What do you run with your mods? (Don't mean this as a call out but real world numbers would answer these questions pretty easy I would think. )
Last edited:
01 cobra vs 2000 camaro SS? who do you think would win
- Thread starter thecobralife
- Start date
What do you run with your mods? (Don't mean this as a call out but real world numbers would answer these questions pretty easy I would think. )
I don't think anyone is expecting the Cobra to run 12s or the SS to hit its best number either. It's just the benchmark were using to say which CAR (not driver) would be faster.
The problem with that is the numbers you use... If we are talking average numbers an a4 ls1 is 13.5 @ 105... Best possible ever and we are talking 12.99/13.00 area... If we assume the guy can't drive the Camaro will still pull mid 13s... I've owned and driven enough of them to know its not exactly hard to reproduce the numbers without being a perfect driver. It seems to me the best possible outcome for the cobra is being pitted against an average time for the ls1.
I haven't run with my 4.10s yet (I installed them on New Year's Day) but my other runs were at Las Vegas in the heat with elevation. I did 13.78 spinning on borrowed bald DRs and a horrible shift into 3rd (didn't want to miss the gear). My 60ft was just over 2. My buddy's LS1 6 speed with ms3 cam and headers did 13.99 just as a comparison. Everyone was running slower cause of conditions. GTs were all hitting 15s along with Subarus with no traction issues. I outran every Mach 1 there too.
Mach 1 midnight mayhem - YouTube
Last edited:
:beer:
On a cold day even an auto SS won't keep from spinning
TBCobra and I are good friends...That race, was like a 65 roll and he got the jump on me. It was going to take some time to come around him at that speed. We raced again....
Now, I had 4.10s and he had 3.27 so I started a gear up.. remember the MACH has the revised heads that flow a bit better plus a 3.55 gear
Mach 1 vs Cobra - YouTube
got 1:50 for run..
TB's Cobra runs hard though..he has beaten many cars that made more power than him..Now he has a good size shot so his car runs really strong.
I am sure he will chime in..LOL
Last edited:
Guys I bleed blue. I love Fords and I love for them to be better than their competition from GM. With that said I try to be realistic about it. Everyone downplays how fast the old Mustangs were and particularly the 2v cars but they were actually pretty fast cars in their day for their price its just that the LS1 Fbodies were really faster cars for their price in their day is why people act like the older Mustangs were slow. The main reason I bought my Terminator is because I knew a bunch of Fbody guys, and we were cool peoples and all, but they would clown on us Mustang guys about the LS1 cars being faster cars in general and they were so that made me really want a Mustang that was superior. LS1 Fbodies like most LS powered cars were kind of overachievers. They did really good for what they had to work with. Very similar to the way the new 5.0 Mustangs, or GTR's, CTS-V's, etc seem to perform really well for the power to weight ratio they have.
Again I like for Fords to be better but the honest truth of it is that in general the LS1 Fbodies were better overall performers than the older N/A 4.6L Mustangs regardless of their valve count.
This is a old insert from a MM&FF magazine probably 11/12/13 years ago:
Again I like for Fords to be better but the honest truth of it is that in general the LS1 Fbodies were better overall performers than the older N/A 4.6L Mustangs regardless of their valve count.
This is a old insert from a MM&FF magazine probably 11/12/13 years ago:
Last edited:
See I'm willing to bet money the 4.10 geared cobra has more issues than the fbody in that situation. Even 2v cars blow off street rubber with 4.10/4.30s
You can get the DA pretty easy... Track location/date and time of the run.
My 9.8 NPI GT with an auto would pretty easily turn over some 245's, yet my '98 Z28 A4 with 235 all-season tires wouldn't hardly spin in the rain, and it wasn't traction control controlled. :lol:
And lol @ 13.99. That MS3 Camaro would destroy you. You can't possibly be that naive.
And lol @ 13.99. That MS3 Camaro would destroy you. You can't possibly be that naive.
Last edited:
It was at the end of July 98 degrees, track elevation 2000 DA 4750
I know. It's my brothers Z28. He slowly walks me on the street. I only got him cause he didn't have DRs. I was posting his time to show how other cars were suffering with the heat too- not to say I always destroy him.
Last edited:
If that DA was accurate that's a 12.97 pass corrected. That would also mean your brothers pass was junk or his car is hurt.
Which isn't likely considering the easy shifting and crappy radials. But I digress... OP, just race and post back.
You're on a predominantly Ford site where a stock 4V walks bolt-on/cammed LS1's with ease. Ask on LS1TECH and you'll receive answers of the same caliber but favoring the SS.
