what heads cam. . .

[NIKwoaC]

said might in the first place because i own both... my stang isnt near 400hp but my ls1 99z28 with stock ls6 heads/intake/tb and street suspension/tires

Gearbanger already covered this, but a LS1 with LS6 parts and a bunch of other bolt ons is NOT a stock, or even a near-stock car.

stock ls1/2...

You keep saying this, as if they're the same motor. They're not. They're 0.3L and 50+hp different. So which is it?

as much as i love stang (now because i have learned how awesome ford small blocks are and mustangs are super sick w/ aftermarket support and cheaper too) there is no comparing ls1 in stock trim to mid/highly modded 302/strockers...

This is just getting silly. There all sorts of guys running deep 11s and even 10s on NA, pump gas, street driven 331s and 347s. If you think a STOCK LS1 can do that, you're smoking some strong stuff.

plus with gm's t56 or 4l60/80e auto trans' 1-2 shift is at 45mph with stock gears... with my t5 in my stang with 373:1 1st gear is only good till like 30 or so...

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. When my Stang had 2.73s in it, I could damn near hit 80 in 2nd gear. What does that have to do with winning a drag race?

now i have almost 500 FWHP (stock tune zo6 maf)

Dyno numbers to back your claim?

 

[JungleJoe]

Actually, the LSX series engines are marvels. I'm not going to get on this argument wagon, but the LSx engines were the pioneers of today performance, You ever heard of project white pony, or white horse? Look it up if not.The "ford" guys swapped in a cam only ls1 and it went into the 10's,with a little suspension work, that car is in the 9's now.
Just adding my .02 worth. . .

 

[NIKwoaC]

but take into account ls series motors have more of a flat torque curve.

That's a generalization, and it's not really true. You CAN BUILD a SBF to do everything an LS can do, including a flat torque curve.

if youd put hoosier 8inch slicks on a stock f body 98-02, it will run deep 11's....

PLEASE show me an example of this.

 

[FastDriver]

Put your 8" hoosiers on your stock LS1 and launch like you mean it for that 11.83 and you won't make it 30 feet before the stock 10-bolt pops. You sound like a 16 y/o.

For comparison's sake, the 11.96 was on a nearly stock suspension with an unbolted front sway bar, 4cyl springs, and ET Streets (not slicks) out back.

In any event, you really are smoking rock if you think you'll get a stock LS1 into the 11s with nothing but tires, and I defy you to show me an example. After making comments like that, honestly, I don't believe anything you've said now. You've lost all credibility with me.

 

[FastDriver]

For what it's worth, I currently own an LS1, too. It's a stock '97 C5 corvette - lighter, faster, and rated at more power than an LS1 F-body. In a drag race with my old mustang, it would lose... Not a fair contest. This car has gone a respectable 13.2@108 is its best time and trap, and I'll bet I could break into the 12s on street tires without further modification. I think that's impressive as hell, but you're taking your argument too far. My old stang didn't make 400hp at the crank and it was a nightmare to stock LS1s. Sorry, you're too biased to see the truth.

 

[Gearbanger 101]

Actually, the LSX series engines are marvels. I'm not going to get on this argument wagon, but the LSx engines were the pioneers of today performance, You ever heard of project white pony, or white horse? Look it up if not.The "ford" guys swapped in a cam only ls1 and it went into the 10's,with a little suspension work, that car is in the 9's now.
Just adding my .02 worth. . .

Tried looking it up....couldn't find it?

 

[88gt373]

Put your 8" hoosiers on your stock LS1 and launch like you mean it for that 11.83 and you won't make it 30 feet before the stock 10-bolt pops. You sound like a 16 y/o.

For comparison's sake, the 11.96 was on a nearly stock suspension with an unbolted front sway bar, 4cyl springs, and ET Streets (not slicks) out back.

