00gt z28 - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1996-2004 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 05-30-2014, 06:03 PM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
samcrored's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: atlanta
Region: Georgia
Posts: 90
00gt z28

I wondering who and why you like gts better than z28s
samcrored is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-30-2014, 06:12 PM   #2
Legacy Member
Legacy
 
lowflyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Region: Mississippi
Posts: 19,890
Send a message via AIM to lowflyn
Because they look better.

Sent from my massive johnson.
__________________
"I'm not driving too fast...just flying too low"
Mine:
-03 SB Cobra vert- 2552 of 5082 Born 02/25/03
Our's:
90 7up vert - new project-07 DSG Focus -DD
335
lowflyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 06:22 PM   #3
Road Trip!
 
shrek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: California
Region: California
Posts: 44
00gt z28

I don't. Other way around tbh

3.8<4.0<4.6<ls1

However..

Gt<z28<cobra
shrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-30-2014, 06:33 PM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
PonyBoyV6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago Area
Region: Illinois
Posts: 1,079
I'd still prefer a GT over a z28. The body style just absolutely kills it for me. I really like the LS platform don't get me wrong, but holy hell is that gen ugly.
PonyBoyV6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 06:41 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,209
I'm partial to my late 4th gen F-bodies, I have one. It's been the funnest car I have ever owned, and I have owned some pretty damn nice cars.

I will say that the New Edges are better looking but they don't have the performance to back up the looks.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 06:48 PM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
PonyBoyV6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago Area
Region: Illinois
Posts: 1,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
I'm partial to my late 4th gen F-bodies, I have one. It's been the funnest car I have ever owned, and I have owned some pretty damn nice cars.

I will say that the New Edges are better looking but they don't have the performance to back up the looks.

Hence why I am a supporter of ls1 swaps. A bolt on 4.6 cannot even play with an LS1. If i had the cash, i would swap mine to an ls1 bastardized New edge. Theres No doubt the LS platform is one of the greatest bang for your buck motors you can tinker with.
PonyBoyV6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 06:57 PM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
PonyBoyV6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago Area
Region: Illinois
Posts: 1,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
I'm partial to my late 4th gen F-bodies, I have one. It's been the funnest car I have ever owned, and I have owned some pretty damn nice cars.

I will say that the New Edges are better looking but they don't have the performance to back up the looks.

Hence why I am a supporter of ls1 swaps. A bolt on 4.6 cannot even play with an LS1. If i had the cash, i would swap mine to an ls1 bastardized New edge. Theres No doubt the LS platform is one of the greatest bang for your buck motors you can tinker with.
PonyBoyV6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 07:09 PM   #8
Road Trip!
 
shrek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: California
Region: California
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by PonyBoyV6 View Post
Hence why I am a supporter of ls1 swaps. A bolt on 4.6 cannot even play with an LS1. If i had the cash, i would swap mine to an ls1 bastardized New edge. Theres No doubt the LS platform is one of the greatest bang for your buck motors you can tinker with.

Bang for your buck? Sure!

Cheap? Not exactly. A fast intake is $1,000

On the bright side a cam is like $260
shrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 07:13 PM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
PonyBoyV6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago Area
Region: Illinois
Posts: 1,079
Never said it was cheap! But then again. They take to mods alot better than a 4.6. And like you said, its $1000 for an intake. But $250 for a cam. All about compromise. Takes money to go fast! That's why my broke *** putts around in a stock new edge. Lol
PonyBoyV6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 07:26 PM   #10
Road Trip!
 
shrek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: California
Region: California
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by PonyBoyV6 View Post
Never said it was cheap! But then again. They take to mods alot better than a 4.6. And like you said, its $1000 for an intake. But $250 for a cam. All about compromise. Takes money to go fast! That's why my broke *** putts around in a stock new edge. Lol

