Official Callout!!!
#31
09-05-2005, 07:36 PM
too bad im not in CO...im in PA.....and i am one of 10...yes 10....Stang owners........there are 3 fox bodies....5 94-98 models....and 2 99-04 models(my girlfriend has a 00 v6 and i got a v8.....) i feel special that i have the only 99-04 v8..hehe....even tho i let my GF drive my car every now n then..i know im crazy..haha... 
#33
09-15-2005, 02:45 PM
Originally Posted by ColoradoStang
after converting my times here they are:
13.5@106
13.9@94
14.38@98 (missed a shift here)
13.81@102
yay! hahaha overall very happy with my crappy times, not bad for a 97 GT noob!
my 60 foot times were: 2.33, 2.497, 2.397, and 2.382
13.5@106
13.9@94
14.38@98 (missed a shift here)
13.81@102
yay! hahaha overall very happy with my crappy times, not bad for a 97 GT noob!
my 60 foot times were: 2.33, 2.497, 2.397, and 2.382
#34
09-15-2005, 04:57 PM
Jack Touched Me...I Cried
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tallahassee, FL/ Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 3,751
Originally Posted by slappy
Here is a better question, who the hell would want to live in luisiana or florida when all you have is volvo's and houses being thrown around in the wind?
Have you seen the females at my school? or hell even down at UM on South Beach???... lol some of the old timers would sprain their neck just tryin to soak everything in. Aside from that, Tally never get hit from any hurricains, we got Miami and Orlando to Buffer everything for us. LoL
#35
09-15-2005, 04:59 PM
Jack Touched Me...I Cried
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tallahassee, FL/ Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 3,751
Originally Posted by ColoradoStang
friggin' awesome! i was pleased with my virgin runs, 16.1, 15.89, 16.9 (missed a shift, doh!), and 16.39
just glad i dipped into the 15s, now i need more power!
best reaction tme was .200 not bad times for a 97 Gt first-timer
Springs you should have been there, i pitted next to 2 03 Cobras, both low 12's
(in CO speak)
it was awesome
but elevation sucks big time, cause when you post these times they SUCK compared to others, but hey elevation, you try racing at 5600 ft on a 90* day
just glad i dipped into the 15s, now i need more power!
best reaction tme was .200 not bad times for a 97 Gt first-timer
Springs you should have been there, i pitted next to 2 03 Cobras, both low 12's
(in CO speak)it was awesome
but elevation sucks big time, cause when you post these times they SUCK compared to others, but hey elevation, you try racing at 5600 ft on a 90* day
#37
09-15-2005, 05:48 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by 4.6 Love
You miscalcualted somwhere!
it uses Barometric pressure, temp, dew point, elevation, and a helluva a lot of other variables so how did I screw it up?
i just plugged in the stats from my time slip and bam! there it was....
Yikes! lol thats what my v6 runs 16's this past june...just a CAI nothin else...Lol
#38
09-15-2005, 05:49 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by SpringsStang
yeah well he is FIVE THOUSAND feet higher than you
#39
09-15-2005, 06:17 PM
Five thousand feet wont take a 16 sec run and throw it into the 13's. His car isnt ANYWHERE close to be setup to be running in the 13's. 3.73's and some mufflers DEFINATELY wont put you anywhere near that...
Let me put it into perspective...
I drive a Cobra and im probably only going to be in the mid 13's and ive got a DOHC Engine, and thats being only a few hundred feet above sea level. Maybe if you had, say 4.10's, LT headers and Off-Road X, CAI, Underdrive Pulleys, and a solid tune, you might be in the low fourteens/extremely high 13's.
Let me put it into perspective...
I drive a Cobra and im probably only going to be in the mid 13's and ive got a DOHC Engine, and thats being only a few hundred feet above sea level. Maybe if you had, say 4.10's, LT headers and Off-Road X, CAI, Underdrive Pulleys, and a solid tune, you might be in the low fourteens/extremely high 13's.
#40
09-15-2005, 06:20 PM
Originally Posted by MTShambles
Five thousand feet wont take a 16 sec run and throw it into the 13's. His car isnt ANYWHERE close to be setup to be running in the 13's. 3.73's and some mufflers DEFINATELY wont put you anywhere near that...
Let me put it into perspective...
I drive a Cobra and im probably only going to be in the mid 13's and ive got a DOHC Engine, and thats being only a few hundred feet above sea level. Maybe if you had, say 4.10's, LT headers and Off-Road X, CAI, Underdrive Pulleys, and a solid tune, you might be in the low fourteens/extremely high 13's.
Let me put it into perspective...