In any event, you really are smoking rock if you think you'll get a stock LS1 into the 11s with nothing but tires, and I defy you to show me an example. After making comments like that, honestly, I don't believe anything you've said now. You've lost all credibility with me.

i dont see how you can say a 10 bolt would pop by 30 feet.. granted its not a very strong rear, but there are guys who push single leg 10bolts that are 20+ years old with over 500hp and its fine..... 8" hoosiers on my stock 10bolt did fine. and you deff can mod a SBF to get over on a stock ls1 and any other motor for that matter... and im not biased as much as im going from experience.... the point was in the first place is that a 400hp SBF 302 would not beat a stock 346 ls1 w 315hp... i didnt say what was better than what clearly i own both motors so being THAT biased doesnt exist in my book.

and i said i had 8 inchers, short throw and cai... 11.83et with that set up on a f body ls1 is not very far off at all.. 100% stock trim w/ stock tires was supposed to like high 12 seconds! how is 11.83 considered far form reality??

you dont have to believe anything i say... and if you cant sent your vette into the 12s with street ets you shouldnt be drivingt.. im sorry... im jus saying with my Z ive rocked just about everything on the street after my mods and ive rocked 400hp stang in stock trim with 18/19 inch zo6 wheels... believe me or not...

 

[88gt373]

Well, why didn't you say so? Make up your mind...are we comparing a stock LS1, or one that had to change its entire top end? Having to add the LS6 top end to the engine kind of kills your "stock" argument, don't you think? Running "stock" GM parts, doesn't qalify it as a "stock" engine. I mean...I could put a "stock" 5.0 TiVCT engine in my Coupe and run 11's all day long....but that doesn't exactly make it a stock era Mustang, now does it?

Errrrrr....yeah, but it's still......100 more horsepower!?! And in a car that weighs 200-300lbs less to boot. I'm not sure what pudding you're eating, but in the real world, the odds don't look good for the F-Body.

Wait...so because you beat your buddies '93 Cobra, that makes all 400hp Mustangs slow? There are several dozen members in this particular forum that would love to be your Huckleberry on that one.
....sure it will. You do know what the word "stock" means, right?

So what's your point? The 5.0L OHV you're comparing the LSX engine to was produced back in 1968. What does it matter how old the engine is?

Look...the LSX wasn't a mechanical marvel. GM made large cube engines, with a high flow H/C/I package and made power. That's not exactly what I would call impressive. Guys have been adding big H/C/I packages to large displacement strokers for over a decade and making as good, or better power than that.

GM would have impressed me if they pulled those kinds of power numbers of a small displacement engine like Ford has....but they couldn't. They always went with the "bigger = better" formula. In some ways it worked (it appeased the horsepower junkies), but in the end couldn’t save the car and the 4th Gen FBody crashed and burned. When all is said and done though, they're still just the big bully picking on the underdog. Nothing special there?

The fact that the new 5.0L TiVCT nearly matches the horsepower and torque figures of the much larger 6.2L LS3 V8 while pulling cleaner emissions and knocking out 30mpg is frigging astounding. And running 11's off the show room floor in a full weight car, with nothing more than tires, 10’s with tires and basic suspension and bolt ons and deep-10’s with a small shot of giggle gas on top of it all is frigging incredible!!! And that’s all without even removing a valve cover….now that it something to be impressed by!!!

i agree with the 5.0vivct motor is awesome period and will eat most everything up and thats not the argument im making at all....
5.0ViVCT < LS1/2/3 definitely...

oh and as for GM small dis motors back in the day when trans am racing was happening the z28 w/ DZ302 motors ate up trans am racing and fords 302 and the z28 of that era ate everything up in T/A racing up until AMC came in the picture..

and everyone in the day said bigger was better... look at the cj428/429... all the makers made huge displacement motors no just gm....

and yea 75HP still doesnt mean your gonna beat my stocker Z... with a better driver most likely... but not all the time. and from a dead stop like i said you take into consideration the transmissions backing those motors and thats the real reason why ls cars beat a 400hp 302.... like i said, im at 60 mph by the time i get into second gear!!! while your stang is shifting i been in gear... back your 400hp 302 with a t56 against my ls1 w/ t56... then yea you got me all day...