1 cam<2 cams<4 cams! Lol jkjk

Stock mustangs are cool. They are the white whales of the car world. Just like a well taken care of bone stock fox body will fetch a nice profit so can yours one day hahah
shrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 07:47 PM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
FullyAutomatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Automatic
Region: Mexico
Posts: 941
mainly because the z28 is really ugly.. not sure how they thought it looked good..
Then again before the new edge design the mustangs looked cheap and ****ty 2 for a while
FullyAutomatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 08:33 PM   #12
Registered Member
Regular
 
GHO5T5NIPER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Kansas
Posts: 476
Personally I don't think z28's are anything special unless you have a really nice one. I have raced countless z28's in my 02GT and I never expected to win because I knew everyone says they are faster than our new edges, but I actually beat them. I don't think it's a huge difference unless there is a good driver behind the z28. Have faith in our mustangs!
GHO5T5NIPER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 09:37 PM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
FullyAutomatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Automatic
Region: Mexico
Posts: 941
The 2000 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 is equipped with a standard 5.7-liter V8 engine with 305 horsepower and the SS makes 320 hp and 345 lb-ft
FullyAutomatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 10:11 PM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHO5T5NIPER View Post
Personally I don't think z28's are anything special unless you have a really nice one. I have raced countless z28's in my 02GT and I never expected to win because I knew everyone says they are faster than our new edges, but I actually beat them. I don't think it's a huge difference unless there is a good driver behind the z28. Have faith in our mustangs!
They must not have known you were trying to race..

There is a huge difference between the two power wise.

The LS1 F-bodies put down around 275 - 320 rwhp and 300 - 330 rwtq - 100% stock (01-02 had LS6 intake good for 15-20 rwhp), they were in fact the exact same engine (minus EGR and drive by wire) in the C5 Corvette, it was rated at 345hp/350tq.

A 4.6 2v puts down around 210 - 230 rwhp and 240 - 260 rwtq, 100% stock.

In addition to making a crap-ton more power, also figure in the fact that the F-bodies came more aggressively geared (rear end and transmission T56 cars), weigh about 100-150 lbs more than a new edge (my fully loaded Z28 6spd with leather, power, t-tops and monsoon stereo weighed around 3450 lbs), have larger, stickier tires, better aerodynamics, etc..

It's hard to believe that even a bolt on 2v 4.6 can run with a stock LS1 F body.

What is the fastest showroom stock 2v new edge run in the 1/4 mile? 13.7-13.8 is possible in good air on a great track.

I have personally seen a showroom stock F-body have run a 12.8. I can't recall ever seeing any NA 4.6 2v run anything over a 13.4 on street tires. The 2v 4.6 are just slow.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 10:13 PM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
GHO5T5NIPER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Kansas
Posts: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
They must not have known you were trying to race..



There is a huge difference between the two power wise.



The LS1 F-bodies put down around 275 - 320 rwhp and 300 - 330 rwtq - 100% stock (01-02 had LS6 intake good for 15-20 rwhp), they were in fact the exact same engine (minus EGR and drive by wire) in the C5 Corvette, it was rated at 345hp/350tq.



A 4.6 2v puts down around 210 - 230 rwhp and 240 - 260 rwtq, 100% stock.



In addition to making a crap-ton more power, also figure in the fact that the F-bodies came more aggressively geared (rear end and transmission T56 cars), weigh about 100-150 lbs more than a new edge (my fully loaded Z28 6spd with leather, power, t-tops and monsoon stereo weighed around 3450 lbs), have larger, stickier tires, better aerodynamics, etc..



It's hard to believe that even a bolt on 2v 4.6 can run with a stock LS1 F body.



What is the fastest showroom stock 2v new edge run in the 1/4 mile? 13.7-13.8 is possible in good air on a great track.



I have personally seen a showroom stock F-body have run a 12.8. I can't recall ever seeing any NA 4.6 2v run anything over a 13.4 on street tires. The 2v 4.6 are just slow.