I drive a Cobra and im probably only going to be in the mid 13's and ive got a DOHC Engine, and thats being only a few hundred feet above sea level. Maybe if you had, say 4.10's, LT headers and Off-Road X, CAI, Underdrive Pulleys, and a solid tune, you might be in the low fourteens/extremely high 13's.
#41
09-15-2005, 06:32 PM
Jack Touched Me...I Cried
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tallahassee, FL/ Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 3,751
yes i know how elevation works, lol thnx me College u H.S., hey here's a lil hint, if your in say Vail, Colorado, (or newhere inside the Rocky's) if you race while a Cold front is overhead the air column on you is compressed as it crosses the Rockies, aka it cool's, therefore ur guna get more decent runs every now and again. Ya gotta use physics every now and again.
#42
09-15-2005, 06:36 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHA O GOD...YOU KILL ME...
Yeah ok lets think about this...
I have a 96 Cobra...stock im churning out about 255-260RWHP. If your going by the "unmodded GT" theory, that means that the fastest FACTORY UNMODDED GT (pre-05) is pushing 260HP AT THE FLYWHEEL. Your pushin at least 230HP to the rear wheels.
If I run my car stock, im going to run a 14.1 to a 13.9 Stock. If you run your car stock, you are in the high fourteens. There is NO WAY you can tell me, that his car, which came base with 215 HP (flywheel) engine, is running faster than my car with a 300HP (flywheel) Stock engine.
Maybe if hes driving around on nothing but the engine and the bare minimum systems, no body paneling, heavy rimes, or anything, then I could POSSIBLY see a low time like that from that car. Otherwise, forget it, even at SAE corrected times there is no way that car would be running 13's.
Lemme see this timeslip from this so called Stock GT running 13's. If your referring to 05's I might believe it, for they are rated at 300HP at the flywheel, but theyre also a heavier car, which means I doubt an 05 could pull it off either.
Yeah ok lets think about this...
I have a 96 Cobra...stock im churning out about 255-260RWHP. If your going by the "unmodded GT" theory, that means that the fastest FACTORY UNMODDED GT (pre-05) is pushing 260HP AT THE FLYWHEEL. Your pushin at least 230HP to the rear wheels.
If I run my car stock, im going to run a 14.1 to a 13.9 Stock. If you run your car stock, you are in the high fourteens. There is NO WAY you can tell me, that his car, which came base with 215 HP (flywheel) engine, is running faster than my car with a 300HP (flywheel) Stock engine.
Maybe if hes driving around on nothing but the engine and the bare minimum systems, no body paneling, heavy rimes, or anything, then I could POSSIBLY see a low time like that from that car. Otherwise, forget it, even at SAE corrected times there is no way that car would be running 13's.
Lemme see this timeslip from this so called Stock GT running 13's. If your referring to 05's I might believe it, for they are rated at 300HP at the flywheel, but theyre also a heavier car, which means I doubt an 05 could pull it off either.
#43
09-15-2005, 06:52 PM
Originally Posted by MTShambles
HAHAHAHAHAHA O GOD...YOU KILL ME...
Yeah ok lets think about this...
I have a 96 Cobra...stock im churning out about 255-260RWHP. If your going by the "unmodded GT" theory, that means that the fastest FACTORY UNMODDED GT (pre-05) is pushing 260HP AT THE FLYWHEEL. Your pushin at least 230HP to the rear wheels.
If I run my car stock, im going to run a 14.1 to a 13.9 Stock. If you run your car stock, you are in the high fourteens. There is NO WAY you can tell me, that his car, which came base with 215 HP (flywheel) engine, is running faster than my car with a 300HP (flywheel) Stock engine.
Maybe if hes driving around on nothing but the engine and the bare minimum systems, no body paneling, heavy rimes, or anything, then I could POSSIBLY see a low time like that from that car. Otherwise, forget it, even at SAE corrected times there is no way that car would be running 13's.
Lemme see this timeslip from this so called Stock GT running 13's. If your referring to 05's I might believe it, for they are rated at 300HP at the flywheel, but theyre also a heavier car, which means I doubt an 05 could pull it off either.
Yeah ok lets think about this...
I have a 96 Cobra...stock im churning out about 255-260RWHP. If your going by the "unmodded GT" theory, that means that the fastest FACTORY UNMODDED GT (pre-05) is pushing 260HP AT THE FLYWHEEL. Your pushin at least 230HP to the rear wheels.
If I run my car stock, im going to run a 14.1 to a 13.9 Stock. If you run your car stock, you are in the high fourteens. There is NO WAY you can tell me, that his car, which came base with 215 HP (flywheel) engine, is running faster than my car with a 300HP (flywheel) Stock engine.
