have we really degraded to talking about fuel mileage?
have we really degraded to talking about fuel mileage?
Um the people that have done it get better milage. The mustang is lighter.....:read::idea:The Modular engines have pretty good BSFC, and I'd wager they are more efficient than the non-MDS LSXs with the same exact load, such as on an engine dyno.
F-Bodies got better mileage than the Mustangs even with the V6s. Chevy trucks are smaller and lighter, it isn't that hard to figure out why they get better mileage in some applications.
The LS1 wouldn't get the same mileage in a Mustang with a 5 speed and the 5.3 would get worse mileage in an F150.
Have we degraded to talking about people talking about fuel mileage?
You are absolutely going to destroy the value of the car, not to mention the eternal burning in your testicles of 80,000 SVTP members putting impotence curses on you. :lol:
Seriously though, don't do it.
The 32v engine you have makes the LS engine (technology-wise) look like a throwback to the troglodyte era.
Hussein Obama our commander in chief or an LS1 in a Cobra??
I don't know which one is worse!!
Hussein Obama our commander in chief or an LS1 in a Cobra??
I don't know which one is worse!!
The 5.4 GT super car engine wins! let's throw in the 500+HP NA Roush Yates 5.0 Modular DOHC motor in the Grand AM FR500 GT to end this LS1 VS Modular debate once and for all. LS1 fans:burn::burn::burn:
Um the people that have done it get better milage. The mustang is lighter.....:read::idea:
Damn, I can't remeber the last time I saw so much drama on one thread. How about bringing this thread back onto the orginal topic?
Hate to break it too your but the ls is a more efficient motor. Throw both on a engine dyno:rollseyes And your weight specs just proved my point, a f-body owns a mustang(2v, 4v doesnt matter) in fuel economy and donnu where you got those numbers but they are heavier than a stangAerodynamics and final drive ratio makes a bigger difference on fuel economy than weight, at least when the weight is close.
How many people do you know that have swapped an LS1 into a new edge Mustang with a 5-speed and gotten better mileage?
Also, in regards to weight...a quick google search shows
2002 Camaro SS - 3439 lbs
2003 Mustang Mach 1 - 3466 lbs
Hate to break it too your but the ls is a more efficient motor. Throw both on a engine dyno:rollseyes And your weight specs just proved my point, a f-body owns a mustang(2v, 4v doesnt matter) in fuel economy and donnu where you got those numbers but they are heavier than a stang
The numbers are from Ford and GM. It's what they weigh.
And why is it more efficient, because you say so?
Excuse me if I don't take your word for it. :bored:
I dont know how the concept is hard for you to grasp, a motor with 1.1L more displacement getting better mpg than a smaller motor is more efficient:rollseyes But thats fine you can continue to be an ignorant idiot if you want. Its not a some kind of top secret info, and engine is a air pump thats all it is. An ls1 just happens to be better at pumping air than the mod motor.