Either that or they didn't know how to drive or launch.. One of them is a good friend and he will straight up admit he lost. So idk maybe he has a lemon
GHO5T5NIPER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2014, 10:58 PM   #16
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: JB MDL
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 16,576
Lol, ppl like the 94-04 cars for looks or they just like the Mustang period. Modding the 2V is kind of an effort in futility IMO. By the time you build up a 2V or put a power adder onto it properly you can just swap in a LS1... or a Coyote.

I like my 98 for looks and it was cheap. It will keep on being a cheap fun weekend car until I get something that is legit fast in the garage.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 12:38 AM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
V6 stang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 2,252
I don't really understand how ford got so behind in performance during these years. I mean look at it now, yeah the mustang beats the camaro ss... But barely. It's close. If what has been said is true, the same level as the GT, but for chevy is a full second faster? wtf happened lol.
__________________
"Hp sells cars, Tq wins races" - Carroll Shelby... RIP
2012 Mustang GT Convertible
Roush Exhaust

2003 Mustang GT (Sold)
1999 35th Anniversary V6(SOLD)
V6 stang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 01:24 AM   #18
Road Trip!
 
shrek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: California
Region: California
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by V6 stang View Post
I don't really understand how ford got so behind in performance during these years. I mean look at it now, yeah the mustang beats the camaro ss... But barely. It's close. If what has been said is true, the same level as the GT, but for chevy is a full second faster? wtf happened lol.

Idk what happened but it's been that way since I can remember lol
shrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 08:34 AM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
Eturner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Region: Michigan
Posts: 3,257
The New Edge is a better looking and better sounding car!.. Ya the LS1 is faster, but I get more compliments in my GT then the FBody guy gets!..
Eturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 11:44 AM   #20
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,209
Just to put an end to this once and for all...

It happened because GM had the Corvette.

The Corvette was designed to compete with high end sports cars from around the world. So GM gave the Vette a year of exclusivity with a new engine and then the F-body got it the next year.

It started with the third gen F-body (1987-1992) and the L98 350 5.7L TPI, it's output started at 225 hp @ 4400 and 330 torque @ 2800 and was revised until it finally made 245 hp @ 4500 and 340 torque @ 3200.

Compare that to Mustangs of the time. They had the 302 or 5.0L. During the same times (1987 - 1992) the engine for the Mustang produced 225 hp @ 4000 and 300 torque @ 3200.

So, GM gave the F-body a 20 hp and 40 lb ft advantage over the Mustang.

Then in 1993, things get ugly. GM stuffed the LT1 into the new 4th gen F-body. The LT-1 started off with 275 hp @ 5000 and 325 torque @ 2400. That along with a new 6 spd (T56) and ABS, the 4th gen F-body absolutely murdered the Mustang in performance.

According to motortrend, the 93 Z28 ran 0 - 60 in 5.6 and the 1/4 in 14.0 @ 98.8 mph. The 93 Cobra managed a 0- 60 in 6.2 and 1/4 in 14.4 @ 97.4 mph. The standard GT did 0 - 60 in 6.2 and 1/4 in 14.8 @ 95.8. So at this point, the standard GT is .8 seconds behind the Z28 in the 1320. For top speed, the 93 Z28 went 154 mph. The 93 Cobra managed 141 mph, the GT just 135 mph.

Good read - 1993 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 vs 1993 Ford Mustang Cobra Comparison - Motor Trend


In 94, the SN95 showed up. That came with much improved looks, refinement and only 215 hp @ 4200 and 285 torque @ 3500 in the GT.

The fact that the car made less power than the previous car and weighed nearly 200 lbs more meant even worse performance numbers. 0- 60 in 6.7 and the 1/4 in 15.2 @ 89.6 mph. So, at this point, you are looking at a difference of 1.1 seconds 0 - 60 and 1.2 seconds in the 1/4. This is not competition.