 

[NIKwoaC]

88gt373, you ignoring my questions above?

and i said i had 8 inchers, short throw and cai... 11.83et

I'm still having a hard time swallowing this. An F-body with a driver in it is around 3500 lbs. It would take North of 400hp to push that weight to an 11.83 ET. A stock LS1 was a 315hp engine... You picked up 85+ hp with a CAI?

 

[JungleJoe]

Tried looking it up....couldn't find it?

Here ya go my friend.... I was off on the name, its an old project, I quit following it a long time ago. I was a "little off" of the numbers, my fault... But the car was sold, and its waaay in the 9's now with alot LESS than one would think. But none the less, I'll never get rid of my pony! I dont give a rats azz if its slower that a horse and buggy, its sounds GREAT!!

‪PHR Magazine Project Orphan Dyno Run at Cartek 414 rwhp‬&rlm; - YouTube


And for whats its worth, some of the t56 camaros dyno 315-320 to the rear! I just happen to know this personally! Thats alot more motor than what GM claims...ok, Im out of this "talk" what about my heads combo folks....LOL

 

[88gt373]

88gt373, you ignoring my questions above?



I'm still having a hard time swallowing this. An F-body with a driver in it is around 3500 lbs. It would take North of 400hp to push that weight to an 11.83 ET. A stock LS1 was a 315hp engine... You picked up 85+ hp with a CAI?

im not sure what your asking.... all your saying is what i stated is not true and you only quoted half of what i said... maybe water will help you swallow that... here are basic knowledge stats:

ls1: 315hp, better geared trans, higher c/r almost 10;1, better ignition, 6100rpm, better fuel injection, more advanced intake system, better valve train stability, higher flow exhaust, and more displacement! THATS ALL STOCK! come on.. you ad slicks, cai, short throw in that equation... yea the car is about 300 lbs heavier.. but thats pebbles...

FOX 5.0 : UP GRADED TO 400hp 8.8:1 c/r, 5900rmp limit, 20 year old FI, iron block/gt40p or alum heads @ 250+ cfm, TONS of chassis flex, you want me to keep going?

yes in the 80s the 5.0 was a revolutionary.. but is still not a comparison... not even in the same generation of motors as the ls1... if you want a discussion of motors lets talk 4 valve motors

 

[FastDriver]

First of all, the ratings on LS1s don't matter. They made 290+rwhp in the early years, and then often well-over 300 rwhp later on. I personally saw a stock Z28 put down 311rwhp. Incidentally, this was one of those Z28s my old sub-400hp mustang outran. This was one of those stripped packages typically ordered by police... I forget the nomenclature. The guy was so confident he was going to win that he brought a friend along. When I blew his doors off from a stop and a roll, he dismounted his friend and then I did it again.

Second, the reason I don't believe you is because you're either lying about your 11.83 or about the modifications on your car. I know what an LS1 will do. I've been following them closely since they were created, which is probably a couple of years after you were born. Bone stock LS1s breaking into the 12s is rare. Oh by the way, the track conditions and the track itself can make a couple tenths of a second difference in ET and Trap speed. So for you to criticize my time without even asking the question highlights your ignorance. However, I don't care what track you're on, an 11.83 ain't happenin' in a stock f-body with tires, a CAI, and slicks. In a Z06? Sure (LS6, not LS1)... In an F-body? No way. It's not a question of wondering whether it's possible. I know it isn't and the fact that you're holding onto that statement shows both your immaturity and your dishonesty. Further, I have personally experienced this race first hand both from the driver's seat and as the opponent against stock LS1 f-bodies in a less than 400 hp mustang. You're wrong.

Your facts are wrong: the limiter in the 5.0 is 6250 rpm, why would anyone lower it? The Z302

Since you don't use complete sentences, this is hard to interpret. Did you mean to say this:

when trans am racing was happening the z28 w/ DZ302 motors ate up trans am racing and fords 302

Because as I recall, the Boss 302 won the 1970 season.

