13.20 @ 104 stock!!

Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by lopey4.6, Dec 12, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Paul and JDM went 13.4, magazines went 13.5-6, theres a couple members who went 13.3-4 here and on other forums theres a few who also ran a 13.4. I'm counting more than just two.
  2. All right whats goin on here? Yeah so anyway I posted this because 13.2 is very impressive for just some prep work.

    JonJon, yes thats Pete's car.
  3. The mags probably got some 13.4's as well. They do averages, correct?
  4. I dont recall any magazine running a 13.4; they dont have the best drivers, didnt C&D run a 13.6?

    edit: my mistake I read it wrong, I've read articles where they took the best of runs and the average.
  5. hummmmmmmmmmmmm.......

  6. Lets not get ahead of ourselves here.

    Paul went 13.9 and yes JDM went 13.4. That's 13.4 at Englishtown Raceway(one of the fastest there is) in very cold air. Motortrend went 13.5 at like 103.6mph, which seams very fishy. We have not seen that trap speed coupled with a time close to that from an actual owner. Shoot, I cant recall if I have even seen that trap speed with a slow run. The 13.6 was in an auto and a pre-production car at that. Remember that many magazines run their times at abandoned airports and such, not always at legit tracks.

    There have been claims from some of 13.3-13.4 runs. The only one I have seen backed up is Bryan with the white GT. Please post links to validated 13.3-13.4 runs as I could have easily missed them. We have heard lots of bogus claims, where the starter of the thread mysteriously disappeared when asked to post a timeslip.

    Don't get me wront, the times we have seen, even the 13.6's are absolutely amazing. I for one am very impressed. For a 3500lb car with 270rwhp to run those times on street tires is very impressive. Not to mention the 13.35 Bryan ran. I just hope all the kids reading these posts dont think that when they get one for a graduation present this June they are going to go to the track and run these times. This is THE time of year (well Jan and Feb are good too) to run fast times and the drivers ticking of the 13.3-13.4's are very experienced at the track: JDM and Bryan.
  7. well,i guess that sums it up!!! (and i also shall be at sgmp on the 19th) :banana:
  8. see ya there, btw is gtp2gto going to be there? i'm trying to get one of my employees to bring his moms stock 04 gto so i can make some passes in it too, i'm curious as to what it will run.
  9. Can't wait for the results! Good luck :nice:
  10. Paul ran an UNCORRECTED 13.90 @ 101.35mph with a 2.13 60' in Milan; 80F with 60% humidity. Motortrend ran a 13.6 @ 99.9mph on an Automatic, and that was on a track, not an airport.

    I searched quicky on other forums and I didnt find the threads which I saw the rest of the times, and I've only seen one bogus claim, and that was from SD Wheeler. Theres plenty of 13.6 timeslips, but I know there are atleast two more besides bryans slip running a 13.4 and a 13.5. 13.6 is an amazing time, and thats coming from amateur drivers; look how long it took the GTO to get down to a 13.2, almost a year.
  11. This run was made at about 300 ft above sea level, a 15 mph head wind and about 40 deg.
  12. your story gets more outrageous with every post. your "friend" ran the best time anyone has ever seen WITH a headwind?!!

    what causes you to get on here and lie so much??!!

    :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs:
  13. You're going to post a timeslip right?
  14. I ran a 13.1 @ 106 with a 1.7 60ft
    But some computer illeterate garden gnomes have my timeslip. They are trying to scan it but only end up downloading furry ****.

    I don't care if anyone doesn't believe me, it's the truth!
  15. Relax buddy, I have no reason to lie. I will be posting time slips and the car's dyno numbers. Hopefully this evening. I have better things to do than post garbage in this forum.

    And BTW get your post count up a little more before making comments like that.
  16. lopey4.6 i believe you.Dont waste your typing argueing with people. 99% of the time when sombody is the type to be BS itting they woundt have a post number like yours. When you get the slips just post thgis next to the picture :owned:
  17. Well, to add some fuel to the fire - if you REALLY want to run a 13.2 BONE stock then you could always buy an '04 GTO. Actually I ran a [email protected] at Cecil county in mine BONE STOCK. And oh yeah, I didn't remove seat, or jack, or spare, or AC, etc.
  18. or a mach1
    which is why i don't doubt 05's can go low 13's
  19. Sure you could spend nearly 10K more for a few tenths in the 1/4, weigh more, run slower in the corners, etc,etc,etc…
  20. Exactly. Don’t forget Mach 1’s have run high 12’s bone stock and since we have seen the GT is under rated and running better RWHP numbers than the Mach’s, has a MUCH stiffer chassis and a Much better suspension, and weighs less than 100 lbs more than the Machs. The GT is capable of low 13’s, hell we might have seen some high 12’s if Ford wouldn’t have messed with the TB closing. It cracks me up because the Ford and Mustang haters out there will use that all day long as an advantage in their argument. To see the real abilities of this motor and of this chassis without touching it’s internals, exhaust and even without even touching the fat A/F mixture you gotta get that turned off and allow the driver to control the TB. I’m willing to bet the car could run high 12’s in the ¼ on a good track in good air with a competent driver with just that aspect turned off.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.