mogs01gt said:yeah, good way to get your opinion across with the Mullet comment. Last pic I saw of Bob, he had a military cut.
laying on his back setting NMRA records and getting the rules changed from the 5.0 whiners. If that is lying on your back to you then please give me your definition of hard work.
More ignorant rants from one who is quite ignorant on the subject at hand (go look up "ignorant" - I'm not calling you a dirty name...just telling you how uninformed you are).JBVobra said:so I need to have "credentials" of lying on my back in the pits to know that a T45 and 4.88s is a "bit ridiculous".... LOL Not hardly. I'll let mullets like you enjoy that kind of fun and strecth the limits of input shafts... LOL
Although your math is good (and note the 7500 rpm redline I had with the 4.88s), acceptable is subjective. It is acceptable to some and not to others. Kindly show me where I have stated otherwise (I ask you to quote me to back up your accusations all the time, but you never do it. Guess you won't this time either).cosby, this is far too easy. Why don't you do a little math and show how far from the "acceptable" T45/4.88 combo ratio you have backed off of (ok, I'll do it):
4.88 X 3.37 = 16.45 (ok sports fans, this is what cosby calls "acceptable" in first gear LOL)
Bzzzt. Never broke an input shaft after Dec 01. Care to tell me why? Hint: I used the same tranny, same clutch, and both 4.56s and 4.88s.bob comes to his sense after countless input shaft snaps:
4.56 X 3.37 = 15.37 (ok, still snapping shafts, getting tired of car breaking and lying on back in pits LOL)
Bzzzzt. MPG would not change on tranny swap alone, as the T5 I had prior also had the .59 5th gear. 60fts cannot be compared, as I no longer have an untouched long block (I make ~45 more HP, and do it more efficiently). Ditto my latest MPG numbers.bob throws more money at it. Enter custom T5 with 2.92 first:
4.56 X 2.92 = 13.32 (rut-roh....maybe that jbvobra vette driven guy isn't so far off after all.....better 60fts, better mph trap, better mpg....hmmmm)
Ok sports fans with the T45/3650 that don't exactly savor the idea of throwing $1500 towards a new tranny. Whats the comparable first gear ratio to Cosby's current setup??? Do you need me to do the math??? It might be something slightly less than the gear whore would like you to realize:
4.10 X 3.37 = 13.82 (holy smoly....down to 4.10's and the first gear overall ratio is STILL greater than what he's setting records in today! LOL Maybe the mod god was a little over zealous with the gear analysis and just didn't want to admit that tranny strength was the real culprit of his previous struggles.... LOL)
I'll go you one better than that, shippy. Talk to a variety of people who have been there, and done that. Speaking of which, not only have I tried to get the best n/a 4V performance out of my car, but I also drive it in the city and on the highway. A lot.JBVobra said:exactly the point
you want all out 4V performance, listen to bob. You want something more sane for city driving, take what he says with a grain of salt.
Ummm....goofy? Can you please tell me a bit more about my "thought process"? Funny, I don't believe you're a shrink, and if you were, you sure wouldn't be mine. As for city manners, I drove mine to work this morning. 4.56 gears and G-Force tranny and all. Golly wally, it didn't mind the shifting one bit.He has the up most incentive to get the car to go fast. City manners are way in the back field of his thought process.
Wish you would start, but I digress.glad you're paying attention
RustyFox said:This guy is hopeless Bob. Please ignore him.
LOL. Nah, we've only had to tear it down once after a race, and hopefully won't have to do it again (we were quite legal). It definately would get old in a hurry.mogs01gt said:hell I didnt know you still drove your car to work? That has to suck breaking it down after every event then driving it back into work. I think my stress level would be through the roof.
Nick
That "fact" is nothing but a fantasy in your head. I ran a T45 and 4.56s for over 2 years - nearly 50,000 miles. What "fact" am I "dancing around" again?JBVobra said:cosby, without the T5 you would have backed off to 4.30s in a heartbeat. Why do you keep dancing around this fact?
You make a good broken record, but you are so wrong it is beyond funny. Hint: If you want to find a good reason not to go to 4.56 (or more) gear, it doesn't have anything to do with 1st gear. Nothing at all. But then again, having never driven one, you wouldn't understand this, would you?Piss-poor drivability with a 3.37first
Ya'll kindly excuse Jeff here. He has reading comprehension problems. He has this idea in his head that it was the rear gear that broke the input shafts in my tranny. No amount of logic or actual experience will convince him otherwise.and broken shafts on the 2-3 and 3-4 exchanges?