10-bolts are a joke. That's why so many chevy guys replace them with 9" Fords, or 12-bolts.

Getting 60 out of 1st gear is not preferable to shifting at closer to 30mph. It means you're not taking advantage of the torque multiplication inherent in gearing... You've got a lot to learn... Stop lying and settle down, and you might actually get something other than condemnation out of your time here.

Chris

 

[88gt373]

First of all, the ratings on LS1s don't matter. They made 290+rwhp in the early years, and then often well-over 300 rwhp later on. I personally saw a stock Z28 put down 311rwhp. Incidentally, this was one of those Z28s my old sub-400hp mustang outran.

Second, the reason I don't believe you is because you're either lying about your 11.83 or about the modifications on your car. I know what an LS1 will do. I've been following them closely since they were created, which is probably a couple of years after you were born. Bone stock LS1s breaking into the 12s is rare. Oh by the way, the track conditions and the track itself can make a couple tenths of a second difference in ET and Trap speed. So for you to criticize my time without even asking the question highlights your ignorance. However, I don't care what track you're on, an 11.83 ain't happenin' in a stock f-body with tires, a CAI, and slicks. In a Z06? Sure (LS6, not LS1)... In an F-body? No way. It's not a question of wondering whether it's possible. I know it isn't and the fact that you're holding onto that statement shows both your immaturity and your dishonesty. Further, I have personally experienced this race first hand both from the driver's seat and as the opponent against stock LS1 f-bodies in a less than 400 hp mustang. You're wrong.

Your facts are wrong: the limiter in the 5.0 is 6250 rpm, why would anyone lower it? The Z302

Since you don't use complete sentences, this is hard to interpret. Did you mean to say this:

Because as I recall, the Boss 302 won the 1970 season.

10-bolts are a joke. That's why so many chevy guys replace them with 9" Fords, or 12-bolts.

Getting 60 out of 1st gear is not preferable to shifting at closer to 30mph. It means you're not taking advantage of the torque multiplication inherent in gearing... You've got a lot to learn... Stop lying and settle down, and you might actually get something other than condemnation out of your time here.

Chris

10 bolts are a joke and id rather have a 9" rear. but it wont blow up in a 60 foot. and im not hyped up at all just an intense discussion.. and i 60 in second not first.. and if you have mapping until 6k and power peaks till 6k than why shift at 3?

BTW yes ford won 70 ta, but the dz302 did take home wins in TA in 68 and 69.. ford 70 and i think 71, then amc twice after chevy stopped factory support for racers in late 69....

you can deny engine specs!!! thats the basis of the discussion.... your right how can i know squat about a motor i have been building since and driving for almost 10 years?? i have owned f bodies of all years just like most guys here probably owned stangs... so i guess were not the first to have diff opinions about this... and prob not the last...

for the record i never denied any of YOUR experiences with these face offs.. so i dont need to know what your specifics were at the track.. but your right... in my experience and my runs that was my time take it or leave... but im sure your sub 400hp stang that beat the z28 had acouple chassis mods witch help to put power down too... or maybe this experience is exclusive to me.

you just said it your self with the right conditions it possible to win that race (SBF302 v. stock ls1) why dont you hop on youtube and look at sub 12 sec mostly stock f body runs... my background is primarily drifting in imports and muscle cars are a hobby of mine so you probably have seen more than i have in the area of argument... but in my experience on the street and my 3 runs in sac raceway 11.83 was my best and my first run... believe it or not... and ls1 vettes with light mods/tires are 12 sec cars to begin with...ls6 cars ET's werent THAT much better in 1/4 times..

 

[FastDriver]

I'll leave 'em... I don't need to verify anything on you tube. I've been at the track enough that I've already verified it. This car, as well as the LS6s, and LS7s were my targets when I was building different mustang combos. I know that the fastest published time for a stock F-body is the 12.89 that Evan Smith put down in a bone-stock Camaro. You're trying to get me to believe that you cut more than a second off of that time with just slicks and a lid. First of all, I don't think you started with the equivalent car to Smith, and second, even if you did, slicks and a lid aren't enough to cut off that much time.