Motortrend review of 1994 Mustang GT - 1994 Ford Mustang GT - Motor Trend Magazine

In 1996, Ford introduced the 4.6L 2v modular. It's output or lack thereof was 215 hp @ 4400 and 285 torque @ 3500. Nearly identical to the 94 and 95 5.0.

They also released the 96 Cobra, the first showing of the 4.6l 4v. It made 305 hp @ 5750 and 300 torque @ 4750.

The new 4.6L 2v let the car run 0 - 60 in 6.6 and 1/4 in 15.1 @ 92 mph.

The 4.6L 4v Cobra ran 0 - 60 in 5.4 and 1/4 in 14.0 @ 102 mph. Roughly matching the performance of the 96 Z28 and it's 285 hp.

GM on the other hand gave the LT1 a boost of 10 hp to 285 hp and ram air options good for 305 hp in the SS Camaro and WS6 Trans Am. The added power combined with the suspension and tire changes with the SS/WS6 packages let them put that power down better than ever.

According to Car and Driver - the 1996 Camaro SS was capable of 0 - 60 in 4.9 and the 1/4 in 13.6 @ 106 mph.

I could stop here. As even this 1996 Camaro SS is running better times than even the 2010 Mustang GT with Track Pack, 0-60 in 5.1, 1/4 in 13.7 @ 104 mph.


However, we would be missing out on the true aluminator. The LS1.

The LS1 powered Fbody was capable of running 0 - 60 in 4.7 and the 1/4 in 12.8 @ 109 mph, 100% showroom stock. These cars are rated up to 325 hp and 350 torque and were capable of putting down 325 rwhp and 340 rwtq, again, completely stock.

A 2001 Bullitt put down 236.8 rwhp and 280 rwtq on the same dyno, the same day as the Camaro put down 321 rwhp. You can see where this headed..

An article from Muscle Mustang and Fast Fords, pitting a 2001 Bullitt against a Camaro SS. The Camaro ran a 12.96 @ 107.43 mph, the Bullitt ran a 13.91 @ 98.5 mph. Same driver, same day, same track. This Camaro had previously ran a 12.89 @ 108 mph -









Then 2003 came, the F-body no longer in production and the 03/04 Cobra showed up to war that had ended a year earlier.

The best numbers I have seen for one of these is a 12.6 @ 112 mph, very close to a normal C5 in straight line performance.

I can also say from personal experience that once these cars were heat soaked, they were easy prey for stock or very lightly modded LS1 fbodies.

Then 2005 came and with the 3v 4.6, Ford decided to go back to mediocrity with a performance level between the LT1 and LS1 powered f-body, and again, did basically nothing until the arrival of the 5th gen Camaro. Now, they are back to where they were in the mid 80's, actually competing against each other.

That is good for everyone.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 12:09 PM   #21
Registered Member
Regular
 
Eturner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Region: Michigan
Posts: 3,257
One thing you have to keep in mind too, is that when the 3v showed up, there was nothing for it to compete against!.. No Camaro, Challenger, nothing!... And in reality, Ford had won the Muscle Car Wars!.. The Terminator was being tested and put into production because Ford thought GM was bluffing about killing off the FBody!.. So when the Terminator showed up, the only thing they could compare it to was the Corvette!.. Hence the reason why the Top Mustang, Shelby GT500, is also compared to the Corvette!.. Even though they are not in the same league!..
Eturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 03:54 PM   #22
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: JB MDL
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 16,576
Actually the V6 Mustang won the war through sales alone. There were SO many V6 Mustangs on the road between 94-04 it wasn't even funny.

Those who have driven a LS1 F body or even a LT1/LT4 car know how good these things are stock and understand why it takes SO much work to get a modular or pushrod even up to stock LS1 power levels. My HCI Cobra was dynoing 301/325 which is about what a stock LS1 F body does... My Father's LT4 1996 Corvette is bone stock minus a mail order tune that lets it run a little cooler, slightly more aggressive fuel tables and gets rid of the stupid 1-4 shift or whatever its called. Its WAY faster than my bolt on 2V is and that's without really trying very hard.