Maybe if hes driving around on nothing but the engine and the bare minimum systems, no body paneling, heavy rimes, or anything, then I could POSSIBLY see a low time like that from that car. Otherwise, forget it, even at SAE corrected times there is no way that car would be running 13's.
Lemme see this timeslip from this so called Stock GT running 13's. If your referring to 05's I might believe it, for they are rated at 300HP at the flywheel, but theyre also a heavier car, which means I doubt an 05 could pull it off either.
im not saying everyone can do this, but an extremley good driver at sealevel with perfect conditions can run 13s in a 01+ stock GT
#45
09-15-2005, 07:14 PM
Dude, not at all..nowhere close. You with that body weight you need to have at least 260 RWHP to run in the 13's.
Your gonna tell me that his car, which has the EXACT SAME body style, dimensions, and approximately the same weight, is going to run FASTER with less RPMS?
HELLO!! LITTLE LESSON IN PHYSICS HERE. MORE HP MEANS MORE GO FAST POWER.
I challenge you to find me a STOCK, and I want BONE STOCK, GT from 96-04 that can run a true 13.7 seconds.
And some of that info has been posted here, where I ask you. Cite me a post. Now. Go search. Find me one. The 01 GT without modification is NOT going to be able to run in the 13's, EVEN WITH an INCREDIBLY GOOD driver without powershifting. Yes I read the article that had the Bullitt that was in the 13's, but the Bullitt isnt a GT, even though the platform is the same (Throttle Body and Intake system varies by a TON, plus the suspension system drops the center of gravity on the car, enabling it to move a bit quicker.)
You cant get into the thirteens putting this down for power: 231.7HP @ 5150 RPM with Stock Gears. Forget it. Not Happening.
And the T-45 isnt that bad. Its actually a pretty damn good Tranny if you firm it up a bit and give it a good clutch to run on.
Dont quote what you dont know. Where are your time slips?
Your gonna tell me that his car, which has the EXACT SAME body style, dimensions, and approximately the same weight, is going to run FASTER with less RPMS?
HELLO!! LITTLE LESSON IN PHYSICS HERE. MORE HP MEANS MORE GO FAST POWER.
I challenge you to find me a STOCK, and I want BONE STOCK, GT from 96-04 that can run a true 13.7 seconds.
And some of that info has been posted here, where I ask you. Cite me a post. Now. Go search. Find me one. The 01 GT without modification is NOT going to be able to run in the 13's, EVEN WITH an INCREDIBLY GOOD driver without powershifting. Yes I read the article that had the Bullitt that was in the 13's, but the Bullitt isnt a GT, even though the platform is the same (Throttle Body and Intake system varies by a TON, plus the suspension system drops the center of gravity on the car, enabling it to move a bit quicker.)
You cant get into the thirteens putting this down for power: 231.7HP @ 5150 RPM with Stock Gears. Forget it. Not Happening.
And the T-45 isnt that bad. Its actually a pretty damn good Tranny if you firm it up a bit and give it a good clutch to run on.
Dont quote what you dont know. Where are your time slips?
#46
09-15-2005, 07:37 PM
I wasnt saying HIS gt, its a non pi gt...but an 01+ gt can
And I really dont care if you beleive me or not because i'm not going to waste my time and put out the effort to prove something I already know...either way its irrelevant wether it happened or not, so arguing is pointless...so ill keep on knowing that an 01 gt can run 13's and youll keep beleiving it can never happen
and BTW the t-45 is a POS no matter what you do to it
And I really dont care if you beleive me or not because i'm not going to waste my time and put out the effort to prove something I already know...either way its irrelevant wether it happened or not, so arguing is pointless...so ill keep on knowing that an 01 gt can run 13's and youll keep beleiving it can never happen
and BTW the t-45 is a POS no matter what you do to it
#47
09-15-2005, 07:52 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by Grimmz
yes i know how elevation works, lol thnx me College u H.S., hey here's a lil hint, if your in say Vail, Colorado, (or newhere inside the Rocky's) if you race while a Cold front is overhead the air column on you is compressed as it crosses the Rockies, aka it cool's, therefore ur guna get more decent runs every now and again. Ya gotta use physics every now and again.
i was always under the impression stock GT's ran high 13's at sea level, maybe low low 14's, ? i dont know.
and dont look at me, i have my slips, i just used the correcter on this website, i'll try and find it, maybe it was wrong, but not me
#48
09-15-2005, 08:05 PM
Originally Posted by ColoradoStang
yeh but it was 90* that day, dont worry bud, i understand what youre saying, you and me are good, but what about MTShambles and Springs? this thread just exploded!