My car had subframe connectors, and battle boxes (so the torque boxes wouldn't eventually become damaged. 4 cylinder springs up front and a disconnected front sway bar. Aside from the engine, gears, and some hardened rear axles that's all that was done to the car.

LS6 cars absolutely spanked LS1s... What are you talking about? The '02-'04 Vettes were trapping 116 mph stock and running 12.4s-12.6s stock. The best of them were faster than that. I believe Ranger went a 12.1 bone-stock which is a far cry from the fastest F-body's 12.8. More than that, the average for an F-body LS1 was in the 13.3-13.5 range.

Here's a discussion among F-body enthusiasts on stock capabilities: Fastest stock LS1 fbody? - LS1TECH

The point you should take away is that to run in the 11s, it's going to take bolt-ons and/or significant lightening in addition to slicks. You don't have enough.

If I post that a stock LS1 with a lid on slicks went 11.83 on an f-body or LS1 site, I'd get eaten alive. I'm half tempted to do it just to make a point.

Chris

 

[Gearbanger 101]

And for whats its worth, some of the t56 camaros dyno 315-320 to the rear! I just happen to know this personally! Thats alot more motor than what GM claims...ok, Im out of this "talk" what about my heads combo folks....LOL

...and a lot of them dyno'd as low as the 260-280 range too. And I'd bet the amount of LS1's dynoing above 315rwhp is probably in the 1% range.

I've only ever seen one LS1 powered FBody dip into the 12's in "close" to stock trim. Otherwise, the majority of the one's I've seen run anywhere from low-high 13's.

No offence, but the mentality of the GM lovers in this forum seems to be that if one car is a factory freak and runs an abnormally fast time, they must all run that way as it's par for the course.

...when it' really not.

You ever heard of project white pony, or white horse? Look it up if not.The "ford" guys swapped in a cam only ls1 and it went into the 10's,with a little suspension work, that car is in the 9's now.
Just adding my .02 worth. . .

Well, I was able to find the article in question and read it over. Very quick set up (10.73@132mph) indeed, but I think your memory was a little foggy when you quoted the specs. For starters, you also left out one very important detail....it was an LS1 swapped, lightened Mustang (2,884lbs w/o driver), not a full weight FBody. Chopping 400-500lbs out of what would otherwise be the weight of a stock LS1 is certainly good for a huge advantage right out of the gate, wouldn’t you say? Regardless, lets recap.....

We then worked fastls1.com's Jeremy Beck to hook us up with his LS1 crew. Within an hour, we spoke with LS1 fanatic John Moundros of J&T Auto in Huntington Station, New York, who said he had a complete take-out engine and transmission assembly, rescued from a wrecked 2001 Camaro SS, just waiting for our scruffy little hands to take home. Next we scoured the classified ads on FASTLSX.COM, where we came across a set of ported 5.3 heads and a matching aftermarket cam, miscellaneous parts for our swap, and a connection for custom headers (American Racing, Amityville, New York).

To get airflow into the engine, we visited Intakehoses.com, where we were able to find a 4-inch 90-degree rubber elbow to connect our ported throttle-body to a section of 4-inch aluminum pipe. From here, we used a factory Camaro bellows-type reducer, and connected the Camaro's 3.5-inch mass air meter to an open-element air filter inside the fenderwell.

In back, it consists of UPR Product's chrome-moly rear control arms with ploy bushings and a Suspension Techniques factory-location sway bar. On the front end, UPRs' chrome-moly tubular crossmember-with a coilover conversion, 175 lb/in springs mounted on the stock struts, and lightweight tubular control arms

So, for staters we have the addition of….