Breaking input shafts? Not likely - but then, I know why they broke. You don't.Damn, that could have happened just as easily in a "street" race with radial tires, forget about drag strip launches on slicks. LOL
Bologna. But again, one should take whatever advice one feels comfortable with.back full circle: take bob's advice on wild gearing, sure. I've never argued the performance end. But put a crow bar in that wallet and plan for the inevitable tranny swap to a T5. Because you're going to need it.
The irony of this quote is awesome.How about the bellhousing on the T5? Fill us in on the full T5 swap from a T45. How much is this adventure going to cost one who started off with just a simple gear swap in mind??? And here I thought the whole pony car gig was about affordability.... LOL
hotmustang331 said:The guy I was posting too had a Z28 auto with STOCK suspension and STOCK tires...NOT a drag car.And he was claming to run 12.2s. So I dont know what your talking about, if he had slicks or maybe just some suspension and wider tires I wouldnt of said anything.I know you can get 12s with slicks a stuff, but he didnt have any of that so thats why I brought up the stock Z06 and how its time was slower than his...SOME HOW LOL.So be sure to read the post FULLY please.
Hey, now that's original! Never seen that before!JBVobra said:crosby
Ok. Whatever.you remind me alot of the mullets running around the ls1 forums that say a 240/236 .612 lift cam "ain't that bad" on daily driving. "We can make it idle, i promise".... ya right. Maybe you can, but it's at such a level it's not very fun to drive at low speed and alot of the low end tq has vanished.
Hello Capt Obvious. Please go back and find me somewhere, anywhere that "advised" someone to get 4.88s. Please. Quote me.this is almost identical scenario. 4.88 pleas (originally) is completely wreckless advice.
Bzzzt. Incorrect. I never once changed my tone. One only needs to go back to the beginning of our little, uh, discussion and read for themselves.Funny how your tone changed to "4.30s are perfect for a street car IMO..." LOL
If you think I'm being hypocritical, I'm likely doing something right.I see your hypocritical ways haven't changed much.
LOL...once again, look in the mirror, shippy.Just can't admit when you're wrong
Color me truely sad. The GT Mustang is not as fast as the LS1 twins, but it is still a solid, quick, fun car.Cadence said:Seriously this is the saddest thing I have ever seen in my life. Ford made the GT mustang a wussy car straight out. If you cant admit that, then your truely sad. The Cobra/Saleen/Mach 1 are good cars, but the stock GT sucks.
Wow - have a bad day at summer school today? That's pretty narrow-minded of you. Perhaps you'll grow out of it? (ppsst...I won't hold my breath).Doesnt matter what you say, or boast about how great your mustang is, unless its one of the three above, you have a suck ass car.
No doubt they are nice, very powerful cars. I had one. 99 T/A. Outstanding powerplant. Didn't care for the car that was wrapped around it.Camaros/Firebirds with the LS1's/LS6's are probably one of the "Best Buy" for american muscle, as the are outfitted with the 345hp 5.7L corvette motor.
"Hella" power? Playground language?Not to mention they are restrictive, and with headers, intake and a few minor mods, they can seriously have hella horsepower.
2007. My goodness, I took a gander at my watch and it said 2004! Holy timewarp batman, we gotta wait almost 3 years for the newest wundercar to hit the streets!And as for the comment of Camaros not in production anymore, you might wanna read up on it, 2007 GM will be releasing the GT Killer, just like they did in the 60's.
Ya. Hey, you sit on GM's board of directors?Its a cat and mouse game, they let Ford take the lead for a bit, then WHAM come in with the killer.
"Ground yourself with"? Hooked on ebonics? The LS2 promises to be a fantastic motor, btw. Perhaps you'll be able to afford one some day.Do not forget the New Pontiac GTO's will have 400HP from the factory, with the LS2 motor. That should give you guys that think GT's are fast something to ground yourself with.
Correct. Welcome to the last decade.Stock for stock an LS1 Camaro/Firebird will beat a 4.6GT all day long.
I think you might have reading comprehension problems. Been to Jeff's school of posting, have you?Someone posted above that if they had the same gearing, hp, mods the GT would win because its 200lbs lighter, give me a break a 260hp motor vs a 345hp motor, what the hell do you plan to do to upgrade the hp/torque, ITS NOT EVER GOING TO BE EVEN STOCK FOR STOCK, stop torturing yourselves.
