 10th...
only a .1 away, but my run wasnt in the best of weather....from the looks of those pics you were probably racing in 50-60 degree tepmps04azuremach said:
flashstang04
New Member
Similar threads