High compression (11.0:1) ported 5.3L heads
Custom stepped 1 3/4" into 1 7/8" long tube headers
complete custom intake system with ported throttle body
complete tubular light weight front and rear suspension

Also noted in the article was a Cartek custom tuned ECU, fully upgraded fuel system, upgraded ignition system, 4.10 gears, aftermarket clutch, LS6 intake manifold and coil packs, full exhaust, a custom drive shaft and slicks n skinnies....not to mention the countless amount of custom work required just to get the thing running.

Oh...and the crown jewel of it all....a Nitrous Works 125hp shot of giggle gas!!!

As I stated above. Quick car....but not even close to "cam only"

BTW, the quickest the car ran without the nitrous was 11.20's@122mph. Fast...but not spectacular considering the work put into it and it's displacement. Lightened H/C/I Mustang have run that quick with those same "tweaks", without the additional 45 cubic inches.

Feel free to check out the project for yourself in case I missed anything.

The Orphan | Find Information on The Orphan at Popular Hot Rodding Magazine

 

[FastDriver]

Cutting off your nose to spite your face.... I'll validate that the 11.20@122 isn't hard to accomplish with the SBF the car came with, even in n/a trim. As stated it can be done with a 302. Then again, the simplest way to do it would be a HCI stroker in a street car. You'd only need about 400rwhp, and a lightened car. I didn't look at the article, but I'm guessing that LS motor was probably pushing that or just a little north of it. That mph should be capable of squeaking into the 10s, too.

 

[JungleJoe]

I know all about the car,but quit following it along time ago. I figured since i said "ford" guys swapped a ls1 in......
All I know is the mustang wasa swapped "LS1" that went in the 10's LOOOOONG time ago. I didnt leave that part out.You guys was talking about LS1's so I mentioned it. I like ford and chevy,neither one or the other better.Some people die because of a ford or chevy...not me.

I dont assume anything about any car unless i see the numbers,thats why i said I personally know of a car that dynoed that,your right, some will not even get close to that with some simple bolt ons...LOL

 

[90lxcoupe]

BTW, the quickest the car ran without the nitrous was 11.20's@122mph. Fast...but not spectacular considering the work put into it and it's displacement. Lightened H/C/I Mustang have run that quick with those same "tweaks", without the additional 45 cubic inches.

I would love to see these HCI 302's running low 11's...

 

[NIKwoaC]

im not sure what your asking.... all your saying is what i stated is not true and you only quoted half of what i said...

Only quoted what I cared to respond to.

ls1: 315hp, better geared trans, higher c/r almost 10;1, better ignition, 6100rpm, better fuel injection, more advanced intake system, better valve train stability, higher flow exhaust, and more displacement! THATS ALL STOCK! come on.. you ad slicks, cai, short throw in that equation...

Ahh, there's the "magic" LS argument I'm used to hearing. It's always just "better". No matter what you do with aftermarket parts on a SBF, the LS is still "better".

yea the car is about 300 lbs heavier.. but thats pebbles...

You're right, that's nothing. It's like driving around with me, my wife, AND our dog in the back seat. Just pebbles.

FOX 5.0 : UP GRADED TO 400hp 8.8:1 c/r, 5900rmp limit, 20 year old FI, iron block/gt40p or alum heads @ 250+ cfm, TONS of chassis flex, you want me to keep going?

You just described a 275hp Fox, not a 400hp Fox.

JUST for illustration, my 302 has 9.8:1 CR, I shift at 6200 (will be higher after I move the rev limiter), my heads flow ~320CFM, and with nothing but my Maximum Motorsports sub frame connectors, I can (and have) put a jack stand on 3 corners of the car and the 4th won't sag even half an inch. Chassis flex, what? And this is just a street car, not set up for drag racing at all. Want me to keep going?

What your argument comes down to is you're trying to say that a heavier car with less power will be faster than a lighter car with more power JUST because the first car has an LS. And that's the magic LS argument that I just loathe. You seriously need to educate yourself more if you really believe that to be true.

 

[Rick 91GT]

I love this thread....im impressed ive kept my mouth shut.