You got caught being a smart-ass punk kid trying to sound like you know what you're talking about. Now deal with it.You got caught buying a wussy american car now deal with it.
There is a guy local to me that runs 9.6s with a 2V 2000 GT. While a handful of LS1s have gone quicker, it is quite rare. The point? At the track, all bets are off, and your silly statement only shows what you really are - an uninformed overhormoned kid.You wanna beat LS1's go buy a Cobra, or a Mach1, then do some modding and MAYBE you'll be able to stick with a "STOCK" LS1.
"MuRdEr"? My 11 year old likes to see words typed like that. Tells you something, huh?Not to mention ANY upgrades to an LS1 will MuRdEr you.
Wow. You convinced me. No no, really.Check the video below.
www.streamload.com/Cadence/2000Taownz.wmv
1st stang 1 1/2 cars head stock, had intake, exhaust, and some other light mods, beat him by 1 1/2 cars that = 3 cars behind.
2nd stang, launched off the line so hard he quit within 1/16 mile. Sad. Keep in mind that LS1 is stock, so the comment of stock for stock doesnt apply. Mods done to the stang wont help you unless your spraying. Line up with an LS1 on juice and see what it does to your stang on Juice.
Uh. Jr? Isn't that exactly what you just did above? Is not the GT an "American car"? And did you not do your best to bash the hell out of it?Bottom line dont bash another american car
ROFLOL. So many things wrong with this statement. Are you even old enough to have a car? I can believe your parents do, but you? Nah.you wanna make it fast to beat it fine, but there is no need to talk B.S. about a car in which your friends, parents, grandparents, AND local law enforcement drive i.e. California CHP uses LS6 Camaros
Bhahahahahahahaahahahahahaha. I just love it when blubbeing idiots say things like this. Where do you live, goofball? I bet I can setup a race between you and a n/a 2V GT. Bring your video camera - we'll enjoy it.Flame me all you want, your stang will never, EVER, E-V-E-R beat my car. Did I forget to mention EVER?
Cadence said:Seriously this is the saddest thing I have ever seen in my life. Ford made the GT mustang a wussy car straight out. If you cant admit that, then your truely sad. The Cobra/Saleen/Mach 1 are good cars, but the stock GT sucks.
Doesnt matter what you say, or boast about how great your mustang is, unless its one of the three above, you have a suck ass car.
Camaros/Firebirds with the LS1's/LS6's are probably one of the "Best Buy" for american muscle, as the are outfitted with the 345hp 5.7L corvette motor. Not to mention they are restrictive, and with headers, intake and a few minor mods, they can seriously have hella horsepower.
And as for the comment of Camaros not in production anymore, you might wanna read up on it, 2007 GM will be releasing the GT Killer, just like they did in the 60's. Its a cat and mouse game, they let Ford take the lead for a bit, then WHAM come in with the killer. Do not forget the New Pontiac GTO's will have 400HP from the factory, with the LS2 motor. That should give you guys that think GT's are fast something to ground yourself with. Stock for stock an LS1 Camaro/Firebird will beat a 4.6GT all day long. Someone posted above that if they had the same gearing, hp, mods the GT would win because its 200lbs lighter, give me a break a 260hp motor vs a 345hp motor, what the hell do you plan to do to upgrade the hp/torque, ITS NOT EVER GOING TO BE EVEN STOCK FOR STOCK, stop torturing yourselves. You got caught buying a wussy american car now deal with it. You wanna beat LS1's go buy a Cobra, or a Mach1, then do some modding and MAYBE you'll be able to stick with a "STOCK" LS1. Not to mention ANY upgrades to an LS1 will MuRdEr you. Check the video below.
www.streamload.com/Cadence/2000Taownz.wmv
1st stang 1 1/2 cars head stock, had intake, exhaust, and some other light mods, beat him by 1 1/2 cars that = 3 cars behind.
2nd stang, launched off the line so hard he quit within 1/16 mile. Sad. Keep in mind that LS1 is stock, so the comment of stock for stock doesnt apply. Mods done to the stang wont help you unless your spraying. Line up with an LS1 on juice and see what it does to your stang on Juice.
Bottom line dont bash another american car, you wanna make it fast to beat it fine, but there is no need to talk B.S. about a car in which your friends, parents, grandparents, AND local law enforcement drive i.e. California CHP uses LS6 Camaros
Flame me all you want, your stang will never, EVER, E-V-E-R beat my car. Did I forget to mention EVER?
coughgearingcoughconvertercoughdrivercough
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?