You're on a predominantly Ford site where a stock 4V walks bolt-on/cammed LS1's with ease. Ask on LS1TECH and you'll receive answers of the same caliber but favoring the SS.
Last edited:
Guys I bleed blue. I love Fords and I love for them to be better than their competition from GM. With that said I try to be realistic about it. Everyone downplays how fast the old Mustangs were and particularly the 2v cars but they were actually pretty fast cars in their day for their price its just that the LS1 Fbodies were really faster cars for their price in their day is why people act like the older Mustangs were slow. The main reason I bought my Terminator is because I knew a bunch of Fbody guys, and we were cool peoples and all, but they would clown on us Mustang guys about the LS1 cars being faster cars in general and they were so that made me really want a Mustang that was superior. LS1 Fbodies like most LS powered cars were kind of overachievers. They did really good for what they had to work with. Very similar to the way the new 5.0 Mustangs, or GTR's, CTS-V's, etc seem to perform really well for the power to weight ratio they have.
Again I like for Fords to be better but the honest truth of it is that in general the LS1 Fbodies were better overall performers than the older N/A 4.6L Mustangs regardless of their valve count.
This is a old insert from a MM&FF magazine probably 11/12/13 years ago:
:beer:
OP, you around?
Yeah, come check out a hero run! I love this site!!
As for LS1 tech, I let them know the Mach was a 4V and got the **** out of there before they burned me at the stake. Maybe some of you hard core guys should go fight over there lol
12.9 isn't a hero run LMAO. Quite a few LS1's have ran 12.9-13.0, be them A4 or M6. Why can't some people just wrap their heads around that an LS1 is faster stock for stock and mod for mod than a 4V (again, not including Terminator's).
Here's what I know as fact: My 1998 Z28 with an automatic, 235 all-season tires, and 170k miles ran a 8.8 in the 1/8th and a 13.6 in the 1/4. That's bone stock with t-tops and a 270lb driver. No special tricks, just leaving off idle and going WOT after it squats.
Here's what I know as fact: My 1998 Z28 with an automatic, 235 all-season tires, and 170k miles ran a 8.8 in the 1/8th and a 13.6 in the 1/4. That's bone stock with t-tops and a 270lb driver. No special tricks, just leaving off idle and going WOT after it squats.
That article has been cited countless times over the years, yet is definitely not representive of what you'll see at the track.Guys I bleed blue. I love Fords and I love for them to be better than their competition from GM. With that said I try to be realistic about it. Everyone downplays how fast the old Mustangs were and particularly the 2v cars but they were actually pretty fast cars in their day for their price its just that the LS1 Fbodies were really faster cars for their price in their day is why people act like the older Mustangs were slow. The main reason I bought my Terminator is because I knew a bunch of Fbody guys, and we were cool peoples and all, but they would clown on us Mustang guys about the LS1 cars being faster cars in general and they were so that made me really want a Mustang that was superior. LS1 Fbodies like most LS powered cars were kind of overachievers. They did really good for what they had to work with. Very similar to the way the new 5.0 Mustangs, or GTR's, CTS-V's, etc seem to perform really well for the power to weight ratio they have.
Again I like for Fords to be better but the honest truth of it is that in general the LS1 Fbodies were better overall performers than the older N/A 4.6L Mustangs regardless of their valve count.
This is a old insert from a MM&FF magazine probably 11/12/13 years ago:
People claimed that a local stock '99/'01 ran 12.90's bone stock to the tires, with a woman driver no less. I never saw it but they have been known to trap 106-107 in good air so it sounds plausible.
Mine bone stock went 13.1 @ 108 with me driving and 13.1 @ 105 with the wife driving (different days). Neither of us are great drivers... hell my pass was on a 2.19 60ft.
Amen on these results not being the norm at the track... The first time I took the car out the DA was 3000-3200 and I ran 13.4 - 13.6 @ 104-105 no matter what I did. Of course a Mach or 99/01 Cobra isn't clicking off low 13s stock most of the time either.
Reality is niether could touch a terminator and they were cracking off high 12s with mids for the best drivers.
Amen on these results not being the norm at the track... The first time I took the car out the DA was 3000-3200 and I ran 13.4 - 13.6 @ 104-105 no matter what I did. Of course a Mach or 99/01 Cobra isn't clicking off low 13s stock most of the time either.
Reality is niether could touch a terminator and they were cracking off high 12s with mids for the best drivers.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