i was always under the impression stock GT's ran high 13's at sea level, maybe low low 14's, ? i dont know.
and dont look at me, i have my slips, i just used the correcter on this website, i'll try and find it, maybe it was wrong, but not me
i was always under the impression stock GT's ran high 13's at sea level, maybe low low 14's, ? i dont know.
and dont look at me, i have my slips, i just used the correcter on this website, i'll try and find it, maybe it was wrong, but not me
#49
09-15-2005, 08:19 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
#50
09-15-2005, 08:22 PM
You wanna come out here and say that to my face springs...im sure my "Slow Cobra" would romp your GT hands down. Trust me, you didnt run a 13.7. And until you provide the slips, its all bull****.
Im already starting to push ~275RWHP right now, with an exhaust I should be even closer to 300. I dont think youll be coming anywhere close to me should you come against me on the track.
Im already starting to push ~275RWHP right now, with an exhaust I should be even closer to 300. I dont think youll be coming anywhere close to me should you come against me on the track.
#51
09-15-2005, 08:29 PM
Originally Posted by ColoradoStang
Springs have you run Bandimere yet? any slips?
and shambles, find one post where i said I ran a 13.7
#52
09-15-2005, 08:30 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
is this the goofy kid who's getting hella worked up over this pointless sh*t?
haha just kidding bud
springs where is pmi?
haha just kidding bud
springs where is pmi?
#54
09-15-2005, 09:08 PM
Originally Posted by Springsstang
and besides even if I did somehow find that timeslip from ages ago, i wouldnt beable to convince you that it was stock anyway
#55
09-15-2005, 11:43 PM
Jack Touched Me...I Cried
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tallahassee, FL/ Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 3,751
Originally Posted by ColoradoStang
yeh but it was 90* that day, dont worry bud, i understand what youre saying, you and me are good, but what about MTShambles and Springs? this thread just exploded!
i was always under the impression stock GT's ran high 13's at sea level, maybe low low 14's, ? i dont know.
and dont look at me, i have my slips, i just used the correcter on this website, i'll try and find it, maybe it was wrong, but not me
i was always under the impression stock GT's ran high 13's at sea level, maybe low low 14's, ? i dont know.
and dont look at me, i have my slips, i just used the correcter on this website, i'll try and find it, maybe it was wrong, but not me
#56
09-16-2005, 07:04 AM
Ok! fellas give the Man a break! he was just posting his times? and seemed to be very pleased about it!
ColoradoStang, here is the Bandimere correction factor:
Time x .09276
Speed x 1.0773
Some of those Calculators are a bit of thats why iam just happy with the #s that the track post up!
MTshambles is partially correct at best the non PI Gt will probably run High 14s and thats nothing to be ashamed of cause thats why You Modify your car anyway to make it faster!!
ColoradoStang, here is the Bandimere correction factor:
Time x .09276
Speed x 1.0773
Some of those Calculators are a bit of thats why iam just happy with the #s that the track post up!
MTshambles is partially correct at best the non PI Gt will probably run High 14s and thats nothing to be ashamed of cause thats why You Modify your car anyway to make it faster!!
#57
09-16-2005, 12:21 PM
you non PI Heads/cams/intake mustang is nowhere near mid 13's man. I'm not bashing you, just telling you that you miscalculated. For you to be anywhere near the low 14's, high 13's you'd need as shambles has stated at least 4.10-4.30 gears, full exhaust, plenum to be able to achieve that. Hell i doub i could be able to pull a low 13 even with my car, as i haven't been to the tracks in over a year and a half...
#58
09-17-2005, 09:28 AM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by Samsstang
Ok! fellas give the Man a break! he was just posting his times? and seemed to be very pleased about it!
let off i used a f'n calculator, i didnt calculate it, the PC did
using Sams's calculations it puts me at 14.4 @ 97, which sounds more right than the other converter
sams, where'd you get those #'s?
#59
09-20-2005, 07:09 PM
Join Date: May 2005
Location: denver - getting slowed by elevation
Posts: 205
used a different calculator, gave me 14.3 @ 98
disappointed, but hell it's a 97 GT, anyone know what they are rated at factory?
disappointed, but hell it's a 97 GT, anyone know what they are rated at factory?
#60
09-20-2005, 07:12 PM
Originally Posted by ColoradoStang
used a different calculator, gave me 14.3 @ 98
disappointed, but hell it's a 97 GT, anyone know what they are rated at factory?
disappointed, but hell it's a 97 GT, anyone know what they are rated at factory?