When the Camaro re-released with the LS engine and the 2010 Mustang had a slight power bump out of the 3V I really was mad at Ford. Like "here we go again". And then a miracle happened. I can still remember where I was the first time I read about the 2011 and the Coyote and the numbers it was putting out and the times it was running. Was one of the happiest car related days of my life. Yes they are back to competing against each other as they were in the late 80s and it IS good for everyone involved. The only problem I see now is that the new Camaro rear end is butt ugly and I don't even want to get started on what I think of the 2015 Mustang.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 03:54 PM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Salinas
Region: California
Posts: 7,401
Lol.
The night before I bought my Bullitt, that was one of the, many, articles that I dug up about the car. The "hardcore" Ford guys weren't very happy were they?

You didn't go back far enough Ish... The 60's and early 70's, when the "big three" all had factory race teams, and the motto was, "What wins on Sunday, sells on Monday", that's when the real "performance wars" took place. GM, Ford and Chrysler, all dicing for top position, those were the days. The cars were just comparatively slow by today's standards.
GM has always taken the safe route and used bigger displacement engines, which is smart in my opinion. The first gen (and variants) of the small block Chevy was put into production vehicles for nearly 50 years... They had plenty of time to perfect the design! And I don't think that the LS series was that far of a jump from the LT.
Ford has always been the company that is willing to change up their designs and embrace different technology, things like the 427 SOHC "cammer" in 1964 (The predecessor of the modular) and the mid eighties SVO Mustang. Ford changed the design of their small block engine three times during the lifetime of Chevrolets first gen small block.
As far as the age old Mustang/Camaro debate goes, the Mustang came first so it has been as simple as Chevrolet knowing what the current model of Mustang is, and coming out with something more powerful. They're not entirely stupid at GM...
The Mustang has always been a good seller for Ford and most of the people that are buying them brand-new from the dealers (school teachers, secretaries and nurses) don't really care if they can beat a Camaro in the quarter mile or not...

So, as long as they keep buying them, Ford doesn't really care either...
straybullitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 08:08 PM   #24
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,209
The Pontiac GTO was technically the first pony/muscle car from the 60's, then Ford released the Mustang. The thing the Mustang had then, that it lost and then got back was it's appeal and functionality. The Fox bodies were meh but the SN95 is what got people looking at Mustangs again. They have been able to maintain that level of appeal since.

I will say, through the 60's and early 70's there really wasn't a bad muscle car. Then the emissions and fuel crisis hit in the 70's and 80's before really rebounding and improving ever since.

As for the Ford changing small block designs ..

Dates are for North America.

The Ford small blocks went from the Y block (1954 - 1964), to the Windsor (289, 302, 351) 1962 - 2001, then to Cleveland (302, 351, 400) 1970 - 1982, before going back to Windsor, then modular (4.6, 5.0, 5.4, 5.8) 1991 - current.

Technically, that is four (if you count the failure that Cleveland was) small block generations (Y block to Mod) for Ford in the time the SBC was in use.

In the lifetime of just the Windsor design, GM jumped 3 small block generations.

As for GM, they went Gen1 (SBC) (283, 302, 307, 327, 350, 400) in 1955-1993, Gen 2 (LT) (265, 350) 1992 - 1997, Gen 3 (LS1 and 6) 1997-2007, Gen 4 (LS2, LS3, LS4, LS7, LS9, LSA) 2005 - current, Gen 5 (LT New). As for the jump from Gen 2 (LT) to Gen 3 (LS), everything but the hydraulic-roller lifters and rod bearings are new.

I would say that both have had their share of technologies. Ford tried embracing the OHC design and it bit them in the ***, as most of the engines were vastly under powered compared to the competition, be it GM, Chrysler, Toyota or Nissan (trucks and cars). It's only when they went 4V that they have had any sort of success, apparently that never caught on until recently. Meanwhile, GM just keeps investing and innovating in pushrods and keeps them more than competitive with the OHC designs while being smaller (physically), lighter and all while producing better torque (big cubes help).

Regardless, Ford finally caught up in the engine department thus creating competition.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 08:48 PM   #25
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: JB MDL
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 16,576
You're right SN95 is what "killed" the Camarobird and like I said, it was the V6 more than anything. Still, the new Camaros are awesome and so are the Coyotes. Hell, even some of the Mopar stuff is good these days, just way too overpriced. It truly is the golden age of big power vehicles right now. Too bad GM didn't keep an iteration of the G8 around. Those things are like if the Charger didn't suck.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 08:54 PM   #26
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Salinas
Region: California
Posts: 7,401
Yeah, I didn't include the Cleveland because they are very similar to the Windsor and some of the parts interchange. The Cleveland was the preferred engine of the time for medium duty applications and had better breathing heads than the Windsors.
There is just no way that anybody can deny the success of the small block Chevy... Or the big block!
It does kind of have the feel of the 60's and 70's again though... Sorta.
The big three all have their versions of various factory race cars, and, as you said, that's a good thing!
Hell, the six cylinders of today would beat up on most of the muscle cars that Detroit had to offer 40+ years ago...
straybullitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 09:05 PM   #27
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottydsntknow View Post
You're right SN95 is what "killed" the Camarobird and like I said, it was the V6 more than anything. Still, the new Camaros are awesome and so are the Coyotes. Hell, even some of the Mopar stuff is good these days, just way too overpriced. It truly is the golden age of big power vehicles right now. Too bad GM didn't keep an iteration of the G8 around. Those things are like if the Charger didn't suck.
What I find most amusing is that the SN95, initially was the worst performing Mustang in the last 30 years, yet it was responsible for killing off the competition.

If GM would have made the 4th gen F-body more visually appealing, I think it would have been the Mustang that disappeared for several years.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 09:18 PM   #28
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Salinas
Region: California
Posts: 7,401
Haha.
Well, I don't know about that but in the late 80's, if I recollect, Ford was talking about using whatever platform that the Ford Probe was based on as the new Mustang to replace the aging Fox.
Had they done that, yes, there's a good possibility that the Mustang might have disappeared for a few years...
straybullitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2014, 09:32 PM   #29
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Charlotte, NC
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 1,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by FullyAutomatic View Post
The 2000 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 is equipped with a standard 5.7-liter V8 engine with 305 horsepower and the SS makes 320 hp and 345 lb-ft
That's what GM rated them at but its a known fact that all LS1 F bodies put down roughly 300 HP to the wheels. The HP increases for the SS packages and the same year corvettes is basically just marketing by GM to sell more of the expensive cars. If you look at stock dyno numbers for firebirds, camaros or corvettes all will put down around 300 HP making the LS1 engines at ~350 HP that the corvette was rated on.

I realize that this is a mustang form if you focus just on performance the 98-02 F bodies were light years ahead of the same year GT's (and really any GT up until 2011). I mean with the 6 speed I would run low 13's stock in the 1/4 and drive home and get 31 MPG's. I want to say a 2000 mustang GT was rated at around 270 HP and would run around 14.6's in the quarter and still not come close to 31 mpg.
StarzTA17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1996-2004 Mustang GT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ricer Race in a Z28 Zuperzacker The Bar 9 05-31-2007 06:12 PM
1994 Z28 1996stang Mustangs for Sale and Wanted 1 06-25-2006 10:52 AM
Raced a z28 camaro with the new setup.. MonteCitan 1979-1995 Mustang GT 1 01-19-2006 05:34 AM
Local used car place selling a red 93 z28 SpectorV The Bar 6 03-28-2005 04:35 PM
drove a z28 today STEVE The Bar 38 01-24-2005 04:50 PM

» Like Us On Facebook



05:01 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.